Some manufacturer's recommendation in cars driven

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: wirelessF
United States: 0W20 year round


What's interesting is that 0-20 protects as well as the 20-50 oils, and gives all the benefits of 0-20.


:sigh: ... again, what are all of these 0W20 "advantages"...and for crying out loud, don't open with "flow"

Originally Posted By: tig1
Another thing, 0-20 oils may be very hard to find in many countries that are not as advanced as we are here and Asia, that design many of these engines. Just a thought.


nice...
 
When an owner's manual specs thicker oil if the car is going to be raced or to be driven at extended highs speeds,that means thicker oils offer better protection,or else such language wouldn't be present in the manual.

The current Corvette specs 15W50 under "racing" conditions in the owner's manual. If the opposite were true,GM would spec 0W20 for racing,but they don't.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The disparity between 5w-30 and 10w-30 temp ranges in there is the strangest to me. Just because an oil is 5w-30 or 10w-30 doesnt make it destined for such low temps or magically robust to support the higher ones. THe oils are indeed the same viscosity at operating temperatures, quality and shear stability aside.

The BMW chart is much more realistic in that maybe a 10w-30 can go a little higher given less VIIs, etc.


I think that the charts are premised on dino, and VM characteristics of the 80s...

I run 5W30 A3/B4 in my Nissan (the Nissan Diesel chart up there), simply because it's a new kettle of fish that has emerged since the charts were made.

Caprice has 10W30 A3/B4, but it will be 5W30 next OCI.
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I must be too Americanized; I wouldn't even think of running 20w50!


Same here...but it wouldn't hurt it.

Cars in Oz would get to 200,000+km before their oil consumption reached 1qt/3,000 miles...at that point we'd be considering the consumtion getting a bit high.
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
When an owner's manual specs thicker oil if the car is going to be raced or to be driven at extended highs speeds,that means thicker oils offer better protection,or else such language wouldn't be present in the manual.

The current Corvette specs 15W50 under "racing" conditions in the owner's manual. If the opposite were true,GM would spec 0W20 for racing,but they don't.

Your comment is backwards on that. Start with Corvetts don't spec 0-20 for their DD. If 15-50 is what GM spec's for racing, but I believe 5-30 for street use. Why does GM do that? Answer: Because 15-50 is gives more protection under race conditions, but 5-30 gives more protection with street use. Cold starts, street use with stops and starts, moderate hwy driving, all lend to the fact that 5-30 gives better protection under these conditions.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: expat
I started to spend time in North America in the mid 70's, comming from the UK Being interested in cars a couple of things struck me.

1) Lighter oils were used, 10w-30 was on the rack at every gas station.

2) People paid more attention to motor oil. Guy's would talk about doing an oil change and what brands they would use. You would often see people checking their oil at a gas station.

3) Considering car engines were very much larger. Car trips were typically longer (lots of short trip use in the UK) and usage was typically gentle (no thrashing on the motorway) Engines were NOT LASTING MUCH LONGER than a typical 4 banger would back in the UK. 100k.


Here's another couple from the vault...

This one is a late 60s early 70s Holden, with 307,327, and 350 chev options.
IMG_20150131_111042.jpg


Here's a Nissan 510...(sorry about the quality, but am searching libraries for more).
5106973.jpg


Both seem to have 10W30 as the universal lubricant.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: wirelessF
United States: 0W20 year round


What's interesting is that 0-20 protects as well as the 20-50 oils, and gives all the benefits of 0-20.


:sigh: ... again, what are all of these 0W20 "advantages"...and for crying out loud, don't open with "flow"

Originally Posted By: tig1
Another thing, 0-20 oils may be very hard to find in many countries that are not as advanced as we are here and Asia, that design many of these engines. Just a thought.


nice...


Yes, flow on start up in extreme cold temps is one huge benefit for top end protection of 0 wt oils.
 
I must say that where I live; whether I use our shops Service Pro 0w20 full syn or M1 5w or 0w 20 oil it would be a lot better than a 30weight oil. Sorry, I think I'll agree with Tig1 and his experience
 
Originally Posted By: Kuato
It amazes me every time we see this comparison. I'll side with the engineers designing the engine vs the gov't desk jockey that's justifying his job by putting out some [possibly] uninformed paperwork.

Example in the Supercharged 3.8 manual: "20W/50 for normal use....For prolonged use in snow areas the use of 15W/40 is recommended". Now granted Australia doesn't get nearly as cold as the US does (single digits °F, at altitude at Thredbo ski resort for example), but still this points to me that the engineers designing the engines want them to last.


Here's the Holden recommendation from the 80s in Holden's home grown V-8s and I6s (carbed, leaded fuel). Holden manual March 1980.
IMG_20160202_071207.jpg


the drain interval chart was 6 months 10,000km normal, and 3 months 5,000km severe.
 
Good stuff Shannow - the Aussies don't have a high opinion of the 5W-20, 5W-30 watery stuff when the heat is actually on - like summertime outback heat. Yeah Tig, the 0W-20 works great over here on non-stressed engines - they certainly start better at 0F - but when the heat is on, they may be just getting by. It helps that M1 is good stuff and synthetic. When Nascar starts using 0W-20 in the 500 milers, I'll be a little more swayed. Sorry, I'm in the thicker is better crowd - when you need it most, 20W-50 won't let you down. Of course, 90%+ of us don't need it.
 
Shannow - I checked out the factory service manual for our 1975 Holden HJ (253 V8) and noted the thickest oil suggested (for temperatures above somewhere around 10ºC) was a an "xW-40"

After the engine rebuild, our mechanic put in the Penrite 5w30 for the car given the huge improvements in lubrication since 1975. Penrite at least does carry the 'full-zinc' additive package, which is beneficial for the old girl.

TBH I doubt that the new craze in the USA of 0w/5w-20 oils is going to hurt anything. If it did, given these oils began implementation 10-15yrs ago, there would already be a huge number of stories about "exploded engines" "sludge" and other mechanical mishaps.

All the UOA's I've seen thus far for these oils, including on the Toyota Hybrids doesn't show a huge amount of wear metals found in the oil and the oil itself isn't in severely degraded condition.

If something were amiss with the recommendation for light oils - then all these people with broken-down cars would have created a class action lawsuit.

If it makes anyone feel better - then run a thicker oil, although that comes at your own risk since you a disregarding the manufacturer's recommendation. If the engine wasn't designed for thick oil, you may well do more harm than good.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: tig1


tig1 said:
Another thing, 0-20 oils may be very hard to find in many countries that are not as advanced as we are here and Asia, that design many of these engines. Just a thought.


nice...


I almost choked on that one too.

BTW that truck that I decided to run exclusively on 20w-50.

I kept it for 500k miles without a rebuild!

Now,I'll be the first to say that is NOT just down to the heavy oil. But I would say, it did NOT kill it prematurely either!
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
When an owner's manual specs thicker oil if the car is going to be raced or to be driven at extended highs speeds,that means thicker oils offer better protection,or else such language wouldn't be present in the manual.

The current Corvette specs 15W50 under "racing" conditions in the owner's manual. If the opposite were true,GM would spec 0W20 for racing,but they don't.

Your comment is backwards on that. Start with Corvetts don't spec 0-20 for their DD. If 15-50 is what GM spec's for racing, but I believe 5-30 for street use. Why does GM do that? Answer: Because 15-50 is gives more protection under race conditions, but 5-30 gives more protection with street use. Cold starts, street use with stops and starts, moderate hwy driving, all lend to the fact that 5-30 gives better protection under these conditions.


5W30 doesn't protect better in daily driven conditions vs 15W50,it provides better fuel economy.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
When an owner's manual specs thicker oil if the car is going to be raced or to be driven at extended highs speeds,that means thicker oils offer better protection,or else such language wouldn't be present in the manual.

The current Corvette specs 15W50 under "racing" conditions in the owner's manual. If the opposite were true,GM would spec 0W20 for racing,but they don't.

Your comment is backwards on that. Start with Corvetts don't spec 0-20 for their DD. If 15-50 is what GM spec's for racing, but I believe 5-30 for street use. Why does GM do that? Answer: Because 15-50 is gives more protection under race conditions, but 5-30 gives more protection with street use. Cold starts, street use with stops and starts, moderate hwy driving, all lend to the fact that 5-30 gives better protection under these conditions.


That makes sense. If GM felt 5W20 or a 40 grade was better suited in that application for street use, with stops and starts, moderate hwy driving etc. they would have recommended that.
 
Originally Posted By: B320i

TBH I doubt that the new craze in the USA of 0w/5w-20 oils is going to hurt anything. If it did, given these oils began implementation 10-15yrs ago, there would already be a huge number of stories about "exploded engines" "sludge" and other mechanical mishaps.

All the UOA's I've seen thus far for these oils, including on the Toyota Hybrids doesn't show a huge amount of wear metals found in the oil and the oil itself isn't in severely degraded condition.

If something were amiss with the recommendation for light oils - then all these people with broken-down cars would have created a class action lawsuit.


The thread was posted in response to a statement that no manufacturer has "50" in their manual in the other thread I linked to in the first post, not as a thick/thin thing.

I agree...with typical US vehicle utilisation, the CAFE oils will provide (in Honda's words), adequate life expectancy for the vast majority of operators.

Millions of engines worldwide are scrapped with another few hundred thousand km left in them.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: wirelessF
United States: 0W20 year round


What's interesting is that 0-20 protects as well as the 20-50 oils, and gives all the benefits of 0-20.


What's really interesting is that engines have widely differing oil grade recommendations in different markets.
Engines are apparently a lot less affected by the grade of oil used than we sometimes believe.
If Toyota thinks that its V-6 is fine with anything from a 0W-20 to a 20W-50, then it is. Nothing changes between NA and Australia other than the grade recommendations.
The engine will outlast the vehicle in which it's installed either way.
 
I have suggested before that I suspect the inclination for thinner oil specs for the US market, might be based on the LOWEST ambient temp that the engine is likely to encounter in that market. The Highest temp would be dependent on the vehicle useage.

In North America high speed Autoroutes do not exist, so the lighter spec oil will likely cope with normal use.

But on this site we want what is optimal, not just acceptable, right?

What is 'optimal' in North Dakota might not be optimal for Florida.

I also feel there is often a 'more must be better' attitude
here where lighter than specified oil is sometimes used, even in warm climates just because thinner is better.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
But a) it hasn't HURT longevity at all, and b) the argument could just as easily be made that the rest of the world is clinging to outdated viscosities just because of the inertia in the supply chain.

Well, look at the prevalence of 10w-30 on retail shelves, even though no gassers specify the grade in North America, and really haven't for a while. Up here, at least some Canadian Tires have gotten rid of 10w-3 synthetics. Imperial Oil (our XOM) doesn't bother with gasoline 10w-40 grades and sticks to stuff that's actually specified recently, aside from still making 10w-30 for those who want it. I suppose they're relying on those who want 10w-40 to be bright enough to know that a 15w-40 or a 5w-40 is a suitable replacement, and they make both options available to consumers.

As for the general comments about 5w-30 being treated by the charts as inferior in the heat, I would also agree with Shannow that it's an artifact of the oils of the day. I wouldn't worry about it in the least today, and I didn't then, either. If I need seasonal oil changes, why would I be using a multigrade in the summer at all?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tig1
What's interesting is that 0-20 protects as well as the 20-50 oils, and gives all the benefits of 0-20.


Still don't get where you get your stuff from tig1...

http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4442/3/2/142/pdf

Quote:
The 5W30 lubricant class is widely used in the passenger car and heavy-duty industry; it is also the lubricant specified for the investigated engine. However, it is of interest to investigate also the potential for a further friction reduction in the journal bearings by using even lower viscosity lubricants. Therefore,an additional lubricant is studied, namely a 0W20 oil. By reducing the lubricant viscosity significantly,not only the power losses within the lubricant film decrease, but at the same time the likelihood of metal-metal contact increases. To ensure the same load carrying capability of the oil film, a 0W20 lubricant with the same HTHS-viscosity of 3.6 mPa s as the 5W30 lubricant is studied in the following;Table 1 lists the rheological properties of both lubricants. A 0W20 lubricant with such a high HTHS viscosity needs to be extraordinarily shear stable to remain the conventional durability of the journal bearings. This oil film stability at high shear rates can decrease the advantages of the fuel-efficient engine oil by increasing the power losses within the oil film in comparison to an engine oil with a lower HTHS-viscosity. Therefore, also a more common 0W20 lubricant with a HTHS-viscosity of 2.8 mPa sis investigated having otherwise the same viscosity properties as the 0W20 listed in Table


Quote:
Within this work the friction power losses in the 13 journal bearings of a heavy-duty Diesel engine of the 13 litre-class are investigated in detail for a large range of operating conditions. It is found that the FMEP of the journal bearings depends about linearly on the engine speed and on engine load at high load operation points but only weakly on the engine load at part load operation. The results show that this behaviour is caused by the combination of high bearing temperatures with high shear rates which together very effectively reduce the lubricant viscosity and the associated friction losses.In a next step, the potential for friction reduction using ultra-low viscosity lubricants is explored by investigating the friction power losses using 0W20 lubricants. It is found that a friction reduction of about 8%can be achieved for the journal bearings using a 0W20 lubricant with a 3.6 mPa s HTHS-viscosity.A more common 0W20 oil with a HTHS-viscosity of 2.8 mPa s achieves the same friction reduction,but shows the presence of metal-metal contact for full load operation. This metal-metal contact might be able to be addressed by suitable additive technology of the lubricant or alternative surface technology for the shaft or bearing


More HTHS, more hydrodynamic film thickness, less occurrence of metal to metal contact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top