Does thicker oil=better protection?

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27

The M1 will permit longer drains than either Synpower or Maxlife.


How do you know that? Especially with the OP's engine and driving style?

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
To give you a rough idea in most applications a virgin HTHSV 3.5cP oil can withstand sump oil temp's of 145-150C before the onset of bearing wiping under maximum load.
A HTHSV 3.1cP oil may be able to withstand sump oil temp's of 130-135C and a 2.6cP oil temp's of about 120C under the same condtions.


That's a pretty big generalisation, and if it's supported by documentation, I'd be interested ins seeing it.

Any bearing performance is defined by it's operating parameters, and to infer that "most" will be alright at 3.5 @150 degrees demonstrates a lack of understanding of bearing lubrication fundamentals.

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Honda and Toyota have developed 0W-15 (HTHSV 2.3cP) and 0W-10 (HTHSV 2.0cP) oil grades and are using them in Japan. They are in the process of getting these oil grades certified so that they can be used as service fill in export countries. In fact the 0W-10 is the factory fill on some Japanese models like the Honda Insight that we get here. The main reason these light oils can be used successfully is that the maximum sump oil temp's are well contained.


The main reason they can use the thinner oils is likely that they changed their engine design to increase the film thicknesses provided by the thin oils.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

The M1 will permit longer drains than either Synpower or Maxlife.


How do you know that? Especially with the OP's engine and driving style?


You aren't seriously asking that, are you?
Neither Valvoline oil shows TBN retention anywhere near as strong as that of any M1 oil.
Check the UOA forum for details.
I run Valvoline knowing that I'm not going to have the TBN retention to do the number of miles I could do on either M1, PP or Ultra.
Since 5-6K drains are fine with me, and the very low metals wear numbers we see in Valvoline UOAs are attractive, I'm using Valvoline oils in a couple of cars, soon to be three.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

The M1 will permit longer drains than either Synpower or Maxlife.


How do you know that? Especially with the OP's engine and driving style?


You aren't seriously asking that, are you?
Neither Valvoline oil shows TBN retention anywhere near as strong as that of any M1 oil.
Check the UOA forum for details.
I run Valvoline knowing that I'm not going to have the TBN retention to do the number of miles I could do on either M1, PP or Ultra.
Since 5-6K drains are fine with me, and the very low metals wear numbers we see in Valvoline UOAs are attractive, I'm using Valvoline oils in a couple of cars, soon to be three.


You are the one that made the assumption, so seriously how are you coming up with that data. I have seen some pretty low TBN numbers on UOA'S of Valvoline Oils but TBN depletion is not linear.

Do you know what specifications GM4718 and ACEA A5 mean?
Do you know what the recommended OCI for is for the vehicles that require these oils are? So since Valvoline Synpower meets or exceeds both specs it is a long life oil.

So I recommend you research oil specifications for details not a just a couple low TBN UOA's since I am pretty sure you and I can not calculate TBN depletion.

 

[fdcg27]

I'd suggest that you look at some of the Valvoline UOAs in that forum where TBN is listed.
While TBN retention may not be linear, very low TBN values on moderate drain intervals are not encouraging.
Do I know what various specs mean?
Yeah, and GM 4718 is a high temp deposit spec, not a long drain one, so the recommended OCI is not relevant.
Did you know that most of the GM vehicles to which the 4718 spec applies have OCIs recommended as either that allowed by the OLM or one year?
Have you also seen the UOAs where this recommendation was clearly too long?
Maybe you should need to do a litle research yourself?

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
To give you a rough idea in most applications a virgin HTHSV 3.5cP oil can withstand sump oil temp's of 145-150C before the onset of bearing wiping under maximum load.
A HTHSV 3.1cP oil may be able to withstand sump oil temp's of 130-135C and a 2.6cP oil temp's of about 120C under the same conditions.


Very interesting and potentially useful info for me. I don't know if I've seen you quote these number before. If you did, I must really be slipping as I actively look for the closest thing I can find to generalities that fit the broadest possible application. From whence did this info come?

It's derived from racing folk, it's always originates with racing folk.
And while oil temp's is what's often referenced, they are dealing with a known oil with known fuel dilution tendencies. Oil pressure is a better bottom line since it takes into account shear and fuel dilution.

For example, if the minimum recommended OP spec' is 60 psi at 6,500 rpm, bearing wiping may not occur until the OP has dropped to the operational viscosity that's associted with 50 psi.
Personally I have no interest in testing at what point below the recommended spec' wiping will actually occur although I've had racing buddies who have inadvertently found out.
Put another way, your OP will be way below spec' if you're seeing 120C oil temp's with a 2.6cP 20wt oil as it will be for a 3.1cP 30wt at 135C and a 3.5cP 30wt at 150C.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
To give you a rough idea in most applications a virgin HTHSV 3.5cP oil can withstand sump oil temp's of 145-150C before the onset of bearing wiping under maximum load.
A HTHSV 3.1cP oil may be able to withstand sump oil temp's of 130-135C and a 2.6cP oil temp's of about 120C under the same condtions.


That's a pretty big generalisation, and if it's supported by documentation, I'd be interested ins seeing it.

Any bearing performance is defined by it's operating parameters, and to infer that "most" will be alright at 3.5 @150 degrees demonstrates a lack of understanding of bearing lubrication fundamentals.

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Honda and Toyota have developed 0W-15 (HTHSV 2.3cP) and 0W-10 (HTHSV 2.0cP) oil grades and are using them in Japan. They are in the process of getting these oil grades certified so that they can be used as service fill in export countries. In fact the 0W-10 is the factory fill on some Japanese models like the Honda Insight that we get here. The main reason these light oils can be used successfully is that the maximum sump oil temp's are well contained.


The main reason they can use the thinner oils is likely that they changed their engine design to increase the film thicknesses provided by the thin oils.

Shannow as I prefaced I'm giving a rough idea of the relationship between oil temp's and the onset of bearing wiping based on HTHSV. Of course it is going to vary with different engines somewhat.
And the temp's I've given is when wiping could occur. So I'm saying a 3.5cP oil WILL NOT likely provide sufficient viscosity at 150C.

Regarding the application for the proposed 0W-15 and 0W-10 oils.
I don't think the internal engine design including bearings has been altered much if at all. Some of the cars for which these oils have been specified already exist. I mentioned the Honda Insight as one. Their engines have low specific output which limits the viscosity demands right there and controlling maximum oil temp's on top of that seems to be key. Normal operating oil temp's are in the 75-90C range for many cars today so it's not a stretch to cap oil temp's at say 85C. In so doing a 0W-10 oil will provide more than adequate bearing viscosity.

 

[dave1251]

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2376201
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
I'd suggest that you look at some of the Valvoline UOAs in that forum where TBN is listed.
While TBN retention may not be linear, very low TBN values on moderate drain intervals are not encouraging.
Do I know what various specs mean?
Yeah, and GM 4718 is a high temp deposit spec, not a long drain one, so the recommended OCI is not relevant.
Did you know that most of the GM vehicles to which the 4718 spec applies have OCIs recommended as either that allowed by the OLM or one year?
Have you also seen the UOAs where this recommendation was clearly too long?
Maybe you should need to do a litle research yourself?


I have yet to see a Corvette that has used GM4718 certified oils with a bad UOA up 15K OCI's. Here are some UOA's for you to read along with Valvoline Synpower being a ACEA A5 certified oil, I believe the you are mistaken, along with DEXRON VI ATF and Supertech oils. Believe it or not I am not trying to run you into the ground, I am trying to get you to think about what you are posting.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2463952
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2114849
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2551916
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1823051
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2376201
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1247356&fpart=1
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1191436.

I also have UOA's from other forums with VSP it it stacks up very well with other off the shelf synthetics. There is something to Valvoline's formulation from what I can see the longer in miles it remains in service TBN depletion is less compared to other brands of oils. If you followed a former board member on here it told everyone that Ashland has some of the most resourceful and bright formulators in the industry.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

It's derived from racing folk, it's always originates with racing folk.
And while oil temp's is what's often referenced, they are dealing with a known oil with known fuel dilution tendencies. Oil pressure is a better bottom line since it takes into account shear and fuel dilution.

For example, if the minimum recommended OP spec' is 60 psi at 6,500 rpm, bearing wiping may not occur until the OP has dropped to the operational viscosity that's associted with 50 psi.
Personally I have no interest in testing at what point below the recommended spec' wiping will actually occur although I've had racing buddies who have inadvertently found out.
Put another way, your OP will be way below spec' if you're seeing 120C oil temp's with a 2.6cP 20wt oil as it will be for a 3.1cP 30wt at 135C and a 3.5cP 30wt at 150C.



Well, it makes sense and given the caveat that it may not be 100 percent applicable to all engines/circumstances, it still seems a useful yardstick. Thanks!

150C is so far out of any operational situations I'll ever see with my equipment that it's barely on the "watch out" radar. Even 120C is highly unlikely but probably my "worst case."

OP and OT are my two most watched gauges. In the 5.4L, 219F is the highest oil temp recorded but OP was essentially the same as the normal 190F OT seen on hot days with a towed load. Maybe 1 psi less. I have wondered how far the oil pressure "plateau" extends on either side of that 100C (210F) point. Not anxious to experiment at 150C, though. ( : < )

That leads me to another question, which I think I will use to start a new post, about the best place to measure oil temp to simulate the hottest point of the oil.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen

That leads me to another question, which I think I will use to start a new post, about the best place to measure oil temp to simulate the hottest point of the oil.


I'd like to see that, I'm seriously doubting it's in the oil pan that's hanging down in the airflow... Oil temps at the bearings and cylinder walls are likely far higher, at least under heavy load... Unless the load is sustained(heavy towing up grade, racing, etc) these temps will have almost zero impact on oil in the pan temps... Of course there is no method for the average Joes to monitor temps at the bearings...

I'll never subscribe to the thin as possible conspiracy, just because of the possibility there is a brief period bearing temps could flash to dangerous levels...

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM


150C is so far out of any operational situations I'll ever see with my equipment that it's barely on the "watch out" radar. Even 120C is highly unlikely but probably my "worst case."

OP and OT are my two most watched gauges. In the 5.4L, 219F is the highest oil temp recorded but OP was essentially the same as the normal 190F OT seen on hot days with a towed load. Maybe 1 psi less. I have wondered how far the oil pressure "plateau" extends on either side of that 100C (210F) point. Not anxious to experiment at 150C, though. ( : < )

That leads me to another question, which I think I will use to start a new post, about the best place to measure oil temp to simulate the hottest point of the oil.

150C is the purview of the race track as no one wants to see oil temp's that high ever on the street.

The relationship between oil temp's and oil pressure is not linear. The reason one notices a large drop in OP with the rise of oil temp's from cold up to say 80C or so is because viscosity change with temperature is dramatic in that temperature range. As temp's continue to rise past about 80C for lighter oils the rate of viscosity change with temperature starts to become more linear and is virtually linear and much more gradual from 100C on up.
Your OP will reflect this. OP doesn't exactly "plateau" at higher temp's but the drop in OP will reflect the gradual drop in viscosity at high oil temp's.
That's a good thing because if you know you're OP with the oil viscosity you're running is comfortably above the recommended optimum minimum at normal operating temp's, a further rise of 10-20C oil temp's will not significantly lower your OP. Consiquently, for most normally aspirated applications you don't need to run an oil any heavier than what provides about 5 psi above the minimum spec'.

BTW the need for an oil temperature gauge (in addition to an OP gauge) really only becomes necessary if you're routinely seeing oil temp's of 115C and higher.

Regarding the best place to locate the oil temp' sensor? Honestly it's not that important. When the engine oil is up to temperature at high rev's with maximum oil pump flow rates the oil is circulating [censored] fast through the engine, something like a gallon every 12-15 seconds. With a normal sized sump of 4-6 qts the difference in oil temperature between the oil returning to the sump and at the pick-up point at the bottom of the sump will be only a few degrees.

 

[[RT] ProjUltraZ]

I don't think we have to worry about 0W-10 or 15 oils because they'll only work in cars around 2,100 lbs and have less than 150hp. i've never seen so many tiny fragile looking cars as i saw in japan. they make a prius or that cube look like a mid sized car

 

[fdcg27]

I think that it's kind of you to try to make me think about what I'm posting.
The implication, though, is that you think deeply about what you post, while I write any sort of nonsense.
This is condescending on your part, and is hardly admirable.
It may be that what I'm posting is something with which you disagree.
No matter.
It appears that we disagree about the longevity in service of Valvoline oils.
That's fine, since I'll post some empirical results.
I'll UOA my two current Valvoline runners when I drain them, the BMW after 4K in the next couple of weeks and the Forester after 5K in September.
I expect low wear metals as compared to most UOAs of similar engines on other brands along with low residual TBN.
You can say what you like about Valvoline TBN retention, but I get nervous at values around 2.0, which is what I expect to see from the oil from both cars.
We'll see whether my thinking is correct, and I'll be the first to note that it isn't.
Oil is certainly cheap enough to change, and UOAs are certainly cheap enough to have done, and are very entertaining.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: [RT
ProjUltraZ] I don't think we have to worry about 0W-10 or 15 oils because they'll only work in cars around 2,100 lbs and have less than 150hp. i've never seen so many tiny fragile looking cars as i saw in japan. they make a prius or that cube look like a mid sized car

I agree light low powered cars is the application for these light oils. But remember, when Toyota developed their ultra high VI (216) 0W-20 oil it was only intended for the Prius. This lubricant proved to be so successful and robust with so many advantages that it is now the spec' oil across the entire Toyota/Lexus line.
When these new light oils become available I believe it will be just a matter of time before they make their way into more powerful vehicles.

 

[G-MAN]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: [RT
ProjUltraZ] I don't think we have to worry about 0W-10 or 15 oils because they'll only work in cars around 2,100 lbs and have less than 150hp. i've never seen so many tiny fragile looking cars as i saw in japan. they make a prius or that cube look like a mid sized car

I agree light low powered cars is the application for these light oils. But remember, when Toyota developed their ultra high VI (216) 0W-20 oil it was only intended for the Prius. This lubricant proved to be so successful and robust with so many advantages that it is now the spec' oil across the entire Toyota/Lexus line.
When these new light oils become available I believe it will be just a matter of time before they make their way into more powerful vehicles.


Bet they never spec 0w20 for the Lexus LFA.