I never thought I'd see the day oil for a diesel would be 0W-16

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
874
Location
A Warm place to live in
Today I saw 0W-16 Honda Genuine oil in a dealer shelf for their diesel EarthDreams engine!

IMG_0616.jpg
 
Originally Posted by joekingcorvette
I have to agree I am surprised as well. Is 0W-14 and 13 and 12 next?


You're not even close.

"Driven Racing Oil's Lake Speed, Jr. reports that in addition to this 0W-16 viscosity, currently there is testing being done on 0W-12, 0W-8, and even 0W-4 viscosities as potential solutions to this CAFE challenge." - https://bit.ly/2NmOGOT

smile.gif


Ed
 
thinner oils keep EPA + government satisfied while shortening engine life so you buy new sooner!!! consumer is the looser for sure!
 
Originally Posted by benjy
thinner oils keep EPA + government satisfied while shortening engine life so you buy new sooner!!! consumer is the looser for sure!


Really? When data shows that the average age of cars is older than ever? The last figure I saw was 11 years. That just doesn't jibe with the idea that thinner oil causes engines to wear out sooner. On the contrary, it appears cars are lasting longer and that the quality and capability of oil has improved enough to more than compensate for being thinner. If not, please pony up with some data.
 
I don't buy that cars are lasting longer. In the rust belt they are rusting out far faster than the older ones did. I sure don't see all these 11 year old and older cars on the road. Most are not even 5 years old any more.
 
Originally Posted by rideahorse
I don't buy that cars are lasting longer. In the rust belt they are rusting out far faster than the older ones did. I sure don't see all these 11 year old and older cars on the road. Most are not even 5 years old any more.

I think you need to look more closely.
 
I too "feel" that I see mostly newer vehicles on the road; however, the data does not seem to support my observations. My source, however, is Wikipedia, so take it with a grain of salt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry#World_motor_vehicle_production), but the data there suggests that, excluding China, Korea, and India, which have experienced massive recent growth, the amount of vehicles produced per year over the past 20 years has remained relatively steady. If cars were failing sooner, then consumption would have to increase, unless people were surviving with fewer cars, which is, of course, a possibility. I remember in the early 2000's (based on observations of my friends' families) it was not uncommon for families to have more vehicles than drivers in the household. I don't see this happening as much any more, but of course, my observations are not quantified, and they are limited to my locale, so they are heavily biased. Another thing to consider is that where I live, we have very strict state inspection regulations. I used to live in MD, which only required an initial state inspection upon vehicle purchase (no recurring state inspections). I saw many older vehicles driving around (usually with parts falling off, mind you). I don't see that here in New England.

There are many things to consider. Perhaps cars are failing sooner and people are buying fewer cars (which is one possibility that could support the argument that cars are failing sooner while the world production rate remains relatively steady). Perhaps cars are not failing sooner and people are buying cars at a rate similar to that of 20 years ago. The one important thing to consider is that in addition to vehicle operation, vehicle production also contributes to pollution. Factories require electricity, raw materials (mining), recycled materials (processing). We, as a civilization, need to ensure that we don't get tunnel vision. Creating more efficient vehicles that fail more quickly may not necessarily reduce pollution; the pollution generated by the manufacture of vehicles used to replace failing vehicles may very well offset the reduced emissions from the vehicles themselves. Of course, I don't have any concrete data to support one side or the other; I'm just spitballing here.
 
Still wondering how this oil could retain so much pressure from the power condition

Cust will change sooner at least
 
At least in India, I've seen Honda and Suzuki push 0w20 and 0w40 ACEA C2/C3 type oils across their range of cars. Most others are at 5w30 or 5w40 while some of the older spec vehicles (big diesels) still specify 15w40 mineral HDEOs CH4 and higher.
 
Consider an increase in major repairs and growth in the number of repair facilities that are thriving. Maybe the increased wear is showing up in increased repairs.
 
Originally Posted by nyumski
Still wondering how this oil could retain so much pressure from the power condition

Cust will change sooner at least

We're not talking a huge CAT C16 diesel, it's in a Honda
 
Originally Posted by loneryder
Consider an increase in major repairs and growth in the number of repair facilities that are thriving. Maybe the increased wear is showing up in increased repairs.

Interesting and possible. Maybe people are keeping cars longer to justify the cost of the repairs, which was still less than replacing the vehicle. Food for thought.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top