15,000 mile synthetic motor oil

The Saturn dealer said he guesses it's OK to use the 15,000 mile
synthetic motor oil. Just make sure to change the filter every 3-5K
miles.

Any thoughts on this matter?

"carqs123" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> The Saturn dealer said he guesses it's OK to use the 15,000 mile
> synthetic motor oil. Just make sure to change the filter every 3-5K
> miles.
>
> Any thoughts on this matter?

The Mobil 1 15K Oil doesn't meet the API energy conserving oil requirements.
It is API certified. 15K oil change intervals will not maintain your
warranty. If you care about the warranty, I don't see the point in paying
extra for a 15K oil and then changing it at 5K intervals. If you are out of
warranty, then it is your dime.

From Mobil's web site:

Does the Mobil 1 Extended Performance meet GF-4 specifications? How
did the new specification impact the development of the high-endurance
product line?

Mobil 1 Extended Performance contains extra performance additives to
deliver exceptional performance and protection. This fully synthetic
technology is designed specifically for longer service intervals. While it
does not meet all the requirements for GF-4, it provides protection of the
critical engine parts well beyond conventional engine oils including
conventional GF-4 engine oils, and meets all the engine durability and
protection requirements for GF-4. Additionally, Mobil 1 Extended
Performance oils exceed the requirements of API SL/CF and various ACEA
(European) specifications.


Ed

"carqs123" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> The Saturn dealer said he guesses it's OK to use the 15,000 mile
> synthetic motor oil. Just make sure to change the filter every 3-5K
> miles.
>
> Any thoughts on this matter?
>

There seems to be a prevailing opinion that synthetic must be better because
it is more expensive. IMHO this is a fallacy. IMHO synthetic is not cost
effective.

Most manufacturers state that their engines are designed to operate on
commercial mineral oil products and few recommend any extra additives and
most discourage their use. Oil functions as both a lubricant and as a way
of removing the unwanted products of combustion and wear. Mineral oil does
not really wear out but rather becomes contaminated by waste products which
can and are often removed by re-refining. Oil change intervals are
dependant on the environment and nature of use of the engine. Short trips
in cold or moist weather = bad, steady speed and load (highway) use in
temperate climate = good. The primary reason to change the oil is to remove
the waste products (often acidic or corrosive) which are suspended in it.
Many oil and engine manufacturers recommend change intervals determined by
time as well as mileage or hours.

Modern mineral oils are much better than oils of twenty years ago and have a
high concentration of synthetic and detergent additives. IMHE premium
mineral oils do give longer periods between both additions and changes.

Synthetic oil MAY be better for EXTREME high temperature use but I have no
experience, and would suggest that for most applications a quality mineral
oil of the CORRECT viscosity will provide good service.

The one service condition that I would definitely recommend the use of
synthetic oil is extreme cold or arctic weather. This is especially true of
gear oil and bearing greases as these components never really warm up even
in use and mineral oils do not flow in extreme cold. In this SEVERE cold
service I would not be extending engine change intervals and would also
recommend a reduced change interval.

Personally I buy whatever premium oil that I find on special and buy a case
or more at a time. My application is in two SW1s (240000km & 130000km) in
mainly highway use in the mountains of western Canada. I have used oil
analysis to check the condition of my used oil and have established a
personal change interval of 6000km (3600mi) Normally I just run it until it
is down a quart then change the whole works. As a test on the last change
of the 240k car I used Wal-Mart Tech 2000, usage increased much more than
normal. The first quart was added at 2800km and a second was required at
2200k. This is much faster consumption than usual and I will be going back
to premium oil Pennzoil 5w30 which has given me good service and seldom
requires addition bettween changes.

Just my .02 YMMV

private (who?) wrote:

> Modern mineral oils are much better than oils of twenty years ago and
> have a high concentration of synthetic and detergent additives. IMHE
> premium mineral oils do give longer periods between both additions
> and changes.

This is true, but mineral oils are still not as clean as synthetics. This may
or may not be a problem, but in Saturn engines it seems to be.

The three Saturns we've had in our household all had 3000 mile oil changes with
mineral oil. All had considerable carbon sludge and varnish, like I haven't
seen in well-maintained engines for 20 years. None of our cars have had engine
problems, except for some oil burning, but inside they looked a mess. And
according to Saturn themselves, the oil burning is due to dirty, jammed piston
rings.

If synthetic oil had been used, I bet these engines would have been perfectly
clean inside -- with no oil burning.

With synthetic, I would have no qualms about the longer oil changes recommended
by the oil change lights. The interval would double and so would the cost, with
no net cost increase. But I'm sure the engine would be better off. However I
agree that 15k mile oil changes are insane with a Saturn. I'd stick to the
manufacturer's recommendation, which is typically halved for mineral oil.

My BMWs never had this sludge problem with mineral oil, so that's what I used.
There was some yellowing of the metal (varnish) but that was it. I could have
used synthetic, but there didn't seem to be any reason to. Not so with the
Saturn.

> Synthetic oil MAY be better for EXTREME high temperature use but I
> have no experience,

The oil in a Saturn must be exposed to extreme temperatures somewhere, to cause
all that carbon buildup. This probably wouldn't happen with a good synthetic.
But maybe it does, and frequent oil changes are required anyway to remove it.
Thus the oft-heard recommendation to stick with mineral oil for Saturns. Still,
if it were my car I'd be using Mobil 1 and going by the oil change lights, not
mineral oil every 3k.

Matt O.

Hello Matt,

What are oil change lights?

IMHO sludge is usually caused by operation where the oil is not at full
temperature for long enough to expel excess moisture. It often accompanies
short trips at low load (or excessive idling) and is often an indicator of a
malfunctioning thermostat or the need for a winter front to reduce the
airflow through the rad and engine compartment. If this situation continues
it will cause ring sticking and the subsequent blow by will also contribute
to even more sludge formation especially in the ring grooves.

It is a bit of a chicken or egg situation as sticking rings cause both oil
consumption and blow by, and blow by and burnt oil residue causes sticking
rings. High oil consumption motivates people to use cheaper oils and to
think that since they are adding so much they do not need to change as
frequently. High shift points are also a contributor as high piston speeds
make oil control more difficult. The high detergent formulas in modern oils
have helped a great deal but operating temperature and clean oil is still
the key factor. Old oil burns quicker and this is why I tend to just change
it all when it is down a quart and never add more than one.

Just my .02

"Matt O'Toole" > wrote in message
...
> private (who?) wrote:
>
> > Modern mineral oils are much better than oils of twenty years ago and
> > have a high concentration of synthetic and detergent additives. IMHE
> > premium mineral oils do give longer periods between both additions
> > and changes.
>
> This is true, but mineral oils are still not as clean as synthetics. This
may
> or may not be a problem, but in Saturn engines it seems to be.
>
> The three Saturns we've had in our household all had 3000 mile oil changes
with
> mineral oil. All had considerable carbon sludge and varnish, like I
haven't
> seen in well-maintained engines for 20 years. None of our cars have had
engine
> problems, except for some oil burning, but inside they looked a mess. And
> according to Saturn themselves, the oil burning is due to dirty, jammed
piston
> rings.
>
> If synthetic oil had been used, I bet these engines would have been
perfectly
> clean inside -- with no oil burning.
>
> With synthetic, I would have no qualms about the longer oil changes
recommended
> by the oil change lights. The interval would double and so would the
cost, with
> no net cost increase. But I'm sure the engine would be better off.
However I
> agree that 15k mile oil changes are insane with a Saturn. I'd stick to
the
> manufacturer's recommendation, which is typically halved for mineral oil.
>
> My BMWs never had this sludge problem with mineral oil, so that's what I
used.
> There was some yellowing of the metal (varnish) but that was it. I could
have
> used synthetic, but there didn't seem to be any reason to. Not so with
the
> Saturn.
>
> > Synthetic oil MAY be better for EXTREME high temperature use but I
> > have no experience,
>
> The oil in a Saturn must be exposed to extreme temperatures somewhere, to
cause
> all that carbon buildup. This probably wouldn't happen with a good
synthetic.
> But maybe it does, and frequent oil changes are required anyway to remove
it.
> Thus the oft-heard recommendation to stick with mineral oil for Saturns.
Still,
> if it were my car I'd be using Mobil 1 and going by the oil change lights,
not
> mineral oil every 3k.
>
> Matt O.
>
>
>
>

private wrote:

> IMHO sludge is usually caused by operation where the oil is not at
> full temperature for long enough to expel excess moisture. It often
> accompanies short trips at low load (or excessive idling) and is
> often an indicator of a malfunctioning thermostat or the need for a
> winter front to reduce the airflow through the rad and engine
> compartment. If this situation continues it will cause ring sticking
> and the subsequent blow by will also contribute to even more sludge
> formation especially in the ring grooves.

This is one cause, but how do you explain sludge formation when these factors
are not present? Saturns do seem to have this problem, even when mostly highway
driven. Also, even when these factors are present, synthetic oil seems to
prevent sludge.

> It is a bit of a chicken or egg situation as sticking rings cause
> both oil consumption and blow by, and blow by and burnt oil residue
> causes sticking rings.

There's a snowball effect, but sludge/varnish is what causes rings to stick and
get the process started. Using a cleaner oil may prevent this.

Matt O.

"Matt O'Toole" > wrote in message
...
> private wrote:
>
> > IMHO sludge is usually caused by operation where the oil is not at
> > full temperature for long enough to expel excess moisture. It
often
> > accompanies short trips at low load (or excessive idling) and is
> > often an indicator of a malfunctioning thermostat or the need for
a
> > winter front to reduce the airflow through the rad and engine
> > compartment. If this situation continues it will cause ring
sticking
> > and the subsequent blow by will also contribute to even more
sludge
> > formation especially in the ring grooves.
>
> This is one cause, but how do you explain sludge formation when
these factors
> are not present? Saturns do seem to have this problem, even when
mostly highway
> driven. Also, even when these factors are present, synthetic oil
seems to
> prevent sludge.
>
> > It is a bit of a chicken or egg situation as sticking rings cause
> > both oil consumption and blow by, and blow by and burnt oil
residue
> > causes sticking rings.
>
> There's a snowball effect, but sludge/varnish is what causes rings
to stick and
> get the process started. Using a cleaner oil may prevent this.
>
> Matt O.
>
>

That, and the rings being poor quality to begin with.

I'm getting into this conversation a little late, but here goes. I have a
2002 LW300 (V6), that I use for primarily highway driving. I typically
change my mineral oil every 3-4K miles. Last oil change I decided to try a
full synthetic, and will change at the oil change light's recommendation,
probably every 6k. I did this for one reason - MY TIME. Whether I change it
myself or let the dealer do it, I figure I will be wasting half as much of
my time, which I feel is worth more than the cost difference.

The Saturn service dept. seemed pretty squeamish about me using synthetic,
saying that with the smaller molecular structure, you can develop leaks that
weren't there before. They didn't say not to, but it seemed like they knew
something that they didn't want to tell me (like 'Don't buy this vehicle, we
are going to discontinue them in a couple years and you won't get **** for
resale!'). I wonder if they were thinking about increased blow-by if the
ring design tolerances simply aren't up to snuff with synthetics. This
seemed a little absurd on a motor with 55k on it, so I ignored them and
switched.

The other day (~2000 miles later) just by accident, I noticed a puff of oily
smoke at startup. I started the car with the A/C on which gives it a bit of
a jolt when the compressor kicks in, which may have been a contributing
factor. I am going to keep an eye on the exhaust at startup and my oil
consumption to see what happens. I would like to stick with the synthetic
simply to save time and cut down on the use of oil products.

Europeans have long used 6000k miles plus as their oil change interval with
mineral oil and double that with synthetics, likely because of the expense.
But to me it makes good sense to not treat any oil like tapwater since it is
a limited resource. Instead, we should be insisting on engines that are
designed for longer oil change intervals, and corresponding lubricant
designs to complement these engines. After 120 years, they can't find
something other than fossil oil for lubrication?? It seems like they should
be able to run your oil through a machine that reclaims it, cleans it, adds
a few additives, then pumps it right back into your oilpan. Then maybe after
several cleanings you recycle it as we do now, and replace it. Couldn't an
oil filter be designed that you replace every 6k and reconditions the oil?
No, the auto industry instead tries to add DVD players, redundant safety
systems, and develops vehicles capable of 140-180 mph on the street, (????)
all increasing consumption and decreasing efficiency. It's the 60's all over
again. Having lived through it, I am bracing for the reality that set in the
70's - waiting in line to buy gas on alternate days based on the last digit
of your plate number, having your vacations designed around where & when you
can buy gas, 2 ton vehicles with 120 Hp engines with 80 mph top speeds.

But I'll get off that rant. What I meant to add to the discussion that
hasn't been brought up is the myriad types and qualities of gasolines out
there across the country. The discussion seems to be focusing simply on
engine temp, oil change intervals, and synth vs fossil oils and the effects
on sludge/varnish and engine wear. But I would advise that you should also
look at the gasoline additives and quality - after all, over 6k miles you
are dumping 250-300 GALLONS of gasoline into the system and thousands of
cubic feet of polluted/dirty AIR and burning it. I think that has a lot more
to do with sludge and oil change intervals than the type of oil you use.
Think of the crap that is left behind after the gasoline/air/oil mix
combusts - the oil is there to catch some of it. I think the only way you
can discuss the issue of oil change intervals is after a thorough
investigation of gasoline additive/contaminants and how THEY affect both
types of oil. We can't scrutinize the oils types to the Nth degree with
regard to quality and additives, then run 250 gallons of gasoline of unknown
quality, consistency, and purity through the system, as well as air with a
myriad of dirt and pollutants and judge the relative merits of fossil vs
synth. I submit that the useful engine life of American vehicles may depend
more on the gasoline and air we run through them than the oils we use to
lubricate them. Thoughts?

Dana
Port Kent, NY

2002 Saturn LW300
93 Jeep YJ
90 Jeep XJ Ltd.
---------------
95 Grand Cherokee Ltd.
91 Grand Wagoneer Ltd.
82 Cherokee 4dr
76 Cherokee 2dr

"carqs123" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> The Saturn dealer said he guesses it's OK to use the 15,000 mile
> synthetic motor oil. Just make sure to change the filter every 3-5K
> miles.
>
> Any thoughts on this matter?
>

"Dana Rohleder" > wrote in message
...
> I'm getting into this conversation a little late, but here goes. I have a
> 2002 LW300 (V6), that I use for primarily highway driving. I typically
> change my mineral oil every 3-4K miles. Last oil change I decided to try a
> full synthetic, and will change at the oil change light's recommendation,


what is the oil change light? and how does it work?


> probably every 6k. I did this for one reason - MY TIME. Whether I change
it
> myself or let the dealer do it, I figure I will be wasting half as much of
> my time, which I feel is worth more than the cost difference.
>


Will you use the time saved to better purpose? or will it be wasted working
to pay the cost of time saved? The tax burden on both the service you
purchase and the income you make may consume the value of any time saved and
may even mean a net loss of time vs. DIY, but that is a personal calculation
and another discussion.


> The Saturn service dept. seemed pretty squeamish about me using synthetic,
> saying that with the smaller molecular structure, you can develop leaks
that
> weren't there before. They didn't say not to, but it seemed like they knew
> something that they didn't want to tell me (like 'Don't buy this vehicle,
we
> are going to discontinue them in a couple years and you won't get **** for
> resale!'). I wonder if they were thinking about increased blow-by if the
> ring design tolerances simply aren't up to snuff with synthetics. This
> seemed a little absurd on a motor with 55k on it, so I ignored them and
> switched.
>
> The other day (~2000 miles later) just by accident, I noticed a puff of
oily
> smoke at startup. I started the car with the A/C on which gives it a bit
of
> a jolt when the compressor kicks in, which may have been a contributing
> factor. I am going to keep an eye on the exhaust at startup and my oil
> consumption to see what happens. I would like to stick with the synthetic
> simply to save time and cut down on the use of oil products.
>


IMHO a puff of oil at startup is usually from oil that has leaked past the
valve seals and worn valve guides and not the rings. It may be a factor of
the smaller molecule size or viscosity?


> Europeans have long used 6000k miles plus as their oil change interval
with
> mineral oil and double that with synthetics, likely because of the
expense.
> But to me it makes good sense to not treat any oil like tapwater since it
is
> a limited resource. Instead, we should be insisting on engines that are
> designed for longer oil change intervals, and corresponding lubricant
> designs to complement these engines. After 120 years, they can't find
> something other than fossil oil for lubrication?? It seems like they
should
> be able to run your oil through a machine that reclaims it, cleans it,
adds
> a few additives, then pumps it right back into your oilpan. Then maybe
after
> several cleanings you recycle it as we do now, and replace it. Couldn't an
> oil filter be designed that you replace every 6k and reconditions the oil?
> No, the auto industry instead tries to add DVD players, redundant safety
> systems, and develops vehicles capable of 140-180 mph on the street,
(????)
> all increasing consumption and decreasing efficiency. It's the 60's all
over
> again. Having lived through it, I am bracing for the reality that set in
the
> 70's - waiting in line to buy gas on alternate days based on the last
digit
> of your plate number, having your vacations designed around where & when
you
> can buy gas, 2 ton vehicles with 120 Hp engines with 80 mph top speeds.
>

I understand that we can and do re-refine used oil but that it requires the
use of a cracking tower similar to that used for refining crude. These
re-refineries do exist but are a questionable business proposition due to
the cost of oil collection and the problems of contamination with PCBs etc.
It is currently cheaper to refine new crude but I think this is changing as
the price of both new crude and the disposal of used oil increases. I am
sure that it will become more common as oil runs out and is part of the
discussion of "peak oil". Some large trucking companies mix used (filtered)
oil with diesel fuel and burn it as fuel which is an elegant solution but
can cause increased opacity especially if used in too high a concentration.


> But I'll get off that rant. What I meant to add to the discussion that
> hasn't been brought up is the myriad types and qualities of gasolines out
> there across the country. The discussion seems to be focusing simply on
> engine temp, oil change intervals, and synth vs fossil oils and the
effects
> on sludge/varnish and engine wear. But I would advise that you should also
> look at the gasoline additives and quality - after all, over 6k miles you
> are dumping 250-300 GALLONS of gasoline into the system and thousands of
> cubic feet of polluted/dirty AIR and burning it. I think that has a lot
more
> to do with sludge and oil change intervals than the type of oil you use.
> Think of the crap that is left behind after the gasoline/air/oil mix
> combusts - the oil is there to catch some of it. I think the only way you
> can discuss the issue of oil change intervals is after a thorough
> investigation of gasoline additive/contaminants and how THEY affect both
> types of oil. We can't scrutinize the oils types to the Nth degree with
> regard to quality and additives, then run 250 gallons of gasoline of
unknown
> quality, consistency, and purity through the system, as well as air with a
> myriad of dirt and pollutants and judge the relative merits of fossil vs
> synth. I submit that the useful engine life of American vehicles may
depend
> more on the gasoline and air we run through them than the oils we use to
> lubricate them. Thoughts?
>


Good big picture thinking. IMHE 6000km @ 6.4lt/100km =408lt / 4 = approx
100 USgal. I am under the (anecdotal,uninformed and perhaps faulty)
impression that Canadian gas is better than US gas. I understand that
sulfur is one of the major contaminants in fuel and that it is being reduced
with recent laws in both of our countries and that the manufactures concur
that if we had cleaner fuel that both our engines and our exhausts would be
cleaner and our engines would last longer. Until we do get better gas we
still have the problem of removing the byproducts of the combustion of dirty
fuel and lube oil from our engines in order to maximize their service life
and minimize the consumption of both fuel and oil. The best way to do this
is by driving lighter vehicles and fewer miles but that is also another
discussion.

Just my .02 YMMV

"Dana Rohleder" > wrote in message
...
> I'm getting into this conversation a little late, but here goes. I have a
> 2002 LW300 (V6), that I use for primarily highway driving. I typically
> change my mineral oil every 3-4K miles. Last oil change I decided to try a
> full synthetic, and will change at the oil change light's recommendation,


what is the oil change light? and how does it work?


> probably every 6k. I did this for one reason - MY TIME. Whether I change
it
> myself or let the dealer do it, I figure I will be wasting half as much of
> my time, which I feel is worth more than the cost difference.
>


Will you use the time saved to better purpose? or will it be wasted working
to pay the cost of time saved? The tax burden on both the service you
purchase and the income you make may consume the value of any time saved and
may even mean a net loss of time vs. DIY, but that is a personal calculation
and another discussion.


> The Saturn service dept. seemed pretty squeamish about me using synthetic,
> saying that with the smaller molecular structure, you can develop leaks
that
> weren't there before. They didn't say not to, but it seemed like they knew
> something that they didn't want to tell me (like 'Don't buy this vehicle,
we
> are going to discontinue them in a couple years and you won't get **** for
> resale!'). I wonder if they were thinking about increased blow-by if the
> ring design tolerances simply aren't up to snuff with synthetics. This
> seemed a little absurd on a motor with 55k on it, so I ignored them and
> switched.
>
> The other day (~2000 miles later) just by accident, I noticed a puff of
oily
> smoke at startup. I started the car with the A/C on which gives it a bit
of
> a jolt when the compressor kicks in, which may have been a contributing
> factor. I am going to keep an eye on the exhaust at startup and my oil
> consumption to see what happens. I would like to stick with the synthetic
> simply to save time and cut down on the use of oil products.
>


IMHO a puff of oil at startup is usually from oil that has leaked past the
valve seals and worn valve guides and not the rings. It may be a factor of
the smaller molecule size or viscosity?


> Europeans have long used 6000k miles plus as their oil change interval
with
> mineral oil and double that with synthetics, likely because of the
expense.
> But to me it makes good sense to not treat any oil like tapwater since it
is
> a limited resource. Instead, we should be insisting on engines that are
> designed for longer oil change intervals, and corresponding lubricant
> designs to complement these engines. After 120 years, they can't find
> something other than fossil oil for lubrication?? It seems like they
should
> be able to run your oil through a machine that reclaims it, cleans it,
adds
> a few additives, then pumps it right back into your oilpan. Then maybe
after
> several cleanings you recycle it as we do now, and replace it. Couldn't an
> oil filter be designed that you replace every 6k and reconditions the oil?
> No, the auto industry instead tries to add DVD players, redundant safety
> systems, and develops vehicles capable of 140-180 mph on the street,
(????)
> all increasing consumption and decreasing efficiency. It's the 60's all
over
> again. Having lived through it, I am bracing for the reality that set in
the
> 70's - waiting in line to buy gas on alternate days based on the last
digit
> of your plate number, having your vacations designed around where & when
you
> can buy gas, 2 ton vehicles with 120 Hp engines with 80 mph top speeds.
>

I understand that we can and do re-refine used oil but that it requires the
use of a cracking tower similar to that used for refining crude. These
re-refineries do exist but are a questionable business proposition due to
the cost of oil collection and the problems of contamination with PCBs etc.
It is currently cheaper to refine new crude but I think this is changing as
the price of both new crude and the disposal of used oil increases. I am
sure that it will become more common as oil runs out and is part of the
discussion of "peak oil". Some large trucking companies mix used (filtered)
oil with diesel fuel and burn it as fuel which is an elegant solution but
can cause increased opacity especially if used in too high a concentration.


> But I'll get off that rant. What I meant to add to the discussion that
> hasn't been brought up is the myriad types and qualities of gasolines out
> there across the country. The discussion seems to be focusing simply on
> engine temp, oil change intervals, and synth vs fossil oils and the
effects
> on sludge/varnish and engine wear. But I would advise that you should also
> look at the gasoline additives and quality - after all, over 6k miles you
> are dumping 250-300 GALLONS of gasoline into the system and thousands of
> cubic feet of polluted/dirty AIR and burning it. I think that has a lot
more
> to do with sludge and oil change intervals than the type of oil you use.
> Think of the crap that is left behind after the gasoline/air/oil mix
> combusts - the oil is there to catch some of it. I think the only way you
> can discuss the issue of oil change intervals is after a thorough
> investigation of gasoline additive/contaminants and how THEY affect both
> types of oil. We can't scrutinize the oils types to the Nth degree with
> regard to quality and additives, then run 250 gallons of gasoline of
unknown
> quality, consistency, and purity through the system, as well as air with a
> myriad of dirt and pollutants and judge the relative merits of fossil vs
> synth. I submit that the useful engine life of American vehicles may
depend
> more on the gasoline and air we run through them than the oils we use to
> lubricate them. Thoughts?
>


Good big picture thinking. IMHE 6000km @ 6.4lt/100km =408lt / 4 = approx
100 USgal. I am under the (anecdotal,uninformed and perhaps faulty)
impression that Canadian gas is better than US gas. I understand that
sulfur is one of the major contaminants in fuel and that it is being reduced
with recent laws in both of our countries and that the manufactures concur
that if we had cleaner fuel that both our engines and our exhausts would be
cleaner and our engines would last longer. Until we do get better gas we
still have the problem of removing the byproducts of the combustion of dirty
fuel and lube oil from our engines in order to maximize their service life
and minimize the consumption of both fuel and oil. The best way to do this
is by driving lighter vehicles and fewer miles but that is also another
discussion.

Just my .02 YMMV