Will the chemistry of low visc oils catch up to physical properties of thicker ones

[StevieC]

The conspiracy that the thinner oils don't offer protection like a thicker oil would all in the name of Fuel Economy. That's just complete nonsense.

I don't have any other case to provide proof of other than that one. However there are literally millions and millions of cars on the road today running 20 weights just fine, so much so that they are now moving toward 16 weights. OH THE HORROR!!!!!

 

[nap]

Would you also be suggesting that all the scientific studies quoted so far are part of this alleged conspiracy to discredit thinner oils?

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by StevieC
The conspiracy that the thinner oils don't offer protection like a thicker oil would all in the name of Fuel Economy. That's just complete nonsense.


What ????

The drive for thinner oils is for Fuel Economy, CAFE, or Carbon...name whichever market you are in.
The OEMs tell us that the regulators tell us that, and the oil companies tell us that.

The challlenge, per the OEMs is to provide greater economy with "acceptable" increases in wear (Honda, Ford)
The challenge, per the oil companies is to maintain acceptable wear, in an environment where there is less reliance on hydrodynamic lubrication (used to be defined as the "zero wear" regime, and a higher reliance on boundary/mixed, and additives.
The challenge per API is developing engine wear tests that are representative of the two line above.

Originally Posted by StevieC
The conspiracy that the thinner oils don't offer protection like a thicker oil would all in the name of Fuel Economy. That's just complete nonsense.


I'm happy for you to support your blanket statement above, it's very reminiscent of the rants of aehaas, and CATERHAM, prepared to throw the obvious and readily available information out the window, because it doesn't suit the paradigm that they WANT to believe.

For example you stated that they are keeping the 20s, and changing the engineering (and materials)...that's in direct contravention to your statement above.
WHY do they have to change their materials and engineering, if the oils protect as well as ever ?
WHAT is their motivation for making these changes ?

You can't say that the drive for 20s and 16s is IMPROVED wear can you (although those that came before you certainly did, absolutely without foundation)

 

[RDY4WAR]

A little anecdotal evidence... My grandfather-in-law has a 2006 Dodge Ram 1500 5.7L with 371k miles, all on 5w-20 of whatever flavor used at Jiffy Lube. The engine still runs smooth and quiet.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted by Shannow
The challlenge, per the OEMs is to provide greater economy with "acceptable" increases in wear (Honda, Ford)
....or with the same wear as in the past. ... We don't have to go forward into the future with more wear. Nothing says we have to do that. .
Pushing the effort to go to thinner oils is CAFE fuel economy credits & consumer appeal from the higher sticker MPG displayed. There is less wear at start-up with thinner oils, and that may be offset somewhat by greater wear at peak temperatures. Stronger boundary layers from advanced additives reduce wear in the greater % of non-hydrodynamic conditions we get from thinner oils.

 

[nap]

Apparently Toyota is part of the conspiracy.... they're suggesting that, while thinner oils produce better fuel economy, the thicker oils ensure better lubrication....

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by nap
Apparently Toyota is part of the conspiracy.... they're suggesting that, while thinner oils produce better fuel economy, the thicker oils ensure better lubrication....








Today's engines loaf at 1500-200rpm on the freeway. Unless you are driving 100mph ( speeding) or constantly screaming up long grades, or pulling loads, the 0w20 should perform just fine.

Toyota's statement sounds like it had heavy input from their lawyers.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by oil_film_movies
There is less wear at start-up with thinner oils


Is there ?

Can you provide some evidence to that statement ?

Quantification ?

(Oh, and it's not "flow"...unless at the limits of Pumpability, and that's "W" grade, NOT operating viscosity)

 

[nap]

Originally Posted by PimTac


Today's engines loaf at 1500-200rpm on the freeway. Unless you are driving 100mph ( speeding) or constantly screaming up long grades, or pulling loads, the 0w20 should perform just fine.

Toyota's statement sounds like it had heavy input from their lawyers.


This is quite conflicting with some previous claims of the thin camp that:

- thin oil is equally good from a lubrication perspective

- manuals are written by engineers who have nothing but the customer at heart

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by nap
Originally Posted by PimTac


Today's engines loaf at 1500-200rpm on the freeway. Unless you are driving 100mph ( speeding) or constantly screaming up long grades, or pulling loads, the 0w20 should perform just fine.

Toyota's statement sounds like it had heavy input from their lawyers.


This is quite conflicting with some previous claims of the thin camp that:

- thin oil is equally good from a lubrication perspective

- manuals are written by engineers who have nothing but the customer at heart





You are being argumentative. You are against thinner oils and try to justify your argument.

This is the never ending argument here.

 

[StevieC]

Shannow, sorry I was changing the water filters in the house and got carried away with other maintenance in the house.

Ok. Thicker oils have their place. Eg: Racing, operating vehicles at high speeds for a long duration. (Not typical highway driving) or severe duty applications like towing heavy loads in say Arizona summer.

However, today's modern cars, trucks and SUV's that spec a 20wt oil will see just as much life as if you were using a 30wt oil instead. I provided proof in my fleet operated Journey, and so did RDY4WAR along with everyone else that drives their engines to the junk yard on 20wt oils.

 

[RDY4WAR]

I run my bracket car, 1993 Camaro with LT1 engine at 160k miles, on Amsoil Dominator 5w-20. That said, the highest oil temperature I've ever logged with that car is 181*F while idling back to the pits. It runs for less than 3 minutes total from startup to shut down with at least an hour cooldown in between.

 

[nap]

Originally Posted by PimTac

You are being argumentative. You are against thinner oils and try to justify your argument.

This is the never ending argument here.


I could easily replace "thinner" with "thicker" and throw the first sentences back at you

The argument never ends because the thin camp was never able to produce a link to a scientific study that would show that the existing thinner oils are able to match or surpass the thicker ones from a lubrication performance pov. They just deny or intentionally misinterpret any evidence to the contrary, or engage into various logical fallacies (with strawman, moving the goalposts, anecdotal, shifting the burden of proof and ad hominem being the most popular).

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by nap
Originally Posted by PimTac

You are being argumentative. You are against thinner oils and try to justify your argument.

This is the never ending argument here.


I could easily replace "thinner" with "thicker" and throw the first sentences back at you

The argument never ends because the thin camp was never able to produce a link to a scientific study that would show that the existing thinner oils are able to match or surpass the thicker ones from a lubrication performance pov. They just deny or intentionally misinterpret any evidence to the contrary, or engage into various logical fallacies (with strawman, moving the goalposts, anecdotal, shifting the burden of proof and ad hominem being the most popular).



As I said before, this argument will not be settled here so I bid you goodnight.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by PimTac
However I do see the day approaching when 'personal choice' has to be
severely restricted for the good of everyone



I hope to not see that day when freedom of choice is taken away.

It's been happening for a long time actually. When you are required by law to wear a seat belt for your own safety, marriage is regulted from before your even actually marru eg. Pre marriage counseling and a required marriage certificate or a court has the say in who when where and how a parent is involved in their childrens lives ) family/divorce court). Who gets and what you do with your stuff. They even have a death tax now.
Try and choose what curriculum your kids get at school or In many states if you'd like to home school or even have a choice of schools.
Texas, which is considered one of the freest states in u.s. has laws in some cities limiting your right to have a yard/garage sale to just 2 times a year. You almost have to have a permit or license to do anything these days and you [censored] sure better be ready to pay tax on it. Hang on to your guns tight if you have and like them cuz they're coming for those. The list is infinite. Tax is what, 40% if you add up all the angles? We are not a free people by any means.

 

[SonofJoe]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by PimTac
However I do see the day approaching when 'personal choice' has to be
severely restricted for the good of everyone



I hope to not see that day when freedom of choice is taken away.

It's been happening for a long time actually. When you are required by law to wear a seat belt for your own safety, marriage is regulted from before your even actually marru eg. Pre marriage counseling and a required marriage certificate or a court has the say in who when where and how a parent is involved in their childrens lives ) family/divorce court). Who gets and what you do with your stuff. They even have a death tax now.
Try and choose what curriculum your kids get at school or In many states if you'd like to home school or even have a choice of schools.
Texas, which is considered one of the freest states in u.s. has laws in some cities limiting your right to have a yard/garage sale to just 2 times a year. You almost have to have a permit or license to do anything these days and you [censored] sure better be ready to pay tax on it. Hang on to your guns tight if you have and like them cuz they're coming for those. The list is infinite. Tax is what, 40% if you add up all the angles? We are not a free people by any means.



I don't have a problem with wearing a safety belt since it became the law in 1983. If the choice is hurtling through a windscreen at 70 mph or losing a tiny amount of hypothetical 'freedom', I'm opting for the latter every time!

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I run my bracket car, 1993 Camaro with LT1 engine at 160k miles, on Amsoil Dominator 5w-20. That said, the highest oil temperature I've ever logged with that car is 181*F while idling back to the pits. It runs for less than 3 minutes total from startup to shut down with at least an hour cooldown in between.


5W-20 at 180F is about the same viscosity as 5w30 at 200F. Your oil temp is probably even lower when you launch off the line, so it might be closer to a xW-40 at 200F while you're starting off the line.

 

[bbhero]

Originally Posted by SonofJoe
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by PimTac
However I do see the day approaching when 'personal choice' has to be
severely restricted for the good of everyone



I hope to not see that day when freedom of choice is taken away.

It's been happening for a long time actually. When you are required by law to wear a seat belt for your own safety, marriage is regulted from before your even actually marru eg. Pre marriage counseling and a required marriage certificate or a court has the say in who when where and how a parent is involved in their childrens lives ) family/divorce court). Who gets and what you do with your stuff. They even have a death tax now.
Try and choose what curriculum your kids get at school or In many states if you'd like to home school or even have a choice of schools.
Texas, which is considered one of the freest states in u.s. has laws in some cities limiting your right to have a yard/garage sale to just 2 times a year. You almost have to have a permit or license to do anything these days and you [censored] sure better be ready to pay tax on it. Hang on to your guns tight if you have and like them cuz they're coming for those. The list is infinite. Tax is what, 40% if you add up all the angles? We are not a free people by any means.



I don't have a problem with wearing a safety belt since it became the law in 1983. If the choice is hurtling through a windscreen at 70 mph or losing a tiny amount of hypothetical 'freedom', I'm opting for the latter every time!



I always wear my seat belt... Because the physics are not good with sudden accidental stops.

I think there's a need for balance in all these type of different circumstances.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by SonofJoe
I don't have a problem with wearing a safety belt since it became the law in 1983. If the choice is hurtling through a windscreen at 70 mph or losing a tiny amount of hypothetical 'freedom', I'm opting for the latter every time!


I'd wear a seat belt even is someone paid me not to. I feel unsafe without one.

 

[SonofJoe]

Well that went well!

As a follow-up, can I say (a) that paying taxes never ever bothered me that much and (b) I especially won't object to paying a 'death tax' (or death duties as they're called here) on account of me being....err...dead!