new Honda CR-V break in

Same as what happens to the freedom fry oil at Mickey D's?

 

Same as what happens to the freedom fry oil at Mickey D's?

 

Well it happens. And people who know why it happens say that
lubricating oil is the root cause. Strange as that may seem.

Most of the research in this area has been done on engines that run on
natural gas. This fuel produces virtually no soot so soot deposits in
the combustion chamber and in the crankcase are not an issue. But there
is an issue related to burning exhaust valves in these engines. They are
much more likely to have an exhaust valve burn because of the higher
temperature exhaust gasses. These engines exhaust valves are very
sensitive to the amount of ash content in the lubricating oil. If the
lubricating oil has too little ash content then the valve seat recession
becomes a problem. Too much ash in the oil is associated with holes
blown in the exhaust valve that look just like yours.

Basically the problem is that if the valves seats are too clean then
they wear away very rapidly. This was the mechanism behind why lead in
gasoline was said to protect valves from valve seat recession. Lead
caused engines to burn very dirty (created lots of cylinder deposits)
and that protected the valves seats from wear. However nowadays with all
the additives in motor oil designed for gasoline engines the oil and
fuel that burns in the combustion chamber generally produces enough
residue that valve recession is not a problem with gasoline engines
(particularly old engines that consume more oil). But industrial natural
gas engines burn extremely clean and despite extremely hard valve seats
in these engines the seats can wear away rapidly in the absence of any
combustion chamber deposits. But if the oil is formulated so there are
too much deposits from burning oil then they find the incidence of
catastrophic failure (like your valve) increase greatly.

You say that because you fail to understand how a 4 cycle spark ignition
engine works. When a exhaust valve leaks it will let exhaust gas into
the cylinder during the intake stroke. That dilutes the air/fuel charge.
It takes very little dilution before the charge will no longer ignite
when the the spark plug fires. That means a slowly developing leak in a
valve will only get so big. After it gets to the point where the
cylinder no longer fires then the valve and cylinder go cold and the
valve leak no longer gets any bigger.

I'd love to hear your theory on how viscosity plays role in the
explanation of why your valve burned. You seem to think that making a
statement like "you don't understand flow dynamics" explains something.
It doesn't explain anything. It simply illustrates your ignorance.


Some valve leaks develop slowly and others don't. But if they burn
slowly then the size of the leak is limited. The size can't increase
past the point where the cylinder goes cold.

You don't need to examine it closely. You should be able to recognize
that type of burn from a distance.

You didn't see the valve burning either. If you had any comprehension
of the meaning of your own words you would realize that you are calling
yourself a "fucking moron".

And what metallurgy have you done on valves like this? This is
obviously once again a meaningless statement that you will later claim
is an thorough explanation.

If you want to do an experiment on the metal try this: Try cutting the
head of your valve with a cutting torch. If you attempt that you will
find that it doesn't cut like steel does. But then try again and this
time introduce some flux into the cutting stream and it will blow a hole
in the valve that looks just like your valve does. If you are looking
for some flux - try using some combustion chamber deposits.

 

Well it happens. And people who know why it happens say that
lubricating oil is the root cause. Strange as that may seem.

Most of the research in this area has been done on engines that run on
natural gas. This fuel produces virtually no soot so soot deposits in
the combustion chamber and in the crankcase are not an issue. But there
is an issue related to burning exhaust valves in these engines. They are
much more likely to have an exhaust valve burn because of the higher
temperature exhaust gasses. These engines exhaust valves are very
sensitive to the amount of ash content in the lubricating oil. If the
lubricating oil has too little ash content then the valve seat recession
becomes a problem. Too much ash in the oil is associated with holes
blown in the exhaust valve that look just like yours.

Basically the problem is that if the valves seats are too clean then
they wear away very rapidly. This was the mechanism behind why lead in
gasoline was said to protect valves from valve seat recession. Lead
caused engines to burn very dirty (created lots of cylinder deposits)
and that protected the valves seats from wear. However nowadays with all
the additives in motor oil designed for gasoline engines the oil and
fuel that burns in the combustion chamber generally produces enough
residue that valve recession is not a problem with gasoline engines
(particularly old engines that consume more oil). But industrial natural
gas engines burn extremely clean and despite extremely hard valve seats
in these engines the seats can wear away rapidly in the absence of any
combustion chamber deposits. But if the oil is formulated so there are
too much deposits from burning oil then they find the incidence of
catastrophic failure (like your valve) increase greatly.

You say that because you fail to understand how a 4 cycle spark ignition
engine works. When a exhaust valve leaks it will let exhaust gas into
the cylinder during the intake stroke. That dilutes the air/fuel charge.
It takes very little dilution before the charge will no longer ignite
when the the spark plug fires. That means a slowly developing leak in a
valve will only get so big. After it gets to the point where the
cylinder no longer fires then the valve and cylinder go cold and the
valve leak no longer gets any bigger.

I'd love to hear your theory on how viscosity plays role in the
explanation of why your valve burned. You seem to think that making a
statement like "you don't understand flow dynamics" explains something.
It doesn't explain anything. It simply illustrates your ignorance.


Some valve leaks develop slowly and others don't. But if they burn
slowly then the size of the leak is limited. The size can't increase
past the point where the cylinder goes cold.

You don't need to examine it closely. You should be able to recognize
that type of burn from a distance.

You didn't see the valve burning either. If you had any comprehension
of the meaning of your own words you would realize that you are calling
yourself a "fucking moron".

And what metallurgy have you done on valves like this? This is
obviously once again a meaningless statement that you will later claim
is an thorough explanation.

If you want to do an experiment on the metal try this: Try cutting the
head of your valve with a cutting torch. If you attempt that you will
find that it doesn't cut like steel does. But then try again and this
time introduce some flux into the cutting stream and it will blow a hole
in the valve that looks just like your valve does. If you are looking
for some flux - try using some combustion chamber deposits.

 

I'm one of those.

That thing about the leaks might have been true decades ago, but it's most
certainly not true now.

Switched both cars to Mobil 1 a few years ago. No new leaks at all. Not
even any new seepage. Old seepage (my oil pan gasket) has not gotten worse.

Frankly, the stuff's amazing. Perhaps a tenth the varnish, and none of the
actual buildup, that happened with dino oil.

I have no idea what the lubrication properties of synthetic are like versus
dino, but by gosh Mobil 1 keeps your motor clean.

Use it without concern.

I change my filter with each oil change. With my annual mileage of over
20,000, I change oil and filter eight times a year (yeah, I'm a dummy and a
dupe, I know).

Plenty of competitors. Are they as (apparently) good? Don't know. And don't
care. I like ExxonMobil for their politics and for what I see of their
commitment to doing good work. So I give them my money.

 

I'm one of those.

That thing about the leaks might have been true decades ago, but it's most
certainly not true now.

Switched both cars to Mobil 1 a few years ago. No new leaks at all. Not
even any new seepage. Old seepage (my oil pan gasket) has not gotten worse.

Frankly, the stuff's amazing. Perhaps a tenth the varnish, and none of the
actual buildup, that happened with dino oil.

I have no idea what the lubrication properties of synthetic are like versus
dino, but by gosh Mobil 1 keeps your motor clean.

Use it without concern.

I change my filter with each oil change. With my annual mileage of over
20,000, I change oil and filter eight times a year (yeah, I'm a dummy and a
dupe, I know).

Plenty of competitors. Are they as (apparently) good? Don't know. And don't
care. I like ExxonMobil for their politics and for what I see of their
commitment to doing good work. So I give them my money.

 

maybe there's something i can tell you to put your fears to rest...

if you examine this pic,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/4291579733/ at high res and
look closely at the cam lobe at 1o/c, you'll see scoring. when i
changed the head gasket on this engine about 42k miles ago, it was a
friday afternoon, and i had a hot weekend date in los angeles 400 miles
away and was in a hurry. needless to say, i rushed the job, didn't
strip and clean like i should have, and cleaning the head after scraping
the gasket off comprised putting the head on the driveway, and hosing it
off. needless to say, the splashing washed grit /on/ to the head, as
well as gasket flakes off it. but i didn't care - i was thinking of
upgrading the motor anyway, i had to get going, and to heck with the
consequences. i didn't even change the oil. i noticed that it scored
right away and was expecting it because of the grit.

i drove to l.a., back, and was busy for the next couple of months, so
when i eventually got around to changing the oil, i was expecting to
have nuts and bolts fall out of the drain hole. nothing. looking
inside the filler hole and at the cam, i expected to see either greater
trauma, or that the scoring had worn off - scoring is ridges and valleys
- all the high spots should get rubbed away.

instead, what i saw was exactly as it had been about ten minutes after
start-up from the gasket change gritting. and what you see there today,
is the same, 42k miles later.

now that sir, is a truly remarkable feat. those are not the marks of a
distressed cam where the nitriding has worn through to the soft
substrate beneath. this is where the oil has maintained a robust
hydrodynamic separation between the running surfaces, in spite of a
dramatically roughened surface, essentially not allowing any wear in
what is for many engines, a considerable fraction of their total lifetime.

i was ambivalent about synthetics before - i mean, i supposed them to be
good for chemical stability, friction reduction, etc. but i did not
expect them to be /this/ good for wear resistance. absolutely amazing.
and this last batch of oil has been in there for 20k miles.

the corollary: 2.5k mile change intervals on synthetic are completely
unnecessary. and i'm still running that engine at nearly 200k miles.
and it's not burning oil.

 

maybe there's something i can tell you to put your fears to rest...

if you examine this pic,
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/4291579733/ at high res and
look closely at the cam lobe at 1o/c, you'll see scoring. when i
changed the head gasket on this engine about 42k miles ago, it was a
friday afternoon, and i had a hot weekend date in los angeles 400 miles
away and was in a hurry. needless to say, i rushed the job, didn't
strip and clean like i should have, and cleaning the head after scraping
the gasket off comprised putting the head on the driveway, and hosing it
off. needless to say, the splashing washed grit /on/ to the head, as
well as gasket flakes off it. but i didn't care - i was thinking of
upgrading the motor anyway, i had to get going, and to heck with the
consequences. i didn't even change the oil. i noticed that it scored
right away and was expecting it because of the grit.

i drove to l.a., back, and was busy for the next couple of months, so
when i eventually got around to changing the oil, i was expecting to
have nuts and bolts fall out of the drain hole. nothing. looking
inside the filler hole and at the cam, i expected to see either greater
trauma, or that the scoring had worn off - scoring is ridges and valleys
- all the high spots should get rubbed away.

instead, what i saw was exactly as it had been about ten minutes after
start-up from the gasket change gritting. and what you see there today,
is the same, 42k miles later.

now that sir, is a truly remarkable feat. those are not the marks of a
distressed cam where the nitriding has worn through to the soft
substrate beneath. this is where the oil has maintained a robust
hydrodynamic separation between the running surfaces, in spite of a
dramatically roughened surface, essentially not allowing any wear in
what is for many engines, a considerable fraction of their total lifetime.

i was ambivalent about synthetics before - i mean, i supposed them to be
good for chemical stability, friction reduction, etc. but i did not
expect them to be /this/ good for wear resistance. absolutely amazing.
and this last batch of oil has been in there for 20k miles.

the corollary: 2.5k mile change intervals on synthetic are completely
unnecessary. and i'm still running that engine at nearly 200k miles.
and it's not burning oil.

 

that is an utterly ridiculous and unfounded statement - there is little
or no oil in the combustion chamber.

ash is silica and/or alumina abrasive. valve wear can cause clearance
problems, if there is any, hence it would be poor clearance and
maintenance that's the issue, not some magical unexplainable crap about
carbon deposits causing burn like you said before.

and let's ignore the effect of heat - the /real/ cause of valve pain.

bullshitter.

bullshit - first it's the ash, now it's cleanliness. utter bullshit.

bullshit. it burned cooler and thus wore less. heat softens the metal.
it's heat that kills valves.

bullshit. natural gas engines burn much cleaner, and thus have much
extended oil change intervals. it's neglect and lack of servicing
that's causing the problem [if any, and given that there's only honda
and a few converted frods on the road that run on this stuff, i'm
calling BULLSHIT on you having any experience.

you forgot two things cowboy:

1. the scavenging from valve overlap - that starts gas inflow momentum
long before there is any back-pressure.

2. you're expecting gas to flow through a tiny hole, when a honking
great big one is also open.

oh, and when one cylinder is on the intake stroke, its partner is on the
power stroke [no back pressure - valves are closed]. the others are on
compression [no back pressure - valves are closed], and one is on
exhaust. for exhaust to be an issue, it has to stop it's momentum down
the exhaust and blow back up the manifold and through a tiny hole, all
while being more viscous due to heat. in other words, you're just
making shit up because you can't think this through and don't have
enough information.

but you said the hole was instantaneously big! bullshitter.

indeed. but that is not an instantaneous process. cylinders don't fire
at low rpm's but at higher rpm's, because of gas momentum, they still do.

you can't read - i didn't say it has anything to do with burning - i
said your back-pressure bullshit was bullshit because of it.

er, other way around, idiot.

so, they burn fast when you want to bullshit, but they don't when it's
ok to admit otherwise? great stuff there jim.

they burn slowly either way, and limitation depends on rpm's. bullshitter.

not to **** up and jump to conclusions you don't no!

then why did you get it so wrong???

wow, the hypocrisy is stunning.

you don't know what you don't know. idiot.

this is the best statement yet - no, it doesn't cut like steel does -
valves have to be heat and oxidation resistant. thus they DO NOT
INSTANTLY BURN IN A SHOWER OF SPARKS BECAUSE THERE IS NO OR LITTLE
OXIDATION MECHANISM as you were bullshitting earlier.

what a bullshitting asshole.

 

that is an utterly ridiculous and unfounded statement - there is little
or no oil in the combustion chamber.

ash is silica and/or alumina abrasive. valve wear can cause clearance
problems, if there is any, hence it would be poor clearance and
maintenance that's the issue, not some magical unexplainable crap about
carbon deposits causing burn like you said before.

and let's ignore the effect of heat - the /real/ cause of valve pain.

bullshitter.

bullshit - first it's the ash, now it's cleanliness. utter bullshit.

bullshit. it burned cooler and thus wore less. heat softens the metal.
it's heat that kills valves.

bullshit. natural gas engines burn much cleaner, and thus have much
extended oil change intervals. it's neglect and lack of servicing
that's causing the problem [if any, and given that there's only honda
and a few converted frods on the road that run on this stuff, i'm
calling BULLSHIT on you having any experience.

you forgot two things cowboy:

1. the scavenging from valve overlap - that starts gas inflow momentum
long before there is any back-pressure.

2. you're expecting gas to flow through a tiny hole, when a honking
great big one is also open.

oh, and when one cylinder is on the intake stroke, its partner is on the
power stroke [no back pressure - valves are closed]. the others are on
compression [no back pressure - valves are closed], and one is on
exhaust. for exhaust to be an issue, it has to stop it's momentum down
the exhaust and blow back up the manifold and through a tiny hole, all
while being more viscous due to heat. in other words, you're just
making shit up because you can't think this through and don't have
enough information.

but you said the hole was instantaneously big! bullshitter.

indeed. but that is not an instantaneous process. cylinders don't fire
at low rpm's but at higher rpm's, because of gas momentum, they still do.

you can't read - i didn't say it has anything to do with burning - i
said your back-pressure bullshit was bullshit because of it.

er, other way around, idiot.

so, they burn fast when you want to bullshit, but they don't when it's
ok to admit otherwise? great stuff there jim.

they burn slowly either way, and limitation depends on rpm's. bullshitter.

not to **** up and jump to conclusions you don't no!

then why did you get it so wrong???

wow, the hypocrisy is stunning.

you don't know what you don't know. idiot.

this is the best statement yet - no, it doesn't cut like steel does -
valves have to be heat and oxidation resistant. thus they DO NOT
INSTANTLY BURN IN A SHOWER OF SPARKS BECAUSE THERE IS NO OR LITTLE
OXIDATION MECHANISM as you were bullshitting earlier.

what a bullshitting asshole.

 

A) AFAIK, the original M1 apparently did have issues with seal
shrinkage. The noodle heads added a more esters and other seal
'moisturizers' to the mix and the problem was cured.

B) Of course. Any decent Syn will work just fine.

Personally, I'd not use the low end Frams or other cheapo filters under
any circumstances. IMO, you should spend a few extra bucks on a Bosch,
Wix, Purolator, Mobil, etc. if you want to extend the oil change
intervals beyond the traditional 3000~5000 miles.
FWLIW, I'm running a 92 Accord at 10K OCI (oil change interval) on Syn
oil and Purolator Pure-One or M1 filters. I occasionally cut the
filters open at the end of their service life. None of these filters
has shown any sign of distress.

There's really little to differentiate most mainstream Syn oils. Penz
Plat, M1, Valvoline's SynPower, etc. are all of roughly equal quality.
You may well find standout products in each manufacturer's lineup.
These are usually Euro-spec oils, or high mileage mixes which usually
feature boosted anti-wear additives. Syntec 0W-30 ("German Castrol"),
M1's 0W-40 and 10W-30HM, and other oils have attracted cult-like
supporters.

A CR-V will not require anything super dooper. When buying, look for an
"Oil Change Special" (oil + filter) at the local parts store and call it
good!

Redline makes possibly the best high performance oil available in the
US. Ester base, excellent viscosity characteristics, massive anti-wear
additives, made by a straightforward small company, right here in the US.

Head over to http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ for more oil
information (and plenty of unsubstantiated opinion as well!) than you
can shake a dipstick at.

 

A) AFAIK, the original M1 apparently did have issues with seal
shrinkage. The noodle heads added a more esters and other seal
'moisturizers' to the mix and the problem was cured.

B) Of course. Any decent Syn will work just fine.

Personally, I'd not use the low end Frams or other cheapo filters under
any circumstances. IMO, you should spend a few extra bucks on a Bosch,
Wix, Purolator, Mobil, etc. if you want to extend the oil change
intervals beyond the traditional 3000~5000 miles.
FWLIW, I'm running a 92 Accord at 10K OCI (oil change interval) on Syn
oil and Purolator Pure-One or M1 filters. I occasionally cut the
filters open at the end of their service life. None of these filters
has shown any sign of distress.

There's really little to differentiate most mainstream Syn oils. Penz
Plat, M1, Valvoline's SynPower, etc. are all of roughly equal quality.
You may well find standout products in each manufacturer's lineup.
These are usually Euro-spec oils, or high mileage mixes which usually
feature boosted anti-wear additives. Syntec 0W-30 ("German Castrol"),
M1's 0W-40 and 10W-30HM, and other oils have attracted cult-like
supporters.

A CR-V will not require anything super dooper. When buying, look for an
"Oil Change Special" (oil + filter) at the local parts store and call it
good!

Redline makes possibly the best high performance oil available in the
US. Ester base, excellent viscosity characteristics, massive anti-wear
additives, made by a straightforward small company, right here in the US.

Head over to http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ for more oil
information (and plenty of unsubstantiated opinion as well!) than you
can shake a dipstick at.

 

motul and red line are ester based, but the others are based on olefins.

"bosch" and "mobil 1" are in fact made by champion labs. the mobil
filters are slightly different construction, but the bosch style filters
are sold under the walmart house brand label for ~$2. i use them and
the results you see above.

"german castrol" is what is supposed to be in bmw's, and i can attest to
that stuff being bad for engine deposits.

most of that "opinion" is underinformed drivel.

 

motul and red line are ester based, but the others are based on olefins.

"bosch" and "mobil 1" are in fact made by champion labs. the mobil
filters are slightly different construction, but the bosch style filters
are sold under the walmart house brand label for ~$2. i use them and
the results you see above.

"german castrol" is what is supposed to be in bmw's, and i can attest to
that stuff being bad for engine deposits.

most of that "opinion" is underinformed drivel.

 

Are you really trying to argue that the exhaust can't flow through that
hole and dilute the gasses on the intake stroke???????


If you had a hole that size in your exhaust manifold, do you think
exhaust gas would not flow through it? Do you think momentum and and the
fact that there is a bigger hole someplace else is going to keep the
exhaust gasses from going through the hole?

Do you think no one has ever measured the exhaust gas temps coming
from a cylinder with a burnt valve like that?

Except that isn't always the case. The mechanism that protects the
iron in the valve from rapid oxidation is an extremely thin surface
layer of chromium oxides. Under the right conditions that protective
layer can be destroyed and then the iron in the valve can rapidly
oxidize just as fast as mild steel.

 

Are you really trying to argue that the exhaust can't flow through that
hole and dilute the gasses on the intake stroke???????


If you had a hole that size in your exhaust manifold, do you think
exhaust gas would not flow through it? Do you think momentum and and the
fact that there is a bigger hole someplace else is going to keep the
exhaust gasses from going through the hole?

Do you think no one has ever measured the exhaust gas temps coming
from a cylinder with a burnt valve like that?

Except that isn't always the case. The mechanism that protects the
iron in the valve from rapid oxidation is an extremely thin surface
layer of chromium oxides. Under the right conditions that protective
layer can be destroyed and then the iron in the valve can rapidly
oxidize just as fast as mild steel.

 

look at the fucking valve dipshit - all those marks are for exiting gas,
not entering. now, you go ahead and argue what you like to the
contrary, but it'll just be ignorant idiotic bullshit.

does you ass fill with water if it's downstream of a fire hose? how
about if it's upstream? cos that burnt valve is upstream, just in case
your powers of observation hadn't allowed you to determine the facts. [sic]

see above.

of freakin' course!!! but it's low compression causing low power yield,
and thus lower exit temps, not "exhaust dilution"!!!! jeepers - for a
guy that was bleating about knowledge of the 4-stroke cycle, you sure
are amazingly ignorant of it.

absolute bull fucking shit. you clearly know as much about valve
metallurgy as you do about flow dynamics.

absolutely not. you're just guessing. and guessing wrong.
bullshitting idiot.

 

look at the fucking valve dipshit - all those marks are for exiting gas,
not entering. now, you go ahead and argue what you like to the
contrary, but it'll just be ignorant idiotic bullshit.

does you ass fill with water if it's downstream of a fire hose? how
about if it's upstream? cos that burnt valve is upstream, just in case
your powers of observation hadn't allowed you to determine the facts. [sic]

see above.

of freakin' course!!! but it's low compression causing low power yield,
and thus lower exit temps, not "exhaust dilution"!!!! jeepers - for a
guy that was bleating about knowledge of the 4-stroke cycle, you sure
are amazingly ignorant of it.

absolute bull fucking shit. you clearly know as much about valve
metallurgy as you do about flow dynamics.

absolutely not. you're just guessing. and guessing wrong.
bullshitting idiot.

 

A US Market CR-V requires 5W20 weight oil per the mfr. You're not likely to
find that at any "oil change special" unless its the Honda dealer. If you
run anything else in it, they could invalidate the warranty if there are any
oil related engine problems.

 

A US Market CR-V requires 5W20 weight oil per the mfr. You're not likely to
find that at any "oil change special" unless its the Honda dealer. If you
run anything else in it, they could invalidate the warranty if there are any
oil related engine problems.