16 wt coming very soon Honda 1st

uart · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: dave1251
I have seen where the most respected 5W30 synthetics sheared out of grade. But the most cost efficient 5W20 conventional has not. So where are you getting your data?

What do you mean it doesn't shear out of grade. I just looked through the UOA's section and it seems just about every 5w20 that I saw there had sheared down to a xw16.

FoxS · Feb 10, 2013

skyship - with respect, it seems that you selectively google information to confirm you bias. That is not a scientific approach.

I recently read an SAE paper titled "Extending SAE J300 to Viscosity Grades below SAE 20" released in 2010

You can google it.

You can see it is authored by oil folks. You will see it shows empirical information on HTHS and bearing wear. You can go quite low in HTHS before anything changes with respect to bearing wear.

It says that oil companies noted that high VI low volatility base stocks could facilitate lower HTHS viscosity fluids in the future.

When the real research is out there, I am continuously amazed by your and other self proclaimed experts approach to arguing instead of reasoning.

I also skimmed through a book called "High Temperature, High Shear Oil Viscosity". A bit old in 1989 but even then on page 8 it said the following:

"This study undermined a premise that many people had held - that bearing wear is governed primarily by viscosity and to only a small degree by the DI package. In face, the DI package choice can have almost as large an effect on bearing distress as the viscosity modifier choice"

skyship · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: RiceCake
Originally Posted By: skyship
[...]the proof is that it is unlikely to be a recommended oil outside the US and the manufacturer will insist on a shorter OCI within the US[...]

Originally Posted By: RiceCake
Show me where engines will definitely suffer on 16W oils. Show me where there is empirical evidence it will cause failures in passenger car applications. Show me wear numbers, pictures of failing engines, damaged components.

This isn't proof, so you still haven't answered me. Prove it skyship. I don't care what they do in other countries, I want evidence that in a regular passenger car, driven by regular passengers, replacing a 30 weight with a 20 or 16 will guarantee more engine damage and that manufacturers are letting this happen to benefit fuel economy, and that the car will have a measurably shorter lifespan because of it.

According to you, thin oils guarantee that my engine will be damaged, period, and the car will have a measurably shorter lifespan. Prove it.

Where did I say it would guarantee to damage your engine?, in fact if you change the oil at the higher than normal rate recommended in the US and your engine is not subject to severe service in terms of load and temperature it won't make much difference.
The effects of using thin oil in older engines or engines subject to severe service are very well known and I don't have the time and this is not the place for such basic engineering lessons.
It's obvious to anyone that looks at the financial implications of the CAFE regs why the US manufacturers are playing the thin oil game, but because the publications from those companies were very reliable before the CAFE game started, owners still think new publications are correct. The car manfacturers have gone to a lot of trouble to give the impression that the new thinner oils are good news and not bad and they seemed to have fooled most people that buy a new car in the US into believing every word and the Japanese manufacturers are helping them with their aim of collecting CAFE credits or at least avoiding penalties.

FoxS · Feb 10, 2013

Stop this nonsense about the thin oil game.

All manufacturers in all countries are being pushed to improve fuel economy.

There are regulations that require European oil to improve fuel economy also.

There are manufacturers who sell newer technologies such as turbos and diesels to improve fuel economy. These new technologies are as much, if not more a risk for consumers in NA then thin oil that has proven itself over a decade and trillions of miles.

If you are actually concerned about NA consumers, maybe you should investigate claims that the newer turbos don't in reality achieve the fuel economy claims that they make.

Otherwise you are a broken record.

dave1251 · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: uart
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I have seen where the most respected 5W30 synthetics sheared out of grade. But the most cost efficient 5W20 conventional has not. So where are you getting your data?

What do you mean it doesn't shear out of grade. I just looked through the UOA's section and it seems just about every 5w20 that I saw there had sheared down to a xw16.

RiceCake · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: skyship
The effects of using thin oil in older engines or engines subject to severe service are very well known and I don't have the time and this is not the place for such basic engineering lessons.

Once again you tell me "there's proof, just find it, trust me." Sorry skyship: prove it.

Quote:
The car manfacturers have gone to a lot of trouble to give the impression that the new thinner oils are good news and not bad and they seemed to have fooled most people that buy a new car in the US into believing every word and the Japanese manufacturers are helping them with their aim of collecting CAFE credits or at least avoiding penalties.

Funny, you have no time to prove thin oil is bad, but when it comes to how you know the USA has evil, capitalistic motives and the Japanese are part of a conspiracy to do it with them, you have tons of time to explain it.

Which you also have no proof of.

FoxS · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: FoxS
skyship - with respect, it seems that you selectively google information to confirm you bias. That is not a scientific approach.

I recently read an SAE paper titled "Extending SAE J300 to Viscosity Grades below SAE 20" released in 2010

You can google it.

You can see it is authored by oil folks. You will see it shows empirical information on HTHS and bearing wear. You can go quite low in HTHS before anything changes with respect to bearing wear.

It says that oil companies noted that high VI low volatility base stocks could facilitate lower HTHS viscosity fluids in the future.

When the real research is out there, I am continuously amazed by your and other self proclaimed experts approach to arguing instead of reasoning.

I also skimmed through a book called "High Temperature, High Shear Oil Viscosity". A bit old in 1989 but even then on page 8 it said the following:

"This study undermined a premise that many people had held - that bearing wear is governed primarily by viscosity and to only a small degree by the DI package. In face, the DI package choice can have almost as large an effect on bearing distress as the viscosity modifier choice"

I wanted to add that in my relatively short time at this site, I've concluded that my time is better spent going to the source of the information put together by engineers rather than the inane back and forth between mechanics, investigators and painting contractors.

I see a few others who liked to rely on and share information direct from engineering sources who simply have stopped contributing.

So I suggest stop the repeating, reduce the number of posts, and build properly reasoned arguments based on the sound engineering information out there.

uart · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: uart
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I have seen where the most respected 5W30 synthetics sheared out of grade. But the most cost efficient 5W20 conventional has not. So where are you getting your data?

What do you mean it doesn't shear out of grade. I just looked through the UOA's section and it seems just about every 5w20 that I saw there had sheared down to a xw16.

Unless the new SAE 16 is going to be in the 7-9CST range at 100C you are incorrect.

The new SAE 16 grade is 6.1 to 8.2 cSt. So yes a large number of 20 weight UOA's would now show the oil in the SAE 16 range. Even some of the ones you linked.

Obviously that's not a fair comparison, as some of those oils would have been in the new 16 weight range as VOA's. My point is that "out of grade" is a completely arbitrary measure, it would be a lot more useful to look at something like the percent loss of viscosity for example. If a 5w30 starts at 9.8 and shears to 9.0 that's "out of grade". If a 5w20 starts at 8.7 and shears to 8.0 then that's the same percentage, but technically it stayed "in grade". Well previously we would have said so, but now I guess we could say that it sheared to a 16 weight, not that it makes any difference though. I'm just pointing out the arbitrariness of the "stayed in grade" criteria.

blackman777 · Feb 10, 2013

Perhaps he could be banned?
Originally Posted By: skyship
In terms of 16W oils the proof is that it is unlikely to be a recommended oil outside the US

Honda's already recommending it in Japan. They call it "Green" oil.

Sonataman · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: uart
Originally Posted By: dave1251
I have seen where the most respected 5W30 synthetics sheared out of grade. But the most cost efficient 5W20 conventional has not. So where are you getting your data?

What do you mean it doesn't shear out of grade. I just looked through the UOA's section and it seems just about every 5w20 that I saw there had sheared down to a xw16.

I've looked at all the 5w20 UOA's and 90% or better do shear down to the low 7 to high 6 cst.
Mine sheared down to 7.1 in 2k miles but the wear was nill, as are many others.
Seems many of those that shear the most are with a 2.4 liter engines. Bigger engines seem easier on the oil for whatever reason.

Garak · Feb 10, 2013

Originally Posted By: skyship
It's obvious to anyone that looks at the financial implications of the CAFE regs why the US manufacturers are playing the thin oil game, but because the publications from those companies were very reliable before the CAFE game started, owners still think new publications are correct.

CAFE also affects European manufacturers who sell in the U.S. In the end, much of this debate is ignoring some important points. If one doesn't like vehicles to be speced for 5w-20, 0w-20, or 0w-16, one can buy something from Europe or some of the other NA/Japanese vehicles that spec something different.

Alternatively, no one is holding a gun to one's head when they're changing oil. If they really want to put in 20w-50 and think it's better for engine durability than a 0w-20, they're free to do so.

johnachak · Mar 26, 2014

[/quote]

Are we sure MPG is the driving force with thinner oils? It feels more like a mindless trend which would be illogical if this is the case. The easiest way to improve mpg (and in the process improve power, handling, and overall responsiveness) is reverse the trend in heavier vehicles that has been going on for over 20 years.

An easy place to start is making mpg- and performance-stunting large diameter wheels a dealer installed option. Let the cars and trucks be mpg-tested with lightest weight wheel/tire combos [/quote]

I think it's funny that the manufacturers are shaving 10-20 lbs off a car and people put like 200 lbs of junk in the trunk.

16 wt coming very soon Honda 1st

Similar threads