Engine Masters (MotorTrend) Tests Oil Viscosity (Thickies Rejoice!)

Joined
Aug 25, 2018
Messages
3,789
Location
South Carolina
Engine Masters on MotorTrend did a test of engine oil viscosity using Driven GP-1 in 5W-20 and 20W-50. The test engine was a marine 454 BBC with a stock bottom end and quite a bit of age on it. They were mostly looking at the differences in viscosity and pressure at different temperatures, mainly 40°C (100°F) and 100°C (212°F), and there wasn't anything spectacular there. The 5W-20 ran ~10 psi lower than the 20W-50 across the pull. What was interesting was the power.

When cold (40°C), the 5W-20 made more power than the 20W-50. When hot (100°C), the 20W-50 made more power than the 5W-20. The reason for that is the engine in use. It's a rather worn engine with thick 5/64", 5/64", 3/16" high tension rings with likely a less than stellar hone profile. This is the reason for the slight bump in power with the 20W-50 over the 5W-20 when hot is the higher viscosity is helping ring seal.

Everyone who knows me and my passion in lubricants knows I'm a proponent of lower viscosity. Lower viscosity will make more power up until the point that ring seal becomes compromised, and that is what happened here. I wish they would've done more with the episode. I think if they'd put in GP-1 10W-30, they would've found more power than both 5W-20 and 20W-50 at 212°F.

Something else to note is that GP-1 uses majority ARG group I base oil which has a much higher pressure-viscosity coefficient when cold that falls substantially as the oil gets hot. Group III and IV synthetic base oils have a higher P-V coef pretty much everywhere above ~160°F so running this same test with something like Amsoil Dominator 5W-20 vs 15W-50 or even a shelf oil like Mobil 1 5W-20 vs 15W-50 could potentially not have the ring seal issue.

There's a ton of variables at play here which is why I'm laying this out. I don't want people to look at this and say "Oh, higher viscosity makes more power" because >95% of the time, that won't be the case. They acknowledged that in the video as well. This is one of those exceptions where that wasn't the case due to it being an old, worn out engine.

If you have Motortrend on Demand, hop over there and watch the episode.

Engine Masters 5W-20 vs 20W-50 GP-1.jpeg
 
Did we learn anything more than this well used engine runs better on thicker oil? How applicable is this anywhere else really?

Edit: Not trying to be negative I'm just not immediately seeing the big lesson from this test. It seems pretty specific.
 
Before I traded in my 2019 Ram 1500 5.7L Hemi, I went from the recommended 5w-20 and put in M1 FS 0W-40 for an OCI. After putting the M1 in, I had to "relearn" the throttle input on my right foot because I kept spinning the tires with my muscle memory "learned" throttle input.

No idea what else was at play, and if it had anything to do with the oil at all, but was very evident after the switch to the 0W-40.
 
Engine Masters has to be taken as it is…
Controlled environment, consistent fuel grades, and a bottomless budget. Some of there reported horsepower/torque results are a stretch. This particular test with a worn engine using an oil that’s too thin (5w20) even when it was new is a nothing test in my opinion.
 
Engine Masters on MotorTrend did a test of engine oil viscosity using Driven GP-1 in 5W-20 and 20W-50. The test engine was a marine 454 BBC with a stock bottom end and quite a bit of age on it. They were mostly looking at the differences in viscosity and pressure at different temperatures, mainly 40°C (100°F) and 100°C (212°F), and there wasn't anything spectacular there. The 5W-20 ran ~10 psi lower than the 20W-50 across the pull. What was interesting was the power.

When cold (40°C), the 5W-20 made more power than the 20W-50. When hot (100°C), the 20W-50 made more power than the 5W-20. The reason for that is the engine in use. It's a rather worn engine with thick 5/64", 5/64", 3/16" high tension rings with likely a less than stellar hone profile. This is the reason for the slight bump in power with the 20W-50 over the 5W-20 when hot is the higher viscosity is helping ring seal.

Everyone who knows me and my passion in lubricants knows I'm a proponent of lower viscosity. Lower viscosity will make more power up until the point that ring seal becomes compromised, and that is what happened here. I wish they would've done more with the episode. I think if they'd put in GP-1 10W-30, they would've found more power than both 5W-20 and 20W-50 at 212°F.

Something else to note is that GP-1 uses majority ARG group I base oil which has a much higher pressure-viscosity coefficient when cold that falls substantially as the oil gets hot. Group III and IV synthetic base oils have a higher P-V coef pretty much everywhere above ~160°F so running this same test with something like Amsoil Dominator 5W-20 vs 15W-50 or even a shelf oil like Mobil 1 5W-20 vs 15W-50 could potentially not have the ring seal issue.

There's a ton of variables at play here which is why I'm laying this out. I don't want people to look at this and say "Oh, higher viscosity makes more power" because >95% of the time, that won't be the case. They acknowledged that in the video as well. This is one of those exceptions where that wasn't the case due to it being an old, worn out engine.

If you have Motortrend on Demand, hop over there and watch the episode.

View attachment 161525
Excellent info and observations! Sound right 2 me.
 
Dino test is the ultimate proof of better lubrication IMO. Why is an interpretation. Maybe there should be a timing chain wear sensor on modern engines. As far as rings maybe the engine when new should get a baseline compression test after break in. Then you can monitor the ring health. As far as OCI, always choose the severe option IMO.
Racing oil is a different thing.
 
Last edited:
Interesting stuff. The hp differences are v. small but likely real and make sense w/r to the reasoning you stated. Would be cool to see with a modern/newer engine like the ones in the GR 86, Supra, etc. that call for 20. Of course wear is the primary (and cleaning....oh the cleaning) concern of the BITOG-Kollective, not power and that is the other component of testing I'm sure many would like to see but obviously much more invovled testing is required with tear down/measurement/etc. Thanks for the post.
 
Since this was a marine 454 BBC it was never specced for xW-20, but what about the road going versions? Not that there'll be significant engine differences, only the type of duty isin another league.
 
Did we learn anything more than this well used engine runs better on thicker oil? How applicable is this anywhere else really?

Edit: Not trying to be negative I'm just not immediately seeing the big lesson from this test. It seems pretty specific.

That's it. The old engine with thick 5/64" rings just generates too much friction and load for the thinner oil to effectively keep them in full HD lubrication.
I am guessing that BBC had rectangular port heads and a bit of a cam to get 6,000 RPM. I would be curious to know...

GM Performance heads (made by Edelbrock), but I don't recall if they said which ones. The cam was a hydraulic roller of unknown specs, but they speculated around 224 @ .050". Airgap dual plane intake, 850 carb, and dyno headers.
Engine Masters has to be taken as it is…
Controlled environment, consistent fuel grades, and a bottomless budget. Some of there reported horsepower/torque results are a stretch. This particular test with a worn engine using an oil that’s too thin (5w20) even when it was new is a nothing test in my opinion.

I completely agree. I feel like they intentionally chose that engine and a 5W-20 oil, 2 grades lower than recommended when the engine was new, to get that oddball result. Now you'll have a bunch of people sharing it, claiming higher viscosity makes more power, and completely missing the entire context of the episode. That makes them more money though. Still, since it was oil related and has some technical detail with ring seal, even though they barely touched on that, I figured it was worth posting.

Interesting stuff. The hp differences are v. small but likely real and make sense w/r to the reasoning you stated. Would be cool to see with a modern/newer engine like the ones in the GR 86, Supra, etc. that call for 20. Of course wear is the primary (and cleaning....oh the cleaning) concern of the BITOG-Kollective, not power and that is the other component of testing I'm sure many would like to see but obviously much more invovled testing is required with tear down/measurement/etc. Thanks for the post.

A modern engine with thinner rings and better hone profile would show different results. I think if they would've run GP-1 10W-30, it likely would've been the sweet spot on the edge of MOFT that would've made more power than the 5W-20 and 20W-50, but that's just speculation.
 
Is this going to bring back the Pennsylvania grade crude debate of 50 yrs ago? I would guess many on here wouldn't know about that. Back then QS and Pennzoil were preferred. Part of it was that Esso(Exon) put out oil that had too much paraffin in it and clogged engines. Penn Grade crude was a big marketing tool.
 
If we're talking scientifically, all engine oils are paraffinic.

Group I has a higher pressure-viscosity coefficient than other base oil groups but it fades fast as the oil gets hot. Above ~160°F, a group III has a higher P-V coef. Due to poor oxidation resistance, poor thermal stability, and high volatility, there's no real world benefit to using a group I base oil outside of something like a Nitro SAE 70.
 
GM Performance heads (made by Edelbrock), but I don't recall if they said which ones. The cam was a hydraulic roller of unknown specs, but they speculated around 224 @ .050". Airgap dual plane intake, 850 carb, and dyno headers.
The Edelbrock heads are known as "Roval", or a cross between the rectangular and oval port designs. Great street heads. The intake is necessary because the stock Chevy manifolds were flat to fit under the hood, even the rectangular versions. My L35 manifold starts choking before 5,000 RPM. Hydraulic rollers are the only way to fly; if I ever pull that engine out again I will stab a hyd roller. Of course BB Chevys love headers and are a good match for that cam. That looks like a great street engine with good manners!
 
The Edelbrock heads are known as "Roval", or a cross between the rectangular and oval port designs. Great street heads. The intake is necessary because the stock Chevy manifolds were flat to fit under the hood, even the rectangular versions. My L35 manifold starts choking before 5,000 RPM. Hydraulic rollers are the only way to fly; if I ever pull that engine out again I will stab a hyd roller. Of course BB Chevys love headers and are a good match for that cam. That looks like a great street engine with good manners!

Yep, roval heads. A BBC is the worst case scenario when it comes to flat tappets because you have the smallest lifter diameter of the big 3 (.842") paired with that tall and heavy valvetrain across a high rocker ratio.
 
I record and watch every show and like it but those guys get excited about a few HP or TQ at the RPMs average Joe will never see/care or it's sometimes relatively insignificant considering the test equipments, margin of error, unit under test, all other variables , etc. ... just like we get excited here on bitog about a little change in cSt or thin(er) vs thick(er). lol
 
I record and watch every show and like it but those guys get excited about a few HP or TQ at the RPMs average Joe will never see/care or it's sometimes relatively insignificant considering the test equipments, margin of error, unit under test, all other variables , etc. ... just like we get excited here on bitog about a little change in cSt or thin(er) vs thick(er). lol

Agreed. I like those tiny details though. They tend to represent them in the wrong way because they're more about captivating an audience than they are giving factual and relevant results, but I still like to watch it even if just to shake my head at it.

What I really wish they would've done is started with the 20W-50 and then dropped one oil grade at a time until they found the point where ring seal became compromised and power fell. That wouldn't make for good sensational and controversial TV though.
 
Back
Top