Jaguar F-Type V8 Supercharged.....0W20. Seriously?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by tig1
Originally Posted by Treadstone
Originally Posted by tig1
[

Don't BMW engineers know what their doing? Wouldn't they have tested 0-20 oils extensively before releasing their engines to the public with 0-20 in the sump? I would think so.


Well, I have read posts here from BMW owners saying they fully expect to replace crank bearings at 70k miles as a matter of fact. So, I would say, NO.

But has that actually happened? Well?[/quote]
YES. However, that is specific to certain oder M engines.
But look my answer above. Europeans are moving to 0W20 here in the US due to CAFE, nothing else.
 
The Ravenol looks good. Think I'll Prime it for him right now.

Thing is, even the Euro spec is 0W-20, so I don't even have that excuse to fall back on. Weird juju.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
And once again the blame is on a decades old regulatory action. Seems to be the default excuse of many.
Exactly right. It is an excuse, and edyvw isn't the only one that believes you must have HTHS > 3.5 to have a low-wearing engiine.

Instead of just making emotional statements, with no proof, as some above always do, let's look at actual facts:

1. First, examine all the wear graphs at HTHS Wear Engineering Graphs PROOF Link and notice wear doesn't have problems until well below HTHS 3.0 .

2. Thick oil in Europe is partially driven by old habits, & it is what sells in marketing to nearby 3rd world or similar countries who have needed to buy cheaper base oils which are thicker to avoid oxidation problems.

3. Warranties in the U.S. are quite long, around 6 years on the powertrain, and engine makers who say 0w20 is fine aren't trying to increase warranty costs. They know what they're doing.

4. Recent advancements in boundary condition surface-active additives reduce the need for high-visc oils even further. All the engine makers know this, and that's why 0w20 is the go-to oil for most engines.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
 
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Friend of mine has a Jag F-TYPE with the blower 5.0. I was kind of dumbfounded when I flicked through the owners manual to find 0W20 as the only recommended oil.....at all.

Went online to Jaguar's customer center and pulled up the rec there......0W20.

Now, he beats the ever loving daylights out of this car. Something about a Supercharged 5.0 510HP V8 carrying such a thin oil feels ridiculous to me.

My Eurotrash V8 doesn't even make that much power and Maserati has now upped my spec from 5W40 to 10W60 for hot climes.

He's up for an oil change, and part of me wants to dump in some Euro 0/40.

Is there really some engineering magic I'm missing here that he should go with 0W20 on an out of warranty car like this getting it's ashes hauled in the middle of FL summer?


I would guess that the redline RPM has something to do with the oil spec, in at least some small way. Forced induction engines generally turn slower RPM at redline than NA engines, so it looks like this blown V8 gets by just fine with thinner oil. Fuel economy goals may have an influence on the recommended viscosity as well. Also, even low-viscosity oils nowadays will offer very good wear protection.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by K20FA5
Remember not all that long ago when the manufactures started specing 5w30 and everyone said that was too thin?
smile.gif

Guessing people just freak out over the "5w" part because they don't understand its just a cold temperature rating. ... I heard an autoparts counter guy complain that German Castrol 0w30 was "like water" because of the "0w" rating (year: 2003), just silly.

Wonder what people have done with SAE viscosity grades over many years? If we go back further in time,
1980: 10w30 or Xw40: mobiloil.com goes as far back as 1980 on oil recommendations.
1978: the new Mobil 1 5w-20 was introduced
1957: SAE 20 or 30 ... http://www.oldcarmanualproject.com/manuals/Chevy/1957/Owners/pages/25_jpg.htm
1950: SAE 20 ... http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/chevyowner/50om22.htm
1940: SAE 20 ... http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/chevyowner/40om44.htm
1934: SAE 30 ... http://chevy.oldcarmanualproject.com/chevyowner/34om52.htm
.. and ZDDP wasn't there for most of the oils during the early time. It wasn't invented until 1941, and the industry got used to it years later, when they "discovered" it reduced wear greatly, in the 1950's.

At some point, if you ran a hot cam, stiff springs, you ran a 50 or 60 weight.
Yet most normal driving it was 20 or 30 weight for many years.
 
Last edited:
Well the old 5w30 conventional WERE problematic. Shear prone, sludgers,

And they were made with light, low V.I. basestocks and very high % VM load.

A Terrible compromise.

You need a true synthetic to make a good 0w/5w..
 
Jag and Land Rover were running into a CAFE crisis prior to Trump getting elected. They were looking to squeeze mpg anyway possible.
 
Originally Posted by The Critic
It requires a very specific type of 0W-20 - one that is approved against the STJLR.51.5122 spec:

Motul Specific 5122 0W-20

I believe the published HTHSV = 2.7 cP may be incorrect. I used my viscosity calculator and that HTHSV would correspond to a base-oil VI = 163, which is too large to make sense. I assumed a base-oil VI = 133, which is a Group III+ and PAO mix, and this gave HTHSV = 2.55 cP, which is barely rounding off to the 2.6 cP minimum required for a 0W-20.

Published KV100 = 8.1 cP -- the thinnest 0W-20 I've ever seen -- and the VI = 187, indicating a large VII content. MSDS is showing that it's mostly Group III with perhaps 25% PAO. All these point to a very low HTHSV and I doubt HTHSV = 2.7 cP can be realized with these parameters and base stocks unless there is a very unique VII being used, which I doubt because it would probably fail the turbocharger-deposits test. Chances are that HTHSV = 2.55 cP, rounding off to the 2.6 cP minimum, is more likely to be the actual HTHSV spec.

I would go with a more established 0W-20, such as the M1 EP 0W-20, which is a PAO-and-AN-based true synthetic with no Group III or GTL.
 
Originally Posted by demarpaint
If it were mine I'd pass on the 0W20. I'd also avoid buying a used one.

I'll let the early adopters report on how well the 0W20 does in the sump.



I agree.
 
Originally Posted by spasm3
Originally Posted by demarpaint
If it were mine I'd pass on the 0W20. I'd also avoid buying a used one.

I'll let the early adopters report on how well the 0W20 does in the sump.



I agree.



20 grades have only been the recommended grade for 2 decades I guess you will wait until cars are replaced before you adapt to the modern era.
 
Originally Posted by dave1251



20 grades have only been the recommended grade for 2 decades I guess you will wait until cars are replaced before you adapt to the modern era.



I'm probably never going to run 20wt, certainly not in a modern DI. I would be more inclined to run it in a MPFI, but with so many good 30wt oils out there, i can't see a reason to do so.
 
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by spasm3
Originally Posted by demarpaint
If it were mine I'd pass on the 0W20. I'd also avoid buying a used one.

I'll let the early adopters report on how well the 0W20 does in the sump.



I agree.



20 grades have only been the recommended grade for 2 decades I guess you will wait until cars are replaced before you adapt to the modern era.


+1
 
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by spasm3
Originally Posted by demarpaint
If it were mine I'd pass on the 0W20. I'd also avoid buying a used one.

I'll let the early adopters report on how well the 0W20 does in the sump.



I agree.



20 grades have only been the recommended grade for 2 decades I guess you will wait until cars are replaced before you adapt to the modern era.


20 weight has not been the recommended grade for two decades on a forced induction and direct injected high performance application though. Show me a vehicle like that which has run a 20 weight oil for the past few decades. You won't find any, because they don't exist. So it's still unproven in the real world....
 
Originally Posted by Patman
20 weight has not been the recommended grade for two decades on a forced induction and direct injected high performance application though. Show me a vehicle like that which has run a 20 weight oil for the past few decades. You won't find any, because they don't exist. So it's still unproven in the real world....

The F-150 Lightning, the supercharged generation, was back speced to 5w-20. I'm not convinced people were switching in droves. It originally specified 5w30.
 
Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by Patman
20 weight has not been the recommended grade for two decades on a forced induction and direct injected high performance application though. Show me a vehicle like that which has run a 20 weight oil for the past few decades. You won't find any, because they don't exist. So it's still unproven in the real world....

The F-150 Lightning, the supercharged generation, was back speced to 5w-20. I'm not convinced people were switching in droves. It originally specified 5w30.


DOHC and GDI?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Cujet
2017 Jaguar F-Type V6 oil choice (475 HP tune)
Replies
17
Views
3K
Cujet
T
Ow-20 for Jag/LR 5.0 SC
2 3
Replies
49
Views
7K
ZeeOSix
Cujet
Just purchased a 2017 Jaguar F-Type S V6
2 3
Replies
43
Views
6K
Cujet
D
Castrol Edge Professional EC5 0W-20 (Factory Fill) 2754 Miles 2021 Jaguar F Type R
Replies
14
Views
8K
wpod
Cujet
  • Locked
Used Jaguar F-Type V6 or C7 'Vette
2 3
Replies
42
Views
6K
pandus13
Back
Top Bottom