What is the preferred 5W 20 or even 0W20 oil

[rossn2]

Isn't Schaeffers 7000 a synthetic blend? why not go for the 9000 series instead?

Question, if he went from a 5w-20 to a 5w-30 don't believe he would see that much of a mpg drop (like .6mpg). Most consumers will never notice the difference. The purpose behind 5w-20 oil is to meet CAFE standards here in the US.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: rossn2
Isn't Schaeffers 7000 a synthetic blend? why not go for the 9000 series instead?

Question, if he went from a 5w-20 to a 5w-30 don't believe he would see that much of a mpg drop (like .6mpg). Most consumers will never notice the difference. The purpose behind 5w-20 oil is to meet CAFE standards here in the US.


There is no 5w20 9000.
5w30s just end up as 5w20s. 5w20s are better oils.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Best F100
I have to qualify my statement for Cateham's behalf:

From an engine durabiltiy and longevity stand point, the higher the better, HT/HS figure. Some manufacturers even recommend going to a 5W30 for their performance engine of the same model (Honda, 2011 Ford Flex with Ecoboost engine), over a 5W20.

From a fuel economy stand point (and engine start up stand point) for a 20 wt oil, a lower cst@ 40C and 100C is better.

kbmag 1, so consequently, I picked Motorcraft 5W20 Full Synthetic
because it had the low viscosity ( 45.9 cst@ 40C, 8.3 cst@ 100C) combined with the higher 2.7 HT/HS figure.

I will add that Kendall 5W20 Full Synthetic w/ Liquid Titanium is rumored to be same product as the Motorcraft (with the addition of Liquid Titanium). All the other product data numbers are identical for both products. Motorcraft 5W20 Blend has a HT/HS of 2.6.



Again, I have to disagree.

A higher HTHS vis is not automatically better in increasing an engine's durability and longevity. If an engine does not require a higher viscosity oil (higher HTHS vis) then there is no advantage in using an oil with a higher HTHS vis spec'.

Very few on BITOG understand the full significance of the HTHS vis spec', it is a lot more than just a measure of an oil's viscosity under stress at 150C. For example:
- It correlates closely with operating viscosity in an engine more so than the kinematic 100C vis spec', even at temps' below 100C.
- Fuel economy of an oil tracks closely with the HTHS vis spec', more so than the 100C k'vis spec'; again at operating temp's commonly below 100C.

 

[Best F100]

Anyone can disagree about anything. Common sense is in short supply around here.

No one has said a high HT/HS in and itself guarantees you a 500,000 mile vehicle. However we do know:

A) GM, Exxon, Toyota & Lubrizol have papers on file indicating that 2.6cp HT/HS is the MINIMUM needed to protect con-rod bearings, piston rings & cam faces.

922342 - Exxon papers "Engine Oil Viscosity & Bearing Wear: Field Test Results.

932782 - Toyota/Lubrizol paper on the Influence of Engine Oil Viscosity on Piston Ring & Cam Face Wear.

B) Some higher performance engine manufacturers that would normally recommend a 5W20 for their standard engines, recommend a 5W30 for their higher performance engine (Honda, 2011 Ford Flex with EcoBoost). Why? Coincidently, the 5W30 has a higher HT/HS.

C) Some turbocharged Subaru WRX owners using a thin, well known 5W30 synthetic oil (a manufacturer recommended viscosity), are winding up with spun bearings("brisk driving"). Others owners using 30 and 40 wt synthetics (also recommended viscosity grade) with higher HT/HS are not.

I don't want, or care to understand the full significance of HT/HS. I made my decision to use something a cut above the bare minimum 2.6 HT/HS for the above reasons. See you in 500,000 miles.

 

[CATERHAM]

Best F100, you brought the HTHS vis into the discussion.
All I've done is correct some misstatements you've made on that viscosity measurement primarily for the benefit of others.

That you "don't want, or care to understand" what you're talking about is your business.
But your comments are off topic and have nothing to do with the OP's question.

 

[Jason_M]

I have been using 0W-20 ENEOS Full Syn in my 2008 F150 Ford, and 5W20 is the factory recommended. Fuel Mileage on highway improved 2.5 mpg on long road trips. But mixed driving around town/highway about the same as 5W-20. It has been in for two oil changes or 10K. I am very happy with the 0W-20, no issues at all. And that is in a full size V8 Engine!

 

[kbmag1]

Has anyone found the tech data sheet for either MC 5W20 syn blend or full synthetics?

 

[Best F100]

Originally Posted By: kbmag1
Has anyone found the tech data sheet for either MC 5W20 syn blend or full synthetics?



I have seen it. Although it is hard to find, someone will post it, but it may be removed now that we are getting close to GF-5. MC Blend has the same numbers and data as Kendall Blend. MC Full Synthetic reads the same as Kendall Full Synthetic. Go to the ConocoPhillips web site.

 

[kbmag1]

Thanks, good to know. I had them, didn't know they were the same as MC. Also printed the tech data sheets of Penn PP,PU/QSUD, Mobil 1 and Val Syn Pow. I've reached data overload. What would be the "ideal" set of numbers that would make up the "ideal" tech data sheet?

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Jason_M
I have been using 0W-20 ENEOS Full Syn in my 2008 F150 Ford, and 5W20 is the factory recommended. Fuel Mileage on highway improved 2.5 mpg on long road trips. But mixed driving around town/highway about the same as 5W-20. It has been in for two oil changes or 10K. I am very happy with the 0W-20, no issues at all. And that is in a full size V8 Engine!


FYI, Nippon Oil, the maker of ENEOS also makes the Toyota Brand (red bottle) 0W-20. It's the same product except the Toyota spec's appear somewhat better. The main advantage of the Toyota Brand, at least here in Canada, is that it's half the price of ENEOS. I suspect the price difference in S.Cal is much less.

 

[Gary Allan]

I'll package my response as compactly as possible.

Buy based on how long you're going to leave the sump in service. You can't take too much advantage of cold flow properties ..so the only feature of merit is durability.

If you have nothing exceptional to your usage, no reason to endure exceptional costs for no benefit.