CAFE and 5W-20 - The Truth

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Kestas
They probably just pull some reasonable numbers out of the air.
Or some orifice.
LOL.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Originally Posted By: Riptide
Fuel for the fire.

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showpos...19&postcount=12

Scott Whitehead, one of the engineers that worked on the Ford 4.6 modular, indicating use of 5W-20 is a no-no.


Wow. Good fuel!

Yeah, but he didn't say WHY 5-20 is no good!! Kinda' makes you wonder....
28.gif

To his postulation, all I can say is we've run mostly MC (some M1) 5-20 in a variety of mod motored vans/p'ups for years, getting well over 200,000 miles (usually, before the PA road salt gets 'em) on them with no oil related issues.
21.gif
 
I'm sure they do extensive bench testing on engines at WOT from cold startup until they grenade (and various points in between for tear down and measuring).

Millions upon millions of units that used shear prone 5w-30 were just fine when they sheared to a 20 grade. 5w-30 grade oils were with us in wide spread distribution from the latter half of the 70's. No mass grenading of engines. Nope
21.gif
What wasn't available were multi-visc 20 grade oils that started out as 20 grade oils ..at least not in widespread distribution.
 
So far I haven't seen any xxW-20 motor oils in the Netherlands.
Not by Castrol, Mobil1, Elf, Shell, etc.
As far as I know the major oil companies sell the same oils all over Europe.

When the majority of cars sold in Europe have engines smaller than 1.6 liters I guess you don't need 20 weights to conserve fuel.
Small cars with 1.0 liter engines ar HOT nowadays and even now (crisis!
wink.gif
)it can take up to 5 months to get a new one.
 
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: peterdaniel
I highly doubt that Honda would ask you to use something that would hurt their incredibly well designed engines. I might have some second thoughts in a ford vehicle because FORD has been known to lie to the american public and place its own interests ahead of the consumer. ( and before you start with the hate mail, I am a big ford fan and have had several ford's but truth is truth..)

Honda has superior engineering. I seriously doubt that if they say 5w20 will work and work well, that it would be bad for the engine.


I guess it's the type of engineering you're talking about.

If it's strength of stock components, you can't compare Ford and Honda. My TL starts putting rods through the block at ~340whp and that's one of the largest engines they produce. Then you have Ford's modular that in some forms can nearly touch 1,000hp on stock parts.


LMAO!!! Dude, I was literally laughing out loud at this!!!
thumbsup2.gif
 
I vaguely recall reading somewhere in BITOG that when Mobil 1 came out in the 1970's, it was offered in a 5W-20 economy grade. Then for some reason, Mobil 1 discontinued that grade of oil.
 
Originally Posted By: Throckmorton
I vaguely recall reading somewhere in BITOG that when Mobil 1 came out in the 1970's, it was offered in a 5W-20 economy grade. Then for some reason, Mobil 1 discontinued that grade of oil.





That's true. I used it in 78 in a new Dodge slant 6. It gave good protection and kept the engine very clean, but my Dodge used a little more of the 5-20 than I liked. My guess is tolerances were not as close then as they are now.
 
Originally Posted By: RWEST
Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Originally Posted By: Riptide
Fuel for the fire.

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showpos...19&postcount=12

Scott Whitehead, one of the engineers that worked on the Ford 4.6 modular, indicating use of 5W-20 is a no-no.


Wow. Good fuel!

Yeah, but he didn't say WHY 5-20 is no good!! Kinda' makes you wonder....
28.gif

To his postulation, all I can say is we've run mostly MC (some M1) 5-20 in a variety of mod motored vans/p'ups for years, getting well over 200,000 miles (usually, before the PA road salt gets 'em) on them with no oil related issues.
21.gif



Actually he did say why. The results of many engines torn down after being run on the dyno. He's an engineer for Ford, part of the development of several of the engines spec'd for 5w-20, has done much research on the dyno with 5w-20 and he recommends against it. What more do you need to hear?

This is what I don't get about this place. You can have clear evidence right in front of you that should and could end the discussion yet it doesn't. It goes more on "feelings" than facts.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
What more do you need to hear?



Mass seizures of engines using it.


I know there is a lot of sarcasm in that statement but I believe it to be true of most people.

Even if it will live a decent life on 5w-20, if it could live a healtier longer life for no additional cost, why wouldn't you use the 30wt?

There comes a point when the additional wear and corresponding loss of mileage outweights the initial tiny mpg advantage of the 20wt.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: RWEST
Originally Posted By: Liquid_Turbo
Originally Posted By: Riptide
Fuel for the fire.

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showpos...19&postcount=12

Scott Whitehead, one of the engineers that worked on the Ford 4.6 modular, indicating use of 5W-20 is a no-no.


Wow. Good fuel!

Yeah, but he didn't say WHY 5-20 is no good!! Kinda' makes you wonder....
28.gif

To his postulation, all I can say is we've run mostly MC (some M1) 5-20 in a variety of mod motored vans/p'ups for years, getting well over 200,000 miles (usually, before the PA road salt gets 'em) on them with no oil related issues.
21.gif



Actually he did say why. The results of many engines torn down after being run on the dyno. He's an engineer for Ford, part of the development of several of the engines spec'd for 5w-20, has done much research on the dyno with 5w-20 and he recommends against it. What more do you need to hear?

This is what I don't get about this place. You can have clear evidence right in front of you that should and could end the discussion yet it doesn't. It goes more on "feelings" than facts.


I'm not sure his experiences are any longer relevant. Think about it, he was testing 2003 and 2005 MY engines. That means he was likely seeing the results based on 2001-2003 era 5W-20s. We know the early runs of 5W-20 weren't as good as what we have now.
 
ALL of you are missing the point entirely.

The rules/designs/criteria etc. are all designed for the masses. Not BITOG'ers

The majority of people don't give a hoot what OIL BRAND is in their car let alone what weight it is which most people don't understand, nor care to.

I still see 10W-40 on the shelf.. That weight has been obsolete for many many years but yet, there it is!

the way most people change their oil ( they don't) check their oil ( are you kidding?) and by the sheer success of garbage products such as Jiffy Lube and Fram filters, and the fact that most people will NEVER keep a car long enough to worry about how much life a 5w-20 weight oil removes from an engines life span, makes this discussion kinda moot anyway.
 
They don't care about the longevity of the engine past whatever mileage their research shows the average original owner keeps their car.

Once again, they have no interest in the mileage down the road. They received their CAFE numbers and that's all that matters.

As much as we would like to believe otherwise, car manufacturers are out to make money, and that's it. They balance profit with making cars just reliable enough so that when the time comes, you will buy another one of their cars. Some are more successful at this than others.

Ed
 
Originally Posted By: peterdaniel
ALL of you are missing the point entirely.

The rules/designs/criteria etc. are all designed for the masses. Not BITOG'ers

The majority of people don't give a hoot what OIL BRAND is in their car let alone what weight it is which most people don't understand, nor care to.

I still see 10W-40 on the shelf.. That weight has been obsolete for many many years but yet, there it is!

the way most people change their oil ( they don't) check their oil ( are you kidding?) and by the sheer success of garbage products such as Jiffy Lube and Fram filters, and the fact that most people will NEVER keep a car long enough to worry about how much life a 5w-20 weight oil removes from an engines life span, makes this discussion kinda moot anyway.


I agree.

But I want to keep my TL forever, it's almost paid off and I don't want another car payment for a very long time. This is why I'm interested in every last mile I can get out of the engine (and trans).

Most people would get rid of this car before the potential extra wear ever has a chance to show up. I plan on driving it until it won't drive anymore and being in CA, it's not likely the engine will outlast the rest of the car unlike many others. I'm sure as [censored] not going to follow a CAFE mandated oil recommendation just for that extra .0000001 mpg.
 
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
What more do you need to hear?



Mass seizures of engines using it.


I know there is a lot of sarcasm in that statement but I believe it to be true of most people.

Even if it will live a decent life on 5w-20, if it could live a healtier longer life for no additional cost, why wouldn't you use the 30wt?

There comes a point when the additional wear and corresponding loss of mileage outweights the initial tiny mpg advantage of the 20wt.



Then show me the ailing engines? The junkyards are full of more cars due to collisions ..autotrans issues ..head gasket issues ..failed timing belts than they are from tired engines. The only truly tired engines I've ever seen, outside of design flaws, is an engine that's been neglected or abused.

Now if you're saying that a engine can endure abuse better with heavier oil ..I'd say ..probably ..but we're into subjective views here. Just what is abuse? To you it could be common every day driving. The way I drove from the day I got my license through my late 20's ..as fast as you could in the space allotted .. it looked normal to me.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
What more do you need to hear?



Mass seizures of engines using it.


I know there is a lot of sarcasm in that statement but I believe it to be true of most people.

Even if it will live a decent life on 5w-20, if it could live a healtier longer life for no additional cost, why wouldn't you use the 30wt?

There comes a point when the additional wear and corresponding loss of mileage outweights the initial tiny mpg advantage of the 20wt.



Then show me the ailing engines?


Amsoil 5W-20 has better wear numbers than Super Tech dino 5W-20. The problem is we don't have any ailing engines to prove it.
 
I can understand why Ford back-spec'd engines to help sell more 5W20 so the oil companies would produce it. If that really is the reason..... But, why make the cut off 1993, and not 1992, or 1990 (a nice round number), or 1985? There's plenty of old Fords still on the road.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I can understand why Ford back-spec'd engines to help sell more 5W20 so the oil companies would produce it. If that really is the reason..... But, why make the cut off 1993, and not 1992, or 1990 (a nice round number), or 1985? There's plenty of old Fords still on the road.


1993 was the first year of Hypereutectic pistons in the 302. This meant tighter piston-to-bore clearances for emissions reasons. 92 and earlier had forged TRW pistons.....
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
What more do you need to hear?



Mass seizures of engines using it.


I know there is a lot of sarcasm in that statement but I believe it to be true of most people.

Even if it will live a decent life on 5w-20, if it could live a healtier longer life for no additional cost, why wouldn't you use the 30wt?

There comes a point when the additional wear and corresponding loss of mileage outweights the initial tiny mpg advantage of the 20wt.



Then show me the ailing engines? The junkyards are full of more cars due to collisions ..autotrans issues ..head gasket issues ..failed timing belts than they are from tired engines. The only truly tired engines I've ever seen, outside of design flaws, is an engine that's been neglected or abused.

Now if you're saying that a engine can endure abuse better with heavier oil ..I'd say ..probably ..but we're into subjective views here. Just what is abuse? To you it could be common every day driving. The way I drove from the day I got my license through my late 20's ..as fast as you could in the space allotted .. it looked normal to me.


I have seen engines that were plain old worn out before. No oil pressure at idle due to excessive bearing clearances, and burning oil badly when lifting throttle. No other issues besides too many miles. Engines do wear out.

You are thinking in absolutes. Just because 20wts aren't sending cars to the junkyard with a rod through the pan doesn't mean they wouldn't be in better shape at the same mileage with a heavier oil.

I'm very confident I have something to gain by the (true) 30wt I'm running but I can't find a single positive of running the recommended 5w-20 in my climate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Redhawk454
0w-30/5w-30 in a 2024 crosstrek and subaru timing chains
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
9K
Redhawk454
W
Opinion needed on Kia Oil and Filter choice
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
pbm
Oil fan 47
2019 HRV with R18z engine and 30 weight oil?
Replies
11
Views
1K
JustN89
Hillbilly Deluxe
Moving from 0W-20 to 5W-30 in late model Toyotas
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
14K
ARCOgraphite
W
Is there a "best" oil for timing parts longevity in Ford's 2nd Gen Coyote?
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
zray1
Back
Top