Well, I didn't believe it either :scratchhe

But here it is -- hot off the press, July 06, saying unequivocally "Synthetic oils are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines including Renesis in RX-8. Only mineral oils must be used." :Eyecrazy:

Many, many questions are raised about engine longevity for early buyers from this, it seems to me.

Oh, and please don't shoot the messenger :hahano:

hmm, they claim it's due to carbon deposits. But we all know how best to get rid of that :)

hmm, they claim it's due to carbon deposits. But we all know how best to get rid of that :)
YES WE DO! In fact I will be spending this Fri, Sat, Sun removing deposits at this special carbon removal facility :)

I am glad to see that TSB.... thanks. It clears up two points:
1st) 5W-30 is ok to us
2nd) Only Minerial Oil.....

which is great for me because that is all that I have used.

that TSB is hilarious, synthetics don't eat seals, at least not since the 70s.

As for carbon deposits, synthetics burn cleaner, so good luck with that. I can't believe they are trying to prepetuate that crap.

One less excuse for people to substaniate their waste of money buying syns for the rotary. Still some will profess it's all a conspiracy :suspect: and never believe any of it...

depending on what those O-rings are made from.... If they are just rubber like most o-rings are, syth wont hurt them. Alot of turbo's have o-rings in them and you dont see those getting eat'n up from synth oil.

I'll stick to what mazda says and keep using the suggested for now.

that TSB is hilarious, synthetics don't eat seals, at least not since the 70s.The TSB mentions seals with regards to pre-renesis engines. For the RX-8 the only thing they mention is carbon buildup...


So if anything, this will help us move on with the debate on syn vs non-syn because the single reason mazda is giving us for not using syn in the 8 is a non issue.

Once again we see another piece of cover our ass marketing. First of all as has been proven time and time again, synthetics do not leave worse carbon deposits than synthetics. Quite the opposite actually. Most of the carbon deposits in an engine come from the fuel used anyways. Maybe we should stop using gasoline! That would at least make some people happy.

As has also been stated time and time again, the original issue in the past with synthetics was from some synthetics, specifically Group IV PAO's. They had issues with dissolving rubber parts in an engine such as seals. This is what Mazda is pointing out. This goes back to the statement that Yamaguchi-san said to me last year at Sevenstock. "Not all synthetic oils are created equal". Most today are formulated to solve the issue of melting rubber parts. There were 2 ways they could do this. One way which was the easiest was to add an additive which neutralized the chemical interaction between the PAO and the rubber. The other way was to just modify the PAO during formulation so the property was built in. Either way worked to cure the issue.

Idemitsu synthetic "rotary safe" oil is a Group IV PAO. Remember this is the group that had the issues. Guess what they did? They modified the formulation so it wouldn't affect rubber parts! Oh happy days! There is a remote possibility that there is still a synthetic oil on the market that has not taken the steps necessary to cure the issue. Fortunately most have and the most popular ones are included. Royal Purple and many others are fine. Remember that not all synthetic oils are Group IV. some are Group V. They would not suffer any issues. I have been running RP, a Group IV oil for years now in a rotary with no issues. so have many people including Racing Beat. Even Mazda races their engines with Group IV oils. If there is any synthetic oil anywhere in the world that does not have the necessary formulation steps taken, they could be responsible for this TSB. Different parts of the world get different oils and formulations just like they get different gasolines.

This all goes back to the fact that Mazda isn't going to name everyone who's oils are good and those few that still have issues so releasing a blanket statement to include everyone is the easy thing to do. This is the legal side of the company talking, who along with the financial side of the company shouldn't be influencing what gets said when it comes to technical topics they don't know about. Unfortunately with lawsuits the way they are now, this is necessary.

To the people here that have been using synthetics for a while, don't worry about it. Keep using them. You are fine. For the most part I only see people here running well known oils that are known to work good. A TSB isn't going to change that. The thing I feel sorry for is the people who can't seem to distinguish the truth from a legal statement made to keep giving dealerships bs reasons to keep voiding warranties. It's all about money. The more warranties they void, the less they spend.

One less excuse for people to substaniate their waste of money buying syns for the rotary. Still some will profess it's all a conspiracy :suspect: and never believe any of it...

Just out of curiosity, what octane of gas do you run?

:Eyecrazy: this just prove's one point for all! you can't win you can't lose you just take a chance like everyday driving and hope that rock won't find your bumper or windshield to make you pay out the behind for the repairs mazda won't cover for your had dollars of joy riding there product!! :spank:

Just out of curiosity, what octane of gas do you run?more often than not 91, sometimes 93, occasionally 89 .. our gas also has 10% ethanol here

...Oh, and please don't shoot the messenger :hahano::rl: jk

and expo1, careful with that bumpy tunnel turn :ylsuper:

rotarygod makes some good points, i.e. synthethics are probably compatible with the renesis seals, but the TSB only mentions carbon buildup in regard to the renesis. It does not say anyhting regarding seals in the renesis. Based on this I think we should focus on the carbon builup issue primarily. I agree some synthetics are cleaner burning than mineral and so this would not make any sense. I suggest you all experiment with torching some oils and post results of your findings. For instance, redline10-40 virtually leaves any residue, however german castrol 0-30 which is touted in BITOG as one of the best group IV PAO's leaves an incredible amount of gunk and residue and alot more than castrol GTX in my experimentation upon torching a sample. I've found motorcraft semi-syn 5-20 leaves a little more residue than redline and castrol 5-20 GTX leaves a fair amount more residue than the motorcraft. So, I urge you all to post results and maybe we can get a quantitative analysis on this issue.

When Mazda Australia write me a letter telling me they'll void my warranty if they catch me putting synthetic in there, then I'll pay attention. It's a moot point with me......I've only ever used Mazda Rotary Oil.

I'd use synthetic if I found it convienient to do so.

rotarygod makes some good points, i.e. synthethics are probably compatible with the renesis seals, but the TSB only mentions carbon buildup in regard to the renesis. It does not say anyhting regarding seals in the renesis. Based on this I think we should focus on the carbon builup issue primarily. I agree some synthetics are cleaner burning than mineral and so this would not make any sense. I suggest you all experiment with torching some oils and post results of your findings. For instance, redline10-40 virtually leaves any residue, however german castrol 0-30 which is touted in BITOG as one of the best group IV PAO's leaves an incredible amount of gunk and residue and alot more than castrol GTX in my experimentation upon torching a sample. I've found motorcraft semi-syn 5-20 leaves a little more residue than redline and castrol 5-20 GTX leaves a fair amount more residue than the motorcraft. So, I urge you all to post results and maybe we can get a quantitative analysis on this issue.

I don't find the torch test to be too relevant to the issue. Here's why. This test is useful if we are trying to find out how many eposits our oils leave after they have completely burned off. Logic would say that this is relevant because we burn a small amount of oil in the engine. However it does not take into account the diference in burn characteristics and flash point when diluted with gasoline. Even a 2% dilution of oil with gas can result in a nearly 100 degree lowering of the flash point of the oil. This also includes what is in it. With oil injection we have such a large ratio of fuel to oil that flash point concerns are nearly moot.

Synthetics should only be judged based on their performance in the engine as a lubricant in the traditional fashion. If we let the oil burn off like this, it doesn't really matter which one you have anymore. Your engine is toast. Most of our carbon issues are with the fuel used. Piston engines which don't inject oil into the chambers still get carbon deposits in them so oil isn't the issue.

The TSB is a safety measure in the event that someone somewhere actually finds an oil that does happen to cause an issue. If carbon is really the issue, they should ban all motor oils and gasolines from entering the engine. Perhaps 2 stroke and ethanol?

I agree with fuel dilution lowering the flash and altering the burn, but that still doesn't alter the chemical makeup of the oil.

So rotarygod flash point aside, are you saying that if you take the worst oil with the most residue mix it with large fuel ratio then it will burn off all the deposits and leave no residue?

Quote from rotarygod: "This also includes what is in it. With oil injection we have such a large ratio of fuel to oil that flash point concerns are nearly moot."

I agree that the flash point is moot because synthetic will burn just as well as mineral with fuel dilution, but that still does not address the issue of carbon residue left after the burn. I think the sulfated ash of the oil will be the most important characteristic to consider at this point now that mazda has finally stated their issue with synthetics in the renesis. Particularly, that lower sulfated ash oils leave less carbon build up and that a significant amount of synthetics have a higher ash content than minerals.

If carbon is really the issue, they should ban all motor oils and gasolines from entering the engine. Perhaps 2 stroke and ethanol?


Hell yeah!! Let's go way back and throw some Weber side drafts on there too. :)

When Mazda Australia write me a letter telling me they'll void my warranty if they catch me putting synthetic in there, then I'll pay attention. It's a moot point with me......I've only ever used Mazda Rotary Oil.

I'd use synthetic if I found it convienient to do so.I doubt your dealer would want to spend the money and time to do a chemical oil analysis just to see if you are running synthetic.

API Certified For Gasoline Engines and/or API Service SL----those are the only requirements for engine oils used in RX-8s.Unless Mazda send out a revision to the Owners Manual superceding those requirements your warranty is in tact FULL STOP.

I am glad to see that TSB.... thanks. It clears up two points:
1st) 5W-30 is ok to us
2nd) Only Minerial Oil.....

which is great for me because that is all that I have used.
I would point out this is an Australian-sourced TSB, so 5W-30 may not be totally appropriate for you elsewhere in the world, depending on climatic conditions.

I doubt your dealer would want to spend the money and time to do a chemical oil analysis just to see if you are running synthetic.

Correct.

Oh NO !

my balls are shaking ! Shake it BABY !

Synth .... I changed to RP 5w30 .... couldnt be happier ! Oh yes Full Synth all the WAY.

This letter .... is totally a cover my ass kind of company TSB.

Mazda just "ignored" 8's survey cuz it "lowers" their "overall" score. Is that cover my ass kind of PR speech ? I think so.

This TSB, I think its just the same idea.

hell if ur worried about carbon deposits buildin up, TSB or not from mazda from australia....... just go to ur local auto store.......pick up some intake system cleaner........which removes carbon deposits......( IF U DRIVE LIKE A GRANDMA AT LOW RPMS EVERYWHERE) becuz gas it too expensive to go fast...........then run the synthetic n buy that intake system cleaner every 10-20k miles, n ull be carbon free lol

Rotarygod you are my hero!
Two more thoughts:
1.Here in Europe the original 5w-30 Mazda oil (which is recommended for the Renesis) is synthetic. So, is there any question?
2. I hardly believe, that a true mineral oil can reach the 5w spec., maybe 15w.

quote from TSB "... causes carbon deposits in the inlet ports..."

why does the carbon build up in the inlet? if it's created in the combustion is it moved round to the inlet by the rotar?

quote from TSB "... causes carbon deposits in the inlet ports..."

why does the carbon build up in the inlet? if it's created in the combustion is it moved round to the inlet by the rotar?

its being pushed.

Why do these documents always come from Australia? This is the 2nd one. In both cases, I believe, there's prominent mention of the "official Mazda genuine oil imported from Japan, carefully decanted into the convenient 1litre and 5litre packs, untouched by human hands and available at your dealer". I think someone's trying to protect their sales. If there were a real mechanical reason, Mazda Corporate would be pushing the prohibition worldwide. It's very simple -- warranty repairs and replacements cost them money. If there's a "bad oil" out there, you will know about it without having to monitor the Aus. grapevine.

It's OK as long as Mazda keeps that @!~#%& paper over their :nono:

Did anyone ever poll "The New Engine Club" guys what type of oil they been using?

Rotarygod you are my hero!

2. I hardly believe, that a true mineral oil can reach the 5w spec., maybe 15w.

Castrol Syntec comes in a 5W-50 and it's just a highly refined conventional oil.

We just got a similar bulletin here in the UK, addressed to the European market (see attached picture).

I have used PAO semi-synth oil (Fuchs Titan XTR 5w-30) from the start, and then switched to fully synth PAO (Motul 8100) about 12k miles ago (I am now on 32k miles in 2 years).

I take my car on the track, I never had hesitation, still on original CAT.

I do fill up with Shell's Optimax, equivalent to 93 Octane, which contains some additives to clean carbon deposits, but I never really thought that to be an issue as long as you rev the engine in the medium power band (4k to 6k revs).

I just purchased some original Mazda Dexelia 5w-30 oil from my dealer today just to be prepared as I yet haven't opened the 5L bottle of Motul.

The Mazda oil is API SL ACEA A5 specs, same as the Motul. It is made by Total/Elf/Fina which sells it under the name Quartz Future 9000.

The Mazda bottle doesn't say anything about it being synthetic, the Total brand bottle says it is synthetically engineered.

We have some oil chemists on the uk forum, and we found out the Mazda Dexelia/Total Quartz is in fact a group III hydrocracked oil so infact not really synthetic but as mineral as it gets in 5w-30 viscosity.

So although Mazda is obviously trying to play it safe recommending people don't just go and buy the first oil they see on the shelf, especially if it claims to be synthetic, I do believe as long as your oil is chosen carefully, you should be just fine.

Besides, I don't know if I fancy tracking my car using mineral oil. I am going to be on track on the 26th August, I hope I will get a clearer picture before then, otherwise I'll just take my 5L Motul bottle with me.

Not all Synthetic are the same. Some are really bad I admit, so does Mineral oil.

and most people who owns a 8 doesnt know shit about cars, they thought that "oh, dont rev the engine cuz it might shorten its life" but its exact opposite. This applies to piston engine owners too.

AS RG pointed out, carbon deposite MOSTLY came from the gasoline, I think Mazda should require people to use at least 91 octane. So engine failure rate would be lower.

We just got a similar bulletin here in the UK, addressed to the European market
Hmmm...but direct from Mazda HQ in Jp. I note this one isn't simply pushing MRO as the sole solution, either. I'm betting there will be a similar notice from MNA very soon.

Castrol Syntec comes in a 5W-50 and it's just a highly refined conventional oil.

Highly refined, with synth additives.

It doesn't work that way. There no "synth additives". The additives that go into a synthetic oil are no different than those that go into any other oil. They may be in different proportions and some may have a few extra ones that others don't but none are special "synth additives". There are only so many different additives that may go into oils. Not aevery one needs to be used as some have redundant properties to other ones that are available. Which ones get used and in what ratio is dependent on the manufacturer.

It's the base stock that determines whether or not it is "synthetic" Group I-III oils are conventionals. Some consider Group III conventionals but all they are is more highly refined lower grade oils. That's what separates these groups out. The more refined, the less impurities in it. In this case more is a good thing. I don't consider Group III oils to be synthetic. They are still paraffin base stocks.

Group IV Poly Alpha Olefins and Group V oils are true synthetics. What makes a motor oil what it is? Is it the base stock or the additives? The base stock determines whether we consider it synthetic or not but it's the additive package that turns it all into motor oil. All base stocks require an additive package. They are not motor oil without them.

"Synth additives" are the same the same basic things as the additives that go into conventional oils. There is nothing any more synthetic or conventional about them. If Castrol Syntec is a Group III oil, it is a conventional. Just the best most pure conventional which makes it better than the standard oils that most people use which are Group I-II. Since all oils including "synthetics" are derived from the petroleum industry, what makes any of them "synthetic" as opposed to not? What's more important, what it's called or how well it works?

Hopefully that clears that up.

Thanks! One more question: Could be a mineral oil 5w? As Mazda said in the service bulletin, only mineral oil to use, not semi synthetic or synth. The semi synthetic oils are mineral base, so Mazda says No to mineral base oils too, in this bulletin. Is there any mineral ( not only mineral base) oil on the market with 5w spec? Sorry if I just confuse this theme.

ayrton, the mazda dexelia 5w-30 oil is an hydrocracked oil (very good quality too), which is mineral oil, not synthetic nor semi-synthetic.

....So although Mazda is obviously trying to play it safe recommending people don't just go and buy the first oil they see on the shelf, especially if it claims to be synthetic, I do believe as long as your oil is chosen carefully, you should be just fine....



fnegroni, where did you get your hands on that bulletin? Did your dealer hand it to you? I take it that it's not widely available.....it's not like there are a stack of them on the service counter at your dealership?

My point is this. Mazda are not playing it safe, as you have suggested. Playing it safe would mean mailing that bulletin to every RX-8 owner in Europe.

My point is this. Mazda are not playing it safe, as you have suggested. Playing it safe would mean mailing that bulletin to every RX-8 owner in Europe.

I think you have a point there, they should contact customers directly rather than wait for them to get to a dealer (that's if the car is still under warranty...)


fnegroni, where did you get your hands on that bulletin? Did your dealer hand it to you? I take it that it's not widely available.....it's not like there are a stack of them on the service counter at your dealership?


It was posted on the UK forum in the public section www.rx8ownersclub.co.uk

All dealers in the UK should have one by now, and as it says in there, all user manuals will have an errata corrige leaflet in there informing the new customers.

Mazda UK told us Mazda Japan issued the TSB following some testing in "extreme" conditions. What these conditions are, we don't know yet (probably never will). We don't even know what synthetic they used in their test, and what conditions was the test performed in (lab or real life).

ayrton, the mazda dexelia 5w-30 oil is an hydrocracked oil (very good quality too), which is mineral oil, not synthetic nor semi-synthetic.

Thanks! So hydrocracked=synthetically engineered?

I have a broschure (German) about Mazda Dexelia's, and I find in it that the 5w-30 Dexelia is synthetically engineered.

All dealers in the UK should have one by now, and as it says in there, all user manuals will have an errata corrige leaflet in there informing the new customers.



Thanks!

You note the emphasis above.....seems like the old punters may never find out, the way I read it.

Thanks! So hydrocracked=synthetically engineered?

I have a broschure (German) about Mazda Dexelia's, and I find in it that the 5w-30 Dexelia is synthetically engineered.

Yes, hydrocracking an oil is legally enough to call it synthetically engineered.

Mazda Dexelia 5w-30 is Total Quartz Future 9000 5w-30, API SL and ACEA A5.
It's a good oil, top of the range for Total.

I use Motul 8100 Fully-synthetic (PAO), been doing that for 12K miles and two trackdays and not yet an issue.

This is how I believe this happened:

Total rings Mazda: "Hey Dave, your RX-8 customers are using fully synthetic oil"
Mazda : "We know, there is no problem with that"
Total: "well, you promised us a lot of market share, the rx-8 is popular and we can't sell our oil to anyone else but the dealers"
Mazda: "Would you like to make a synth oil for us?"
Total: "Don't be silly, we haven't got the expertise, let alone the market, for making such thing!... tell your customers to use Total oil or else...!"
Mazda: "What do you want us to tell them?"
Total: "if they don't use our oil, their seals will swell"
Mazda: "We already issued a TSB where we say the problem is non-existant. What else can we do?"
Total: "Tell them if they don't use our oil, their warranty is void!"
Mazda: "Can't tell them that, the manual doesn't say so, what about our existing customers?"
Total: "Ok, tell them there is a remote possibility under extreme conditions that if they don't use our oil, bad things can happen, like carbon deposits on the inlet valves. Put it in the manual"
Mazda: "Ok, too late to change the manual, and it costs money. What about we issue a TSB?"
Total: "Ok, but only for the countries we have a market presence."
Mazda: "Ok, we'll do that"

Tada! result!

I bet Mazda has already contacted a reputable oil producer (Motul, Total's competitor, or Mobil) and asked them to develop a synthetic specifically for the Renesis so that when the next rx-8 comes out, they will then advertise this revolutionary technology called Synthetic for Rotaries.

You cynical old bastard....... :)

It doesn't work that way. There no "synth additives". The additives that go into a synthetic oil are no different than those that go into any other oil. They may be in different proportions and some may have a few extra ones that others don't but none are special "synth additives". There are only so many different additives that may go into oils. Not aevery one needs to be used as some have redundant properties to other ones that are available. Which ones get used and in what ratio is dependent on the manufacturer.

It's the base stock that determines whether or not it is "synthetic" Group I-III oils are conventionals. Some consider Group III conventionals but all they are is more highly refined lower grade oils. That's what separates these groups out. The more refined, the less impurities in it. In this case more is a good thing. I don't consider Group III oils to be synthetic. They are still paraffin base stocks.

Group IV Poly Alpha Olefins and Group V oils are true synthetics. What makes a motor oil what it is? Is it the base stock or the additives? The base stock determines whether we consider it synthetic or not but it's the additive package that turns it all into motor oil. All base stocks require an additive package. They are not motor oil without them.

"Synth additives" are the same the same basic things as the additives that go into conventional oils. There is nothing any more synthetic or conventional about them. If Castrol Syntec is a Group III oil, it is a conventional. Just the best most pure conventional which makes it better than the standard oils that most people use which are Group I-II. Since all oils including "synthetics" are derived from the petroleum industry, what makes any of them "synthetic" as opposed to not? What's more important, what it's called or how well it works?

Hopefully that clears that up.


Hewww
Could you PLEASE make a small list the "Syn" & "Dino" oils in groups?
Penzoil syn?
redline?
Castrol syn
ect...
& regular dino oils
Which group do these belong too?
THANK YOU!!

Yes, hydrocracking an oil is legally enough to call it synthetically engineered.

Mazda Dexelia 5w-30 is Total Quartz Future 9000 5w-30, API SL and ACEA A5.
It's a good oil, top of the range for Total.

I use Motul 8100 Fully-synthetic (PAO), been doing that for 12K miles and two trackdays and not yet an issue.

This is how I believe this happened:

Total rings Mazda: "Hey Dave, your RX-8 customers are using fully synthetic oil"
Mazda : "We know, there is no problem with that"
Total: "well, you promised us a lot of market share, the rx-8 is popular and we can't sell our oil to anyone else but the dealers"
Mazda: "Would you like to make a synth oil for us?"
Total: "Don't be silly, we haven't got the expertise, let alone the market, for making such thing!... tell your customers to use Total oil or else...!"
Mazda: "What do you want us to tell them?"
Total: "if they don't use our oil, their seals will swell"
Mazda: "We already issued a TSB where we say the problem is non-existant. What else can we do?"
Total: "Tell them if they don't use our oil, their warranty is void!"
Mazda: "Can't tell them that, the manual doesn't say so, what about our existing customers?"
Total: "Ok, tell them there is a remote possibility under extreme conditions that if they don't use our oil, bad things can happen, like carbon deposits on the inlet valves. Put it in the manual"
Mazda: "Ok, too late to change the manual, and it costs money. What about we issue a TSB?"
Total: "Ok, but only for the countries we have a market presence."
Mazda: "Ok, we'll do that"

Tada! result!

I bet Mazda has already contacted a reputable oil producer (Motul, Total's competitor, or Mobil) and asked them to develop a synthetic specifically for the Renesis so that when the next rx-8 comes out, they will then advertise this revolutionary technology called Synthetic for Rotaries.

Maybe that's the truth fnegroni! I have this thought for a while. Oil is a big business! Mazda is the only one who make rotary powered cars, so Mazda can say only one oil is good for it!

oh NO !

Its been 2.5 K miles Im going to change my oil later today. Oh yes Im going for RP again, guess what, Full Synthentic

I've been using it for years on the older engines which are supposed to melt into oblivion at the mere mention of the word "synthetic".

Oil is a big business! Mazda is the only one who make rotary powered cars, so Mazda can say only one oil is good for it!

What would be the point of this? Mazda makes its money on cars, not on the piddlin' margin it might get on oil. And I note the Euro TSB talks about "...other mineral-based oils" not just MRO.

There's no conspiracy here, despite what others might think :nono:

This is interesting that the bulletins only come out in Europe where synthetic oil is really synthetic, i.e. group IV PAO.

This is all starting to make more sense now when considering what Yamamoto stated at sevenstock, which is that he didn't like Mobil 1 which is a PAO.

This also is consistent with my experimentation in burning PAO synthetics in that they leave an extremely large amount of sticky residue behind.

Could be, but I believe carbon deposits from the oil burnt in the combustion chamber would account for a fraction of what may come from low quality fuels with no additives.
Considering most racing teams run race oils with race fuels (with few cleaning additives), and most have experienced next to no carbon deposits, I wonder if this is more related to operating the engine at very low speeds for prolonged periods (as Druck, one of our UKOC members suggests).
I have been running mine from the second top up of oil with PAO semi-synth oil, and switched to PAO fully-synth 12k miles ago and I have yet to experience any negative side effects.

I do want to keep an open mind and will observe this thread, but considering I am on the track next weekend, I don't really fancy going there with an under performing oil...

I would appreciate if Mazda published the research that led to the TSB rather than just issuing a blanket statement that could be mistaken for a hoax of international proportions (as it has been for a few days in the UK)

What would be the point of this? Mazda makes its money on cars, not on the piddlin' margin it might get on oil. And I note the Euro TSB talks about "...other mineral-based oils" not just MRO.

There's no conspiracy here, despite what others might think :nono:

Mazda makes big money on parts too!

I have read that MNAO is close with Mobil but their synth is not good for the Renesis. Can anyone shed some light on this? RG?

Mobile manufactures a mineral only oil, the "5000".

May I dare suggest that this may have something to do with oil drain intervals?

In Europe (don't know about Australia), oil is changed only once every 12.5k miles (20k kms).

i think this is more of the same as we saw in the CD here (never have seen it myself) and we have talked about here for years.- its spelled out clearly in the UK bulletin- Mazda does not recommend any oil it hasnt tested. that has been the basis of the stance from the begining- Mazda will not spend the Money to test every variation of synth and semi synth onm the market. since there has been eveidence that there can be issues it is cheaper for them to say "dont use them" then to bother with all the testing to weed out the specific ones you shouldnt use. Its a "CORPORATE" stance not a scientific one- the science would cost them more than they are willing to spend.

on the flip side- here int he states because of the issues in vegas et al, the dealers are now required to send an oil analysis of the brand they buy for use in their service departments so mazda can approve or not the use of that brand and weight. so it could be there is an additive they are wary of....

The DVD that comes with the 06s? You can watch mine. :)

i think this is more of the same as we saw in the CD here (never have seen it myself) and we have talked about here for years.- its spelled out clearly in the UK bulletin- Mazda (#) does not recommend any oil (#) it hasnt tested. that has been the basis of the stance from the begining- Mazda will not spend the Money to test every variation of synth and semi synth onm the market. since there has been eveidence that there can be issues it is cheaper for them to say "dont use them" then to bother with all the testing to weed out the specific ones you shouldnt use. Its a "CORPORATE" stance not a scientific one- the science would cost them more than they are willing to spend.

on the flip side- here int he states because of the issues in vegas et al, the dealers (#) are now required to send an oil analysis of the brand they buy for use in their service departments so mazda can approve or not the use of that brand and weight. so it could be there is an additive they are wary of....
Hmm, My dealer (University Mazda) used to use Chevron oil, but recently (last 6-12 months) moved to Castrol. Could this be why?

Hmm, My dealer (University Mazda) used to use Chevron oil, but recently (last 6-12 months) moved to Castrol. Could this be why?

dealerships use bulk oil from one vendor.... it changes due to the price, getting a deal...

beers :beer:

I have read that MNAO is close with Mobil but their synth is not good for the Renesis. Can anyone shed some light on this? RG?

http://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php?p=1081332&postcount=74

i had to work to find that one!!!!! btw, thx rg.

beers :beer:

We just got a similar bulletin here in the UK, addressed to the European market (see attached picture)

It says the owners' manual will be revised. Then in the very next sentence it says the owners' manual will not be revised.
:scratchhe

OT: Nubo, why the hell are you online at this time of the morning!

It says the owners' manual will be revised. Then in the very next sentence it says the owners' manual will not be revised.
:scratchhe

The new cars will have their owners manuals revised. Cars already out the dealership door won't be revised.

That's the way I read it.

Mobil manufactures a mineral only oil, the "5000".

May I dare suggest that this may have something to do with oil drain intervals?

In Europe (don't know about Australia), oil is changed only once every 12.5k miles (20k kms).

Yeah, that's way too long, IMO.

Here in Australia the oil changes are due every 10,000kms (6000 miles).

Yeah, that's way too long, IMO.

Here in Australia the oil changes are due every 10,000kms (6000 miles).


funny,

how the marketing works..... in the usa every 3k miles or you are DOOOOOOMMMMMED....

i have been doing every 5 k miles.... and have no more or less problems...

btw, that ambrose guy can drive a truck... go figure..

beers :beer:

I think we should focus on why Yamamoto states Mobil 1 is the worst synthetic to use in the rotary. How much different can Mobil 1 be than Royal Purple? They both use PAO for base stocks. So other than different amounts of additives they are very similar.

However, I would also point out that we assume RP is a group IV. This is controversial and it is felt by members of BITOG that RP is actually a hydrocracked group III. Nowhere, is there a product spec sheet listing the base oil used in RP, not even on RP's website, in fact, RP will not say what they use. If this is the case than it would make sense why RP is safe in rotaries, that is because RP is actually a highly refined mineral base stock.

I think they mean until a future model comes out, not for the current model year. :dunno:

funny,

how the marketing works..... in the usa every 3k miles or you are DOOOOOOMMMMMED....

i have been doing every 5 k miles.... and have no more or less problems...

btw, that ambrose guy can drive a truck... go figure..

beers :beer:

In Europe is every 15.000 kms (9300 miles)

I think we should focus on why Yamamoto states Mobil 1 is the worst synthetic to use in the rotary. How much different can Mobil 1 be than Royal Purple? They both use PAO for base stocks. So other than different amounts of additives they are very similar.

However, I would also point out that we assume RP is a group IV. This is controversial and it is felt by members of BITOG that RP is actually a hydrocracked group III. Nowhere, is there a product spec sheet listing the base oil used in RP, not even on RP's website, in fact, RP will not say what they use. If this is the case than it would make sense why RP is safe in rotaries, that is because RP is actually a highly refined mineral base stock.

Royal Purple is a Group IV PAO. I've been there and had a tour of the place. They have no problem saying what it is. It is not a Group III.

Royal Purple is a Group IV PAO. I've been there and had a tour of the place. They have no problem saying what it is. It is not a Group III.


I'm sure they can say whatever they want, but that is not going to fly. How do you know it is not a group III? because they told you so?? Can you produce a document? Fact is there is no such documentation from RP. Yeah, I'm sure they can say all kinds of BS during a tour.

These guys make an oil scan for 45 bucks, maybe someone interested can pay them to analise one of the RB oils they sell (or probably they already know):

http://www.rotaryart.uk.com/acatalog/Royal_Purple_motor_oils.html

In Europe is every 15.000 kms (9300 miles)

That's probably on the higher maintenance schedule.

Regular maintenance is 20.000kms (12.5k miles). At least this is what my European service manual says, and what my dealer does.

bump

RG: blah, blah, blah.

Raise your hand if you think a mere consumer knows more about rotary engines than the company that produces them.

But you know, some people will defend their false statements to the grave.

valpac: blah blah blah.

Raise your hand if you think a company will mention not to use x company product due to lawsuites?

But you know, some people will blindly believe any corporation despite decades of testing, by the manufacturer themselves, and other aftermarket companies. Though its funny that the type of product the company tells the consumer to use, causes the same issues.

I think I will go with the company that has done the most research and testing on said subject. Looks like Mazda is one of them...

Raise your hand if you think a mere consumer knows more about rotary engines than the company that produces them.
While I don’t feel I know more than Mazda Engineers I think I might know more than their Lawyers. Please explain why Mazda recommends 5w-30 everywhere else but North America where 5w-20 is the rule? Could it be that some other part of Mazda overruled the engineers? As posted before Mazda cannot say one brand of syn is better than another so it’s easier to just say no to all of them.

Dont know why the diff in viscosity between US and Australian cars. The service bulletin does state that Synthetic oils/blends are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines...

I'll say this, corporations have agendas and Mazda is no different than most. It is your choice whether to believe lawyers dreamed up this bulletin to "cover their ass" and mitigate potential lawsuits or Engineers drafted this sb because they have tested synth oils in rotary engines and found them to be detrimental. Why risk it? Your choice.

I really hate reading statements from self-professed experts on this forum that say "using synth oil is fine". Such statements are irresponsible in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

I really hate reading statements from self-professed experts on this forum that say "using synth oil is fine". Such statements are irresponsible in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary. If he said that you might be correct. He said CERTAIN Synth oils are ok, and it's not hard to find which ones he said, oops how did that photo get attached??

...
To the people here that have been using synthetics for a while, don't worry about it. Keep using them. You are fine. For the most part I only see people here running well known oils that are known to work good. A TSB isn't going to change that. The thing I feel sorry for is the people who can't seem to distinguish the truth from a legal statement made to keep giving dealerships bs reasons to keep voiding warranties. It's all about money. The more warranties they void, the less they spend. hmmm... doesnt say certain. And yes, probably should not have used quotes since I paraphrased. sorry.

Dont know why the diff in viscosity between US and Australian cars. The service bulletin does state that Synthetic oils/blends are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines...

I'll say this, corporations have agendas and Mazda is no different than most. It is your choice whether to believe lawyers dreamed up this bulletin to "cover their ass" and mitigate potential lawsuits or Engineers drafted this sb because they have tested synth oils in rotary engines and found them to be detrimental. Why risk it? Your choice.

I really hate reading statements from self-professed experts on this forum that say "using synth oil is fine". Such statements are irresponsible in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

Could you please point me to "the mounting evidence"regarding suitability of synth oil for the RX-8 engines.(I mean real evidence such as pictures of failures etc).Thanks in advance.

The one possible argument I see for the TSB, is not the amount of carbon, but the physical qualities of partially-carbonized oil. There are many forms of carbon, and it seems possible that one type of oil when partially-carbonized might yield a stickier residue, whereas another type might produce a more grainy or flakey residue. If the residue has just the right tarry, sticky quality then I could see small amounts slowly accumulating in the intake ports as pictured, as they are swept by the seals. The reason I think this is possible is that the region around the intake port is cooler, and perhaps allows oil residues in that area to burn, but only partially. I don't know if there are any areas in a piston engine that are quite analagous to this situation.

Thoughts?

Already been two service bulletins (Australian & European w/ a picture) distributed. My guess is more evidence will come as the recall gets in full swing.

You realise that the picture they show has all the "carbon" deposits in the Auxiliary Port.Note that no air flows thru that port until the engine is turning at least 6200rpm and under some load.If you look at the port below,the secondary port ,there is no deposition visible,and this port opens at about 3600-400 rpm.
Note they did not show a picture of the primary port which has air flowing thru all the time the engine runs
I take this as evidence that you need to run your engine at high rpm occasionally.

If he said that you might be correct. He said CERTAIN Synth oils are ok, and it's not hard to find which ones he said, oops how did that photo get attached??

were did you get that stuff????:mdrmed:

beers :beer:

You realise that the picture they show has all the "carbon" deposits in the Auxiliary Port.Note that no air flows thru that port until the engine is turning at least 6200rpm and under some load.If you look at the port below,the secondary port ,there is no deposition visible,and this port opens at about 3600-400 rpm.
Note they did not show a picture of the primary port which has air flowing thru all the time the engine runs
I take this as evidence that you need to run your engine at high rpm occasionally.

Perhaps, but the picture only shows part of the other port. The one with the carbon has most of the deposit on the (trailing?) edge -- can't see the corresponding edge for the other port.

I'm sure they can say whatever they want, but that is not going to fly. How do you know it is not a group III? because they told you so?? Can you produce a document? Fact is there is no such documentation from RP. Yeah, I'm sure they can say all kinds of BS during a tour.
I'm sure you can say it is whatever you want but that's not going to fly either. Can you provide any evidence that it isn't a group IV oil? It is you know so have fun! BS is easy to find everywhere isn't it? As far as the "tour" was concerned, they don't just give tours to the public. David Canitz who gave us the "tour" happens to be one of the local RX-7 guys.

RG: blah, blah, blah.

Raise your hand if you think a mere consumer knows more about rotary engines than the company that produces them.

But you know, some people will defend their false statements to the grave.
valpac: I'm not quite sure what your problem is but I can with absolute certainty say that you don't really intend to stay a member of this forum for much longer. Try me! Next time you have a problem with me, have the balls to bring it to me personally instead of posting to others and waiting for me to happen across it. If that's not good enough for you I'll be at Sevenstock this year and will be more than happy to personally discuss it with you face to face.

In the mean time, you've got 10,000 words per post with which to counter all the information that I've ever posted on the forum over the past few years so get to work. I'll wait.

Perhaps, but the picture only shows part of the other port. The one with the carbon has most of the deposit on the (trailing?) edge -- can't see the corresponding edge for the other port.

You see they could have shown a picture of the plug holes that they were so concerned about.The attached rotor housing is the rear housing off my motor,shown uncleaned,just as dismantled.This engine ran on Castrol Syntech 10W30.The pluge holes look fine.(the little hole is the one they expressed the concern about.

Dont know why the diff in viscosity between US and Australian cars. The service bulletin does state that Synthetic oils/blends are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines...



1. you should be able to find that fairly easily as i have (others have too) posted it on numerous occasions

2. whats funny about the australian bulletin is that the australian dealers only had synth to put inthe cars for over a year as the importer wasnt bringing in any non synth in the recommended weight.

What is even more funny is that the recall instructions don't seem to mention anything about synth oil usage.

Misfire and plugs foulage have been symptoms for some owners since the very beginning and don't seem to be related at all to the make up of the oil, but more to the viscosity and usage of the engine.

You see they could have shown a picture of the plug holes that they were so concerned about.The attached rotor housing is the rear housing off my motor,shown uncleaned,just as dismantled.This engine ran on Castrol Syntech 10W30.The pluge holes look fine.(the little hole is the one they expressed the concern about.

That's cool, I thought all dead Renesis went to Japan -- it's nice to actually see the insides of one that's been in service. How do the sides and intake ports look?

well Mazda ain't perfect and marketing is full of sin--so I go with what makes more sense to me. It never did make sense to me that Mazda said to use ony 5W20 in this car--all the time. Looks like that didnt make sense to a lot of others now doesnt it? Since that was wrong maybe they are wrong about good quality synthetics also. I think they are. And it's my motor and I can do what I want with it. Bah!
How many of you have ever torn a motor down? Ever seen an engine that has had poor mantaince? Ever seen one that has had good mantainance and ran a good synthetic? I have. I will run synthetic's. To Hell with Mazda in that regard. If they told me to jump off a bridge would I do it?
Olddragger

RG: blah, blah, blah.

Raise your hand if you think a mere consumer knows more about rotary engines than the company that produces them.

But you know, some people will defend their false statements to the grave.

Huh? Both RG and I stood and listened while Both Rick Engman and the head of Mazda Rotary engineering told us in person that there were no problems with certain synthetics in rotarys, specifically RP and Valvoline....thats not making a statement based on opinion, thats coming from the horses mouth, which I trust more than MNAO which has to balance a bunch of issues in there statements.

RG is not against, no am I good mineral oils. But there are some unique advantages to certain synthetics that make them useful for rotary enthusiasts. This is about dispelling the myth that all sythetics are bad, no slaming people who use a good mineral oil.

We are trying to help here, this isn't something we spend hours testing and posting on b/c we like debating people. You want to here from the experts? Come meet us at sevenstock this year, I'll gladly introduce you.

Mazda's issues with synthetics are simple - They are all different, and therefore, Mazda doesn't want to take the time and money to test and certify which ones work and don't, pure and simple. That and the PR damage from being black listed could create a lawsuit. Its simpler to say don't use them at all.

The only thing RG and I are taking to our grave will be the knowledge that our research into oil meant we got the most longevity and power out our of engines.

Nice level headed response brillo. Bravo. It's much easier to believe what you say when you simply say it like it happened, and for some who want to, frustratingly hard to refute.

Mazda's issues with synthetics are simple - They are all different, and therefore, Mazda doesn't want to take the time and money to test and certify which ones work and don't, pure and simple. That and the PR damage from being black listed could create a lawsuit. Its simpler to say don't use them at all.


I've heard RG say that elsewhere before, and reading over this thread, I wonder, if the rotary is that sensitive to oil formulation, then how can Mazda recommend *all* dino oils?

Assuming similar additives (viscosity modifiers & detergents) are used in both dino and syn oils, are there *that* many diffferences in the synthetic base stocks out there?

[QUOTE=Nubo]That's cool, I thought all dead Renesis went to Japan -- it's nice to actually see the insides of one

Other than the damage I caused evrything looked really clean,no significant wear on the housings or the seals,side and apex (of course the motor only did about 20k miles).Just based on the visual,100k miles should be no problem.

In the mean time, you've got 10,000 words per post with which to counter all the information that I've ever posted on the forum over the past few years so get to work. I'll wait.
Why would I bother to rebut all your posts? I have already said that I disagree with you on your opinions regarding synthetic oil usage in rotaries. The rest of your posts are not worth my effort.

Does disagreement with another member warrant a permanent ban or a veiled threat of violence?

Why not? Can we take that to the Polls sub-forum of the Lounge? Good question! :D:

Why would I bother to rebut all your posts? I have already said that I disagree with you on your opinions regarding synthetic oil usage in rotaries. The rest of your posts are not worth my effort.

Does disagreement with another member warrant a permanent ban or a veiled threat of violence?

what exactly about posting synthetic/dyno oil scientific information and comments from Mazda's head rotary engineer qualifies to you as opinion?
:scratchhe

Why would I bother to rebut all your posts? I have already said that I disagree with you on your opinions regarding synthetic oil usage in rotaries. The rest of your posts are not worth my effort.

Does disagreement with another member warrant a permanent ban or a veiled threat of violence?
Nope but your personal attacks do and yes you have made them in an off sort of way. You directly implied that I am lying to everyone. Remember saying this? "But you know, some people will defend their false statements to the grave." It came right after you said: "RG: blah, blah, blah". A "false statement" is what corporations and manufacturers give every day. Kind of like what you put all of your faith in. A "false statement" is one in which you know to be wrong yet you say it anyways. I don't give false statements. I give facts based on personal experience. A tsb from Mazda won't change my results.

How about this one. I know you didn't name me directly but everyone knows who you were directing it at and don't claim you weren't. "I really hate reading statements from self-professed experts on this forum that say "using synth oil is fine". Such statements are irresponsible in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary" That's a good one!

I'll tell you what I hate. I hate it when people like you who have zero usable experience on a topic seem to feel like it's your responsiblity to give advice. Contribute when you can but don't if you can't. I've stated time and again from personal experience why I like what I do and my reasons for doing them. Personal experience is quite beneficial and others want to know about it regardless of who it's from, good or bad. I've stated exactly why they have this tsb and why it's worded the way it is. I've even talked to the highest rotary person in the land about it which also backs up what I've said in regards to their reason for saying what they did. Have you? I know you don't read any of what I write (or you wouldn't respond with the material that you do) because you just said that I'm not worth your time. Maybe I'm not personally, and that's fine, but you can apparently learn something from some of what I write. You obviously don't know a whole lot about what you are arguing against when it comes to oils. That's the real reason you won't take the time to rebut me. You can't. You have no material other than "the tsb says". Again, I'll wait. Do your part and contribute.

Does this mean you have to believe what I say? Nope. What you don't need to do is call me "ignorant", "irresponsible", say I make "false statements", or just take a general attitude against me just because you disagree with me on a topic. A little tongue in cheek sarcastic humor is one thing and admiittedly is hard to convey through typing but you are actually saying it and meaning it. No I'm not letting that go. Remember I've never said that using conventionals is bad. I have just been defending good synthetics and talking from personal experience. One test result is worth more than a thousand expert opinions. I've had positive results for years and in light to the current tsb from Mazda stating they are bad is "mouting evidence to the contrary" in favor of synthetics (or at least the ones that I like). Remember what I just said about results vs opinions. Everyone also knows what oil I personally use. That's no secret.

I use RP, Yes RP, oh yes RP RP RP.

So? I like my Full Synthentic Oil. but I am not against Dino oils. You like it? You can use it. but I think valpac just have nothing to counter.

Dont bother valpac, u'll lose.

In all fairness to Mazda, I can appreciate the position synthetics put them in. I don't hate on them because of the "party line" they have to tow to balance all the issues involved. Work in corporate America long enough, you begin to at least appreciate the balancing act.

Hell, to be honest, if ever mazda and rotary owner used a good dyno oil and changed it every 3-4K the motoring world would be a better place as most cars would not only drive longer, but more efficiently.

the truth is, the majority of RX8 owners who drive the cars daily and occationally driven them hard will be more than fine with the above advice. There is a subset though that do push the cars hard, and need a good synthetic option for some extra protection. Thats where all this comes in. I would consider what and how you drive, and the costs involved before you jump into one camp or another. But I would also do your homework, do some research before deciding as well. Its interesting stuff, you might learn someting too.

In Germany are only special SYNTHETIK DEXELIA Super 5w-30 recommend or equivalently ACEA A5/B5. :mdrmed:

http://www.franken-online.de/hgb/RX-8/Mazda-Oel.pdf

In Europe is every 15.000 kms (9300 miles)

Wait juanjux:

is not that every 20.000 km (12,500 miles)? :yesnod:

Regards

jird20

In Germany are only special SYNTHETIK DEXELIA Super 5w-30 recommend or equivalently ACEA A5/B5. :mdrmed:

http://www.franken-online.de/hgb/RX-8/Mazda-Oel.pdfHere is a Google translation of this 8/16/2006 doc. Now how did this oil get the Mazda stamp of approval?? What is the difference between a conventional synthetic and an un-conventional synthetic?
I wonder how many fewer engines Mazda would have had to replace if 5w-30 was also the requirement in the USA?

33 date: 16.08.2006 side: 1/1 engine oil specification
- Mazda Wankelmotore
technology (KSI) No.: 64/06 building group: D (E017/06)

very honoured contracting parties, from given cause we refer again to the specific engine oil requirements with wankel engines. With employment of conventional synthetic high speed engine oils it can come in exceptional cases to increased engine wear and to seal incompatibilities. Therefore we recommend urgently the employment of Mazda Dexelia Ultra 5W-30 with Mazda Dexelia Ultra 5W-30 concern it a particularly developed engine oil, which becomes optimally the special requirements of the Mazda Wankelmotore fair. Mazda Dexelia Ultra 5W-30 is the only engine oil for Wankelmotore, recommended by Mazda. If this engine oil should not be available in exceptional cases, then 5W-30 with the minimum requirement is ACEA A5/B5 to begin excluding lubricants of the specification SOWS. Engine oils with lower ACEA qualities (e.g. A1/B1) are not usable! Note: LOW SAP engine oils of the specification ACEA c1 and/or ACEA C1-A5-B5 and/or ACEA C2-A5-B5 are not suitable for the use!

Yours sincerely M. Grüttke E. weber
leader KS-technology KS-technology

Mazda Distributors other than the US (it appears) have NEVER recommended the use of Synthetic oils for ANY rotary engine...period..

I don't give a rats scrotum what other experts say, until Mazda recommends it I wont use it, and that's what I said when I first joined the forum..

The MA bulletin that circulated here and was some years old still applies, now we see 1+1 new bulletins to distributor/dealers from MMC (1) repeating the same warning.

WHAT ELSE DO YOU NEED TO BE TOLD...there is NO covering their arse or a conspiracy issue.

NO Manufacturer, Dealer, or Distributor can control WHAT an owner does to their car and what they may or may not put in it!.....

While I agree with RG on many of his points, its because the issues of what Synths are good are what are not, can a "blended" synthetic be used or not...blah blah blah...

Of course its easier fro MMC to have a NO RECOMMENDATION for SYNTHETICS, as they don't and wont endorse or test any particular brand, etc, etc.

Those who RACE Rotary engine vehicles should be excluded as ALL are overhauled very regularly and ALL seals are renewed....Its IS the LONG term use of synthetics and carbon build up that IS the issue, that leads to "marbles', poor performance, fowled plugs, oil control "O" Ring degradation,etc.

I know this sounds like a contradiction but CARBON build up in rotaries is nothing new...
It happened in the 70's when SYNTHETIC oils did not exist, and high lead content fuels did,
the only real way to remove it is to strip the engine and wire wheel it off rotors, etc.

Today, the critical difference is the way the exhaust is ported in the RENESIS, through side housings....as shown in Bulletin....ie...high carbon build up is BAD NEWS!!!

Dont know why the diff in viscosity between US and Australian cars. The service bulletin does state that Synthetic oils/blends are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines...

I'll say this, corporations have agendas and Mazda is no different than most. It is your choice whether to believe lawyers dreamed up this bulletin to "cover their ass" and mitigate potential lawsuits or Engineers drafted this sb because they have tested synth oils in rotary engines and found them to be detrimental. Why risk it? Your choice.

I really hate reading statements from self-professed experts on this forum that say "using synth oil is fine". Such statements are irresponsible in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

I can assure you that Mazda Japan have NEVER recommended the use of Synth in ANY of their Rotary engines, from 10a,12a,13a,13b,20b, Ren 13B, they all use that same oil control ring and o ring design.

This has already been covered, but I was told by service at my dealer that the mazda oil is a semi-synthetic mix. I also noticed that it's green, instead of being a nice gold colour ...
... which is bizarre, I've never seen green engine oil before!

of course this will never end-----:) Differant opinions helps the world go around.
Guess I am just a pragmatist--but then again I (along with many others) have been supporting and using pre mix in this engine for a long time. We must have some idea what is going on.
rotor on ------
olddragger

ASH8, the key word in your post is "recommend". As you are aware, initially (ie, until mid '04) there was no MRO available in Australia, so most Australian Mazda dealers were using either Mobil1 or a Castrol synth or semi-synth.

Then MRO was released, with that strange wording on the bottle which certainly suggested you didn't "need" to use it in the Renesis!

The oil mystery continues :) , in the earlier days July 03 i contacted Mazda Australia with my concern at not having the correct as in recommended MINERAL OIL , available to us , and guess what i finally got a reply with this TBS thats been released now .

Timbo is 100% correct the so called recommended Mazda mineral oil was NOT available til mid 04 .

Michael

Today, the critical difference is the way the exhaust is ported in the RENESIS, through side housings....as shown in Bulletin....ie...high carbon build up is BAD NEWS!!!

The only thing is that the ports shown in the picture are INTAKE ports and are no different that 2nd gen 6 port engines(apart from area and timing differences)

of course this will never end-----:) Differant opinions helps the world go around.

It would largely end if Mazda would do a very simple thing. As part of the recall, they could apply a revision to the owner's manual stating NON-SYNTHETIC OIL ONLY, and inform the customer. E.g. have the customer apply the page update. And/or give each customer a new oil cap with the specification marked.

I was prepared to switch, and actually did use conventional oil in my recent change, because it seemed like Mazda was finally going to make their position clear, from reading the press stories which alleged that part of the engine issue was use of synthetics.

Now that I've seen the apparently official notices, which don't mention synthetic oil at all, I see no reason not to switch back and every reason to doubt the accuracy of the press reports.

If there's really a problem, then Mazda is retarded to not take the necessary action, since they will have to spend the time and resources to fix the complaints, not to mention customer dissatisfaction. While we debate the issue endlessly and scour the WWW for evidence, Joe Consumer looks in his owners manual and sees that he needs SL oil. Period.

If Mazda wants the consumer to follow a specification, then Mazda has to ESTABLISH the specification. In no way have they done so in the American market. Yes, I've seen pictures of the little tips booklet and I've heard about the CD. That doesn't cut it and I stand by my statement. I can only conclude that synthetic oils meeting API SL, sold in the American market, are suitable for use in the Renesis engine.

Nubo, which part of:"Synthetic oils are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines including Renesis in RX-8. Only mineral oils must be used." do you not understand?

i think many here, dont read the whole thing....

this is a auzzy and europe thing... we just get new motors...

mazda does not have a tsb out on syn oil in the usa..

hope this helps..

beers :beer:

exactly, synth oils are apparently only prohibited in Europe and Australia. Although countries liek Italy, which don't speak English, don't even know about it!

I used Motul 8100 PAO fully-synth for 12k miles, including a full oil change at the second service and 2 track days.
My oil usage is just the same as before (if not a bit less in winter).

I am now using the mazda Dexelia stuff and again, noticed no change whatsoever.

BTW, at 33k miles, using semi-synth and fully-synth oil, I am still on the original catalyst.

Only difference, I have always used 5w-30 API SL oil

I think the basic issue is how the longer, stronger molecular chains in Synth oils create stronger, bigger ash particles perhaps. The clue I'm looking at is the shear properties of the oil, and Mobil 1 is one of the best in the industry in this regard. It is very resistant to burning, and it must be imagined that it would still retain this property even with fuel diluting it in the cylinder. If it WERE more resistant to being burnt, it is likely that the carbon chains might be extremely prone to clinging together in a tar-like manner, and would, of course be pushed into the tertiary port in light use.

With the upcoming PCM programming change set to inject MORE oil at light cruise (less fuel dilution), it is also likely that we *could* see an increase in the carbon issue in cars where synthetics are run (regardless whether they're a "cracked" synthetic or a full synthetic). The steady-state cruise mode would keep the cylinder heat fairly high and without the occasional opening of the 3rd port, carbon will collect there.

This is purely hypothetical conjecture on my part, but looking at the facts, the very characteristics which make synthetics great for lubrication might be the cause of their carbonizing effect in the Renesis 13B.

Nubo, which part of:

Synthetic oils are prohibited in all Mazda rotary engines including Renesis in RX-8. Only mineral oils must be used.

do you not understand?

It's a very clear, concise declarative sentence. :)

I should have made it clear, I am stating this from a U.S. owners' perspective. Your TSB leaves no room for doubt what Mazda requires of Australian owners. However, in the USA we have no such TSB, no revision to owners' manual, etc...

So, re-read my post in that light.

Nubo wrote:

If Mazda wants the consumer to follow a specification, then Mazda has to ESTABLISH the specification. In no way have they done so in the American market.

They can't. In the US motor oil specification is an industry standard, and Mazda can't freelance - even if they have good technical reasons. They're legally stuck


Joe Consumer looks in his owners manual and sees that he needs SL oil. Period.

Yes - that's what the laws and standards require.

It could be worse. There are organizations like Consumers Union who think Joe Consumer shouldn't even have to look for the SL. He should just have to look for the "star" symbol. They're actually part way there. Look at a bottle of oil. The star symbol is on the front, and the API symbol (which actually conveys information) is relegated to the back.

Mazda is sticking their neck way out by saying mineral oil only in their booklet and the video. They're also sticking their neck out in the places where they say to use only 91 octane fuel. While I am a very conventional, law-abiding person, I think Mazda's hedonism and courage should be rewarded. Dino and 91 for me and my 8!

YMMV

Ken

Im using Synthentic.

My engine is Alive.

18000 miles running strong.

Some ppl on the 7 boards have their engine running Full synthentic For its whole life and not even a single problem.

So? What does that mean ?

Mazda is a company people, a GOD DAMN COMPANY, CORPORATION ! THEY ARE HERE TO MAKE MONEY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

damn it ...... its always ALWAYS ALWAYS easier for them ban all than testing every single one of them out there. cuz you know what, do you guys have ANY idea how MANY oils are out there.

Jesus christ people. Keep these oil thing to yourself. Use Mineral or whatever I dont care. If it works for you. Great !

but Im using Synthentic like most people , I dont buy this "corporation" bullshit. and My engine has yet to blow up. simple as that.

Im using Synthentic.

My engine is Alive.

18000 miles running strong.

Some ppl on the 7 boards have their engine running Full synthentic For its whole life and not even a single problem.

So? What does that mean ?

Mazda is a company people, a GOD DAMN COMPANY, CORPORATION ! THEY ARE HERE TO MAKE MONEY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

damn it ...... its always ALWAYS ALWAYS easier for them ban all than testing every single one of them out there. cuz you know what, do you guys have ANY idea how MANY oils are out there.

Jesus christ people. Keep these oil thing to yourself. Use Mineral or whatever I dont care. If it works for you. Great !

but Im using Synthentic like most people , I dont buy this "corporation" bullshit. and My engine has yet to blow up. simple as that.


Actually mate Mazda Japan have been consistent on this "corporation Bullshit"..
they have over the last 15 years or more NEVER recommended the use of ANY Synthetic oils for rotaries...so there is no bullshit..they have remained consistent.

The BULLSHIT comes from those who don't or won't listen...the owners....and no body really cares what you put down your tube, but hey, don't complain when an issue of marbles, poor performance, missing... MAY occur...hey its MAZDA'S Fault ...Right...yeah...'the land of the synthetics'. :)

exactly, synth oils are apparently only prohibited in Europe and Australia. Although countries liek Italy, which don't speak English, don't even know about it!

I used Motul 8100 PAO fully-synth for 12k miles, including a full oil change at the second service and 2 track days.
My oil usage is just the same as before (if not a bit less in winter).

I am now using the mazda Dexelia stuff and again, noticed no change whatsoever.

BTW, at 33k miles, using semi-synth and fully-synth oil, I am still on the original catalyst.

Only difference, I have always used 5w-30 API SL oil

MAZDA's in Italy are distributed by Mazda Motors Europe?...

It's a very clear, concise declarative sentence. :)

I should have made it clear, I am stating this from a U.S. owners' perspective. Your TSB leaves no room for doubt what Mazda requires of Australian owners. However, in the USA we have no such TSB, no revision to owners' manual, etc...

So, re-read my post in that light.

OK, have re-read, and understand what you're saying....but.....

are you seriously going to wait for MNA to get itself through whatever mire of regulations and specifications that bind it from saying anything along the same lines as it has said in Australia and Europe? It's the same engine in each market, same seals, ports, o-rings etc :Eyecrazy:

ASH8, the key word in your post is "recommend". As you are aware, initially (ie, until mid '04) there was no MRO available in Australia, so most Australian Mazda dealers were using either Mobil1 or a Castrol synth or semi-synth.

Then MRO was released, with that strange wording on the bottle which certainly suggested you didn't "need" to use it in the Renesis!

Yes I do, but, to say that there was not a mineral oil available in Australia at the time was unusual and wrong by MA...

I used and still do Castrol GTX3 a 10w40 MINERAL OIL....fantastic.....and cheaper than MA's MRO...and great for our summer's.

Sure its a little heavier, but, most if not all new oils thin within 500 kilometres of use.

IMO this has been part of the problem in the US using a 0w20, way too light for high temp use...(even though their gradings/standards are slightly different to ours, and I said this in 2005 when they had failures in Nevada, oil that light would have been BOILING and BURNING)

They can't. In the US motor oil specification is an industry standard, and Mazda can't freelance - even if they have good technical reasons. They're legally stuck

Not quite. If they want to require a special brand (such as their vaunted Dexelia), I think they can do so as long as they provide it free of charge.


It could be worse. There are organizations like Consumers Union who think Joe Consumer shouldn't even have to look for the SL. He should just have to look for the "star" symbol. They're actually part way there. Look at a bottle of oil. The star symbol is on the front, and the API symbol (which actually conveys information) is relegated to the back.

Mazda is sticking their neck way out by saying mineral oil only in their booklet and the video. They're also sticking their neck out in the places where they say to use only 91 octane fuel. While I am a very conventional, law-abiding person, I think Mazda's hedonism and courage should be rewarded. Dino and 91 for me and my 8!

YMMV

Ken

Interesting take.

Actually mate Mazda Japan have been consistent on this "corporation Bullshit"..
they have over the last 15 years or more NEVER recommended the use of ANY Synthetic oils for rotaries...so there is no bullshit..they have remained consistent.

The BULLSHIT comes from those who don't or won't listen...the owners....and no body really cares what you put down your tube, but hey, don't complain when an issue of marbles, poor performance, missing... MAY occur...hey its MAZDA'S Fault ...Right...yeah...'the land of the synthetics'. :)


Yeah, I also wonder how many years it took before Harley Davidson accept Synthentic Oil.

people who use Mineral have marbles, poor performance, missing .... what? Sure its NOT Mazda's fault. Its not their fault that they didnt program their PCM right.

Sorry to disappoint you that I just dont have any problems when using Synthentic, and theres no one can give people hard prove. Oh, I think two rotor post a pic of his Synthentic Motor , take a look at it. wheres carbon.

Actually mate Mazda Japan have been consistent on this "corporation Bullshit"..
they have over the last 15 years or more NEVER recommended the use of ANY Synthetic oils for rotaries...so there is no bullshit..they have remained consistent.

The BULLSHIT comes from those who don't or won't listen...the owners....and no body really cares what you put down your tube, but hey, don't complain when an issue of marbles, poor performance, missing... MAY occur...hey its MAZDA'S Fault ...Right...yeah...'the land of the synthetics'. :)


Yeah, I also wonder how many years it took before Harley Davidson accept Synthentic Oil.

people who use Mineral have marbles, poor performance, missing .... what? Sure its NOT Mazda's fault. Its not their fault that they didnt program their PCM right. some people's A/C rough idle issue has been corrected by using Synthentic oil. Oh yes. That must be Mazda's fault too.

Sorry to disappoint you but I just dont have any problems using Synthentic. Oh, I think two rotor post a pic of his Synthentic Motor , take a look at it. wheres the carbon.

Too bad. my engine is still alive.

My personal experience might be a little short (18K miles only), but I have no problems with Synthentic. So just mind your own business and stick with your mineral.

Not quite. If they want to require a special brand (such as their vaunted Dexelia), I think they can do so as long as they provide it free of charge.

Now there's a thought! That could even help the dealers: bring it back to the dealer for free changes, and the service department has the opportunity to sell you more stuff.

My dealer is giving me free oil changes for the first two years. I'll make sure I ask what oil they put in.

Ken

I can assure you that Mazda Japan have NEVER recommended the use of Synth in ANY of their Rotary engines, from 10a,12a,13a,13b,20b, Ren 13B, they all use that same oil control ring and o ring design.

Can you assure me of the same?

I need a bite of a vegi-might sandwich. Heard theirs syn. oil in it. :rock:

Can you assure me of the same?

Forget it. Let them stick to their "marketing" belives.

I always believe in "actual" fact like REAL LIFE people's experience(like myself, RG, RB, and many many MANY others) than "myth/marketing".

and I ALWAYS wonder Why People wont listen to Mazda when Mazda said

"Mazda recommend you to perform this service at a Mazda Dealer"
"Mazda does NOT recommend any aftermarket parts, use original Mazda parts"

Especially the second one, people put this and that into their rotary but just not Oil, what a Joke. :ylsuper:

talking about oil ring, Oh I cant say for all cuz I dont know all but I thought that most Synthentic oil changed their stuff to prevent that from happening. OH THATS WHAT HAPPENED ! and they changed it because its causing problems with OTHER ENGINE AS WELL, NOT ONLY ROTARY. and the change was like what? more than a decade ago ? Now we're using even MORE advance oils now (Synth or Mineral), and science proved that Synth is getting more advance than Mineral.

Oh yeah, shake n bake !

Let me throw this out there for discussion....

In the last few years Mazda Japan have pulled down a large number of failed USDM Renesis engines. It's reasonable to suggest that the knowledge they have gained from the strip down of these engines has led (in some part at least) to the current RX-8 recall.

They would have seen the carbon build up. By testing the carbon samples they could easily ascertain the oil base used in each engine. A crapload of testing would have been done before Mazda sent out this recall, they don't recall willy nilly. I'm sure they have carried out laboratory testing of this carbon. Let me suggest that the results they found pointed the finger of blame at synthetics. Some synthetics, not all. Not RP...we all know that is Gods Oil.

Some of the engines pulled down did not ever have synthetic in them, but significant numbers of them did. What do Mazda do? They warn other markets about the "danger" of synthetic usage. Weird American liability laws preclude them from doing it in the USA. They carry out a recall to fix affected engines in the USA and reflash the PCM to provide an increased MOP output. This increase lifts the compression back up to spec and the improved combustion reduces the carbon build up.

Just a theory.....

I gave up a long, long time ago...(:D) tring to help people who already have made up their minds. I'll keep using my evil oil. If I'm wrong??? Let Mazda try to void my warranty. I'll tell them(Dealer) what ever they want to here. Syn oil? NEVER! :rock:

I still want a Vegie-might sandwich :kiss:

Here you go, get your own bread and spread it :)

Can you assure me of the same?





What's this then...

Here you go, get your own bread and spread it :)


Thanks! :ylsuper:

Dam, Kraft makes everything! :)

Let me throw this out there for discussion....

In the last few years Mazda Japan have pulled down a large number of failed USDM Renesis engines. It's reasonable to suggest that the knowledge they have gained from the strip down of these engines has led (in some part at least) to the current RX-8 recall.

They would have seen the carbon build up. By testing the carbon samples they could easily ascertain the oil base used in each engine. A crapload of testing would have been done before Mazda sent out this recall, they don't recall willy nilly. I'm sure they have carried out laboratory testing of this carbon. Let me suggest that the results they found pointed the finger of blame at synthetics. Some synthetics, not all. Not RP...we all know that is Gods Oil.

Some of the engines pulled down did not ever have synthetic in them, but significant numbers of them did. What do Mazda do? They warn other markets about the "danger" of synthetic usage. Weird American liability laws preclude them from doing it in the USA. They carry out a recall to fix affected engines in the USA and reflash the PCM to provide an increased MOP output. This increase lifts the compression back up to spec and the improved combustion reduces the carbon build up.

Just a theory.....

This is NOT a Theory! It is unsupported supposition.You do not have clue how many engines have been stripped down,you do not have a clue what fraction of those pulled down ran on synthetic oil.
Your countryman ASH8 makes a bold statement that Mazda have never recommended synthetic oil for rotary engines,I provide proof that he is wrong and you ignore it.I should also point out that Mazda's recommendation for oil in (some)other markets is the same as I show in my post above.
I have no idea why Mazda would issue the Service Information Bulletin regarding synthetic oil,in Australia and Europe and not in North America when more than 50% of RX-8 sales are in North America.It does not seem like a prudent action to me.
Maybe we should start using sheep dip to lubricate our motors!

What's this then...

You miss the point Bruce!I have read the Service Information Bulletin.The point here is your earlier statement regarding Mazda never having recommended synthetic oil for any rotary engine is INCORRECT.If you read the information in my Owners'Manual clearly Castrol Syntec meets all the requirements.

This is NOT a Theory! It is unsupported supposition.You do not have clue how many engines have been stripped down,you do not have a clue what fraction of those pulled down ran on synthetic oil.
Your countryman ASH8 makes a bold statement that Mazda have never recommended synthetic oil for rotary engines,I provide proof that he is wrong and you ignore it.I should also point out that Mazda's recommendation for oil in (some)other markets is the same as I show in my post above.
I have no idea why Mazda would issue the Service Information Bulletin regarding synthetic oil,in Australia and Europe and not in North America when more than 50% of RX-8 sales are in North America.It does not seem like a prudent action to me.
Maybe we should start using sheep dip to lubricate our motors!

Theory, shmeory. I'm not going to argue semantics with you. I put up an idea for discussion.

You don't like it? OK.

:stickpoke Some famous (last) words: (this thread brings to mind)

"Helmet! Screw the helmet, I'm careful, and I love the wind blowing in my face."
"Seatbelts are confining. I only wear mine sometimes on long trips."
"Smoking bad? Bah! It's a liberal plot to impoverish tobacco growers. I'll smoke til I die!"
"My sizzor jack holds the car up just fine. Hell I been under it and it barely moves at all."
"We're always careful when it's her time, she'll never get pregnent by me!"
"I'll just roll in the grass after I set myself on fire! I've seen it done on TV."
"One more for the road just helps me relax and concentrate better."
"Et tu, Brute?"
(w/notable exceptions - you know who you are! :hahano: ) "I know more than all the rotary engine engineers in the world combined. Damn the inlet ports, it's full synthetic in my car!" :yelrotflm

You forgot the Stingray!

If you read the information in my Owners'Manual clearly Castrol Syntec meets all the requirements.

The requirement being 5w20, API sevice SL?

If that's it, why spend more money for synthetics when there are much cheaper oils available that meet the requirements? Even Mobil Clean 5000 mile, which Mobil says won't last through Mazda's 7500 mile change interval, is SL.

Is there any industry standard rating for synthetic oils? Personally, I believe the claims the oil companies make about the performance of their synthetics, but can they put their results into an objective rating scheme?

While poking around oil company web sites, I found this interesting page at Mobil:

http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Synthetics/Myths.aspx

Look at the answer to the second myth. I know Mobil 1 is the one synth on everyone's blacklist for rotaries, but how would anyone just looking at the owner's manual and API label know that?

Ken

http://www.royalpurple.com/techa/faqsa.html#re1

Rotary Engines

Can Royal Purple Motor Oil be used in a rotary engine?

Yes. A rotary engine is a modified four cycle engine that recommends the use of an API licensed motor oil for street applications.

More information and FAQs on lubrication of Rotary Engines:

In a rotary engine, the oil lubricates the eccentric shaft bearings, thrust needle bearings and rotor bearings similar to a crank and rod bearing of a piston engine as well as being injected into the combustion chambers to lubricate the apex seals, corner seals, and side seals helping to create the sealing mechanism doing the equivalent job of the piston rings.

Royal Purple provides outstanding protection for the e-shaft, rotor bearings, thrust bearings and is suitable for the oil injection system as it has proven to run cleaner than other oils and is an excellent choice for rotary apex seals, corner seals, and side seals.

Mazda makes a statement in the Owner’s Manual not to use synthetic oils in a rotary engine, why do you say that it is OK?

Royal Purple has performed seal compatibility testing on the components used in a rotary with excellent results, including older rotary engine seals dating back to the Cosmo. Royal Purple’s Technical Services Manager David Canitz has been an owner and racer of rotary engine cars and has used synthetic motor oils in rotaries since 1985 with excellent results. He has been trying to find an answer to this Mazda statement for the last 18 years.

In the early development of synthetic oils decades ago, there were purportedly some seal compatibility issues. Today’s synthetic oils do not have the compatibility issues of the old oils. There is no substantiated evidence of seal compatibility issues with Royal Purple.

Here are some facts:

The Mazda Factory racing departments recommend and use ‘synthetic’ oils including the winning 1991 Leman’s 20-G 4 rotor Mazda 787B.

MazdaComp USA printed manual (now Mazdaspeed) recommends the use of synthetic oils for racing conditions.

Royal Purple Motor Oils have been used in rotary engines (both race and street) for ten plus years with excellent results.

Royal Purple Motor Oil is compatible with the bearing material, sealing elastomers, and combustion seals used in a rotary engine.


I heard that synthetic oil doesn't burn like mineral based oils and will coat the inside of the engine with deposits.

If this was a problem with synthetic motor oils in general, then all internal combustion engines using a ‘synthetic’ would experience increased deposits on internal surfaces. The opposite is actually the norm.

Conventional four cycle motor oils will typically leave deposits of carbon and ash when injected into the rotary apex seal, corner seal, and side seal areas. Royal Purple’s motor oil actually burns cleaner due to the synthetic base stock being free of contamination and many of the additives being ‘ashless’. This may not be true for all synthetics but Royal Purple has been proven to work extremely well in rotary engines.

Royal Purple’s formulation of synthetic hydrocarbon motor oil does burn at the nominal combustion temperatures experienced in both street and racing applications, whether normally aspirated, turbocharged, or supercharged. (500 – 1700° F idle to race rpms typical combustion temps)

Will the synthetic oil effect the oil seals?

No. Royal Purple’s Motor Oil is fully compatible with the elastomers found in rotary engines as well as more conventional piston engines. The oil seals, housing seals and other elastomers used in rotary engines typically consist of Buna N, Nitriles, Neoprene, or Viton materials which are also commonly found in piston engine cars.

Look I am not advocating the use of any particular brand or type of oil,that is the owner's choice.I am just trying to establish fact and eliminate fiction where possible.I have attached pages from my 1987RX7 Owners Manual,1993RX-7 Owners Manual and my 2005 RX8 Owners Manual.
From these it is clear that in North America, synthetic and/or non minerals oils were prohibited by Mazda in RX7s,but no such prohibition exists in the RX8 manual.No TSB has been issued at this time for RX8s in North America.(yes I am aware of Australia and Europe)

One other page out of my RX8 manual.

Its just funny that lots of people use Synthentic in their rx7 with no problems for more than a decade.

Mazda didnt even said anything in the manual for the 8, and people still crying like a baby.

Kool-aid drinkers

Let me throw this out there for discussion....

In the last few years Mazda Japan have pulled down a large number of failed USDM Renesis engines. It's reasonable to suggest that the knowledge they have gained from the strip down of these engines has led (in some part at least) to the current RX-8 recall.

They would have seen the carbon build up. By testing the carbon samples they could easily ascertain the oil base used in each engine. A crapload of testing would have been done before Mazda sent out this recall, they don't recall willy nilly. I'm sure they have carried out laboratory testing of this carbon. Let me suggest that the results they found pointed the finger of blame at synthetics. Some synthetics, not all. Not RP...we all know that is Gods Oil.

Some of the engines pulled down did not ever have synthetic in them, but significant numbers of them did. What do Mazda do? They warn other markets about the "danger" of synthetic usage. Weird American liability laws preclude them from doing it in the USA. They carry out a recall to fix affected engines in the USA and reflash the PCM to provide an increased MOP output. This increase lifts the compression back up to spec and the improved combustion reduces the carbon build up.

Just a theory.....

Right, we ge the 5w20, no mention of synthetics, and an OMP change. You get 5w30 and the TSB.

Maybe both situations are equally efficacious? :)

Either way stick with 5W-30. I have switched to dino 5W-30 in the US this last oil change and already noticed better idle and mechanical smoothness.

I think it has nothing to do with dino or synth. 5w30 is better for this engine than 5w20.

ITs just sad that Mazda gotta follow excatly what Ford said. including Oils. At least in the N.A market. (Thats why its 5w30 for the rest of the world)

I think it has nothing to do with dino or synth. 5w30 is better for this engine than 5w20.

ITs just sad that Mazda gotta follow excatly what Ford said. including Oils. At least in the N.A market. (Thats why its 5w30 for the rest of the world)That follows suit with one of my main problems with Ford - that being Fordmobiles are the only regular cars that can't run on regular gas. Fill a Ford with regular gas and see what happens - the engine will knock its sides out! That really adds to the cost of ownership of a Fordmobile.

Did anyone ever poll "The New Engine Club" guys what type of oil they been using?

8 Dealer oil changes from end of 2003 through mid 2006, 1 self oil change Castrol 5w20. Good hard revving every day or two.

New Engine at 28K miles.

'Course I'm in Vegas where apparantly some freakinsh combination of heat, altitude, humidity, and desert VooDoo causes the engines to self-destruct.

-Kenn

The requirement being 5w20, API sevice SL?

If that's it, why spend more money for synthetics when there are much cheaper oils available that meet the requirements?
Requirements are MINIMUM standards. Even the D- student in school technically passes! I'd rather have the A+ student working for me.

That follows suit with one of my main problems with Ford - that being Fordmobiles are the only regular cars that can't run on regular gas. Fill a Ford with regular gas and see what happens - the engine will knock its sides out! That really adds to the cost of ownership of a Fordmobile.

Thats because their car suck ass.

Ever wonder why Ford is in deep red?

Crappy management is another cause.

8 Dealer oil changes from end of 2003 through mid 2006, 1 self oil change Castrol 5w20. Good hard revving every day or two.

New Engine at 28K miles.

'Course I'm in Vegas where apparantly some freakinsh combination of heat, altitude, humidity, and desert VooDoo causes the engines to self-destruct.

-Kenn

VooDoo?, yeah I watched that show about the moving rocks :eek: