Recent Topics
Freedom 95 furnace doesn't keep house warm long
by laoshanren - 10/22/19 11:36 PM
2006 Altima 2.5 oil leak
by LeakySeals - 10/22/19 10:34 PM
fishing licenses on boats
by motor_oil_madman - 10/22/19 10:16 PM
Tokyo Motor Show 2019
by PimTac - 10/22/19 10:14 PM
More Quick Chargers
by Snagglefoot - 10/22/19 09:48 PM
'08 Chrysler Sebring Test Drive
by Fifth87 - 10/22/19 08:42 PM
Testing old coolant
by ARB1977 - 10/22/19 08:20 PM
Pennzoil Maximum Power 0W30
by HoosierJeeper - 10/22/19 07:44 PM
Bought a unknown air rifle and need help.
by jakewells - 10/22/19 07:26 PM
What happens to used cars that don't sell?
by WhyMe - 10/22/19 07:11 PM
No spark
by Eric Smith - 10/22/19 06:57 PM
So you need a new engine?
by Skippy722 - 10/22/19 06:40 PM
Super Hot Fish at local fish monger restaurant
by Cujet - 10/22/19 06:39 PM
Mobil 1 5w30 SN+ D1G2 VOA
by donnyj08 - 10/22/19 06:07 PM
Newest Members
flyyamata, laoshanren, Vincenze, Alex_CB300R_ABS, TSOC
69652 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
29 registered members (caravanmike, chims, Bailes1992, Aredeeem, CB900F2, 3 invisible), 832 guests, and 24 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics296,364
Posts5,096,365
Members69,652
Most Online3,532
Jul 30th, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? #5115997 05/26/19 06:14 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,588
C
ChrisD46 Offline OP
OP Offline
C
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,588
Through various threads here an "HTHS 3.0 minimum reference" is stated as the base line minimum for engine protection . That would then seem to render HTHS readings below 3.0 (i.e. 2.7) to be inferior or at least less than desirable in engine protection . Perhaps stated another way : "What makes an HTHS of 2.7 less desirable than an HTHS of 3.0 and above ? ... Are their tests of HTHS 2.7 and HTHS 3.0 run side by side in the same temp , load , RPM , etc. conditions that show a clear difference in protection ?


'17 Hyundai Sonata 2.4L GDI 5W20 QSUD / Fram Ultra #9688
'10 Hyundai Elantra 2.0L 5W30 QSUD / Fram Ultra #9688
'07 Kia Sedona 3.8L 5W30 Castrol EP / Fram Ultra #9999
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116000 05/26/19 06:24 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 994
sloinker Offline
Offline
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 994
I suppose that oil that evaporates and shears less under load is desirable but unless coupled with other attributes may be meaningless. For example: an oil that has a high HTHS but say a cold pour point of 40 degrees F probably would be harmful to engines anyplace except the tropics. Many modern oils have given up some HTHS for a lower viscosity and improved economy. With the right add pack and other attributes the HTHS seems less relevant than your hard and fast rule would seem to dictate. Most of these new 16 weight motor oils have relatively low HTHS numbers.

Last edited by sloinker; 05/26/19 06:25 AM. Reason: slipped in Mopar juice

'16 Tiguan TSI Ravenol VST 5W40
'15 VW Golf TDI Ravenol VMP 5W30
'15 VW Golf Sportwagen TDI VMP 5W30
'14 Dodge Grand Caravan 3.6 Red Line Blue Label 5W20
'64 Plymouth Fury440 Red Line Blue Label 10W40
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116004 05/26/19 06:42 AM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,355
T
Triple_Se7en Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,355
Originally Posted by ChrisD46
Through various threads here an "HTHS 3.0 minimum reference" is stated as the base line minimum for engine protection . That would then seem to render HTHS readings below 3.0 (i.e. 2.7) to be inferior or at least less than desirable in engine protection . Perhaps stated another way : "What makes an HTHS of 2.7 less desirable than an HTHS of 3.0 and above ? ... Are their tests of HTHS 2.7 and HTHS 3.0 run side by side in the same temp , load , RPM , etc. conditions that show a clear difference in protection ?

Your Korean engines-designs desire more frequent oil changes. Buy a brand name that you like - in the viscosity range of your owners manual and keep rollin'.


19 Hyundai SantaFe 2.4GDI Castrol Edge 5w30 / NAPA Mann-Hummel filter / 6oz Liqui-Moly Treatment
04 Colorado 3.5 Castrol Edge 0W40 Euro & K&N filter
03 Malibu 3.1 QS / Valv Syn 5w30 mix Fram EG filter
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116033 05/26/19 07:25 AM
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 2,805
J
JLTD Offline
Offline
J
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 2,805
popcorn


I use the overseas manual to choose my viscosity.

Using AMSOIL

Hers: 2008 Jeep Liberty 154k, SS 5w30/Amsoil

His: 2015 4Runner 60k, SS 5w20/Amsoil

Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116038 05/26/19 07:31 AM
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
K
ka9mnx Offline
Offline
K
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
I don't think there would be a difference in wear or protection for the average driver. For me it's an insurance policy. I keep my vehicles until I die. If the vehicles die I fix them. I like to stay in the 3.0 to 3.5 range.


2005 Ranger 3.0 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
2000 4Runner 3.4 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Toyota
1997 B2500 Van 3.9 - M1 HM 10w-30/Mopar
1993 F150 4.9 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ka9mnx] #5116051 05/26/19 07:43 AM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,355
T
Triple_Se7en Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,355
Originally Posted by ka9mnx
For me it's an insurance policy. I keep my vehicles until I die. If the vehicles die I fix them.


Hope your insurance policy has great life insurance coverage. Do not die on us ka9mnx.


19 Hyundai SantaFe 2.4GDI Castrol Edge 5w30 / NAPA Mann-Hummel filter / 6oz Liqui-Moly Treatment
04 Colorado 3.5 Castrol Edge 0W40 Euro & K&N filter
03 Malibu 3.1 QS / Valv Syn 5w30 mix Fram EG filter
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116063 05/26/19 08:05 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 9,513
B
bullwinkle Offline
Offline
B
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 9,513
My opinion has been-use what the manufacturer suggests, as long as the mfr. seems to know what they're doing, and the engine doesn't wear enough that oil pressure starts dropping. Unfortunately, with CAFE going a little wild, I'm not too sure some of the manufacturers really know what they're doing (I'm looking at you, Hyundai/Kia & FCA [Ecodiesel]}!


06 Ram 3500 CTD 4X4(FG Venturi), 93 GMC C3500 6.2, 89 F-450 7.3, 98 XJ 4.0(XG8A), 05 xB(XG3600), 18 Transit 3.7, 03 Merc Grand Marquis 4.6 2V(XG2)
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116069 05/26/19 08:09 AM
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 560
T
talest Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by ChrisD46
Through various threads here an "HTHS 3.0 minimum reference" is stated as the base line minimum for engine protection . That would then seem to render HTHS readings below 3.0 (i.e. 2.7) to be inferior or at least less than desirable in engine protection . Perhaps stated another way : "What makes an HTHS of 2.7 less desirable than an HTHS of 3.0 and above ? ... Are their tests of HTHS 2.7 and HTHS 3.0 run side by side in the same temp , load , RPM , etc. conditions that show a clear difference in protection ?


Well, as you know, HTHS is pretty much the true measure of how much oil is actually flowing through where it is supposed to go at temperature and when it is hotter than blazes outside etc. The synthetics don't shear down. This site is cool and all, but it is still comprised of humans, sometimes, experts! Source: Them - that have their own individual attitudes and other things towards brand, how to measure oil, how to prop up their own oil, how to tear other oils down, ..in some threads, good base stocks make the oil. In other threads, they then don't matter.

If the HTHS is consistent with the SAE grade it says on the engine cap for your car then you should be great, and the rest is just healthy discussion in a good spirit and not nasty bickering about what might not even be applicable law.. the HTHS of an oil that meets the grade supposed to be in the car more than likely specified in something such as 5W-20 is not a disqualifier of that oil.

In conclusion, the minimum HTHS of a 5W-30 is 2.9, so having an oil with an HTHS 3.0 is probably indicating some kind of sweet spot of a Thick 20 if you wanted to say, I was not aware of the statement people prefer an HTHS of 3.0 although I can see why that would be attractive. Would have to indicate that it is all relative, as to your post.

Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116071 05/26/19 08:10 AM
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
K
ka9mnx Offline
Offline
K
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
I lost trust in what the manufacturer suggests when Ford back-specd my 1960's designed 300ci inline six to 5w-20. I tried it and it wasn't pretty.


2005 Ranger 3.0 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
2000 4Runner 3.4 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Toyota
1997 B2500 Van 3.9 - M1 HM 10w-30/Mopar
1993 F150 4.9 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ka9mnx] #5116073 05/26/19 08:12 AM
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 560
T
talest Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by ka9mnx
I lost trust in what the manufacturer suggests when Ford back-specd my 1960's designed 300ci inline six to 5w-20. I tried it and it wasn't pretty.


Yeah, the back-spec has also had spectacular badness on Volkswagen etc. What happened to your Ford?

Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116080 05/26/19 08:15 AM
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
K
ka9mnx Offline
Offline
K
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,223
It became EXTREMELY noisy. Like a thrashing machine (if you know what that is).


2005 Ranger 3.0 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
2000 4Runner 3.4 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Toyota
1997 B2500 Van 3.9 - M1 HM 10w-30/Mopar
1993 F150 4.9 - SuperTech Syn 5w-30/Motorcraft
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116108 05/26/19 08:39 AM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 3,200
F
FordCapriDriver Offline
Offline
F
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 3,200
I also tried the back spec'd 5W-30 once in my old 1992 Escort which was originally spec'd for 10W-40 or 15W-40, never again.
The engine and specially the hydraulic lifters hated it with passion, it sounded horrible, put 15W-40 HDEO back in it and guess what i had a smooth running quiet engine again, expensive Mobil 1 too, proverbially down the drain with just 250 miles.

Last edited by FordCapriDriver; 05/26/19 08:42 AM.

1975 Ford Capri II Ghia 3000 V6 - Repsol Elite Super 20W-50
1988 Ford Escort XR3i Cabrio - Shell Rimula R4X 15W-40 HDEO

Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: ChrisD46] #5116125 05/26/19 08:54 AM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 14,172
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 14,172
Compare oils spec by spec. viscosity by viscosity SN ,A3/ B4 etc.


2015 F150 2.7
2018 F350 6.2
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: talest] #5116127 05/26/19 08:56 AM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 14,172
C
CT8 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 14,172
Originally Posted by talest
[quote=ka9mnx]I lost trust in what the manufacturer suggests when Ford back-specd my 1960's designed 300ci inline six to 5w-20. I tried it and it wasn't pretty.

Why would you want to do that?


2015 F150 2.7
2018 F350 6.2
Re: Why HTHS 3.0 Minimum Is Preferred By Many ? [Re: talest] #5116135 05/26/19 09:05 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,516
O
OVERKILL Offline
Offline
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,516
Originally Posted by talest
Well, as you know, HTHS is pretty much the true measure of how much oil is actually flowing through where it is supposed to go at temperature and when it is hotter than blazes outside etc.


What? No, HTHS is the measure of VISCOSITY (not oil volume) under high temperature (150C) high sheer conditions. Think of it is as the viscosity the bearings see.

Originally Posted by talest
The synthetics don't shear down.


Yes they do. There are VERY few monograde synthetics out there sold as multigrades. They may have LESS VII polymer in them, on average, than your typical "conventional" oils, but they certainly still contain it.

Originally Posted by talest
If the HTHS is consistent with the SAE grade it says on the engine cap for your car then you should be great,

And this is why we check the owner's manual. Typical HTHS for a GF-5 ILSAC 5w-30 for example will be somewhere between 3.0cP and 3.2cP. Typical HTHS for a Euro 5w-30 (same SAE grade) will be 3.5cP +. Like kinematic viscosity varies inside a grade, so too does HTHS, with ILSAC oils being on the low-end typically and many Euro examples on the high end.


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2016 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™