Wayne Graefen wrote: > Parts Doc Gary was seeking comment on why multi-viscosity oils are > not recommended. My $.02 is that was a consensus around the car > hobby for all the while multi-vis existed .... until about 10 years > ago. I read an outstanding article in the Classic Car Club of > America publication to its members by a very highly placed oil > industry engineer regarding the fact that it was time to end all > that controversy. > While it had been true that some of the chemical blends required to > make the oils change viscosity depending on temperatures were often > less than ideal, particularly on very wide viscosity number spreads, > that the time had come to accept them and in fact embrace them > because for the old cars in particular, using multi-vis was going to > give the best protection at start up during our occasional use of > our cars and that the chemical package of today's multi-vis oils was > so superior to single-vis oils that they simply were a necessity for > old cars. > Now I would remind you that some of his readers had million dollar > Duesenbergs in their collections and other great classics so this > man was putting his carreer and reputation on the line and you can > bet would have been sued by a Hispano-Suiza owner if proven wrong. > So for our post-war near equivalents to the great pre-war Duesies, I > took his advice and offer it for your consideration. > Wayne There is an EXCELLENT motor oil company in Indianapolis. D - A Lubricants. It would be of some interest to see what those folks have to say on this topic. At one time I used one of their products ALL the time. Thier Speed-Sport oil was a real fine product in our race motors. It seems that sometime in the 90's it was reformulated for cars JUST like ours. (in general) Those that saw imtermittent duty, good storage charactoristics, but once in operation good lubrication. Low acids buildup. I brought this up once before. Will have to dig the site location again. -- Paul Holmgren Hoosier Corps #33, L-6 2 57 300-C's in Indy