Why isn't 5w20 good for long trips? Does it get as hot as 10w30?
5W-20 people - explain this please:
- Thread starter Accord2005NJ
- Start date
- Status
JHZR2
Staff member
I respectfully see no value to such statements.
At cold startup, generally (basestock, syn oil, etc. excluded), any 0w- oil should flow better than any 5w- oil, which should flow better than any 10w- which is better than the 15w- oils. Of course, at ones' own strting temp, this may not be entirely true as it is not a linear argument.
Now, at say, warm startup, say 40C, the argument is very nonlinear, and a 10w-40 oil could potentially flow better than a 5w-30 oil, or similar.
At operating temp, say 100C as typical for an engine (and operating at 60F ambient isnt all that much different from operating at 110F ambient, in terms of the engine internals), the important thing is what combination of oil and chemistry will provide the best protection. It could be that a typical consumer 30wt oil will shear down slightly more than a 20wt in some high load conditions... or it could be that a 20wt oil with some extra chemistry at the surfaces will provide a better combination of cooling flow and bearing protection than an oil that is slightly heavier.
Remember, we have to explore this not a BITOGers, but as what would the typical consumer have in their engine, its age, condition, state of the VI improvers, etc. If lighter basestock and better chemisry can buy the same protection as some other option, then maybe its the best choice... Engineers need to consider demographics of the populous theyre dealing with... In europe, the majority of folks may buy synthetic oils that carry A3 ratings on them, in the US, most people might buy dino oils that have A1 ratings on them... Perhaps specifying mandatory use of an oil that meets a specific Honda/Ford/DC/Toyota specification as 5w-20 is better than allowing joe schmoe to use whatever discount oil they choose in a 5w-30 viscosity.
I just cant say for sure.
JMH
At cold startup, generally (basestock, syn oil, etc. excluded), any 0w- oil should flow better than any 5w- oil, which should flow better than any 10w- which is better than the 15w- oils. Of course, at ones' own strting temp, this may not be entirely true as it is not a linear argument.
Now, at say, warm startup, say 40C, the argument is very nonlinear, and a 10w-40 oil could potentially flow better than a 5w-30 oil, or similar.
At operating temp, say 100C as typical for an engine (and operating at 60F ambient isnt all that much different from operating at 110F ambient, in terms of the engine internals), the important thing is what combination of oil and chemistry will provide the best protection. It could be that a typical consumer 30wt oil will shear down slightly more than a 20wt in some high load conditions... or it could be that a 20wt oil with some extra chemistry at the surfaces will provide a better combination of cooling flow and bearing protection than an oil that is slightly heavier.
Remember, we have to explore this not a BITOGers, but as what would the typical consumer have in their engine, its age, condition, state of the VI improvers, etc. If lighter basestock and better chemisry can buy the same protection as some other option, then maybe its the best choice... Engineers need to consider demographics of the populous theyre dealing with... In europe, the majority of folks may buy synthetic oils that carry A3 ratings on them, in the US, most people might buy dino oils that have A1 ratings on them... Perhaps specifying mandatory use of an oil that meets a specific Honda/Ford/DC/Toyota specification as 5w-20 is better than allowing joe schmoe to use whatever discount oil they choose in a 5w-30 viscosity.
I just cant say for sure.
JMH
If it were truly the best choice, I don't feel that they would have to make rules like that... Not saying it's not good, just not best.
First, 100°C is an arbitrarily low number. Recall that the Sequence IIIG test runs at 150°C for 100 hours. 120°C might be a more realistic crossover point.
Second, until Accord2005NJ installs an accurate oil temp gauge and can demonstrate his conditions are much more severe such that he elevates the oil temps substantially above that, he's worrying for nothing.
Respectfully, this is not true. The first number represents a viscosity of the oil at -35 degF. At those very, very cold temps your startup argument is true. However, most people start their engines at temps above 30-40F. (of course there are a million exceptions) At the 30 to 40F temps, most 5W20's will be thinner than most 0W30's. So, at the typical startup temp, 5W20 oil will be thinner than ANY Xw30 oil.
One example. GC 0W30 is thicker at EVERY temp than M1 5W30 (the newer thicker SM version)-20degF. It doesnt behave thinner until -20F.
I think this is one of the most misinterpreted numbers on BITOG.(the first number in the oil weight designation)
True Winston.
Vader,
That is basic Goverment hoop jumping language. Nothing about it is indicative of engine oil quality, only indicative of recordkeeping and assurance that the 5w20 was to be readily available to the public if the mileage numbers reported with 5w20 were used. This meant that in order to publish those numbers the manufacturere had to require the use of 5w20 and the oil must be readily availab le at a price that is within norms so that custoemrs would not be forced to=run heavier oils do to lacka of availability or by excessive pricing of that grade.
What do we get out of it? A huge improvement in formulations and automakers demanding tougher sequences of tests for motor oils they recomend for there models. This is good.
Vader,
That is basic Goverment hoop jumping language. Nothing about it is indicative of engine oil quality, only indicative of recordkeeping and assurance that the 5w20 was to be readily available to the public if the mileage numbers reported with 5w20 were used. This meant that in order to publish those numbers the manufacturere had to require the use of 5w20 and the oil must be readily availab le at a price that is within norms so that custoemrs would not be forced to=run heavier oils do to lacka of availability or by excessive pricing of that grade.
What do we get out of it? A huge improvement in formulations and automakers demanding tougher sequences of tests for motor oils they recomend for there models. This is good.
Pure conjecture on your part. I think it has more to do with consumer culture and mindset than forcing manufacturers into using inferior products. The EPA simply wants to insure that manufacurers don't use a "slick" oil for EPA testing while there is no infrastructure to support the use of these oils and the education of the public of the new requirements.
Look how hard it is to convince supposed "oil savvy" enthusist that have access to mucho evidence here? Joe Blow has been so brainwashed to think "thicker is better" that unless the EPA forces the issue, the public will never be re-educated. Heck, we have people that come here to be reassured of the brand of dino SM/GF-4 they're using, let alone the viscosity grade. The EPA has forced the issue so that there is no question in the mind of John Q. Public of what to use. Sorry as that may be, that's how the typical American car owner has to be treated.
P.S. Bryanccfshr said this better than I.
Just my opinion, but I feel that, in the abscence of the above "hoop jumping", then there would be temperature graphs for US cars, the way we had, pre-CAFE.
At any rate, it's pure conjecture on all of our parts...
At any rate, it's pure conjecture on all of our parts...
JHZR2
Staff member
Agreed, thus why I made mention of the nonlinearity of the various results. However, -35 is only the testing point for one specific viscosity number, not all 0, 5, 10, 15's, etc. Without the temperature/viscosity curves for a definitive sampling of the typical oils most commonly used (which is what would be necessary to tailor an oil choice), I can not say for certain.
Let's take one of your examples... You compare GC 0w-30 to M1 5w-30... but if you compared M1 5w-30 to M1 0w-30 would this be the same result? Or would the thickness/thinness behavior of the oils crossover at a different point?
I suppose in the end, its a moot point unless you actually approach some very cold temperature. In reality, engineers must have determined at some point the optimal viscosity that provides excellent flow at most normal cold start and modetate temp start temperatures, and still give good flow at very cold winter temperatures... While considering fuel economy at the same time. All of these are tradeoffs...
Say that they wanted some viscosity value at a typical cold start of say 50F ambient. Well, there is a tradeoff if youre going to use that same oil down at 0F or up at 100F... another oil might make a better choice. In the eng, a 5 or 10w oil seemed to makje the best engineering decision, and though some often talk about why that was chosen (CAFE and fuel use at cold starts, etc), most dont deny that a 5w- oil is a good choice. Is that only because theyre also widely used in Europe and Japan? I dont know.
But similar tradeoffs surely have been considered for the 'hot' viscosity choices, and I doubt that it is a blind choice in the interest of CAFE any more than that it is sincere faith in higher tech basestocks and chemistry... Likely its a bit of both, and worrying about it wont do any good but make you enjoy the vehicle less over the same longevity, regardless of viscosity chosen.
JMH
Hi Accord2005NJ. I've asked the same questions as you earlier but nobody in the 'thin crowd' could give definitive answers, except 'look at the UOAs, they're great'.
Are the Honda engines equal in NA and Europa/Asia?
I went to a friend at a local Honda garage. We looked at the current Honda Accord 2.4 engine as you probably don't have the 2.0 engine in NA.
All mechanical engine parts we looked at had the same part number in NA and Europe.
Are the Honda engines equal in NA and Europa/Asia?
I went to a friend at a local Honda garage. We looked at the current Honda Accord 2.4 engine as you probably don't have the 2.0 engine in NA.
All mechanical engine parts we looked at had the same part number in NA and Europe.
JHZR2
Staff member
OK, so now look at the oils that you have in Norway (even Honda branded oil)... do most folks use synthetic? Are the oils identical? what oil viscosity would you consider to be the 'normal' one that the everage person would use in their average car? Is it dino or syn?
Its nice to have someone from somewhere else on here to give some input like this!
Engines arent the only considerations to be made... average/typical oil selections and quality must be considered too! And lets not forget ambient temperatures and driving styles/conditions!
JMH
Its nice to have someone from somewhere else on here to give some input like this!
Engines arent the only considerations to be made... average/typical oil selections and quality must be considered too! And lets not forget ambient temperatures and driving styles/conditions!
JMH
427Z06 wrote: 'Look how hard it is to convince supposed "oil savvy" enthusist that have access to mucho evidence here? Joe Blow has been so brainwashed to think "thicker is better"...'
From this thread, I think that Joe may be a BITOG member.
From this thread, I think that Joe may be a BITOG member.
Penrite australia "guide to engine oils" indicates they developed a 10W50 semi to replace a 10W30, comment upon choice of additives, and indicate base oils used.
http://www.carwashmag.com/pdf/sept_2005/thicker.cfm
http://www.carwashmag.com/pdf/sept_2005/thicker.cfm
JHZR2, that depends, if your car is on extended drain intervall (more than 10,000 km or 6250 miles) it's probably full synthetic, if not semi-synthetic (or in older cars ( 12,500 - 18,750 miles.
Average car is 19 years old when it's taken to the junkyard..
Average car is 19 years old when it's taken to the junkyard..
JHZR2
Staff member
Thanks!
So it seems that there is a whole lot of worrying here that shouldnt be. most people get rid of their cars at 3-5 years, and most get scrapped by ~10 years. People use dino 5w-30 mainly, and are convinced that they HAVE to change it every 3000mi/3months.
Id venture to guess that in the applications where 5w30 and 10w-40 is used... I assume there are no dino 5w-40 oils... that many of these shear down pretty well, and could very well be light 30wt or even 20wt oils before theyre through at 20-30k km.
Alas, yet it makes it to 19 years old...
I wonder how many miles are on the average car... After all, the engine might only see 10 oil changes in its entire life! Through winter and summer.
JMH
So it seems that there is a whole lot of worrying here that shouldnt be. most people get rid of their cars at 3-5 years, and most get scrapped by ~10 years. People use dino 5w-30 mainly, and are convinced that they HAVE to change it every 3000mi/3months.
Id venture to guess that in the applications where 5w30 and 10w-40 is used... I assume there are no dino 5w-40 oils... that many of these shear down pretty well, and could very well be light 30wt or even 20wt oils before theyre through at 20-30k km.
Alas, yet it makes it to 19 years old...
I wonder how many miles are on the average car... After all, the engine might only see 10 oil changes in its entire life! Through winter and summer.
JMH
Bar1,
You are correct. "Thin" crowd (for lack of a better term) still did NOT provide answer (a credible one) to (for example) this simple question:
1. Why does Honda of Japan recommends several grades for the same (and yes, it is the same engine people-get over it) engine and clearly specifies which grade is good for protection and which for fuel economy? Isn't it a logical conclusion that the only reason why we do not get the multiple choice in our manuals is due to CAFE requirement that only 20 weights are to be recommended to received CAFE credits?
Now, the "thin crowd" may argue (and be right) that for most North American drivers 5-20 will do just fine for various reasons (i.e. auto shifter, no high revving, etc.), HOWEVER, 5W-40 for example will provide better protection (as indicated by the Japanese manual for example).
What is it in the above that is not clear? I don't understand this attitude that 5-20 is the best both for fuel economy and for engine protection. 5-20 may be "good enough" to protect the engine under normal operating conditions, and provide better fuel economy but that's it.
What? Japanese manual is wrong? Recommendation that basis its information on temperatures and driving style/desired effect is stupid while recommending "one oil fits all" is genius? The rest of the world are idiots and we are the only smarts one? Come on....flick the common sense button on guys.
As for thickness issue - what kind of oils are put in racing engines? Thin or thick? This is in response to those who say thin protects as good as thick? That is why BMW M-3 seeks 20-60 weights right?
You can't "pick and chose" and base your argument on few UOAs. I will repeat, a will keep my Honda engine run for 100-150k miles. However, what about 400k hard driven miles? 20 weights? I don't think so.
On a side note. Thanks for participating. I respect everyone opinions (even if I don't agree with some). Its great to see people being passionate about their cars.
Cheers.
[ May 11, 2006, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: Bio-T ]
You are correct. "Thin" crowd (for lack of a better term) still did NOT provide answer (a credible one) to (for example) this simple question:
1. Why does Honda of Japan recommends several grades for the same (and yes, it is the same engine people-get over it) engine and clearly specifies which grade is good for protection and which for fuel economy? Isn't it a logical conclusion that the only reason why we do not get the multiple choice in our manuals is due to CAFE requirement that only 20 weights are to be recommended to received CAFE credits?
Now, the "thin crowd" may argue (and be right) that for most North American drivers 5-20 will do just fine for various reasons (i.e. auto shifter, no high revving, etc.), HOWEVER, 5W-40 for example will provide better protection (as indicated by the Japanese manual for example).
What is it in the above that is not clear? I don't understand this attitude that 5-20 is the best both for fuel economy and for engine protection. 5-20 may be "good enough" to protect the engine under normal operating conditions, and provide better fuel economy but that's it.
What? Japanese manual is wrong? Recommendation that basis its information on temperatures and driving style/desired effect is stupid while recommending "one oil fits all" is genius? The rest of the world are idiots and we are the only smarts one? Come on....flick the common sense button on guys.
As for thickness issue - what kind of oils are put in racing engines? Thin or thick? This is in response to those who say thin protects as good as thick? That is why BMW M-3 seeks 20-60 weights right?
You can't "pick and chose" and base your argument on few UOAs. I will repeat, a will keep my Honda engine run for 100-150k miles. However, what about 400k hard driven miles? 20 weights? I don't think so.
On a side note. Thanks for participating. I respect everyone opinions (even if I don't agree with some). Its great to see people being passionate about their cars.
Cheers.
[ May 11, 2006, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: Bio-T ]
Let's keep things in perspective. The two things that cause %99.99999 lubricated related engine failures are lack of oil flow and contamination of the oil. Lack of oil flow may come from excessive viscosity or lack of pumpability at very cold temperatures. At extremely hot temperatures, sufficient oil flow can be a problem, but it's usually due to the coking or degradation of the oil simply due to the oil being overheated and it stops lubricating and the parts go into thermal runaway. Contamination of the oil due to coking/degradation or sludging create abrasive particle and/or reduce oil flow. Now add to that, the fact that ~ %90 of engine wear comes from cold starts. Therefore, if one avoids the lack of oil flow and contamination scenarios, change often enough to avoid additive depletion, one can see that at most your operating temperature viscosity selection (within reason) may influence your engine life by ~ %10. If the "best" operating temperature viscosity selection gets you 400K miles out of an engine, that implies "below average" operating temperature viscosity selection gets you 360K miles.
If a SM/GF-4 5w20 dino can run for 100 hours at 150°C in the Sequence IIIG test (in an engine that normally specs a 10w30) without blowing up, what are the odds that your engine is going to?
If a SM/GF-4 5w20 dino can run for 100 hours at 150°C in the Sequence IIIG test (in an engine that normally specs a 10w30) without blowing up, what are the odds that your engine is going to?
The viscosity chart you showed us says 5W20 will provide optimal fuel efficiency. It makes no mention that 5W40 (or the other grades) will necessairly provide better protection. Show me where on the chart does it say grades other than 5W20 will provide better protection. You're the one who is assuming that grades other than 5W20 will provide better protection.
To this point, there is no evidence (other than your speculation) that an engine won't last for 400K worth of hard driven miles on a 5w-20. OTOH, you'll probably be on your third transmission by 400K anyway, considering that most newer automatic transmissions (if you have one) last about 150,000 miles before they have some solenoid, valve body, or electronic failure.
[ May 11, 2006, 10:53 PM: Message edited by: Bio-T ]
Easy Accord. I rave a little, but things are outta hand a bit from your end of the table. Even for me. You're demanding proof for....what, again? That 5W20 is "good enough"? How about a little "proof" that 5W20 is "no good", or less than, from you?
Fact is, there is none. To each their own. You burn your oil, I'll burn my oil, and we'll agree to disagree that the 5W20 folks are right, and the "thick" folks are wrong...
Fair
nuff?
Fact is, there is none. To each their own. You burn your oil, I'll burn my oil, and we'll agree to disagree that the 5W20 folks are right, and the "thick" folks are wrong...
Fair
wth is "Gold" protection anyway? Also, please define the use of "best". It seems to be an esoteric standard that you have constructed from past experience with other cars. Yes, 0w-40 may be "best" for a Porsche, but not for a Honda. That does not make it the "best" oil, plus it costs 3x as much. I thought we all knew that.
- Status
Similar threads
