| Author |
Message |
    
Marc
| | Posted on Sunday, May 19, 2002 - 10:12 am: | 
|
Hey guys -
I am changing out all my fluids, but seem to recall a unanimous warning against using one particular fluid of the synthetic sort. Was it brake fluid?
And I will save some of you the trouble of telling me to search the archives; I did a search and could not find it.
Thanks in advance for any help,
Marc |
Marc
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 08:52 am: |
|
anyone? |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 09:50 am: |
|
Synth is fine everywhere except brakes.
-P |
Tate (Tate)
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 10:06 am: |
|
Supposedly synth tranny fluid is bad for the ZF auto. Just passing along what I've heard. This is probably what you're talking about. (With this, several people will likely chime in and say they've been running synth fluid for years now. Hehe) |
Marc
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 10:58 am: |
|
Perrone,
I thought it was the brake fluid - thanks for the response. Care to enlighten me as to why synth brake fluid is bad? Just curious. Thanks again.
-Marc |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 11:17 am: |
|
Its a pretty long and involved story, but the fundamentals are that synth brake fluid is not compatible with what you have, you'd have to do an alcohol flush of your entire current system, synth foams easily so is incompatible with the high pressure of ABS braking systems, and it doesn't absorb water, thus forcing condensation to one spot in the brake lines exacerbating rusting of the lines. It is paint safe though so it is used in vintage and museum cars.
-P |
Norm
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 12:10 pm: |
|
In Rover V8s I would avoid using synthetic motor oil, Amsoil 20W50 racing oil in particular. This stuff is so slick it blows by the piston rings causing oil loss and "pinging" most likely from carbon buildup in the combustion chamber. It may also be too slick/thin for the hydraulic lifters to operate correctly (I got a strange "fluttering" out of the motor on hard acceleration over 3500 rpm). The manufacturer of my 4.6 recommends Valvoline 20W50 racing oil, which I switched to recently and the above problems disappeared and the truck runs a lot better.
Before I start a war with the Mobile 1 guys, this was with Amsoil synthetic, 20W50 racing in particular, although I had the same problems to a lesser extent with the "regular" synthetic Amsoil 10W40. If you read Amsoil's ads (which are apparently backed up by independent research) their oil is a lot slicker than Mobile 1 and anything else on the market.
---Norm |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 12:41 pm: |
|
Norm,
I don't say this to cause an argument, but only to relate a difference of opinion. I know at least a dozen guys who have run Amsoil or are currently running it without incident. Do you think that perhaps your truck had issues and maybe it's not all Rover V8s?
I don't know how slick Mobil 1 is or Amsoil is, but that Mobil 1 15w50 works like gangbusters in my motor. I'll be trying the Amsoil in 1000 miles so we'll see. |
Mike Rupp (Mike_Rupp)
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 02:25 pm: |
|
Perrone:
Not to be a cynic, but what do you mean when you say "that Mobil 1 15w50 works like gangbusters in my motor"?
Provided that the engine is running well, how do you compare one oil to another? Is it a subjective guess or something measured? |
Bill Bettridge (Billb)
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 02:33 pm: |
|
My $.02 to muddy the waters further 
Mobil 1 and Amsoil -have always used since initial break-in - no problems here
Trans fluid - ZF fried after about 10-12K with Amsoil (expensive ouch) - have gone back to Dexron with no probs.
Bill |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 03:27 pm: |
|
Mike,
My comments mean that I am getting no leaking past the rings' my plugs are not fouled, I have good oil pressure, I am not getting leaks at the pan, the truck idles smoothly and reves smoothly and I have no lifter noise. In short, changing to syntetic did not cause my motor to blow up, leak from every orifice, or destroy my hydraulic lifters.
YMMV
-P |
Axel Haakonsen (Axel)
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 07:42 pm: |
|
I have used synthetic fluids everywhere, including brake fluid for years withouth incident. While it is true that you can not mix silicon based syntehtic brake fluid with regular fluid, there are other types of synthetic brake fluids out there that mixes just fine. Valvoline Synpower which I use, is one of them. |
Dee
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 07:58 pm: |
|
To add to Axel's statement Valvoline claims its Synpower compatible with all fluids, I am running it straight also with no problems in the 97 Disco and on several of my other cars. Dont confuse the older pure silcone Brake Fluids with what is available now. Valvoline Synpower is far superior to what came stock.... |
Marc
| | Posted on Monday, May 20, 2002 - 11:02 pm: |
|
hmmm, well I was going to use Valvoline Synpower, but then Perrone had me talked out of it, now Axel and Dee have me re-thinking it... does it never end? |
Axel Haakonsen (Axel)
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 12:27 am: |
|
Haven't you learned not to listen to everything Perrone says by now? |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 12:57 am: |
|
In my original description i debated whether to include a description of DOt 5 and DOT 5.1 fluids. They cause a lot of confusion since DOT 5 (as its known in the US) is not compatible with DOT 4 and DOT 3. However DOT 5.1 as you guys mention is. In Europe, their "DOT 5" is really 5.1 so if you use Euro fluid labeled DOT 5 it's fine.
But since you guys already mentioned the Synpower, I suppose no confusion will come from it. Nice job.
-P |
Ron
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 01:13 am: |
|
GTLMA
Ron |
Norm
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 02:42 am: |
|
Perrone--
I can only go by my experience with Amsoil which I started using in an RPi 4.6 with 5,000 miles on the clock after following the break in procedure to the letter. With the Amsoil 20W50 racing oil I was losing about 1/2 quart per fill up (@ 240 miles) with no obvious leaks, no smoking and no sign of oil burning off the exhaust -- but a fair and constant amount of pinging on hard accelleration, especially up hill.
With the "regular" Amsoil 10W40 the results were somewhat better -- only losing a 1/2 quart every 500 miles or so and less pinging.
With the Valvoline 20W50 racing oil after 750 miles there is no noticable oil loss. I still have some pinging on hard accelleration uphill, which I attribute to residual effects of the Amsoil, but I can eliminate it for a while by flooring it a few times. (How can I get rid of this carbon once and for all?)
What can I say? The truck runs like a bat out of hell with the 4.6, but it just seems to run better with the Valvoline, and I don't get that fluttering sensation over 3500 rpm that I got with the Amsoil.
Otherwise, I'm a believer in synthetics. I've recently switched to Amsoil gear oil in the diffs and swivel balls and Red Line MTL in the 5-speed, with no apparent ill effects -- if anything the truck rolls discernably smoother with the synth in these components. On the other hand, I've used the same Amsoil motor oil for 10,000 miles in a Saab 9-5 with a 2.3 L turbo and it runs MUCH better than with "regular" oil, with no ill effects whatsoever.
It may be that Mobile 1 synthetic is fine in a Rover V8 -- according to Amsoil's propaganda, they're a lot slicker than Mobile 1. Let me know your results when you switch to Amsoil.
---Norm |
Eric L
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 05:02 am: |
|
Perronne is right on with the 5.0 vs 5.1 thing. Essentially, 5.0 is a silicone based fluid, which is not compatible with conventional glycol(inc 5.1, 4.0 & 3.0) fluids. To change to silicone involves a complete system strip & clean, otherwise the fluids mix reacts & destroys seals.
DOT 5.0 fluid does not absorb water(not hydroscopic). This means the boiling point will remain relatively stable, making it last much longer. I would say "water pocketing" would not be an issue, unless the system is flooded. 5.0 is also not harmful on paintwork.
5.0's Disadvantages, aside from it's incompatability, are lower boiling temp, and much higher seal drag. In some systems it means slower master cyl response when "pumping" the pedal.
Not talking anyone out of it, just saying it isn't a simple swap.
Oh BTW my background on this is I also Race roadbikes, where brakes are paramount. I imagine ABS would place symilar stresses on the brake system & fluid. We aviod 5.0 like the plague :-) |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2002 - 11:04 am: |
|
Eric,
Not that I've tried it, but one of the knocks against 5.0 is that it is also prone to aeration so in ABS systems it will froth as it is passes through the small orfices with the pressure and speed the ABS systems provide. Have you heard or experienced the same thing?
-p |
Eric L
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 22, 2002 - 06:08 am: |
|
Haven't heard that one. Aeration shouldn't occur, as there shouldn't actually be any air present to mix with. If the problem occurs, I guess it would be cavitation, and given it's "heavier" nature, I guess that's not out of the question. |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 22, 2002 - 11:16 am: |
|
I've never bled a brake system that didn't have some air in it.
-P |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page