Originally Posted by Ironflight
This a good topic Geaorge, but in all fairness and good conscience, there is no way I could vote. I think you'd have to be a fleet operator to make a meaningful input on this, because individual owners are going to have statistically meaningless experience on which to make a choice. The question "which oil do you prefer?" would be better, with a follow-up of "why?"Paul
Fair enough. I think folks are posting why, and I agree that is more interesting than the statistics. However I do meaningless stuff all the time.
I would say the raw poll vote would show, in theory if a proper sample is taken, who uses what, not what is better. A tally of what is most popular is interesting to me, but I agree with your hypothesis the poll is not real useful. It is however a launch for discussion; SEE I got you to make a comment. it worked.
ON THE TOPIC. I talked to Philips Tech guy today and I was mistaken that X/C was a semi synthetic, it is not. It is a multi grade ashless dispersant mineral base stock oil, with no "synthetic oils" added. Here are some facts and truths of all oils (Semi Synthetic or not):
All oils start with a base stock of miniral oils (pure synthetics don't work well in planes, Google Mobile One, synthetic oils airplanes, etc....) See last item.
All oils have additives, some more than others. The ones advertised as MINIRAL oil have the least, used for break in often. The multi grade and ashless dispersant oils have more additives. The synthetic blends (Exxon Elite and Aeroshell 15w50) have the most added to the base.
For planes the fly often corrosion is not and issue, regardless of the oil.
The oil industry itself is in a debate about how effective corrosion protection from low low use aircraft engines are. The industry test may not represent the real case inside an engine. There are additives that help corrosion prevention but there may be un-intended consequences or trade offs by adding these anti corrosion additives.
One function of aircraft oils it to hold in suspension the junk that aircooled aircraft engines make using leaded fuel. The byproduct of combustion (salts) and wear materials need to be held till drained with out leaving deposits (thus the ash-LESS dispersant part). Synthetic oils do not do this well, but do have good antiwear properties. So there's a trade off with blends. You have less miniral base stock to hold junk, but the wear qualities are better, at least in a laboratory in a controlled test. I think if you fly a lot and change your oil every 25 hours, give or take, with a new filter, you'll be as good or better with a basic oils, than if you used a synthetic oil blend and flew infrequently and changed oil less. Clearly your getting something for your $12-$14 premium price for the blended stuff. From the poll it appears that people agree the price premium is with it.
Whether the extra money is worth it is what I am kind of looking to gauge by the poll. So far it seems the group is pretty savvy consumers and are not totally swayed by pretty bottle colors, lab test and sponsored arco teams at the airshows, although I love the free-be stickers, patches and posters. I think Philips does much less advertising and thus may be better bargain. However $14 is like nickles in aviation money. Clearly the Aeroshell and the Exxon Elite (I got a free case also) have something different to offer over a pure (or purer) miniral based only oil. Is it worth it? LET THE POLL CONTINUE!!