Using 5W-20 in place of 5W-30 in 5.3L engine.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: benjy
1/4 to 1/2 mpg is more important to the manufacturers trying to meet mpg standards, once warranty is gone they care less. girlfriends 13 2.5 malibu, changed at 1,xxx then 5,xxx using quality semi synthetic dexos I oil, took a quart between 2nd change, looks like water coming out!!1 now using amsoil 5-30 signature series meets-exceeds dexos I spec but since they did not pay GM for the certification its not there. the same engines used in europe DO NOT spec 5-20 water-i mean oil
Originally Posted By: benjy
1/4 to 1/2 mpg is more important to the manufacturers trying to meet mpg standards, once warranty is gone they care less. girlfriends 13 2.5 malibu, changed at 1,xxx then 5,xxx using quality semi synthetic dexos I oil, took a quart between 2nd change, looks like water coming out!!1 now using amsoil 5-30 signature series meets-exceeds dexos I spec but since they did not pay GM for the certification its not there. the same engines used in europe DO NOT spec 5-20 water-i mean oil
 
Originally Posted By: benjy
1/4 to 1/2 mpg is more important to the manufacturers trying to meet mpg standards, once warranty is gone they care less. girlfriends 13 2.5 malibu, changed at 1,xxx then 5,xxx using quality semi synthetic dexos I oil, took a quart between 2nd change, looks like water coming out!!1 now using amsoil 5-30 signature series meets-exceeds dexos I spec but since they did not pay GM for the certification its not there. the same engines used in europe DO NOT spec 5-20 water-i mean oil
benjy said:
1/4 to 1/2 mpg is more important to the manufacturers trying to meet mpg standards, once warranty is gone they care less. girlfriends 13 2.5 malibu, changed at 1,xxx then 5,xxx using quality semi synthetic dexos I oil, took a quart between 2nd change

looks like water coming out!!1 now using amsoil 5-30 signaexceeds dexos I spec but since they did not pay GM for the certification its not there.

Did the 5w30 stop the oil burning?????

engines used in europe DO NOT spec 5-20 water-i mean oil[/quot
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Did the Ford engineers design the chevy engines ?

Unless they did, with the same bearing loads and surface velocities, same piston and ring designs, same cam surface areas and loads, etc. etc. etc. you can't ever state that Ford's success with 20s would correlate to any other engine manufacturer's designs.

Chev may well have tested them, and decided that the trade-offs...and no, engine's dissolving isn't one of them...aren't what they would like.


Shannow. My point is recent history has shown that 20 grades aren't leaving dead engines on the sides of the road. The 2014's in the 6.0 and 5.3 engine sizes are calling for 0w-20 only.
Recent history has proven that engines live long lives on 20 grades,and to believe otherwise is ignoring the obvious.
GM isn't back spec'ing anything which likely means they've changed something in their new engines.
My entire point is a 20 grade oil doesn't mean decreased engine life nor engine failure and if we look closely it seems to me high mile engines are everywhere and don't seem worn out.
Wasn't there a time when 100000 miles was high mileage yet today that's hardly a concern.
 
Originally Posted By: benjy
1/4 to 1/2 mpg is more important to the manufacturers trying to meet mpg standards, once warranty is gone they care less. girlfriends 13 2.5 malibu, changed at 1,xxx then 5,xxx using quality semi synthetic dexos I oil, took a quart between 2nd change, looks like water coming out!!1 now using amsoil 5-30 signature series meets-exceeds dexos I spec but since they did not pay GM for the certification its not there. the same engines used in europe DO NOT spec 5-20 water-i mean oil


Show me a North American road where you can drive with the foot on the floor. Driving conditions aren't the same. Oil temps are far less likely to get elevated enough to compromise film strength.
Your argument was tried here a decade ago. Try the search function because the answers haven't changed.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Did the Ford engineers design the chevy engines ?

Unless they did, with the same bearing loads and surface velocities, same piston and ring designs, same cam surface areas and loads, etc. etc. etc. you can't ever state that Ford's success with 20s would correlate to any other engine manufacturer's designs.

Chev may well have tested them, and decided that the trade-offs...and no, engine's dissolving isn't one of them...aren't what they would like.


Shannow. My point is recent history has shown that 20 grades aren't leaving dead engines on the sides of the road. The 2014's in the 6.0 and 5.3 engine sizes are calling for 0w-20 only.
Recent history has proven that engines live long lives on 20 grades,and to believe otherwise is ignoring the obvious.
GM isn't back spec'ing anything which likely means they've changed something in their new engines.
My entire point is a 20 grade oil doesn't mean decreased engine life nor engine failure and if we look closely it seems to me high mile engines are everywhere and don't seem worn out.
Wasn't there a time when 100000 miles was high mileage yet today that's hardly a concern.
so far so good... 20 grade oils are showing good promise and it may be because of the better flow of this thinner oil grade which is just adequate for most normal use engines (no hard driven engines will recommend 20 grades, pls correct me if its not true).
It seems that the thin 20 grade oil flows more effectively to more than compensate for the slightly less protective quality of the lower viscosity property.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Shannow. My point is recent history has shown that 20 grades aren't leaving dead engines on the sides of the road.


Your strawman of a few posts ago was that they aren't dissolving...and the piles of dead engines is another strawman...

The people who aren't backspeccing 20s are the people who have decided that the engineering cpmpromises that are being made aren't in the risk pool in which they want to swim.

Designs are different, drivers are different, and the risk/reward that they decide to operate as businesses is different.

A 302 that didn't blow up on xW-20 does not imply that every SBC can run 0W-16...
 
Originally Posted By: fpracha
so far so good... 20 grade oils are showing good promise and it may be because of the better flow of this thinner oil grade which is just adequate for most normal use engines (no hard driven engines will recommend 20 grades, pls correct me if its not true).
It seems that the thin 20 grade oil flows more effectively to more than compensate for the slightly less protective quality of the lower viscosity property.


Please demonstrate this "better flow" with positive displacement pumps.

Then please demonstrate how this "flow" increases hydrodynamic lubrication, when lubrication only needs it's leakage rate supplied.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
A 302 that didn't blow up on xW-20 does not imply that every SBC can run 0W-16...

When was this implied? The industry information that I have read states it will be intentionally named 0W-16 to force people to realize it was a totally different "family" of oils that are not applicable to existing engines.

Flame me if you like, but your "argument" against the strawman argument grows weary. In your eyes exactly when will xW-20 oils be proven and accepted?
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Shannow. My point is recent history has shown that 20 grades aren't leaving dead engines on the sides of the road.


Your strawman of a few posts ago was that they aren't dissolving...and the piles of dead engines is another strawman...

The people who aren't backspeccing 20s are the people who have decided that the engineering cpmpromises that are being made aren't in the risk pool in which they want to swim.

Designs are different, drivers are different, and the risk/reward that they decide to operate as businesses is different.

A 302 that didn't blow up on xW-20 does not imply that every SBC can run 0W-16...


And nowhere did I imply that it could. Your missing my point or are choosing to ignore it.
I quoted the poster that claimed gm will have dead engines running a 0w-20 and I said that,as the market has proven it simply isn't the case.
I also said that dodge and fords trucks aren't dissolving or laying dead and you commented about bearing loads.
I then stated that chev wasn't back spec-ing and of the 2013s or older so these new 5.3 and 6.0 must be different somehow which still gets away from my entire point that the market has proven that 20 grades aren't killing engines,and it seems gm is designing the engine to use a 20 grade.
Then you make the post above which really has nothing to do with where I started here.
Strawman or not up here I'm not seeing any issues using 20 grades.
I'm not sure why exactly you've chosen my post to distort and run off course.
And my 302 is a ford. And sure it may not be ideal running a 5w-20 but I wanted to see with my own eyes what would happen and have experience with it.
I read every one of your posts Shannow because I respect your experience and I feel blessed to be able to access info from professionals such as yourself however I find myself at a loss as to why you have taken a simple post,which is true and chosen to go all over the map with it.
Perhaps the vi threads have soured you today,I don't know however if you can just keep it simple and address where I was wrong then please do so I can see and glean the info from it.
Thank you
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: fpracha
so far so good... 20 grade oils are showing good promise and it may be because of the better flow of this thinner oil grade which is just adequate for most normal use engines (no hard driven engines will recommend 20 grades, pls correct me if its not true).
It seems that the thin 20 grade oil flows more effectively to more than compensate for the slightly less protective quality of the lower viscosity property.


Please demonstrate this "better flow" with positive displacement pumps.

Then please demonstrate how this "flow" increases hydrodynamic lubrication, when lubrication only needs it's leakage rate supplied.


See now this I can agree with. A positive displacement pumps the same volume on every stroke. Thinner oil just reduces the resistance to pumping.
I'd like to see the difference in load carrying ability of whichever oil at operating temp as well as the difference in the hydrodynamic wedge.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy

Show me a North American road where you can drive with the foot on the floor.


In a truck? Depending on load, there are may steep grades all over the nation that will require full-throttle, max load acceleration for miles. I wouldn't run 0W-20 in any of the pre-'10 trucks. Personally, I think a 5W-40 is a better suited oil for these GenIII/IV engines that are going to see more than general driving use.
 
Originally Posted By: Ram01
The wear these motors will face using this light weight 0w20 motor oil. GM WHY GM WHY????????????


How can you be here for three years and post such nonsense?
 
Originally Posted By: Ram01
The wear these motors will face using this light weight 0w20 motor oil. GM WHY GM WHY?

Okay, if Ford was able to make a switch from 30 to 20 grades work in things like taxis, police cars, and pickups, why would GM have any problems? Assuming that they're actually sure of what they're doing and did the work up, there is going to be no problems with respect to wear. And considering the dexos1 specification now can include 0w-20 and 5w-20, that indicates to me that GM did some thinking on the subject.

In some ways, I'm surprised it took GM this long. They were among the first to really push 30 grades at the expense of thicker stuff.
 
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
In your eyes exactly when will xW-20 oils be proven and accepted?


It is, and it is...if I have an engine the the OEM specifies it, I'll run it, at least during warranty while I see what it does.

However, people referring to "dissolving" engines, and asking to see "piles of failed engines" when you are talking the compromises that one manufacturer makes(on the customer's dime) as a discussion closer is not the level of the issues that are being talked about.

Ford tested a Bajillion miles, and found the compromises acceptable...GM probably (my supposition) did the former, but passed on the latter.
 
Let the timing chain wear camshafts replacement. Begin keep all your oil change records and receipts handy. Enjoy your 1/4 mpg savings
 
No one answered the observation from Molokule's article: why is the NEW 5.3/6.2L using 0W20, while the also NEW 4.3L is using 5W30 still, when AFAIK they are the same engines, the 4.3L just has two fewer pistons?
 
Lol whatever.

Originally Posted By: Ram01
Let the timing chain wear camshafts replacement. Begin keep all your oil change records and receipts handy. Enjoy your 1/4 mpg savings
 
Originally Posted By: KenO
Originally Posted By: Clevy

Show me a North American road where you can drive with the foot on the floor.


In a truck? Depending on load, there are may steep grades all over the nation that will require full-throttle, max load acceleration for miles. I wouldn't run 0W-20 in any of the pre-'10 trucks. Personally, I think a 5W-40 is a better suited oil for these GenIII/IV engines that are going to see more than general driving use.


No one is saying to use a 20 grade in anything 2013 or older. The 0w-20 is for the 2014 model year.
From what I've read they are getting a larger sump as well as a variable output oil pump.
I've never tried a 20 grade in my 99 5.3. It's too high mile for me to try either.
I'm unaware of what oil temps it experiences nor am I aware of if there is any supplemental heat exchangers.

The new ones are designed with 0w-20 in mind as far as what I read from a link posted recently. The 5.3 and 6.0 are requiring 91 octane because of 11-1 compression and dexos 0w-20.
The only 0w-20 they mentioned that meets dexos is M1 AFE from what I read. There may be others but they weren't mentioned in the article.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I_Hate_CVTs
2023 VB WRX - Subaru has conflicting oil recommendations!
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
Rand
Redhawk454
0w-30/5w-30 in a 2024 crosstrek and subaru timing chains
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
10K
Redhawk454
Hillbilly Deluxe
Moving from 0W-20 to 5W-30 in late model Toyotas
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
15K
ARCOgraphite
T
Instrumented Fuel Economy Test - 0W-20 vs 5W-30
Replies
10
Views
5K
wemay
L
5.7 hemi oil discussion
Replies
9
Views
905
travis8352
Back
Top