Steve,

I agree with all you say, but would you want to ride in a NY taxi with over
100,000 miles on it?  Yuck!

Karl Wolz

-----Original Message-----
From: S2 <satew@MNINTER.NET>
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Date: Thursday, March 25, 1999 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Synthetic oil not worth it (long)

>So, the test vehicles were torn down at 60,000 miles?  I have a feeling
that
>that is too short a test.  You repeated the testers comments that the
>synthetics flowed better at low temperatures and provided better protection
>at high temperatures. That news alone is a good recommendation to use
>synthetics.   I live in Minnesota where the low can be -40f and the high
can
>be +95f from season to season.  Also, the aircraft industry uses
synthetics.
>If you want an example that absolutely requires the best protection ...
Well
>I don't often get my '82 to 30,000 feet, but I would just as soon my engine
>lasted as long as possible.
>
>The fact that the oil changes were performed at reasonable intervals that
>were shorter than those  recommended by the industry weakens the test in
the
>area of oil characteristics in hard service.  There are a lot of folks who
>rarely change their oil.  As tough as taxi service may seem, it's nothing
>compared to a teenager on a limited budget, or a high mileage salesman who
>doesn't care much because he's gonna trade in the car every two years.  The
>use of fleet vehicles that are professionally maintained and have regular
PM
>intervals invalidates the oil performance test.
>
>I'm guessing that when there is a test that goes over the 100,000 mile
mark,
>or a maximum - possible mileage test, where the oil is changed every 7000
to
>10000 miles, there may be discernible differences in the inspections of the
>engines.  60,000 is a VERY young engine.  In my opinion, the referenced
test
>was prematurely ended, the oil change intervals too short, and the results
>are therefor no more useful than anecdotal evidence.
>Respectfully,
>Steve
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: The Henrys <jch@VNET.NET>
>To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
>Date: Thursday, March 25, 1999 8:31 PM
>Subject: Re: Synthetic oil not worth it (long)
>
>
>>Hello all
>>
>...snip...
>>One distinction: According to the laboratory tests, Mobil 1 and Pennzoil
>>Performax synthetics flow better at low temperatures. They also have
>>the highest viscosity under high-temperature, high-stress conditions,
>>when a thick oil protects the engine. Thus, the article suggested that
>these
>>oils may be a good choice for hard driving in extreme temperatures.
>...snip...
>