The only thing you have to remember is that 0W-20, 5W-20, and straight 20 weight oils all have the same viscosity at normal engine operating temperature. The "0W", "5W", "10W", and "20W" prefixes describe the behavior of the oil at very low (Winter) start up temperatures.
0 weight oils?
- Thread starter BigCahuna
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Samilcar
The "0W", "5W", "10W", and "20W" prefixes describe the behavior of the oil at very low (Winter) start up temperatures.
Exactly. 0W is not a weight.
The "0W", "5W", "10W", and "20W" prefixes describe the behavior of the oil at very low (Winter) start up temperatures.
Exactly. 0W is not a weight.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Wow. Alot of sensitive folks in here. My interpretation of 0w oils is they have the characteristics of a 0 weight when its winter and substantially below 0 celcius
Not exactly. True, 0w-xx oils are thinner than 5w, 10w, etc. oils in colder temperatures. The colder it gets, the more the 0w-xx oil will seperate itself in thinness from the 5w and 10w oils. But keep this in mind too... a 0w oil is NOT a 0 "weight", it is a 0 "grade". In fact, there are many fluids that exist that are far thinner than 0w oils. But as of now, the ISO J 300 chart does not have any recognized specifications for oils thinner than those in the "0w" category. Think of the "0w" range as an arbitrary baseline of the thinnest cold-temperature oils currently available, that spec of which could be expanded/changed to include even thinner oils as base oils and formulations improve in the future.
Wow. Alot of sensitive folks in here. My interpretation of 0w oils is they have the characteristics of a 0 weight when its winter and substantially below 0 celcius
Not exactly. True, 0w-xx oils are thinner than 5w, 10w, etc. oils in colder temperatures. The colder it gets, the more the 0w-xx oil will seperate itself in thinness from the 5w and 10w oils. But keep this in mind too... a 0w oil is NOT a 0 "weight", it is a 0 "grade". In fact, there are many fluids that exist that are far thinner than 0w oils. But as of now, the ISO J 300 chart does not have any recognized specifications for oils thinner than those in the "0w" category. Think of the "0w" range as an arbitrary baseline of the thinnest cold-temperature oils currently available, that spec of which could be expanded/changed to include even thinner oils as base oils and formulations improve in the future.
Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
Ooooooopppps!
I forgot about snowmobiles. And arctic expeditions, and ice racing with those tires with nails on them...
Still, no 0W-xx oils I know of are not "Energy Conserving"...
(so much for JASO MA, huh?)
Cheers!
Unless you buy an oil like Redline, which does not have the API specs or 'energy/resource conserving' label on the bottle. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the API SL 0w-30 GC does not have the 'energy conserving' label on the API donut, since I think that the 'conserving' designation started with SM oils.
Ooooooopppps!
I forgot about snowmobiles. And arctic expeditions, and ice racing with those tires with nails on them...
Still, no 0W-xx oils I know of are not "Energy Conserving"...
(so much for JASO MA, huh?)
Cheers!
Unless you buy an oil like Redline, which does not have the API specs or 'energy/resource conserving' label on the bottle. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the API SL 0w-30 GC does not have the 'energy conserving' label on the API donut, since I think that the 'conserving' designation started with SM oils.
Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
Still, no 0W-xx oils I know of are not "Energy Conserving"...
Any ACEA A3 spec meeting oil will not be energy conserving. GC 0w-30, M1 0w-40, to name a couple. Then you have mfg specific oils such as Yamalube 0w-40 or 0w-30 which are also non energy conserving and also meet JASO MA spec.
The thing to keep in mind is that just because it's not energy conserving doesn't automatically make it suitable for wet clutches, IMO. There are different levels of friction modifiers out there. A non-energy conserving oil may not have a ton of friction modifiers, but it may still have too much for a wet clutch. That's where specs like JASO MA come in...
Still, no 0W-xx oils I know of are not "Energy Conserving"...
Any ACEA A3 spec meeting oil will not be energy conserving. GC 0w-30, M1 0w-40, to name a couple. Then you have mfg specific oils such as Yamalube 0w-40 or 0w-30 which are also non energy conserving and also meet JASO MA spec.
The thing to keep in mind is that just because it's not energy conserving doesn't automatically make it suitable for wet clutches, IMO. There are different levels of friction modifiers out there. A non-energy conserving oil may not have a ton of friction modifiers, but it may still have too much for a wet clutch. That's where specs like JASO MA come in...
fyi
Quote:
Oil weight, or viscosity, refers to how thick or thin the oil is. The temperature requirements set for oil by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is 0 degrees F (low) and 210 degrees F (high).
Oils meeting the SAE's low temperature requirements have a "W" after the viscosity rating (example: 10W), and oils that meet the high ratings have no letter (example SAE 30). An oil is rated for viscosity by heating it to a specified temperature, and then allowing it to flow out of a specifically sized hole. Its viscosity rating is determined by the length of time it takes to flow out of the hole. If it flows quickly, it gets a low rating. If it flows slowly, it gets a high rating.
Engines need oil that is thin enough for cold starts, and thick enough when the engine is hot. Since oil gets thinner when heated, and thicker when cooled, most of us use what are called multi-grade, or multi-viscosity oils. These oils meet SAE specifications for the low temperature requirements of a light oil and the high temperature requirements of a heavy oil.
You will hear them referred to as multi-viscosity, all-season and all-weather oils. An example is a 10W-30 which is commonly found in stores. When choosing oil, always follow the manufacturer's recommendation.
Quote:
Oil weight, or viscosity, refers to how thick or thin the oil is. The temperature requirements set for oil by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is 0 degrees F (low) and 210 degrees F (high).
Oils meeting the SAE's low temperature requirements have a "W" after the viscosity rating (example: 10W), and oils that meet the high ratings have no letter (example SAE 30). An oil is rated for viscosity by heating it to a specified temperature, and then allowing it to flow out of a specifically sized hole. Its viscosity rating is determined by the length of time it takes to flow out of the hole. If it flows quickly, it gets a low rating. If it flows slowly, it gets a high rating.
Engines need oil that is thin enough for cold starts, and thick enough when the engine is hot. Since oil gets thinner when heated, and thicker when cooled, most of us use what are called multi-grade, or multi-viscosity oils. These oils meet SAE specifications for the low temperature requirements of a light oil and the high temperature requirements of a heavy oil.
You will hear them referred to as multi-viscosity, all-season and all-weather oils. An example is a 10W-30 which is commonly found in stores. When choosing oil, always follow the manufacturer's recommendation.
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: OnTheFence
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Google SAE J300 table
Learn to read the table and get back to us.
This is not being terse or rude. IMHO if you have 500+ posts here and it has not been absorbed by reading, I think a visual representation via a table may just help.
I guess when you tell someone to learn to read a chart and get back to the group. Then follow it up with "If you haven't learned by now........" You shouldn't be too surprised when someone takes your remarks as condesending.
However, that's not what I wrote now is it? I explained why I wrote it that way. I suggested that maybe simply reading is not his best mode of learning.
I do however think someone who has over 500 posts, and gives oil advice to others, well maybe should be able to find the table and understand it. Just saying.
Well when I read it, it certainly read as condesending. If that is not how you intedended it, then great. Yes you did explain yourself further later in the post. In those explanations, I was inferring that you were a bit surprised that anyone would take those remarks in a ngative light. So... I gave my opinion on why some folks, including myself saw it as negative.
You aren't the first person to have a written communication that doesn't sqaure with what you intended it to say. And most likely not the last either. If you want to stick your head in the sand and claim that the exact words written would appear as positive and helpful to most people. Go for it!!
Originally Posted By: OnTheFence
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Google SAE J300 table
Learn to read the table and get back to us.
This is not being terse or rude. IMHO if you have 500+ posts here and it has not been absorbed by reading, I think a visual representation via a table may just help.
I guess when you tell someone to learn to read a chart and get back to the group. Then follow it up with "If you haven't learned by now........" You shouldn't be too surprised when someone takes your remarks as condesending.
However, that's not what I wrote now is it? I explained why I wrote it that way. I suggested that maybe simply reading is not his best mode of learning.
I do however think someone who has over 500 posts, and gives oil advice to others, well maybe should be able to find the table and understand it. Just saying.
Well when I read it, it certainly read as condesending. If that is not how you intedended it, then great. Yes you did explain yourself further later in the post. In those explanations, I was inferring that you were a bit surprised that anyone would take those remarks in a ngative light. So... I gave my opinion on why some folks, including myself saw it as negative.
You aren't the first person to have a written communication that doesn't sqaure with what you intended it to say. And most likely not the last either. If you want to stick your head in the sand and claim that the exact words written would appear as positive and helpful to most people. Go for it!!
I freely admit that it does not come across as positive. I did have hope the OP would learn something from the method I proposed. I have a strange tendency to think people learn and retain such material when it is not spoon fed to them. As given, find the table (because one may have to do that again), and read the table, read the x-y headers, the numbers, etc. If you have questions about those details, I'll answer them. At this point I'm not sure the of the outcome.......
I'm using John Deere diesel 0w-40 in my Honda XR 400. Going on 2 yrs now and runs/starts like a champ!
My wife runs 5W-40 T6 in her Kawasaki Ninja 250 and that seems good so far... But she runs a LOT of 4 mile and under trips in cold temps. I have often wondered if a 0W-40 oil would be better for her situation.
I was thinking of the Mobil 1 0W-40 but that Yammalube might be a better choice with it's JASO MA I might not risk clutch issues.
I was thinking of the Mobil 1 0W-40 but that Yammalube might be a better choice with it's JASO MA I might not risk clutch issues.
Originally Posted By: ammolab
I was thinking of the Mobil 1 0W-40 but that Yammalube might be a better choice with it's JASO MA I might not risk clutch issues.
Yeah, there are some 0w-40 JASO MA oils out there, but M1 isn't one of them. I'd say you're perfectly fine with the T6 here.
I was thinking of the Mobil 1 0W-40 but that Yammalube might be a better choice with it's JASO MA I might not risk clutch issues.
Yeah, there are some 0w-40 JASO MA oils out there, but M1 isn't one of them. I'd say you're perfectly fine with the T6 here.
Originally Posted By: grampi
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
Maybe not motorcycle, but an ATV or a snowmobile could easily suggest such a grade, as has been mentioned already. Their engines aren't all that different from motorcycles.
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
Maybe not motorcycle, but an ATV or a snowmobile could easily suggest such a grade, as has been mentioned already. Their engines aren't all that different from motorcycles.
Originally Posted By: grampi
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
You seem to think we are all running "motorcycle" oil in our Bikes?
Allow us a little mental masurbation here!
Are we using Rotella T6? Yes! Valvoline VR-1? Yes! Mobil 1 15W-50? Yes! I have been riding bikes since 1964 and have colored outside the lines on "recomendations" quite often.
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
You seem to think we are all running "motorcycle" oil in our Bikes?
Allow us a little mental masurbation here!
Are we using Rotella T6? Yes! Valvoline VR-1? Yes! Mobil 1 15W-50? Yes! I have been riding bikes since 1964 and have colored outside the lines on "recomendations" quite often.
Originally Posted By: ammolab
Originally Posted By: grampi
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
You seem to think we are all running "motorcycle" oil in our Bikes?
Allow us a little mental masurbation here!
Are we using Rotella T6? Yes! Valvoline VR-1? Yes! Mobil 1 15W-50? Yes! I have been riding bikes since 1964 and have colored outside the lines on "recomendations" quite often.
Are any of them 0 weight oils?
Originally Posted By: grampi
What does this have to do with motorcycles? I've never seen an oil recommendation for ANY motorcycle that calls for 0 weight oil...
You seem to think we are all running "motorcycle" oil in our Bikes?
Allow us a little mental masurbation here!
Are we using Rotella T6? Yes! Valvoline VR-1? Yes! Mobil 1 15W-50? Yes! I have been riding bikes since 1964 and have colored outside the lines on "recomendations" quite often.
Are any of them 0 weight oils?
Since 98 Mr.RC45 and Mobil 1 10W30 has gone through the summer
months here in Ca with outside temps over 100ºF... currently I'm
running Mobil 1 0 30... my coolant temps stabilize between 180ºF
and 220ºF... only at stand still do I see 230ºF but as soon as I
drop the clutch the temps fall... I have over 55K miles on the
clock and Larry Calamari is not known to ride in moderation...
months here in Ca with outside temps over 100ºF... currently I'm
running Mobil 1 0 30... my coolant temps stabilize between 180ºF
and 220ºF... only at stand still do I see 230ºF but as soon as I
drop the clutch the temps fall... I have over 55K miles on the
clock and Larry Calamari is not known to ride in moderation...
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Why are we still talking about 0-weight oils? Do any even exist for normal vehicles?
No. As has been gone over many times before (even in this very thread) there is no such thing as a 0-weight oil.
0W-30 oil is a 30 weight oil. 0W-40 oil is a 40 weight oil.
Why are we still talking about 0-weight oils? Do any even exist for normal vehicles?
No. As has been gone over many times before (even in this very thread) there is no such thing as a 0-weight oil.
0W-30 oil is a 30 weight oil. 0W-40 oil is a 40 weight oil.
- Status
Similar threads
