well i consider myself  youthful (in spirit) but that is relative and i am
certainly not cool i am just practical / lazy

i am a three finger typist, finding shift with pinky and then hunting for
the letter causes 2 problems (1) too much time or (2) hitting caps lock ,
then backspace alot and start again which violates problem 1

also an unfortunate problem derived from my early carreer, a problem not
unlike  those old draftsmen engineers that write everything in CAPITAL BLOCK
LETTERS

i was going by some recent oil study surveys showing propeties such as
viscocity index, thermal break down (flash) and formulation additives
viscocity improvers, ( Eg Mobil 1 and Amsoil uses no viscocity improver
additives in the 5w30 and 10w30 oils)

high on list were...    Amsoil,  Red Line,  Mobil 1,  Castrol GTX

could not find Amsoil or Red Lne local but Mobil 1 can be found at wally
world

yes, welcome back ;)
I am thinking of kicking the synthetic habit , hope my asphalt chariot does
not get withdrawl symptoms
thanks for the info
robb

I think that is broadly true. I changed to synthetic primarily because I
have a 1985 turbo Volvo. Those beasts from that era have an unusual pair of
characteristics. First, they don't have a PCV valve, but instead have an
oil/air separator (a plastic box with a baffle) on the top of the block. To
make that work, the second oddity comes in - the ventilation is like a
breather. The crankcase miasma, with a significant amount of oil mist
remaining, is introduced just past the AMM. The oil mist coats the inside of
the entire induction system from the turbo through the intercooler (which
must be drained periodically) and the throttle body and idle air control
valve. Dino oil gradually builds up hard deposits that resemble packed dust
that has a trace of oil in it. When the deposits block any part of the
system (and mine eventually blocked the 3/8 inch hose because I thought it
was too big to plug up and didn't clean it) the engine will evacuate its oil
rapidly. I lost 3 quarts out the dipstick tube before the next freeway exit
came up.

Anyway, the maximum guru in the alt.autos.volvo forum reported that doesn't
happen with synthetic, so I made the leap. I was so pleased with the results
I changed our other cars to synthetic. The Volvo has not needed the yearly
throttle body or idle air control valve cleanings with synthetic that it did
with dinosaur oil.

Reading all this, you are probably asking, "What does this have to do with
Hondas?" And you are right... as you say, most cars do fine with dino juice.
Maybe synthetic will improve PCV valve operation and life, but since
properly maintained Honda engines usually outlast the rest of the car I
don't see that it is crucial. "Relatively unimportant" certainly describes
it.

Mike

Even though they covered the cost to avoid bad publicity, the real reason
was owner neglect.

They identified a design problem with the baffles in the valve cover as
being the trigger for a more complex situation involving too much heat
difference between the lower levels of the lubrication system and the oil
under the valve cover. IIRC a redesigned valve cover was the fix. Toyota
maintained to the last that the problem was never documented in any engine
that strictly followed their oil change schedule, leading to speculation
that the margin of tolerance for oil changes was oo close for the V6.

Unfortunately, I didn't save the link on that.

Mike

My motorhead brother says Havoline tends to leave carbon deposits, so I
never even gave it a chance to have its way with me. (Although I have to
wonder if somebody who would shoehorn a 454 into a Vega is the best guide!)

I have used Pennzoil, Valvoline and Quaker State pretty much interchangably
over the last three decades. I've only been using Mobil One for a few years,
but so far I'm happy.

Mike

I would too.

The best i can figure from techinical specs is that penzoil scored middle or
so along with oils like Shell and chevron supreme and valvoline all climate
etc

I'm sure you know this, but to share my own view: Part of
the beauty of online fora open to the public is that they
denote in total ultimate marketplace of ideas. People can
and do post anything, substantiated or not. When what is
posted seems off-kilter, typically enough people respond
such that a reasonable person can arrive at a conclusion
that is useful.

With rare exceptions, this method of transmitting 'the best
information possible' is, simply, the best. Mathematical
proofs even exist that argue the more diverse a group of
problem solvers, the more likely the best solution will be
found.

Over 20 years ago I knew young men who claimed Quaker State
caused more sludge than most. Maybe he was right--back then.
But I also think there is abundant documentation that oil
formulations have changed dramatically in 20+ years. So I
read reports on today's conventional oils with I hope an
open mind. I'm not going to switch my car from Pennzoil to
something else, but I don't reject anyone else's use of
anything else.

I am not switching to synthetic because I have the time to
do oil changes. My 91 Civic's oil change schedule also
forces me to crawl under the car for half an hour about
every six months and inspect (and clean up a bit) the
exhaust system, CV boots, my oil pan, etc. I think this
semi-annual or so inspection is important on an older car.

I realize that I might very well get better mileage with
synthetic, and it might improve engine longevity, too.

On the third hand, seems like we get plenty of reports here
of Hondas going over 300k miles on conventional oil.

If I didn't have time and had money to throw away, I'd be a
lot more open to switching to synthetic.

Uh, if you can't or couldn't tell the difference between Castrol and the
other two brands, it is beyond my capacity to help or educate you.

However, I do expect that Quaker State/Pennzoil may have cleaned up
their act after a lot of bad publicity a few years ago...

JT

I believe three "successes" out of three attempts actually
does have a fair amount of statistical significance attached
to it. It's even a little intuitive, IMO, that your little
home study indicates it's probably safe (maybe very safe) to
switch a high mileage car to synthetic.

The amateur (but fairly careful, all things considered)
study to which I refer above appears at
http://www-d0.fnal.gov/~jkrane/cars/synth_survey.html

Summary:
74 cars total
-- Most of the cars studied had less than 100k miles. These
produced two leakers, one easily fixed by proper tightening
of various seal bolts. The second leaker demonstrated a
bizarre single leak at the "fuel pump pivot pin."

-- Clearly the cars with over 100k miles were a minority of
the sample, but not an insignificant one ISTM. They produced
two leakers, both 1975 Porsche 911s. Both began to leak some
20k miles after the switch.