OK without getting into a full blown TCW3 debate, is your personal opinion
that Castrol would be considered an "upper end" oil or a "lower end". I
don't want to debate whether the "upper end" is actually better than the
"lower end", because I know that is debatable. I just want to know if
Castrol TCW3 has a good reputation for marketing a quality product.

This is the Castrol Super Outboard oil, NMMA TC-W3 certified.

I've burned a gallon or so. The only distinctive thing about it is that the
smell of the oil itself is distinctly different than the OEM bulk John/Ev
and Quicksilver I've been using this season. I've never noticed this
distinctive a smell for TCW3. Haven't noticed any difference in smoke or
performance.

By the way, I am not of the school to save $5 on a gallon of oil just to
save the money. Given my use of approximately 200 gallons of pre-mix a
year, the savings just doesn't amount to much, so I just don't worry about
it.. I'd save a LOT more money by price shopping for the gasoline! (which
I don't really do - I go to the station that's most convenient and provides
easy access for the car and trailer.)

The reason I'm trying the Castrol is that it is quite a bit more convenient
to me to buy it at the local hardware store than drive across town to the
Merc or Johnson dealer to buy the OEM oil in bulk. Price for the Castrol
($11 /gal) is about half way between the cheapest ($5-7/gal for off name,
el-cheapo) to the most expensive ($15 - $20 for OEM or Penn. full synth).
Like I said, price is NOT the factor, but convenience is. Store is right on
my route home and saves a good 30-40 min round trip to the boat store.

Cam

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:49:24 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:21:32 -0800, "Camilo"
wrote:

OK without getting into a full blown TCW3 debate, is your personal opinion
that Castrol would be considered an "upper end" oil or a "lower end". I
don't want to debate whether the "upper end" is actually better than the
"lower end", because I know that is debatable. I just want to know if
Castrol TCW3 has a good reputation for marketing a quality product.


I think most of those entering into this argument fall into two camps:

(1) you are an idiot if you don't buy the cheapest TCW3 oil
available.... you are a victim of unreasoned FUD (fear, uncertainty,
and doubt),

(2) or you are better off spending the extra few dollars and buying
the manufacturers recommended (up charged) proprietary oil.


Personally, I don't remember any top vs. bottom discussion. IMHO, I'd
think "bottom" was pretty much a no-brainer and "top" would be the
challenge.

Anybody else have any thoughts?

I buy manufacturer's oil in bulk and pay less than I would at Wal-Mart
for either Pennzoil or Castrol - actually, I think I pay less than the
Tech stuff that Wal-Mart sells.

I did use Pennzoil originally on the FICHTS and just for a goof, I
pulled the plugs one day mid-season and they were crud - the carbon
buildup was amazing. I tried running carbon guard with the Pennzoil,
but that didn't help any.

I switched to the FICHT oil and the problem went away. I now mix the
XD-50 and XD-100 half and half - for some odd reason, I'm using the
same amount of oil, but the fuel consumption per hour went down a
little bit.

On the other hand, I have a bunch of two cycle equipment around here
from leaf blowers to a four wheeler and I use the Wal Mart Tech oil
and it works fine - no problems at all.

I know - it's anecdotal evidence and doesn't prove anything, but it
does validate what I've heard from other folks with non-carbed engines
like the FICHTS.

Later,

Tom

I've run the cheapest or most convienent to buy, for 20 years or so in my
25hp johnson (duckboat). I did change plugs about 6-7 years ago even though
they looked OK. (I keep the changed set as spares).

Since getting and rebuilding a 200hp merc two years ago, I've been running
mostly some Citgo, by the gal, on sale at Bass Pro from time to time for
$3.88/gal. This seems to run as clean as the Walmart Tech, in both engines.
I'm obviously in the camp that, if it says TCW3, it's good enough.
LD
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:21:32 -0800, "Camilo"
wrote:

OK without getting into a full blown TCW3 debate, is your personal
opinion
that Castrol would be considered an "upper end" oil or a "lower end". I
don't want to debate whether the "upper end" is actually better than the
"lower end", because I know that is debatable. I just want to know if
Castrol TCW3 has a good reputation for marketing a quality product.


I think most of those entering into this argument fall into two camps:

(1) you are an idiot if you don't buy the cheapest TCW3 oil
available.... you are a victim of unreasoned FUD (fear, uncertainty,
and doubt),

(2) or you are better off spending the extra few dollars and buying
the manufacturers recommended (up charged) proprietary oil.


Personally, I don't remember any top vs. bottom discussion. IMHO, I'd
think "bottom" was pretty much a no-brainer and "top" would be the
challenge.

Anybody else have any thoughts?

--



Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC.

http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/
Homepage
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where
Southport,NC is located.
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide

If it meets the TCW3 spec then you should be ok. What sometimes increases
the price is what additional is added to the oil.

"Camilo" wrote in message
...
OK without getting into a full blown TCW3 debate, is your personal opinion
that Castrol would be considered an "upper end" oil or a "lower end". I
don't want to debate whether the "upper end" is actually better than the
"lower end", because I know that is debatable. I just want to know if
Castrol TCW3 has a good reputation for marketing a quality product.

This is the Castrol Super Outboard oil, NMMA TC-W3 certified.

I've burned a gallon or so. The only distinctive thing about it is that
the
smell of the oil itself is distinctly different than the OEM bulk John/Ev
and Quicksilver I've been using this season. I've never noticed this
distinctive a smell for TCW3. Haven't noticed any difference in smoke or
performance.

By the way, I am not of the school to save $5 on a gallon of oil just to
save the money. Given my use of approximately 200 gallons of pre-mix a
year, the savings just doesn't amount to much, so I just don't worry about
it.. I'd save a LOT more money by price shopping for the gasoline!
(which
I don't really do - I go to the station that's most convenient and
provides
easy access for the car and trailer.)

The reason I'm trying the Castrol is that it is quite a bit more
convenient
to me to buy it at the local hardware store than drive across town to the
Merc or Johnson dealer to buy the OEM oil in bulk. Price for the
Castrol
($11 /gal) is about half way between the cheapest ($5-7/gal for off name,
el-cheapo) to the most expensive ($15 - $20 for OEM or Penn. full synth).
Like I said, price is NOT the factor, but convenience is. Store is right
on
my route home and saves a good 30-40 min round trip to the boat store.

Cam

--

"Camilo" wrote in message
...
OK without getting into a full blown TCW3 debate, is your personal opinion
that Castrol would be considered an "upper end" oil or a "lower end". I
don't want to debate whether the "upper end" is actually better than the
"lower end", because I know that is debatable. I just want to know if
Castrol TCW3 has a good reputation for marketing a quality product.

This is the Castrol Super Outboard oil, NMMA TC-W3 certified.

I've burned a gallon or so. The only distinctive thing about it is that
the
smell of the oil itself is distinctly different than the OEM bulk John/Ev
and Quicksilver I've been using this season. I've never noticed this
distinctive a smell for TCW3. Haven't noticed any difference in smoke or
performance.

By the way, I am not of the school to save $5 on a gallon of oil just to
save the money. Given my use of approximately 200 gallons of pre-mix a
year, the savings just doesn't amount to much, so I just don't worry about
it.. I'd save a LOT more money by price shopping for the gasoline!
(which
I don't really do - I go to the station that's most convenient and
provides
easy access for the car and trailer.)

The reason I'm trying the Castrol is that it is quite a bit more
convenient
to me to buy it at the local hardware store than drive across town to the
Merc or Johnson dealer to buy the OEM oil in bulk. Price for the
Castrol
($11 /gal) is about half way between the cheapest ($5-7/gal for off name,
el-cheapo) to the most expensive ($15 - $20 for OEM or Penn. full synth).
Like I said, price is NOT the factor, but convenience is. Store is right
on
my route home and saves a good 30-40 min round trip to the boat store.

Cam

This isn't exactly answering your question but, I have done a lot of
dynomometer work on two stroke outboards. Contrary to popular thought 50 and
100 to one oil mix is detrimental to horsepower gain. In every test I've run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p. with 16 to 1 mix. When the ratio was changed to
8 to 1 (yes 8 to 1 ) it made just over 40 h.p. Even at 8 to 1 there was no
noticable smoke at high speeds. Idle was a diff. story. The extra oil seals
piston skirts,reeds and between cyl. crank seals. If motor life and max.
h.p. is your bottom line run as rich oil mix as poss. to a point where plug
fouling becomes a problem. I have a PWC 951cc. that runs 6600 rpm with
factory set oil injection. With the addition of 32 to 1 premix along with
oil inj. the rpm is high 6700 to 6800.
Dixon

In every test I've run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p.

Thats great?

dixon wrote:




This isn't exactly answering your question but, I have done a lot of
dynomometer work on two stroke outboards. Contrary to popular thought 50 and
100 to one oil mix is detrimental to horsepower gain. In every test I've run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p. with 16 to 1 mix. When the ratio was changed to
8 to 1 (yes 8 to 1 ) it made just over 40 h.p. Even at 8 to 1 there was no
noticable smoke at high speeds. Idle was a diff. story. The extra oil seals
piston skirts,reeds and between cyl. crank seals. If motor life and max.
h.p. is your bottom line run as rich oil mix as poss. to a point where plug
fouling becomes a problem. I have a PWC 951cc. that runs 6600 rpm with
factory set oil injection. With the addition of 32 to 1 premix along with
oil inj. the rpm is high 6700 to 6800.
Dixon



Easily explained - as you know, a richer oil mix leans out the fuel
mixture(effectively making the jet size smaller) - which 2 strokes are
very sensitive to - resulting in your higher power outputs at the risk
of burning a hole in the piston, and setting up a "carbon fire" in the
cylinders that will be hard to put out...

Rob

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:22:09 -0400, trainfan1
wrote:

dixon wrote:




This isn't exactly answering your question but, I have done a lot of
dynomometer work on two stroke outboards. Contrary to popular thought 50 and
100 to one oil mix is detrimental to horsepower gain. In every test I've run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p. with 16 to 1 mix. When the ratio was changed to
8 to 1 (yes 8 to 1 ) it made just over 40 h.p. Even at 8 to 1 there was no
noticable smoke at high speeds. Idle was a diff. story. The extra oil seals
piston skirts,reeds and between cyl. crank seals. If motor life and max.
h.p. is your bottom line run as rich oil mix as poss. to a point where plug
fouling becomes a problem. I have a PWC 951cc. that runs 6600 rpm with
factory set oil injection. With the addition of 32 to 1 premix along with
oil inj. the rpm is high 6700 to 6800.

Easily explained - as you know, a richer oil mix leans out the fuel
mixture(effectively making the jet size smaller) - which 2 strokes are
very sensitive to - resulting in your higher power outputs at the risk
of burning a hole in the piston, and setting up a "carbon fire" in the
cylinders that will be hard to put out...

So in this instance of reduced gas/high oil ratio, the gas acts only
as the catalyst to ignite the oil in the combustion side of the cycle?

Take care.

Tom

"The beatings will stop when morale improves."
E. Teach, 1717

--

"trainfan1" wrote in message
...
dixon wrote:




This isn't exactly answering your question but, I have done a lot of
dynomometer work on two stroke outboards. Contrary to popular thought 50
and
100 to one oil mix is detrimental to horsepower gain. In every test I've
run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p. with 16 to 1 mix. When the ratio was
changed to
8 to 1 (yes 8 to 1 ) it made just over 40 h.p. Even at 8 to 1 there was
no
noticable smoke at high speeds. Idle was a diff. story. The extra oil
seals
piston skirts,reeds and between cyl. crank seals. If motor life and max.
h.p. is your bottom line run as rich oil mix as poss. to a point where
plug
fouling becomes a problem. I have a PWC 951cc. that runs 6600 rpm with
factory set oil injection. With the addition of 32 to 1 premix along
with
oil inj. the rpm is high 6700 to 6800.
Dixon



Easily explained - as you know, a richer oil mix leans out the fuel
mixture(effectively making the jet size smaller) - which 2 strokes are
very sensitive to - resulting in your higher power outputs at the risk
of burning a hole in the piston, and setting up a "carbon fire" in the
cylinders that will be hard to put out...

Rob

The high speed carb. adj. was set to best h.p. with all oil ratios. The very
rich oil mixtures always made more h.p. Your explanation is correct that
adding oil will cause the leaning out situation, but not in this case.
Dixon

--

"CCred68046" wrote in message
...
In every test I've run
we get the most h.p. with very rich oil mix. On a recent test, a 50 h.p.
Merc. made an actual 39 h.p.


Thats great?


I have dynoed dozens of 50h.p. 4 cyl. mark 58 mercs, merc 500's merc. 45's
(44cu.in.) and have yet to see 42 h.p.
Dixon