You guys seem to love that heavy oil!!!!! Every time an article appears
here, it refers to or suggests 15w-40. I submit that oil is a lubricant. A
"film" of oil resides between the surfaces, not a big fat cushion.
My dad was a salesman on the road. He drove his new 1956 Power Hawk over
170,000 miles, never had the motor down, ran 10 weight oil year round, and
changed the oil and filter every 8,000 miles. That was in the days when
people wore engines out in 60,000 miles. With today's improved and lighter
oils, cars are going as much as 300,000 without a tear-down. Look at the
mileage on some of those Town Cars on ebay.
I run 10w-30 in my '55 President State coupe which has 66,000 original
miles. When I hit that key, it fires right off and I want oil everwhere
"right now". I don't want to have to wait till the oil warms up and flows
to get things lubricated. Beyond that, it takes energy to move that heavier
oil around a running engine. I wouldn't mind never having to tear the motor
down for a rebuild.
I guess if the motor used a little oil, I might consider using the heavier
stuff. But for now, I wouldn't mind
Jeff Rice - 09 Sep 2007 15:01 GMT
A lot of the more modern engines have warnings about using too heavy an oil.
They say it hurts the mileage.
You'd think the parsimonious Stude owner would be clamoring for 3 weight oil
to get more mileage, huh?
Most lovers of heavy oil have loose engines.
Jeff
"dwcars" wrotet...
> You guys seem to love that heavy oil!!!!! Every time an article appears
> here, it refers to or suggests 15w-40. I submit that oil is a lubricant.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> I guess if the motor used a little oil, I might consider using the heavier
> stuff. But for now, I wouldn't mind

Signature
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Grumpy AuContraire - 09 Sep 2007 23:40 GMT
You bet!
I use Castrol 20/50 in the truck that has over 100k on top of another
100K plus since a simple ring job. I get about 400 miles to the quart
but only 200 if using a cheaper oil.
JT
> A lot of the more modern engines have warnings about using too heavy an oil.
> They say it hurts the mileage.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>>I guess if the motor used a little oil, I might consider using the heavier
>>stuff. But for now, I wouldn't mind
63Avanti - 09 Sep 2007 16:38 GMT
> You guys seem to love that heavy oil!!!!! Every time an article appears
> here, it refers to or suggests 15w-40. I submit that oil is a lubricant. A
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> I guess if the motor used a little oil, I might consider using the heavier
> stuff. But for now, I wouldn't mind
you need to go back and re-reread the old posts. The salient point
this the your grandfather's 10w or your 10w-30 is NOT the same oil.
Due to many factors, it is significantly worse for your older car,
than what you put in 15 years ago. Modern oils are designed in tight
collaboration with new car (engine) manufactures with thousands of
hours of tests to optimize the engine/lubricant/coolant/fuel
combination. This leaves your Studebaker in the cold, and being
damaged every mile it is being driven. Hmmm, that last sentence was
somewhat over the top, but more accurate than not.
The fuss about 15w-40 is NOT about 15w-40, but about the API CI-4 or
CI-4Plus certification. This brings certain additives critical to our
pre-1985 cars. 15w-40 is the most common viscosity in non-synthetic
where CI-4 is available. 5w-40 is the most common synthetic
viscosity.
Yes, lower viscosity does increase fuel mileage, all other things
being equal. However, I posit that that is the most minor of all the
considerations on a 40 - 80 year old engine.
Waiting for the "oil to warm up" to lubricate the engine is very 50's
thinking. Not very applicable to any of the modern oils, unless you
crank it up less frequently than ~3 weeks. In any case, the critical
additives, such as ZDDP do NOT drain.
please go back and re-read the old posts on this.
Also, purchase the November 2007 Avanti Mag. It will treat this and
other issues in depth.