0w30??
- Thread starter Carpart67
- Start date
- Status
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
LOL and others think a UOA is the Gospel.
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
LOL and others think a UOA is the Gospel.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
M1 0w30 is not the best choice of 0w30's for your application.
German Castrol (Syntec 0w30) would be better because of its higher zddp content.
Or as Garak mentions, PetroCanada Duron 0w30, or Mobil Delvac Elite 222 0w30.
M1 AFE 0W-30 may be light on ZDDP like most current SM/SN 30wt oils but I doubt his older truck needs the increased viscosity of almost a 40wt oil such as GC et al.
Besides, alternative 0W-30's will be heavier on start-up in a Nova Scotia winter than most PCMO 5W-30s.
If the OP is concerned with ZDDP (he's not) could go with QS defy 5W-30 or even QS Defy 5W-20 if he can maintain OP (he likely can).
Another 0W-30 option is PC Supreme 0W-30. It has 740 ppm of Phos' which is not bad plus a 177 VI so it will be reasonably light on start-up.
M1 0w30 is not the best choice of 0w30's for your application.
German Castrol (Syntec 0w30) would be better because of its higher zddp content.
Or as Garak mentions, PetroCanada Duron 0w30, or Mobil Delvac Elite 222 0w30.
M1 AFE 0W-30 may be light on ZDDP like most current SM/SN 30wt oils but I doubt his older truck needs the increased viscosity of almost a 40wt oil such as GC et al.
Besides, alternative 0W-30's will be heavier on start-up in a Nova Scotia winter than most PCMO 5W-30s.
If the OP is concerned with ZDDP (he's not) could go with QS defy 5W-30 or even QS Defy 5W-20 if he can maintain OP (he likely can).
Another 0W-30 option is PC Supreme 0W-30. It has 740 ppm of Phos' which is not bad plus a 177 VI so it will be reasonably light on start-up.
Or Duron Synthetic 0w30. SM rated, more P (my UOA showed 1162) and still a 177 VI.
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
Originally Posted By: cp3
Or Duron Synthetic 0w30. SM rated, more P (my UOA showed 1162) and still a 177 VI.
Yes that's an option that isn't a whole lot thicker than their PCMO
0W-30 with a HTHSV of 3.32cP. PDS below:
http://lubricants.petro-canada.ca/resour...amp;language=en
Of course I'm sure he doesn't need 1162 ppm of Phos' so he could blend it 50/50 with the PC Supreme Syn 0W-30 and get a somewhat lighter 0W-30 with 950 ppm of Phos'. Or if that oil is too heavy then blend 50/50 with PC 0W-20 and get a 0W-30 comprable to M1 0W-30 with a slightly higher 172 VI.
Or Duron Synthetic 0w30. SM rated, more P (my UOA showed 1162) and still a 177 VI.
Yes that's an option that isn't a whole lot thicker than their PCMO
0W-30 with a HTHSV of 3.32cP. PDS below:
http://lubricants.petro-canada.ca/resour...amp;language=en
Of course I'm sure he doesn't need 1162 ppm of Phos' so he could blend it 50/50 with the PC Supreme Syn 0W-30 and get a somewhat lighter 0W-30 with 950 ppm of Phos'. Or if that oil is too heavy then blend 50/50 with PC 0W-20 and get a 0W-30 comprable to M1 0W-30 with a slightly higher 172 VI.
Wow, this got complicated. It looks like I won't be able to source Mobil 0w30 anyway.
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
Originally Posted By: Carpart67
Wow, this got complicated. It looks like I won't be able to source Mobil 0w30 anyway.
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
Didn't want to make this complicated, it's not really.
If you want to stick with Mobil 1 then forget their 10W-30 and go with their 5W-30, it's a better oil.
Wow, this got complicated. It looks like I won't be able to source Mobil 0w30 anyway.
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
Didn't want to make this complicated, it's not really.
If you want to stick with Mobil 1 then forget their 10W-30 and go with their 5W-30, it's a better oil.
Originally Posted By: Carpart67
Wow, this got complicated. It looks like I won't be able to source Mobil 0w30 anyway.
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
I suggest the Caterham blend. 50/50 m1 0w-40 and either tgmo 0w-20 or M1 0w-20 AFE. Those oils are easily found on our side of the border and create an oil that is tough to beat.
Jmo
Wow, this got complicated. It looks like I won't be able to source Mobil 0w30 anyway.
Most of the brands recommended are likely not available in my area. All you'll find around here are the basics.
I had wanted to stick with Mobil1 because that's what was used in it, and I know it's available here. It's looking like it'll just be getting Mobil1 10w30 for this oil change, until I do more research. (I had already bought some)
I suggest the Caterham blend. 50/50 m1 0w-40 and either tgmo 0w-20 or M1 0w-20 AFE. Those oils are easily found on our side of the border and create an oil that is tough to beat.
Jmo
Wow, you guys are tough.
Yes I understand a UOA only measures particles of a certain size
(begs question: do different oils create wear particles of different sizes?;
Yes I understand a UOA only shows the condition of the oil
(begs question as to why so many say "uh oh, xxx metal is high you have an engine problem), and
No I don't see a UOA as Gospel.
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
edit: Oh, and:
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
Yes I understand a UOA only measures particles of a certain size
(begs question: do different oils create wear particles of different sizes?;
Yes I understand a UOA only shows the condition of the oil
(begs question as to why so many say "uh oh, xxx metal is high you have an engine problem), and
No I don't see a UOA as Gospel.
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
edit: Oh, and:
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
I think some of the guys on here must put Mobil 1 on their Cheerios.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Kuato
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
In fairness to you, it would only be natural to be alarmed by such results. It's just not the correct time to be alarmed.
From a hypothetical perspective, I'm sure inappropriate lubes could create some ugly UOAs, too. Running a 0w-20 in an off road diesel, for instance, might create an "interesting" UOA. I'm sure running 20w-50 with daily forced cold starts in -40 (i.e. with enough battery reserve to force the issue) could make for ugly UOAs, too.
I think we also have to draw the distinction between iron and other metals. Even the other metals leave a lot of room for guessing when one isn't sure about the additive package or the actual make up of bearings and things. Look what happens to certain numbers when you use an oil with a sodium based additive package or leaded race fuel.
And, if one thinks there is a problem with wear based on UOAs, there's only one way to tell, and that's to check the engine. I'm certainly not tearing into an engine just because a number is high on a few UOAs (unless it's something indicating coolant intrusion, but that's another matter). If I spin a bearing or the camshaft is so flat I have no power, then I'll worry about tearing into things.
As for actual wear, I don't think there will be huge differences between various oils, assuming they actually meet the specifications for the engine in question, and you're comparing apples to apples.
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
In fairness to you, it would only be natural to be alarmed by such results. It's just not the correct time to be alarmed.
From a hypothetical perspective, I'm sure inappropriate lubes could create some ugly UOAs, too. Running a 0w-20 in an off road diesel, for instance, might create an "interesting" UOA. I'm sure running 20w-50 with daily forced cold starts in -40 (i.e. with enough battery reserve to force the issue) could make for ugly UOAs, too.
I think we also have to draw the distinction between iron and other metals. Even the other metals leave a lot of room for guessing when one isn't sure about the additive package or the actual make up of bearings and things. Look what happens to certain numbers when you use an oil with a sodium based additive package or leaded race fuel.
And, if one thinks there is a problem with wear based on UOAs, there's only one way to tell, and that's to check the engine. I'm certainly not tearing into an engine just because a number is high on a few UOAs (unless it's something indicating coolant intrusion, but that's another matter). If I spin a bearing or the camshaft is so flat I have no power, then I'll worry about tearing into things.
As for actual wear, I don't think there will be huge differences between various oils, assuming they actually meet the specifications for the engine in question, and you're comparing apples to apples.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Kuato
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
In fairness to you, it would only be natural to be alarmed by such results. It's just not the correct time to be alarmed.
From a hypothetical perspective, I'm sure inappropriate lubes could create some ugly UOAs, too. Running a 0w-20 in an off road diesel, for instance, might create an "interesting" UOA. I'm sure running 20w-50 with daily forced cold starts in -40 (i.e. with enough battery reserve to force the issue) could make for ugly UOAs, too.
I think we also have to draw the distinction between iron and other metals. Even the other metals leave a lot of room for guessing when one isn't sure about the additive package or the actual make up of bearings and things. Look what happens to certain numbers when you use an oil with a sodium based additive package or leaded race fuel.
And, if one thinks there is a problem with wear based on UOAs, there's only one way to tell, and that's to check the engine. I'm certainly not tearing into an engine just because a number is high on a few UOAs (unless it's something indicating coolant intrusion, but that's another matter). If I spin a bearing or the camshaft is so flat I have no power, then I'll worry about tearing into things.
As for actual wear, I don't think there will be huge differences between various oils, assuming they actually meet the specifications for the engine in question, and you're comparing apples to apples.
Thanks for that. All the oils tested were either 5w30 or 0w30 as spec'd for the vehicle. All other wear metals were within 1-2 ppm. Not alarmed, just not going to use M1 in this vehicle.
Now in all fairness, I got a great UOA in our Wrangler (2.4L four banger) with the same M1 0w30, so it works well in that engine.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
All I stated before the landslide came down was that M1, in the 4.0 flat tappet Jeep engine, produced more than twice as much Fe in my samples compared to other oils, and made a recommendation against using it in flat tappet engines for that reason.
In fairness to you, it would only be natural to be alarmed by such results. It's just not the correct time to be alarmed.
From a hypothetical perspective, I'm sure inappropriate lubes could create some ugly UOAs, too. Running a 0w-20 in an off road diesel, for instance, might create an "interesting" UOA. I'm sure running 20w-50 with daily forced cold starts in -40 (i.e. with enough battery reserve to force the issue) could make for ugly UOAs, too.
I think we also have to draw the distinction between iron and other metals. Even the other metals leave a lot of room for guessing when one isn't sure about the additive package or the actual make up of bearings and things. Look what happens to certain numbers when you use an oil with a sodium based additive package or leaded race fuel.
And, if one thinks there is a problem with wear based on UOAs, there's only one way to tell, and that's to check the engine. I'm certainly not tearing into an engine just because a number is high on a few UOAs (unless it's something indicating coolant intrusion, but that's another matter). If I spin a bearing or the camshaft is so flat I have no power, then I'll worry about tearing into things.
As for actual wear, I don't think there will be huge differences between various oils, assuming they actually meet the specifications for the engine in question, and you're comparing apples to apples.
Thanks for that. All the oils tested were either 5w30 or 0w30 as spec'd for the vehicle. All other wear metals were within 1-2 ppm. Not alarmed, just not going to use M1 in this vehicle.
Now in all fairness, I got a great UOA in our Wrangler (2.4L four banger) with the same M1 0w30, so it works well in that engine.
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: armos
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: armos
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
Hehehe
Originally Posted By: armos
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
Hehehe
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: armos
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
Never said the hot viscosity wasn't in spec, but it's well below typical. The reason it's not called 35 is because no such spec officially exists. If it did that label would give a more accurate impression of it.
After refreshing my memory with some datasheets I see I was exaggerating about it being halfway between. It's closer to a typical 40 than a typical 30. But it's not a typical 40.
If one is concerned with the viscosity, they should look at the viscosity, not the vague classification it was assigned.
13.5cSt at 100C is lower than any other "40" I've seen a spec for.
Originally Posted By: armos
I might use M1 0w40 on that engine. It's hot viscosity is really only about halfway between a typical 30 and 40 grade.
If you have an oil pressure gauge, use that as a guideline.
It's "hot viscosity", unless it shears, is within the range for a 40 grade oil. That's why it is called 0w-40, not 0w-30.5
Never said the hot viscosity wasn't in spec, but it's well below typical. The reason it's not called 35 is because no such spec officially exists. If it did that label would give a more accurate impression of it.
After refreshing my memory with some datasheets I see I was exaggerating about it being halfway between. It's closer to a typical 40 than a typical 30. But it's not a typical 40.
If one is concerned with the viscosity, they should look at the viscosity, not the vague classification it was assigned.
13.5cSt at 100C is lower than any other "40" I've seen a spec for.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question