5w30 in a spec 5w20

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: LubeLuke
I don't agree. Any self respecting engineer understands that these vehicles are driven by the public in MANY different conditions, and they would specify an oil which works for mom dropping the kids off at school in California, and then drives to Colorado for a ski trip on the same oil.

But that's certainly not all conditions, and people can fall out of the parameters, however unlikely. Additionally, I'm not grousing that one grade is or isn't good enough for a huge variety of conditions. One grade clearly is. After all, that's the point of multigrades in the first place. My point was that most of these vehicles could run a 0w-20 all year, , a 5w-20 all year, a 5w-30 all year, or a 0w-40 all year, or what have you.

Manuals listing more than one viscosity are getting rarer all the time. My G37's manual refers to other viscosities in phantom quotes, but only calls for 5w-30. General Motors products have called for only one or two viscosities in their manuals for a lot of years, with a special mention of 0w-30 in Arctic type climates.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: deven
I think there needs to be newer studies done( probably already have obviously)since the popularity of 0w20 oils in many mfgs specifications.
I'm a thick oil guy myself but I also believe that lighter oils will protect equally as well as long as the engine is in sound condition.


I'm always looking for new information, but the fundimentals are that lower viscosity spends more time in boundary lubrication, which is where parts are in contact, and acceptable life is provided by the additive pack, not parts separation.

Under these conditions wear IS taking place at a rate greater than full film hydrodynamic, but it's rate is controlled by additives.

Newer studies will be demonstrative of better additives and performance, not that hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication is miraculously re-established.

 

[BlueOvalFitter]

Originally Posted By: dothedrew1202
sorry for the dead horse, I'm out on my phone so I can't really search. I saw Kendall full syn for 2.99 at my 99 cent store but it was only 5w30. Would you put it in a 5w20 still under warranty?

Yes.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: sds911
Clevy

When I look at pqia summaries it looks like the last round of 5w20 avg 811 zinc, with 5w30 range being higher (they don't show the avg and I haven't calculated one, but they show a higher range). It may or may not have any real world effect, but it does look different from eyeballing the data.



The api limits zddp for the SN spec on 20 and 30 grades equally. And if you look you'll find that for the most part the only difference between a producers 5w-20 and 5w-30 is the viscosity. The additive packages are the same.

There are exceptions however for example let's take PYB in the 5w-20 and 5w-30 flavours. The add packs are identical.
Iirc m1 5w-20/5w-30 and 10w-30 have the same add pack with the exception of VII. Their AFE line shares the same additive package in the 0w-20 and 0w-30 line as well with the exception of the VII.

Again I'm saying for the most part. There are exceptions.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: deven
I think there needs to be newer studies done( probably already have obviously)since the popularity of 0w20 oils in many mfgs specifications.
I'm a thick oil guy myself but I also believe that lighter oils will protect equally as well as long as the engine is in sound condition.


I'm always looking for new information, but the fundimentals are that lower viscosity spends more time in boundary lubrication, which is where parts are in contact, and acceptable life is provided by the additive pack, not parts separation.

Under these conditions wear IS taking place at a rate greater than full film hydrodynamic, but it's rate is controlled by additives.

Newer studies will be demonstrative of better additives and performance, not that hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication is miraculously re-established.


Here's a thread with some fairly recent data that I had erased from my memory, due to a toxic poster from the past.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3390995/Why_designers_allow_mixed_lubr

The initial paper linked is December 2013.

The Honda paper needs a login created, but is still there.

The thinner oils run more in boundary, where the sacrificial films formed DO have greater wear than full hydrodynamic, but friction is lower.


Per Honda, in one of their R and D papers on their F1 engine...2009

Quote:
Engine oil development was important in order to reduce engine friction and achieve durable reliability. Joint development was preformed with Nippon Oil Corportion.
The power can be increased by lowering the base oil viscosity and the HTHS viscosity, but lower viscosity results in decreased durable reliability

 

[KCJeep]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: deven
I think there needs to be newer studies done( probably already have obviously)since the popularity of 0w20 oils in many mfgs specifications.
I'm a thick oil guy myself but I also believe that lighter oils will protect equally as well as long as the engine is in sound condition.


I'm always looking for new information, but the fundimentals are that lower viscosity spends more time in boundary lubrication, which is where parts are in contact, and acceptable life is provided by the additive pack, not parts separation.

Under these conditions wear IS taking place at a rate greater than full film hydrodynamic, but it's rate is controlled by additives.

Newer studies will be demonstrative of better additives and performance, not that hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication is miraculously re-established.


Here's a thread with some fairly recent data that I had erased from my memory, due to a toxic poster from the past.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3390995/Why_designers_allow_mixed_lubr

The initial paper linked is December 2013.

The Honda paper needs a login created, but is still there.

The thinner oils run more in boundary, where the sacrificial films formed DO have greater wear than full hydrodynamic, but friction is lower.


Per Honda, in one of their R and D papers on their F1 engine...2009

Quote:
Engine oil development was important in order to reduce engine friction and achieve durable reliability. Joint development was preformed with Nippon Oil Corportion.
The power can be increased by lowering the base oil viscosity and the HTHS viscosity, but lower viscosity results in decreased durable reliability


And there we have it.

 

[Shannow]

Another thread I started last night, albeit OTR engines, but 5W30 and 0W20 precisely on topic.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3742233#Post3742233

 

[Brigadier]

I run 5W30 Edge EP in my wife's Mazda3 2.0 Skyactiv due to short trips, fuel dilution, and CAFE can go fornicate themselves. The manual recommends 5W30 for the CAFE-less Mexico...

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: deven
I think there needs to be newer studies done( probably already have obviously)since the popularity of 0w20 oils in many mfgs specifications.
I'm a thick oil guy myself but I also believe that lighter oils will protect equally as well as long as the engine is in sound condition.


I'm always looking for new information, but the fundimentals are that lower viscosity spends more time in boundary lubrication, which is where parts are in contact, and acceptable life is provided by the additive pack, not parts separation.

Under these conditions wear IS taking place at a rate greater than full film hydrodynamic, but it's rate is controlled by additives.

Newer studies will be demonstrative of better additives and performance, not that hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication is miraculously re-established.


Here's a thread with some fairly recent data that I had erased from my memory, due to a toxic poster from the past.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3390995/Why_designers_allow_mixed_lubr

The initial paper linked is December 2013.

The Honda paper needs a login created, but is still there.

The thinner oils run more in boundary, where the sacrificial films formed DO have greater wear than full hydrodynamic, but friction is lower.


Per Honda, in one of their R and D papers on their F1 engine...2009

Quote:
Engine oil development was important in order to reduce engine friction and achieve durable reliability. Joint development was preformed with Nippon Oil Corportion.
The power can be increased by lowering the base oil viscosity and the HTHS viscosity, but lower viscosity results in decreased durable reliability


And there we have it.


What does F1 engines have to do with it?

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: tig1
What does F1 engines have to do with it?


What does F1 engines NOT have to do with lubrication ?

HTHS
MOFT
Boundary running
Surface speeds and pressures
Surface materials, finishes and coatings
additive technology and utilisation

(and there were other facets in the other links I provided)

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: tig1
What does F1 engines have to do with it?


As per the final linked paper in the thread I attached....

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Honda have said in their 16 papers that they are operating at times in mixed mode, but still have "adequate" durability...in the paper linked, on a motored L13 Honda engine (another test method commonly used to gain understanding of behaviours), the thing goes undergoes mixed lubrication conditions at 1,500 RPM...with out combustion pressure being added.

https://www.hondarandd.jp/point.php?pid=72&lang=en


That's the paper I refer to as still being available.

Quote:
When the viscosity is high at normal temperature, there are concerns that viscosity resistance may lower fuel economy. On the other hand, when viscosity falls by too much at high temperature, sliding wear becomes more a concern


Table 5 in the paper shows boundary/mixed lubrication occuring.

Quote:
"On the other hand, a slight increase in friction torque was confirmed under low engine speed, low viscosity conditions. This is thought to be because, according to the Stribeck Curve theory, the circumferential velocity and viscosity dropped excessively, and the mixed lubrication and boundary lubrication ranges were achieved.


Goes on to describe oils thinner than their 0W20 (and mention the possibility that for a given HTHS, they are dropping outside the KV limits of 20...possibly/probably this one .

Quote:
The oil I viscosity at high temperatures is approximately the same, so it is thought that lowering the viscosity would not tend to result in much noticeable wear. In addition, no noticeable wear due to lower viscosity was confirmed in sliding parts other than the connecting rod big end bearings


It's an L13 Honda engine, and an oil that they now market for economy.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: tig1
What does F1 engines have to do with it?


As per the final linked paper in the thread I attached....

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Honda have said in their 16 papers that they are operating at times in mixed mode, but still have "adequate" durability...in the paper linked, on a motored L13 Honda engine (another test method commonly used to gain understanding of behaviours), the thing goes undergoes mixed lubrication conditions at 1,500 RPM...with out combustion pressure being added.

https://www.hondarandd.jp/point.php?pid=72&lang=en


That's the paper I refer to as still being available.

Quote:
When the viscosity is high at normal temperature, there are concerns that viscosity resistance may lower fuel economy. On the other hand, when viscosity falls by too much at high temperature, sliding wear becomes more a concern


Table 5 in the paper shows boundary/mixed lubrication occuring.

Quote:
"On the other hand, a slight increase in friction torque was confirmed under low engine speed, low viscosity conditions. This is thought to be because, according to the Stribeck Curve theory, the circumferential velocity and viscosity dropped excessively, and the mixed lubrication and boundary lubrication ranges were achieved.


Goes on to describe oils thinner than their 0W20 (and mention the possibility that for a given HTHS, they are dropping outside the KV limits of 20...possibly/probably this one .

Quote:
The oil I viscosity at high temperatures is approximately the same, so it is thought that lowering the viscosity would not tend to result in much noticeable wear. In addition, no noticeable wear due to lower viscosity was confirmed in sliding parts other than the connecting rod big end bearings


It's an L13 Honda engine, and an oil that they now market for economy.


Interesting. I love words like adequate. The other thing I found interesting was this.
Quote:
The oil I viscosity at high temperatures is approximately the same, so it is thought that lowering the viscosity would not tend to result in much noticeable wear. In addition, no noticeable wear due to lower viscosity was confirmed in sliding parts other than the connecting rod big end bearings
I guess the connecting rod big end bearings don't matter much. LOL

 

[Shannow]

demarpaint, it's funny, because if a Honda Paper (or a poster) said "0W20 is good enough for my racecar", that would be all the evidence in the world that it was good for road cars, and being touted from all and sundry...keep providing engineering eveidence that it's a compromise in favour of economy over ultimate longevity (and a sensible one given that cars are thrown out typically well before their engines are junk), and it's never enough.

 

[BlueOvalFitter]

Does ANYONE have ANY kind of proof that an auto manufacturer voided an engines warranty due to it failing from the use of 5W30 oil when the manual specifically stated to use 5W20 oil?

 

[KCJeep]

BOF, Never heard of that happening, and if the oil had many miles on it UOA would put it very close to a 20 grade anyway, close enough that it would be hard to prove or fight about IMO.

Your truck isnt under warranty is it?

 

[BlueOvalFitter]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
BOF, Never heard of that happening, and if the oil had many miles on it UOA would put it very close to a 20 grade anyway, close enough that it would be hard to prove or fight about IMO.

Your truck isnt under warranty is it?

KC, no isn't.
IMO, I think a 5W20 and a 5W30 are so close in specs that it should not matter which one is used. I kind of chuckle at those that are so anal about when a 5W30 is used in a spec'd 5W20 engine. I get that vision in my head that the 5W20 police will arrest a 5W30 user.

BTW, I often use 5W30 oil in my engine and it's still all in one piece under the hood.

 

[Errtt]

Fill cap "5w-20" which I started out using. Then started 5w-30 for non-winter, then switched to 5w-30 year around and manual says ok for higher temps or something like that. I can't tell any difference mpg wise. Will be triple digit temps soon, but the winters don't get harsh where I'm at. Almost 85k on the clock and engine still in tact. Been using PYB 5w-30, but have thoughts of Maxlife, but dunno if I'll do that or not, yet.

 

[KCJeep]

I agree, a 5w30 and 5w20 have more in common than not, but for my vehicles I am more comfortable with the initial extra 10 plus percent HTHS and kinematic viscosity.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: BlueOvalFitter
Does ANYONE have ANY kind of proof that an auto manufacturer voided an engines warranty due to it failing from the use of 5W30 oil when the manual specifically stated to use 5W20 oil?

That question has been asked 100 times.

 

[BlueOvalFitter]

Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: BlueOvalFitter
Does ANYONE have ANY kind of proof that an auto manufacturer voided an engines warranty due to it failing from the use of 5W30 oil when the manual specifically stated to use 5W20 oil?

That question has been asked 100 times.

And, has anyone been able to show any results?