toyota 86 oil question

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Shannow
As a poster mentioned in another thread, the inertial loads of a fluffed gearchange can't be programmed out

It's always fun to listen to the pontifications
of fellows that have zero track experience and go off half-cocked with knee-jerk recommendations.


It's a good feeling, isn't it.

Unfortunately, your jocularity is a mere shadow of what I get from the board when posters with no technical qualifications or experience whatsoever, who have never designed so much as a towel rail, spout of half baked theories and half truths as irrefutible scientific fact while displaying profound difficulties in reading and comprehension of even rudimentary technical papers.

When they refuse to back any of their pseudo science posits with facts, science, or anything other than feelings of understanding, or statements of "facts", "self evident" from some made up twilight zone, I must admit to mirth.

BTW, don't you still owe me $100 site supporter status from your lessons on measurement accuracy and the calculation of VI, (ironically in a thread on TGMO )???

Right, you the one without a science degree or any track experience who thinks it's a good idea no run a straight grade HDEO for track use because it won't shear.
And BTW you're the one that owes BITOG the $100.
But nice try.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
I have to say that I disagree.
Temperature of oil in oil pan are reduced with installation of oil cooler, but hot spots around engine are still an issue with low viscosity oils. You cannot address increased bearing temperatures and loads with oil cooler. You will notice that sports cars or sporty versions of normal cars do implement oil cooler combined with thicker oils to prevent engine damage when car is tracked or raced. This are not normal road use conditions.
You keep saying how beneficial is use of this 0w20 oils but I can't see those benefits especially on a track.


The oil temp's in every part of the engine will correlate to the sump oil temp's, that's why sump oil temp's are a reference point in racing in determining what oil grade to use and also why keeping them below the ECU triggering point is what you want to do.
I don't know anyone (who knows what they're doing) that uses a heavier than than specified oil grade in conjunction with an oil cooler. In racing you're always trying to maintain a minimum and maximum operational viscosity in a narrow range.

I should also point out that out-right racing is very different than typical track day activities. To use the example of the Mustang GT (and no oil cooler) which is spec'd for a 5W-20 including for track-day activities. An oil cooler is usually not necessary because you likely will not get oil temp's high enough to trigger the the ECU nannies as one member has reported.
The trac-pac option is comprised mostly of suspension mod's plus an oil cooler and reset ECU to allow higher oil temp's and hence the specified 5W-50 grade.
During actual racing an oil cooler's effectiveness can and is often impaired when you're running nose to tail in the heat wake of another racer lap after lap. Out and out racing is not allowed for most track day (driver education) events and track sessions are usually no longer than 20-25 minutes at a time.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
I have to say that I disagree.
Temperature of oil in oil pan are reduced with installation of oil cooler, but hot spots around engine are still an issue with low viscosity oils. You cannot address increased bearing temperatures and loads with oil cooler. You will notice that sports cars or sporty versions of normal cars do implement oil cooler combined with thicker oils to prevent engine damage when car is tracked or raced. This are not normal road use conditions.
You keep saying how beneficial is use of this 0w20 oils but I can't see those benefits especially on a track.


The oil temp's in every part of the engine will correlate to the sump oil temp's, that's why sump oil temp's are a reference point in racing in determining what oil grade to use and also why keeping them below the ECU triggering point is what you want to do.
I don't know anyone (who knows what they're doing) that uses a heavier than than specified oil grade in conjunction with an oil cooler. In racing you're always trying to maintain a minimum and maximum operational viscosity in a narrow range.

I should also point out that out-right racing is very different than typical track day activities. To use the example of the Mustang GT (and no oil cooler) which is spec'd for a 5W-20 including for track-day activities. An oil cooler is usually not necessary because you likely will not get oil temp's high enough to trigger the the ECU nannies as one member has reported.
The trac-pac option is comprised mostly of suspension mod's plus an oil cooler and reset ECU to allow higher oil temp's and hence the specified 5W-50 grade.
During actual racing an oil cooler's effectiveness can and is often impaired when you're running nose to tail in the heat wake of another racer lap after lap. Out and out racing is not allowed for most track day (driver education) events and track sessions are usually no longer than 20-25 minutes at a time.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
You are a fool to trust the ECU to save your engine just to be able to run a thin oil against the manufacturers recommendation.


As a poster mentioned in another thread, the inertial loads of a fluffed gearchange can't be programmed out

It's always fun to listen to the pontifications
of fellows that have zero track experience and go off half-cocked with knee-jerk recommendations.

The solution, as I mentioned at the beginning of this thread, if high oil temp's are routinely visited, is the installation of the oil cooler.
It's a win-win-win. You don't want excessively high oil temp's if they can be prevented for a myriad of reasons. It prevents the ECU safeties from being activated which no one wants and ends the counter-productive discussion of the use of heavier oil grades.


Oh, well my post was based on the assumption that you had not tracked the car in the OP's question. My mistake. Can you please post your logged data for a Toyota 86 in track conditions with a 0w-20 so we can look at the data and make some conclusions?

Yeh, you are are mistake. I did post earlier the thread of the Florida member tracked FR-S and his experiences including the subsequent installation of an oil cooler. Did you bother to even read it?
So just to be clear, are you disagreeing that installation of an oil cooler is not the recommended approach if high oil temp's are being generated? Or are you just fixated like many members here that running the recommended 0W-20 grade is a bad idea, period?

What's so prevalent here, is the automatic assumption by many that Toyota/Subaru don't know what they're doing in specifying a 0W-20 for a sportscar. That they would risk an avalanche of potential warranty claims if the specified grade wasn't more than up to the job. They certainly know that some owners are going to thrash the daylights out of the FA20 engine during the entire warranty period and if a heavier oil grade would minimize claims in any way that's what would be recommend as many European manufacturers do.

The smart money is to run the lightest oil recommended because that is what all of the EOMs torture testing is based on. That's what the more knowledgeable experienced members on this site do recommend.

 

[Shannow]

"Torture Testing" CATERHAM...ridiculous hyperbole doesn't make your case any stronger.

If your definition of torture involves any more than 5 off 15 second dyno runs, a minute apart (that's when the tuners have found the safeties cut in), the Japanese have forgotten all that they knew about torture.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
CATERHAM, given that the TGMO imported specifically for the 86 in Oz is the steel can, made in Japan, and presumably the one that sheared out of grade inside 400 miles in your testing, how "unique" are the (various) TGMO formulations ?


CATERHAM, you haven't answered this one yet.

Is the steel Can TGMO that's available in Oz, and made in Japan (so definitely not the same TGMO as is worshipped on here) presumably the same oil that sheared out of grade in 400 miles in your Cadett engined track car ?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
That's what the more knowledgeable experienced members on this site do recommend.


That doesn't appear to be the case here, or this discussion would have ended long ago. The more knowledgeable members seem to have a different POV. No offense intended.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Shannow
CATERHAM, given that the TGMO imported specifically for the 86 in Oz is the steel can, made in Japan, and presumably the one that sheared out of grade inside 400 miles in your testing, how "unique" are the (various) TGMO formulations ?


CATERHAM, you haven't answered this one yet.

Is the steel Can TGMO that's available in Oz, and made in Japan (so definitely not the same TGMO as is worshipped on here) presumably the same oil that sheared out of grade in 400 miles in your Cadett engined track car ?

That was 4 or 5 years ago and the SM GF-4 version of the Nippon Oil 0W-20 and even after some viscosity loss it was still a bit heavier the the Sustina GF-5 0W-20 that was tested in the FR-S I have referenced.

But indirectly you're brought up a salient point that you "thicker is better" oil guys fail to appreciate.
If you're running the OEM oil you need not be concerned in any way about oil shear, the manufacturer has already factored that into their oil recommendation.
For example, Motorcraft 5W-50 that's spec'd for some high performance Fords, shears a good 25% virtually as it's poured into the engine. Some members have expressed concern over this but they shouldn't be; it's not like Ford isn't aware of it.
They could likely spec' a higher quality shear stable 0W/5W-40 that would give the same operational viscosity but they're obviously not concerned.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
the Japanese have forgotten all that they knew about torture.

Do I detect a xenophobic bias in addition to all your other biases?
Just asking.

 

[chrisri]

I have zero first hand experience with this engine in particular, but number of bottom end failures on fairly new low mileage cars raise a question here. Simply one can't follow OEM recommendations for oil blindly when car is used differently then intended by its manufacturer especially if you consider different oil specification for Germany (and probably rest of continental Europe). You have to admit that oil specd for those markets are quite thicker.
There must be some reason for Subaru/Toyota to go that route.

 

[userfriendly]

Chrisri; I think its called risk analysis, or something like that.

 

[userfriendly]

Shannow; Please accept my apologies for my country man's last post.

 

[Trav]

Please explain Toyota's own document away. Are their engineers clueless and we should accept your opinion over what Toyota themselves publish for operating in these exact condition?

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Please explain Toyota's own document away. Are their engineers clueless and we should accept your opinion over what Toyota themselves publish for operating in these exact condition?

And what document is that you're referring to, that I'm sure you're misinterpreting?
The point that just doesn't seem to want to sink in, is that the recommended oil grade is 0W-20. There no warranty requirement to use anything heavier. And here in NA good luck getting permission to use anything heavier.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
At times here n BITOG we seem to become more knowledgeable than the Engineers who design, test and develop expensive and sophisticated engines etc. Then we tend to disregard the OEM's operating Manuals (sometimes Market place specific due to application and product availability). Some even seem to disregard OEM Service Manuals and TSBs - because we know better?

And then perhaps we also think that the Oil Companies don't know enough to place accurate Product recommendations in appropriate places!

In this case 0W-20 and 5W-30 are the widely recommended viscosities - after first referring to the operating Manual!

This applies in most markets with 0W-20 being recommended here in OZ and in Europe by Shell, Castrol, Motul, Mobil - with 5W-30 being the alternative. Any special applications will no doubt be covered in the operating Manual

We don't know more than the development Engineers and the operating Manual remains the King pin. If you want to deviate, well that's a vehicle Owners prerogative

If I owned such a vehicle here in OZ I would use a synthetic 0W-20 or 5w-30 of SN, GF5, A1/B1 Certification. And we do get temps here around >45C. The warranty tells me I can!!!

Recently I did around 400kms at around 140km/h virtually without stopping - 2000kms in total at an average speed of 100km/h on such a lubricant - the temps were near 40C most of the time
The wheels never fell off.....................

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Trav
Please explain Toyota's own document away. Are their engineers clueless and we should accept your opinion over what Toyota themselves publish for operating in these exact condition?

And what document is that you're referring to, that I'm sure you're misinterpreting?
The point that just doesn't seem to want to sink in, is that the recommended oil grade is 0W-20. There no warranty requirement to use anything heavier. And here in NA good luck getting permission to use anything heavier.



Incorrect. The recommendation is to run a 0W-20 or if running under high speed or high load a thicker weight is recommended.

 

[Nate1979]

Yes I have read a number of threads concerning tracking a stock Toyota 86 in which the oil temperature can get very high, up to 266F was observed in one case I read before they decided to stop and not test any more. No ECU timing was pulled up to this point. The only references I could find to ECU nannies taking over was at high load, but not specifically to high oil temps (i.e. at sustained high loads the ECU pulled timing when the oil was not hot but that the oil could get very hot and timing was not pulled).

Therefore to me the manufacturers recommendation for a stock vehicle makes perfect sense that to run at sustained high temps to run a thicker oil.

You have confirmed this by suggestion to install a oil cooler thereby concluding that a 0W-20 is not sufficient, that oil temps can get beyond the capability of the 0W-20. Instead of installing an oil cooler (which is not in the manual as a suggestion) the simple recommendation is to run a thicker oil.

I had not found a reference that the ECU pulls timing specifically due to high oil temp. Only sustained high load.

The thread you reference is not sufficient as the oil temps did not get that high according to other references as I mention (266F in one case).

 

[Bandito440]

Yikes. This thread took a nasty turn since last I checked in. I wonder if we'll hear from the OP again.

If two viscosity grades are allowed in the owner's manual, I'd run the thicker option for track use in a quality synthetic and change it frequently. He likes Royal Purple, so maybe their HPS 5w-30 or 10w-30, or the API version if he's worried about the warranty.

I'm glad my first post about using an oversized oil filter didn't turn out this way.

 

[Trav]

The Toyota PDF link i posted but you know that. I am not misinterpreting anything, it is an official company document.
You just choose to ignore it or post tripe like i am misinterpreting something because it proves you are dead wrong! I didn't write it Toyota did about tracking this model.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Trav
Please explain Toyota's own document away. Are their engineers clueless and we should accept your opinion over what Toyota themselves publish for operating in these exact condition?

And what document is that you're referring to, that I'm sure you're misinterpreting?
The point that just doesn't seem to want to sink in, is that the recommended oil grade is 0W-20. There no warranty requirement to use anything heavier. And here in NA good luck getting permission to use anything heavier.


Why would you need to get approval when tracking the car voids the warranty anyway as does running other than spec fluids, its a wash.
Quote:
WHAT IS NOT COVERED
This warranty does not cover damage
or failures resulting directly or
indirectly from any of the following:
> Fire, accidents or theft
> Abuse or negligence
> Misuse — for example, racing or
overloading
> Improper repairs
> Alteration or tampering, including
installation of non-Scion Authorized
Accessories
> Lack of or improper maintenance,
including use of fluids other than
those specified in the Owner’s
Manual
> Installation of non-Scion Authorized
Parts
Etc, etc, etc.


http://www.scion.com/manuals/warranty_maintenance/#section=warranty-maintenance-guides

Toyota Racing actually sells a car in Europe as an entry level track version with a stock engine. All the parts are available from Toyota for a stock car.
For track use Toyota specs 10w60 in this exact engine.
A stock engine is a stock engine and tracking the car has similar effects on the car regardless of continent.

http://www.toyota-motorsport.com/motorsport/en/cars/gt86-cs-v3

TMG = Toyota Motorsport GmbH

The irrefutable proof is there, you are wrong about all this 20w track stuff.
Now you produce one single Toyota, Scion or Subaru document that says they recommend 0w20 for track use or even something they states they will warranty a car that has been tracked.

Enough of this foolishness, put up some documentation not just biased opinion or drop it.