What's with the newer cars and their 0-20W ****?
- Thread starter 1200bruce
- Start date
- Status
hahah, don't worry 20wt oils are more than adequate when used where they are spec'd. All your engines will last hundreds of thousands of miles being serviced with the "thin Stuff".
Do some reading and learning here friend, welcome. Pollution? you mean efficiency?
IDK, my hyundai specs 5w20 , 5w30 or 10w30..I just run Pennzoil Synthetic in it as it has the most specs and my Lexus RX350 gets whatever is left over from 5qt jug to add to pennzoil high mileage. Im not nuts about 0w20 and with our Fit over 300,000 I have swapped it to 5w30 and 5w20 in extreme cold. I'm sure its fine but I understand your concern.
In the 50's 20w-20 was a popular oil. So, 20 weight oils are not really new. Today's 20 weight oils are very good.
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
In the 50's 20w-20 was a popular oil. So, 20 weight oils are not really new. Today's 20 weight oils are very good.
Problem was that a 20W20 actually had an HTHS around 2.9-3, which many on this board would posit makes them "really a 30 weight" (30 has a minimum of 2.9).
I would actually run a 20W20 in my V-6, but would not run a typical 2.6HTHS 0W20 in it.
In the 50's 20w-20 was a popular oil. So, 20 weight oils are not really new. Today's 20 weight oils are very good.
Problem was that a 20W20 actually had an HTHS around 2.9-3, which many on this board would posit makes them "really a 30 weight" (30 has a minimum of 2.9).
I would actually run a 20W20 in my V-6, but would not run a typical 2.6HTHS 0W20 in it.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Been using 5w20 or 0w20 for years...no issues.
If I was gonna run a 0w20 i would research uoa's,voa's and find the one with the most performance specs. I would probably go PUP 0w20, M1 EP 0w20 or Redline 0w20.
Originally Posted By: 1200bruce
I have a 2011 Mustang 5.0L, 2008 Miata and a Forester 2013 and they are all suppose to take this "thin stuff", is it just for polution reasons, just to get the engine heated up fast?
Thanks Bruce
CAFE I would think.
I have a 2011 Mustang 5.0L, 2008 Miata and a Forester 2013 and they are all suppose to take this "thin stuff", is it just for polution reasons, just to get the engine heated up fast?
Thanks Bruce
CAFE I would think.
In the long run, a 30 weight would be more efficient. Engines start losing their efficiency when the cylinder walls and piston rings start wearing out. Not to mention the valve guides, camshaft lobes, and all the various bearings.
This guy says it best:
"Short-term Thinking
As wear increases, the efficiency of an engine declines. Valve train wear slightly changes valve timing and movement. Ring and liner wear affect compression. The wear hurts fuel efficiency and power output by an imperceptible amount at first, but then the difference in fuel economy between an SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-20 is hardly noticeable. Efficiency continues to decline as wear progresses. Perhaps optimizing wear protection is the way to reduce fuel consumption over the life of the engine.
Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
LINK
This guy says it best:
"Short-term Thinking
As wear increases, the efficiency of an engine declines. Valve train wear slightly changes valve timing and movement. Ring and liner wear affect compression. The wear hurts fuel efficiency and power output by an imperceptible amount at first, but then the difference in fuel economy between an SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-20 is hardly noticeable. Efficiency continues to decline as wear progresses. Perhaps optimizing wear protection is the way to reduce fuel consumption over the life of the engine.
Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
LINK
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
Its all about maximum HP for those of us that like going fast.
Ford had been using thin stuff since the late 90s. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it.
But, if you don't feel comfortable and think your mustang is different from the millions of other Ford engines that make 200K on xw-20, feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
But, if you don't feel comfortable and think your mustang is different from the millions of other Ford engines that make 200K on xw-20, feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,807
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
"Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
Which engines are those? The ones which were specified for that type of oil? I seem to recall Mr. Blaine Ballentine being discredited on this site on more than one occasion as being a buffoon.
"Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
Which engines are those? The ones which were specified for that type of oil? I seem to recall Mr. Blaine Ballentine being discredited on this site on more than one occasion as being a buffoon.
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
In the long run, a 30 weight would be more efficient. Engines start losing their efficiency when the cylinder walls and piston rings start wearing out. Not to mention the valve guides, camshaft lobes, and all the various bearings.
This guy says it best:
"Short-term Thinking
As wear increases, the efficiency of an engine declines. Valve train wear slightly changes valve timing and movement. Ring and liner wear affect compression. The wear hurts fuel efficiency and power output by an imperceptible amount at first, but then the difference in fuel economy between an SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-20 is hardly noticeable. Efficiency continues to decline as wear progresses. Perhaps optimizing wear protection is the way to reduce fuel consumption over the life of the engine.
Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
LINK
That's an out of date article. It was written when GF-3 was the current spec.
In the long run, a 30 weight would be more efficient. Engines start losing their efficiency when the cylinder walls and piston rings start wearing out. Not to mention the valve guides, camshaft lobes, and all the various bearings.
This guy says it best:
"Short-term Thinking
As wear increases, the efficiency of an engine declines. Valve train wear slightly changes valve timing and movement. Ring and liner wear affect compression. The wear hurts fuel efficiency and power output by an imperceptible amount at first, but then the difference in fuel economy between an SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-20 is hardly noticeable. Efficiency continues to decline as wear progresses. Perhaps optimizing wear protection is the way to reduce fuel consumption over the life of the engine.
Certainly engines that have experienced significant ring and liner wear benefit from thicker oils. Thicker oil use results in compression increases, performance improvements and reduced oil consumption."
LINK
That's an out of date article. It was written when GF-3 was the current spec.
You all are falling for the troll. Come on, a guy's first post and it's deliberately worded in a way to inflame and instigate a contentious subject here on BITOG?
I'm not buying it.
I'm not buying it.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
That's an out of date article. It was written when GF-3 was the current spec.
Agreed. Absolutely hogwash and extremely out of date info.
Just like the cylinder wear vs. temperature thing published decades ago by Ford. With modern oils this old info may not even be relevant...
That's an out of date article. It was written when GF-3 was the current spec.
Agreed. Absolutely hogwash and extremely out of date info.
Just like the cylinder wear vs. temperature thing published decades ago by Ford. With modern oils this old info may not even be relevant...
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Miller88
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
Parallel and different - but 85w-140 is a lot thicker than a 20w-50.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
Parallel and different - but 85w-140 is a lot thicker than a 20w-50.
Originally Posted By: donnyj08
hahah, don't worry 20wt oils are more than adequate when used where they are spec'd. All your engines will last hundreds of thousands of miles being serviced with the "thin Stuff".
Adequate. There's a word that comes up a lot when discussing modern 20 grades.
I keep my vehicles a long time, I'd rather have "optimum" over adequate thank you.
hahah, don't worry 20wt oils are more than adequate when used where they are spec'd. All your engines will last hundreds of thousands of miles being serviced with the "thin Stuff".
Adequate. There's a word that comes up a lot when discussing modern 20 grades.
I keep my vehicles a long time, I'd rather have "optimum" over adequate thank you.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Miller88
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
Parallel and different - but 85w-140 is a lot thicker than a 20w-50.
You missed the first part of my question...cool better...flow better...
and hydrodynamics...
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Miller88
feel free to run 20w-50 or 85w140 in it.
I prefer lighter oils. Cool better, flow better.
Cool what better, and flow what better ?
And you DO know that the gear oil and engine oil classifications are parallel and different.
I'm thinking that you don't understand hydrodynamics.
Parallel and different - but 85w-140 is a lot thicker than a 20w-50.
You missed the first part of my question...cool better...flow better...
and hydrodynamics...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked