Thumbs Up for SAE 16 Vis Grade

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: artificialist
Many cars are junked, not because the engine is failing, but because the interior is falling apart, electrical items are glitchy, the AC isn't cold, and things like that. Also many automatic transmissions are dead by that time.

Lets see what happens when all that other stuff of a car lasts as long as the engine.


^^This. It's the integrity of the car itself that falls apart (body,interior,etc). Engines are lasting forever.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Honda used to mean a 200,000+ mile engine no problem. The Internet is littered with Odysseys blowing up at 80,000 miles and Honda telling loyal customers to pound sand.


Perhaps, but is jumping up a grade or two going to change an 80,000 mile vehicle into a 200,000+ mile vehicle? If the lube specified by the manufacturer is grossly wrong, sure, but I would expect there are other things going on here.


Considering that the basic premise is nonsensical, I'm not sure what it means? I haven't seen the internet "littered with stories of Odyssey engines blowing up". If he's talking about transmissions, then I'm not sure what that has to do with motor oil viscosity?

 

[Shannow]

Honda have admitted that with the 16, reliability is still "acceptable"...if it was "improved", you can guarantee that would be the statement, and if it was "identical", that's the word that would be used.

They are simply reducing further the headroom in their existing designs, and due to simple laws of physics, reliability will take a hit...how big ?...define "adequate"...but as others have pointed out, engines that aren't subject to negligence nearly always outlast the chassis...

Honda have also stated (another thread), that they are increasing the bearing projected areas on new designed engines, and reducing the bearing radial clearances, both measure will increase reliability with thinner oils.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Honda have admitted that with the 16, reliability is still "acceptable"...if it was "improved", you can guarantee that would be the statement, and if it was "identical", that's the word that would be used.

They are simply reducing further the headroom in their existing designs, and due to simple laws of physics, reliability will take a hit...how big ?...define "adequate"...but as others have pointed out, engines that aren't subject to negligence nearly always outlast the chassis...

Honda have also stated (another thread), that they are increasing the bearing projected areas on new designed engines, and reducing the bearing radial clearances, both measure will increase reliability with thinner oils.


I think you've used the word "reliability" where you meant "durability".
Two different things.
I have little doubt that a Honda engine run on whatever oil Honda recommends will outlast the car it's installed in, and Hondas aren't disposable cars.
I write this based upon having owned seven of them since 1976.
Honda's rep is built at least in part on building the best four cylinder engines in the world and I doubt that they'd trade that off for a couple of tenths of miles per gallon on the window sticker.
I've owned too many four cylinder Hondas to mistrust their recommendations.
Experience has shown that oils much thinner than what was the norm forty years ago work very well in practice.
I don't think that any manufacturer will recommend 0W-16 oils for their engines unless they're certain that it won't compromise the durability of them.
The car market worldwide is simply too competitive for any maker to recommend any oil or change interval without adequate testing to ensure that engine life isn't compromised, and the US market is the most open and competitive in the world and has been for as many decades as you or I have lived.

 

[FoxS]

I wonder if in 5 years we'll be having arguments about 16 being too thin and how we were forced away from our beloved, time proven 20 weight oils

 

[4ever4d]

How long before Honda starts to back spec their vehicles for the 0w-16 oils? Newly designed engines are fine to use thinner oils but i don't think back specing engines is the thing to do.

 

[virginoil]

Not sure what point is Honda are trying to make.

Surely Honda engineers should focus on other vehicle components that impact economy.

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: FoxS
I wonder if in 5 years we'll be having arguments about 16 being too thin and how we were forced away from our beloved, time proven 20 weight oils


X2

The trend is towards thinner oils. About 9 months ago I switched from 0W-40 to 0W-20 in my Lexus V8 and could not believe the peppiness gained. It felt like I added 30 HP to the already hefty 300 HP. I added a cold air intake to my former vehicle, a 1999 V6 Honda Accord with 200 HP, and the peppiness added (a claimed 10 hp and 10 torque) felt inferior to what I gained in the Lexus in going to a much lighter oil! Obviously, fuel mileage increased as well.

 

[ammolab]

Will there be a new 14w-39 oil for Aussie and Rusian Hondas?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Capa
Originally Posted By: FoxS
I wonder if in 5 years we'll be having arguments about 16 being too thin and how we were forced away from our beloved, time proven 20 weight oils


X2

The trend is towards thinner oils. About 9 months ago I switched from 0W-40 to 0W-20 in my Lexus V8 and could not believe the peppiness gained. It felt like I added 30 HP to the already hefty 300 HP. I added a cold air intake to my former vehicle, a 1999 V6 Honda Accord with 200 HP, and the peppiness added (a claimed 10 hp and 10 torque) felt inferior to what I gained in the Lexus in going to a much lighter oil! Obviously, fuel mileage increased as well.


What grade/spec is required by the Lexus?

 

[Capa]

5W-30 in the US, but Canada allows 5W-20 because of its colder climate. I haven't looked into it but probably 5W-40 in Europe. Interestingly enough, Toyota's own 0W-20 is not recommended for the GS400 in Canada by Toyota of Canada and therefore I used the slightly thicker Mobil AFE 0W-20.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Capa
5W-30 in the US, but Canada allows 5W-20 because of its colder climate. I haven't looked into it but probably 5W-40 in Europe. Interestingly enough, Toyota's own 0W-20 is not recommended for the GS400 in Canada by Toyota of Canada and therefore I used the slightly thicker Mobil AFE 0W-20.


OK, that makes a lot more sense then, as you are still within the recommended viscosity range for your engine, which was what I was trying to figure out

 

[JAG]

capa, when you say there is a trend toward thinner oils, do you mean that there are no trade offs being made and no changes to engines to make them more compatible with thinner oils?

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: JAG
capa, when you say there is a trend toward thinner oils, do you mean that there are no trade offs being made and no changes to engines to make them more compatible with thinner oils?


Jag, just like the lubricants have been improving with each passing decade, the engineering of engines has been improving as well. Obviously one shouldn't run a 0W-16 oil in a vehicle that specs a 5W-50 but the engineers have allowed some leeway, like the example I gave earlier of my Lexus.

 

[KCJeep]

Far more fuel would be saved if people would simply keep their tires properly inflated than the Govt using CAFE to push marginally thin oils off on people (and engines).

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Far more fuel would be saved if people would simply keep their tires properly inflated than the Govt using CAFE to push marginally thin oils off on people (and engines).


But if people were to do both of those things, then a lot of fuel would be saved worldwide. Gasoline isn't going to last forever, and people need to be less wasteful of it. Sure, running lighter oil is only a small step but every bit helps.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: buster
^+1. I agree. What does adequate mean?


A high probability of a low rate of failure for the population of engines during their 150k mile design life that leads to an acceptable level of warranty claims for the manufacturer.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Art_Vandelay
Since most of their engines outlast the cars they're in I'm sure a 10 - 15% reduction in lifespan would be deemed adequate.

- 5W-30 = 500,000 miles

- 5W-20 = 450,000 miles

- XX-16 = 425,000 miles

Most cars don't even stay on the road long enough to see these numbers. I could see them figuring a set of numbers like these to be an adequate trade-off.

Now if the above number spreads were true I'd run the 5W-30. But then again I'm a Bitog man.


Its so true. Cars fall apart around the powertrain, and well designed engines dont have lube or wear-related failures.

And for all the commentary about disposable cars and cheap stuff, very few people Ive ever seen actually keep their cars 20-30 years and >>150k miles for it to matter.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: virginoil

Not sure what point is Honda are trying to make.

Surely Honda engineers should focus on other vehicle components that impact economy.



I have no doubt that they are. Honda has a lot of engineers. It's probably only a couple of handfuls of engineers that were on the 0w16 project.

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: NateDN10
It'll be interesting to see 0W-16 on the shelves.

Read the title, there is no 0W-16 spec.