Synthetic Blend in an Older Westerbeke?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

angus99

Guru
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
2,742
Location
US
Vessel Name
Stella Maris
Vessel Make
Defever 44
After changing the oil in our 1987 Westerbeke 12.5 genset today, it dawned on me that I’d used a synthetic blend (Rotella T5 10W30). Which might be fine—or maybe not. Unsure of how it would work with older seals and gaskets, I called Westerbeke tech support in Massachusetts and did not get past the lady who answers the phone.

She read me a statement that had to have been written by lawyers—not people who might have a clue, like engineers or mechanics. It was all about uncertainty and assuming all risks for oils other than what is specified in the manual, neither confirming nor denying that a synth blend was acceptable or what “risks” I’m actually facing. Frustrating.

The genny runs really well and I don’t want to screw it up. Most of what I see online reads like conventional wisdom slanted toward synths. Does anyone know the real answer?
 
Don't be surprised if the engine starts using more oil once the very high detergents in the synthetic oil starts dissolving the carbon deposits behind the piston rings.
 
Or for $15 you could drop in a gallon of dyno 15-40 DELO. Russell's comment is possibly correct.
 
I have been using Rotella T5 10w30 in the main engine and generator for 5 years. The main oil analysis has been slowly improving and no additional leaks. The old WB gen had bad analysis from the git go and eventually died of low compression from excessive carbon on the pistons. The analysis before failure was really bad. High iron and aluminum numbers.
Don’t expect the oil to clean carbon from low load running.
 
Last edited:
. The analysis before failure was really bad. .

Clean oil is good. More money doesn't necessarily mean more protection. Extra money is probably better spent on oil analysis and frequent oil changes.

Check the engine manufacturer's specifications. Skip the marketing hype and old wives' tales.


T5 Rotella is good stuff and probably won't hurt any diesel engine in common use.


Contractors make oil and contractors make engine parts. There are a lot more similarities than differences. Everything that rises must converge.
 
Last edited:
He lost me at the additive. Good oil is good oil. Adding "boosters, etc." Nullifies the result. And most are snake oil anyway.
 
It'll be fine. Worst case if the thing was dirty inside, it might clean up a little and a new oil leak might show up somewhere. But if it was clean and healthy, you're unlikely to notice a difference unless you're doing oil analysis (where you might find you can go a little longer between changes).
 
Thanks for the thoughts, all. Just to clarify, the spec is 10W30 for most temps for this engine and the last analysis was very good. I don’t want to be obsessive about it, but I also don’t want to make an expensive mistake. Sounds like draining it and going with T4 Rotella 10W30 might be the right move.
 
I wouldn't bother draining it early. I'd just run it and then put in whatever you want next time.
 
What is your source for your implication that synthetic oil has more detergents than dino oil?
Don't be surprised if the engine starts using more oil once the very high detergents in the synthetic oil starts dissolving the carbon deposits behind the piston rings.
 
What is your source for your implication that synthetic oil has more detergents than dino oil?

Some do, some don't. Within the realm of diesel oils, the detergent levels between syn and dino are likely to be more similar (diesel oils are already higher detergent). However, depending on the base stock used in a given syn oil, some have a bit more natural cleaning ability.

I wouldn't worry about the original comment about piston ring carbon though. If the rings are carboned up enough to be a problem, they'd be sticking and showing high oil consumption and/or low compression, so oil type wouldn't be the primary concern (nor would it expose this problem).
 
Ian, Ihave been using synthetic oils in my two Lehmans, a Perkins-powered Kohler generator, and my 7.7kw Westerbeke generator for five years. Oil analyses come back just fine. In fact after 3 and 4 hundred hours on the clock in the Lehmans, the oil is still quite good to use. The fact is synthetics are wholly good to use in older engines. Many on this forum believe they are a waste of money. I don't for no other reason that oil change intervals can be extended making oil changes less frequent and, because of that, no more expensive than dino oil on a per hour basis.

You may hear from those who fear the "soot bogeyman". Oil analyses test for soot load. Below the spec amount and it's not a problem. Above spec? The oil analyzer will recommend changing. Soot will not be a problem in a Lehman at 300 hours. It wasn't for me at 400 hours. Now, draining that good, new synthetic oil IS a waste.
Thanks for the thoughts, all. Just to clarify, the spec is 10W30 for most temps for this engine and the last analysis was very good. I don’t want to be obsessive about it, but I also don’t want to make an expensive mistake. Sounds like draining it and going with T4 Rotella 10W30 might be the right move.
 
Many on this forum believe they are a waste of money.

Whether they're actually worth the money or not depends on the engine and the usage patterns. Some engine are so easy on oil that a good dino oil will go almost as long, others are harder on oil and see a bigger difference. And some don't use their boats enough to need to change more than once a year with any oil.

Personally, I don't bother with synth in the boat only because it doesn't get started in particularly cold weather and putting much over 100 hours on the engines in a year would be unusual for me right now, so if I change before winter storage every year synth would be a waste. And my generator doesn't have an oil filter, so I wouldn't want to stretch the changes longer on it. Everything I own that isn't the boat gets synth, however.
 
OK. Rethinking this. I use straight 30 dyno in the Lehmans — and would have used dyno in the Westerbeke if I’d been paying more attention. (Bad day; don’t ask :banghead:.) So I’m not interested in boutique oil for the sake of advertising hype. Also, T5 is a synthetic blend, so maybe not as much detergent as full synth?
 
Standard Rotella is already pretty high detergent, so I doubt T5 has all that much more in it. And unless the thing is gunked up badly, you could feed it a bunch of extra detergents without anything bad happening.
 
I don't think synthetic equals high detergent. Detergent level has nothing to do with conventional versus synthetic lube oils.

Conventional lube oil is derived from heavy material vacuum distilled from crude oil. it is then further processed to get the desired viscosity index. Basically you want a material where the viscosity changes as little with temperature.

Synthetic lube oil is derived from chemicals instead of directly from crude oil. Synthetic oils should have more consistent properties than conventional oils since they would be more of a blend of single chemical compounds instead of the hundreds of compounds that would be found in crude oil derived lube oils. I would guess they also have fewer impurities. They also must be more resistant to viscosity lowering shear. This allows for longer oil change intervals in some modern engines.

I doubt synthetic oils would harm an older engine since both meet the API CK4 specification. It is probably a waste of money since you can't increase oil change interval.

I have a turbocharged SUV. According to the owners manual I can use synthetic oil but I can't increase the oil change interval, it is still 6,000 miles.

Even conventional lube oils are made very differently than they were just 10 or 15 years ago because of newer specs.

I would never add any additive to lube oil unless it was recommended by the manufacturer. As a last ditch effort to stop oil consumption in an engine already needing a rebuild might be the exception.

Because lube oil has changed so much it is confusing on what to use in older engines. The good news is all engine oil is of higher quality than in the past.
 
We are talking about 1 gallon of oil in that generator. If you have anxiety about it, just change it.
 
One should use a product because they need it.
The only significant advantage of synthetic oil is that it’s viscosity is considerably more stable. Lube oil that is subjected to exceptionally high engine temps can benefit by being synthetic. Exceptionally high oil temps will be experienced in high output engines with certain types of turbochargers. In diesel pleasure boat engines running at high output some NA engines may benefit from synthetic oil .. I think but perhaps not. But if an engine required syn oil the manufacturer would say so in the manual.

It’s kinda like MV oil. You need it if you need it. A fireboat that’s going to be run at high speeds and heavy loads immediately after startup will benefit from both MV and syn oil and I’d guess those engines will be equipped w internal heaters. Pleasure boats w heated engine compartments in winter won’t benefit from either MV or syn.

Lots of people have a mindset that everything new or newer is superior to earlier products. And if it ended there they are right. But the conditions prevailing under the usage of the product dictate what specific kind of product should be used. Look in your engine manual and you’ll see a specific range of oils suitable for specific circumstances. Straight dino 30w lube oil is probably the ideal oil/lubricant for your diesel inboard boat engine. I’ve never used anything else in my trawler engines.
And re the change cycle syn oil I think accumulates “dirt” and other contaminants from the same sources and at the same rates as dino oil. However there may be exceptions to that chemically.

However I agree w kentucky55 in that syn oil in older engines should’nt cause harm. But I’m talk’in 60’s and 70’s engines. Perhaps not 1914.
 
Last edited:
If it was me (and since this is a forum you are asking me), I would leave the syn blend in the gen, it won't run better or worse it will run just like it always has. As they say, this is a good problem to have!
 
After changing the oil in our 1987 Westerbeke 12.5 genset today, it dawned on me that I’d used a synthetic blend (Rotella T5 10W30). Which might be fine—or maybe not. Unsure of how it would work with older seals and gaskets, I called Westerbeke tech support in Massachusetts and did not get past the lady who answers the phone.

She read me a statement that had to have been written by lawyers—not people who might have a clue, like engineers or mechanics. It was all about uncertainty and assuming all risks for oils other than what is specified in the manual, neither confirming nor denying that a synth blend was acceptable or what “risks” I’m actually facing. Frustrating.

The genny runs really well and I don’t want to screw it up. Most of what I see online reads like conventional wisdom slanted toward synths. Does anyone know the real answer?


When using a synthetic blend you are getting all the bad aspects of conventional oil which negates the advantages of synthetic oil. In other words a blend is a waste of money.
I've used full syn in everything since 1976 and that includes boats tractors cars and trucks...oh, and motorcycles without issues. Sometimes takes a little experimentation to find the best oil for old iron.
 
I know about lubricant formulation so can give you the short and long answers. The short answer is that provided 10W-30 is compatible with the Westerbeke viscosity requirements, Rotella T5 will be fine.
Performance of top diesel oils are similar, in part because they have the same major claims (API CJ-4 or CK-4) since that's the market. Most performance attributes (deposit, oxidation, corrosion, and wear) are provided by the performance additive package, also called the detergent inhibitor (DI) package. The DI package contains the dispersants, detergents, antiwear, antioxidation, and anti-foam additives. People often talk about 'detergency' but this is a hold over from the distant past when metallic detergent provided the main source of piston cleanliness control in engines. That hasn't been the case for decades. A modern DI can contain 10-15 individual components, and costs millions of dollars to qualify for something like API CK-4. The DI is combined with base oil and viscosity modifier (a polymer that reduces the viscosity change with temperature) to blend a finished oil of the desired viscosity grade. There are four main additive suppliers in the engine oil world: Lubrizol, Chevron Oronite, Infineum, and Afton,. These companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year on R&D in this area. This is one reason you don't want to add extra additives, you've just upset a complex chemical system that someone spent millions developing and qualifying.
Base oils: While it used to be true that 'mineral' oils were distilled from crude (solvent refining process) and 'synthetc' where chemically manufactured, that distinction is no longer accurate. Over the past 20 years the use of hydrocracking and isomerization to create lubricating oil has largely replaced the solvent refined base oils which are known as Group I base oils. For the current performance levels, use of these types of base oils, referred to as Group II base oils, is required for cost-performance reasons. In addition, hydroprocessing and isomerization allowed the creation of high viscosity index (VI) base oils for moderate cost (called Group III base oil). VI is a measure of the change in viscosity with temperature. So while it used to be true that synthetics used high cost polyalphaolefins (PAO), these days Group III base oils are used in synthetics with a only few exceptions (extreme low temperature products etc). Thus ‘Synthetic’ is really a marketing term since there isn’t a clear chemical distinction anymore. Industry practice is to use ‘synthetic’ or part synthetic to refer to the incorporation of higher VI base oils (120+VI). These are often required anyway to meet viscometric targets, but a marketer may or may not choose to identify a product as part synthetic depending on where the product falls in their product line.
As I recall, Rotella T5 is a mix of Group II and Group III. Shell has an internal source of Group III made from natural gas (Gas to Liquid-GTL) using Fisher Tropsch processes (very good base oil). DELO 400 uses Group II and Group III as well. Chevron is a leader in the process technology for hydrocracking and isomerization having started use of these types of base oils back in the 1980's. They also license their base oil technology and catalyst to other companies. Chevron brands their base oil as IsoSyn® (a play on isomerization and synthetic). Both oils will have excellent and comparable engine and seal performance. By the way, seal performance is part of the performance requirements for API CK-4 as well as various OEM requirements.
It is likely that your engine has run on a variety of oils meeting a succession of performance categories over the past 30 years. The current generation of oils are backward compatible for 4 cycle diesels and have performance far in excess of what was available in 1987. There should be no concern on your part about seals or other issues.
 
When using a synthetic blend you are getting all the bad aspects of conventional oil which negates the advantages of synthetic oil. In other words a blend is a waste of money.
I've used full syn in everything since 1976 and that includes boats tractors cars and trucks...oh, and motorcycles without issues. Sometimes takes a little experimentation to find the best oil for old iron.
I hate to start an argument but as an expert in the field to say a synthetic blend is the 'worst of both worlds' is simply untrue. I understand that the lay person understands little about how engine oils are formulated, and frankly they probably don't need to. But to give some perspective, the additive companies who provide the chemistry in these products literally spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year in R&D. No reputable company is going to sell a product that isn't fit for purpose. The best thing you can do is buy a product designed for the purpose you intend to use it for. Being in the business I also favor the majors (Chevron, Shell, BP/Castrol, etc), over boutique suppliers (who I won't name) due to the attention to quality management that the majors can bring to bear.

Sythetic blends are fine. Full synthetic is fine if it is required by the OEM (MB, BMW, etc). The best thing about synthetics is typically the marketers puts a strong DI package in them.
 
Last edited:
Thank you Slomo for your excellent post and for taking the time to put it together. You answered 5-6 things that I had been curious about for some time like the very low prices now for synthetic oil.

Do they still put in something in syn oils counteract swelling or contraction of seals in synthetic oils? And typically speaking what would be the viscosity of syn oil w/o any viscosity improver.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong

But its the base oil that give the product its viscosity and low high temperature capability right? The additive package then basically polishes and enhances the characteristics of the base oil and adjusts the product to meet government and industry standards for a particular application.
 
I hate to start an argument but as an expert in the field to say a synthetic blend is the 'worst of both worlds' is simply untrue. I understand that the lay person understands little about how engine oils are formulated, and frankly they probably don't need to. But to give some perspective, the additive companies who provide the chemistry in these products literally spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year in R&D. No reputable company is going to sell a product that isn't fit for purpose. The best thing you can do is buy a product designed for the purpose you intend to use it for. Being in the business I also favor the majors (Chevron, Shell, BP/Castrol, etc), over boutique suppliers (who I won't name) due to the attention to quality management that the majors can bring to bear.

Sythetic blends are fine. Full synthetic is fine if it is required by the OEM (MB, BMW, etc). The best thing about synthetics is typically the marketers puts a strong DI package in them.


Your saying that a rolls royce and a yugo are just cars and as cars both will take you from point a to point b and with that i agree. However, the RR is manufactured to a much higher degree of perfection and will last longer with far greater dependability and performance over time warrantying the higher cost.
Conventional, synthetic, are both oils but that is where the similarities end just as with the RR and Yugo.



Myself I like to eliminate as much as possible the chance of malfunctions at sea so use synthetic lubricants almost exclusively. No harbor freight for me


oh and lots of companies market products that are not fit for the purpose the yugo is an example of that. The market products to make money and for no other purpose.
 
Typically no additional seal swell agent is needed with current base oils. The problems encountered in the 1980's with PAO and ester blends, or even the early hydroprocessed base oils, aren't a factor anymore. The current group II and III stocks are fairly seal neutral.

There is no single answer to the question of viscosity without viscosity modifier. Base oils, no matter what the source, are made in a variety of viscosities. Lighter oils use ligher base oil. A high VI base oil may have the same viscosity as a lower VI base oil at 40C but a higher viscosity at 100C. Heres and example, Chevron 220N has a viscosity of ~6cST at 100C and 41 cSt at 40C. A ChevronPhillips 6cSt PAO (classic synthetic) is
6cSt@100C and 30cSt@40C. So you can while they're the same at 100C the PAO is 'thinner' at 40C. This results in a reduced need for viscosity modifier.
 
Typically no additional seal swell agent is needed with current base oils. The problems encountered in the 1980's with PAO and ester blends, or even the early hydroprocessed base oils, aren't a factor anymore. The current group II and III stocks are fairly seal neutral.

There is no single answer to the question of viscosity without viscosity modifier. Base oils, no matter what the source, are made in a variety of viscosities. Lighter oils use ligher base oil. A high VI base oil may have the same viscosity as a lower VI base oil at 40C but a higher viscosity at 100C. Heres and example, Chevron 220N has a viscosity of ~6cST at 100C and 41 cSt at 40C. A ChevronPhillips 6cSt PAO (classic synthetic) is
6cSt@100C and 30cSt@40C. So you can while they're the same at 100C the PAO is 'thinner' at 40C. This results in a reduced need for viscosity modifier.


And that is an advantage of synthetic oils then and now. What about at 200C or 400C?
 
Typically no additional seal swell agent is needed with current base oils. The problems encountered in the 1980's with PAO and ester blends, or even the early hydroprocessed base oils, aren't a factor anymore. The current group II and III stocks are fairly seal neutral.

There is no single answer to the question of viscosity without viscosity modifier. Base oils, no matter what the source, are made in a variety of viscosities. Lighter oils use ligher base oil. A high VI base oil may have the same viscosity as a lower VI base oil at 40C but a higher viscosity at 100C. Heres and example, Chevron 220N has a viscosity of ~6cST at 100C and 41 cSt at 40C. A ChevronPhillips 6cSt PAO (classic synthetic) is
6cSt@100C and 30cSt@40C. So you can while they're the same at 100C the PAO is 'thinner' at 40C. This results in a reduced need for viscosity modifier.

Thanks Slomo but I really don’t understand your response.
I know synthetic oil w/o MV stabilizers has a MV index or more directly put has the properties of a MV oil w/o MV additives. So I’m curious what those properties are viscosity wise.
 
Question: I have a 1980's vintage Perkins 4.236 with about 1800 hrs on it. Runs fine - easy start and no smoke. Plan is to run from SoCal to PNW next summer probably 250-300 engine hours, then down to Central America and eventually to. Florida. Shell Rotella synthetic blend ($20/gal, so hardly a premium) comes in 5-40 (T6) and 15-40 (T5).

Oil formulation has come a long way in the 30-years since this engine was put in service (and the engine design was unchanged for 20-years prior to that). Is the OEM recommendation (I've run Delo SAE30w for years) archaic? What about running 5-40 to PNW due to much cooler weather, then switch to 15-40 for tropics?
 
Back
Top Bottom