0W-16 is here!

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: 901Memphis
The SAE already has designations for 0w12, 0w8, and 0w4


This is ridiculous. Why even bother with any oil at all.

 

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: Driz
I’d wait a few years at least. Let the other guy be the one to find out how thin is too thin.

+1

 

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Originally Posted By: CKN

Wonder how it would run in a Crown Vic........


Just budget for new timing chains and guide a lot earlier than before.

Shouldn't be long before Ford back specs it in all their older cars/trucks.

+1 to 69GTX

 

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Driz
I’d wait a few years at least. Let the other guy be the one to find out how thin is too thin.

I have a belief that the engineers who say this oil is OK in the motors they have designed know more than the shade tree mechanics on BITOG.


Whatever. What about when vehicles that were spec'd for 5W-30 were then suddenly back-spec'd to 5W-20. Didn't the engineers know what they were doing when 5W-30 was originally spec'd for those vehicles? And then Ford changes back to 5W-30 again for some applications. I believe people can read the writing on the wall.

People can think for themselves and decide whether or not they will run these CAFE-driven oils (5W-20, 0W-20, 0W-16, etc).

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Originally Posted By: Tony10s


People can think for themselves and decide whether or not they will run these CAFE-driven oils (5W-20, 0W-20, 0W-16, etc).


Don't the censor know CAFE is just another four letter word!

 

[69GTX]

Originally Posted By: zeng
Yes, the engineers concerned know more than any of us in Bitog its intended application parameters.
Do we know the parameters in question ? You bet.
There is a reason vehicle purchasers populace ,media included, has no access to OEM engineers in matters related to engineering issues.


Actually, we don't know the parameters in question "beyond the mfg's warranty period." Are the engineers designing the engine/oil combo for 100K, 150K, 200K, 300K, 400K or 500K miles? You will get different answers from them depending on your goals and personal usage. They cannot possibly design for each of us. So they design a package for the masses that exceeds the warranty period and keeps complaints to a reasonable level. Engineers design. But it's the guys in the field (testers, fleets & individual operators) that determine real world outcomes to the engineer's "design." I'd always side with highly experienced testers/fleets/operators vs. the design engineers. The engineers could have a totally different view 3-7 yrs after the car has hit the market...a little late then to make changes as the ship has sailed.

 

[JFAllen]

Along with Penrite, has been on the shelf in Aus for close to a year. A number of hybrid (think Prius,) cars spec this oil.

While too thin for 'most applications' one advantage of oils like this (as the engine tech evolves to use it,) is that they are essentially a mono grade 16W oil. As it's thin enough to not require significant amounts (or any) of PPD's and VII's to comply with the spec. Thus they tend to be very very sheer stable.

Regards
Jordan

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Originally Posted By: JFAllen

Along with Penrite, has been on the shelf in Aus for close to a year. A number of hybrid (think Prius,) cars spec this oil.

While too thin for 'most applications' one advantage of oils like this (as the engine tech evolves to use it,) is that they are essentially a mono grade 16W oil. As it's thin enough to not require significant amounts (or any) of PPD's and VII's to comply with the spec. Thus they tend to be very very sheer stable.

Regards
Jordan


LOL and what kind of bargains can consumers expect to see on this bottle of gold?

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: JohnnyJohnson
what kind of bargains can consumers expect to see on this bottle of gold?

No bargains mate, both the black bottle Penrite 0W16 and the gold bottle Nulon 0W16 synthetics are from Australia, and oil is a bit more expensive here. The Nulon usually costs less than the Penrite.

I've linked to some typical sale prices in a previous post in this thread. Just follow the link.

 

[Crispysea]

I went back and got a photo.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

Originally Posted By: Crispysea
I went back and got a photo.

Thanks for the photo

Is it the same price as all the other CQ Synthetic? Because AAP has CQ syn in one of those oil change specials with a Tearolator

 

[Crispysea]

It is the same price as all the other full synthetic. I think it qualifies for the schedule.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: Tony10s
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: Driz
I’d wait a few years at least. Let the other guy be the one to find out how thin is too thin.

I have a belief that the engineers who say this oil is OK in the motors they have designed know more than the shade tree mechanics on BITOG.


Whatever. What about when vehicles that were spec'd for 5W-30 were then suddenly back-spec'd to 5W-20. Didn't the engineers know what they were doing when 5W-30 was originally spec'd for those vehicles? And then Ford changes back to 5W-30 again for some applications. I believe people can read the writing on the wall.

People can think for themselves and decide whether or not they will run these CAFE-driven oils (5W-20, 0W-20, 0W-16, etc).


I used M1 5-20 in 1978 in an engine calling for 10-40. No CAFE then and the 5-20 performed very well. 0-20 still performs well today. I have put about 400K on Ford engines with 0-20 in recent years.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: tig1
I used M1 5-20 in 1978 in an engine calling for 10-40. No CAFE then and the 5-20 performed very well.


Quote:
Enacted by Congress in 1975, CAFE's purpose is to reduce energy consumption by increasing the fuel economy of cars and light trucks. NHTSA has set standards to increase CAFE levels rapidly over the next several years, which will improve our nation’s energy security and save consumers money at the pump.


https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy

Again, and we've been over this ad nauseum...

in 1978, 10W40 was a woefully inadequate grade, and was one of the primary drivers for research into High Shear viscometry, where it was found that the temporay and permanent shear on this grade made it worse than a 30 grade.

So Mobil's 5W20 (monograde, via their own blurbs and the papers of the time), with a 2.9 to 3.0 HTHS would have been protecting as well as a poor 10W40. the 0W, 5W, and 10W 40 grades had a 2.9HTHS minimum, just the same as the 30s up until recently.

M1 5W20 is not typical of the (clearly) CAFE driven 20s of today...nor of the 16s, which (clearly) have a single driver.

 

[tig1]

Café became law in 1975, but was not introduced until 1978. Pickups later. M1 5-20 was introduced in 1974 in the US. You say 2.9, but 10-40 Valvoline I used was very thick in the cold temps of Maine, and created very loud valve clatter and hard starting in sub zero starts, but M1 5-20, which was much thinner gave quick and very quite starts in my OHV Chevy of that day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy

 

[SR5]

Isn't it possible for a badly formulated Dino 10W40 loaded with VII polymer to give both low HTHS and bad cold climate starting ? These early 10W40's are legendary bad.

However that original M1 5W20 being a monograde or close to it, must have been one of the best oils of the day.

It's not a Thin Vs Thick thing, it's a Synthetic Monograde Vs a Polymer VII Loaded Dino thing. I would definitely go the monograde.

Speaking of monogrades, as suggested before, how close would these new 0W16 oils be to a VII free monograde ? If they are, then they definitely have my attention.

 

[Shannow]

The Ravenol offering appears to have no VII interaction (Harman Index of 1)...I'd take it over a 200VI 0W20 any day.

Will try to dig up the Lubrizol video of a poorly formulated 10W40 turning near solid (SAE papers of the day had statements that sometimes they had to be removed from the sump with knive blades).

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
The Ravenol offering appears to have no VII interaction (Harman Index of 1)...I'd take it over a 200VI 0W20 any day.

Out of the two synthetic 0W16 oils that you and I can easily get, Nulon and Penrite, which would be your pick ?

 

[Shannow]

https://www.nulon.com.au/images/files/productbulletins/PB-SYN0W16.pdf
http://www.penriteoil.com.au/assets/pis_pdfs/ENVIRO+%20HYBRID%200W-16%20(FULL%20SYN.).pdf

Much of a Muchness...Nulon has bit better TBN
Neither seem to have much VII interaction...

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Café became law in 1975, but was not introduced until 1978. Pickups later. M1 5-20 was introduced in 1974 in the US. You say 2.9, but 10-40 Valvoline I used was very thick in the cold temps of Maine, and created very loud valve clatter and hard starting in sub zero starts, but M1 5-20, which was much thinner gave quick and very quite starts in my OHV Chevy of that day.

You can't discern anything about HTHS during Maine ambient temperatures or starting a vehicle. That's the reason HTHS was added into SAE J300, and then subsequently tightened further. SAE grading mostly based upon KV is limited.