> As the owner of my very first British car I find it peculiar, surprised,
> that the MG requires such heavy, thick, oil weight. The only
> explanation I can come up with that anything thinner would probably find
> cracks and crevices to creep through thereby increasing oil
> consumption. For sure this will rule out using the slippery synthetic
> oils. A shame cause they provide less friction and better wear and tear
> control.
>
> '74 BGT
> Peter
I may get in trouble for believing an oil company's literature, but I
remember reading a pamphlet from Mobil regarding their Mobil 1
synthetic oil that said one of the benefits of synthetic oil
was that it was comprised almost entirely of longer-chain molecules,
and was actually LESS likely to leak out of small nooks and crannies.
(or get past worn rings/valve guides). Has anyone had any
experience with both synthetic and conventional oils OF THE SAME
VISCOSITY with regards to "leakiness"?
As for why MG recommends such a heavy weight oil compared to modern
cars, could it have something to do with the larger manufacturing
clearances of the time period compared to modern engines? Maybe the
new cars need a thinner oil to get it through the microscopically
small bearing clearances.
Scott
|