This guy claims a heavier oil will cause more wear

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Next week this guy will make a video claiming that thinner oils cause more wear. That will result in more clicks and more money in his pocket plus another thread will be started here.

Meanwhile this kook is laughing all the way to the bank.


+1
 
Originally Posted by caprice_2nv
ZeeOSix said:
Yeah, why is this even a problem? I've never had it happen on my own old domestic cars but I did have it happen on some when I worked in the Pennzoil quick lube every day. You always check to make sure it stayed on the filter or you're going to have a real bad day eventually. It happened so rarely I don't even know which brands were prone to it.


The only time I've EVER seen it was the first time I changed the oil in the MG. I have no idea how long the old filter had been on there, how tightly it had been put on, or if it had been oiled when being installed(admittedly I don't know how much of a difference that makes, but I do it). I do recall it being sort of "glued" to the filter base and having to use a pick at a couple of places to get it to come off cleanly.

For myself, on any vehicle I maintain, I change the oil and filter at least once a year, hand tighten only, and oil the gasket. I've never had a gasket come off when removing any filter I personally installed.
 
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
Originally Posted by caprice_2nv
ZeeOSix said:
Yeah, why is this even a problem? I've never had it happen on my own old domestic cars but I did have it happen on some when I worked in the Pennzoil quick lube every day. You always check to make sure it stayed on the filter or you're going to have a real bad day eventually. It happened so rarely I don't even know which brands were prone to it.


The only time I've EVER seen it was the first time I changed the oil in the MG. I have no idea how long the old filter had been on there, how tightly it had been put on, or if it had been oiled when being installed(admittedly I don't know how much of a difference that makes, but I do it). I do recall it being sort of "glued" to the filter base and having to use a pick at a couple of places to get it to come off cleanly.

For myself, on any vehicle I maintain, I change the oil and filter at least once a year, hand tighten only, and oil the gasket. I've never had a gasket come off when removing any filter I personally installed.


Yeah I always oil the gasket on every oil change I do and hand tighten except on gm trucks with the ls engine (filter tight to pan - can't get it tight enough by hand), forgot to mention that. I never noticed if any of the customers cars that did have the gasket stick were vehicles I did the last oil change. Likely not, probably someone else did it and didn't oil it or the oil change was overdue. But I can't say for sure. I think they were mostly Dodge products. (Scotty would love that).
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
R1jake said:
I'll tell ya what's ate up is the fact that manufacturers just go and change the recommended specifications many years after the fact.

Then I went on mobile 1 website to see what oil they recommended and they showed 5w20 weight. So I got on the forum and found out ford has now changed my oil weight recommendation now as well. This makes me wonder if this whole thinner thing is all based on better fuel economy/emissions. I want the best protection even if it cost more to run. My oil cap says 5w30 while my manual says anything above 0 F best to run 10w30 now ford has went and changed this to 5w20. All of the tolerances and clearances are the same or larger than they was in 94 so how can a thinner oil be the correct spec to use??

Makes me wonder if all these newer cars really do have tighter clearances or if this is all driven by trying to save the Ozone?? Lol


Quote
Engine clearances have basically been the same for decades.


Based on?

Does a car with Duel Overhead Cams required the same lubrication as a pushrod engine?
 
Quote
Engine clearances have basically been the same for decades.


Based on?

Does a car with Duel Overhead Cams required the same lubrication as a pushrod engine?[/quote]

Talking mainly about journal bearings and piston to cylinder clearances. Some dual OH cam engines have cam lobes actuating directly on a valve bucket shim, so really no different than a "flat tappet" design of a cam lobe on a flat solid lifter in an old V8.
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
[


Talking mainly about journal bearings and piston to cylinder clearances. Some dual OH cam engines have cam lobes actuating directly on a valve bucket shim, so really no different than a "flat tappet" design of a cam lobe on a flat solid lifter in an old V8.


So, did 5W-20 cause more wear?
 
Originally Posted by Jackson_Slugger

So, did 5W-20 cause more wear?

No, just a 10W-30 caused less wear.........OK, OK, hat, coat, leaving.....
 
Originally Posted by dave1251
I apologize the fact of the oil does not get hot enough to thin to the point the lube to compromise the film strength providing extra thickness does not "protect" better. It is not mental gymnastics.

Plus the addition of additives will affect the film strength, friction properties, and anti-wear.

There are many reasons why mixed lubrication is used for IC engines and the grade printed on the bottle label in only one factor.


A higher viscosity gives more MOFT which ensures better parts separation, and provides more headroom before metal to metal contact occurs - therefore it could be said that it "protects better". A more than just barely adequate MOFT due to the viscosity is the first line of defense to prevent wear.

As MOFT goes to zero due to loss of viscosity, then the anti-friction/anti-wear additives kick in. So as oil temps increase it takes a thicker oil to provide adequated MOFT protection - the very reason car manufacturers recommend thicker oil for track use or heavy towing.

This is good info from Machinery Lubrication.

https://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/30835/lubricant-film-strength
 
Originally Posted by Jackson_Slugger
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Talking mainly about journal bearings and piston to cylinder clearances. Some dual OH cam engines have cam lobes actuating directly on a valve bucket shim, so really no different than a "flat tappet" design of a cam lobe on a flat solid lifter in an old V8.

So, did 5W-20 cause more wear?


Depends on how hard an engine is pushed. Using 5W-20 where the oil gets much hotter than normal (normal being 200-220F) will most likely cause a bit more wear than if a thicker oil was used. There have been lots of technical info posted over the last couple years in this forum showing test data of engine wear tests. Less MOFT and less HTHS typically equates to more wear.

Like mentioned above, the main line of defense against wear is the MOFT due to the viscosity, then anti-wear additives to mitigate contact wear after the MOFT goes to zero from viscosity loss/decrease. I went to 5W-30 where it calls for 5W-20 because I want added MOFT and HTHS headroom. I'll give up loosing 0.1 or less in MPG for some added insurance against wear.
 
Track use, with sustained, keeping it in the powerband high RPM driving doesn't occur on the streets unless you're seriously looking for jail time or you're reckless
with your equipment and trying to damage your car regardless of viscosity. This changes if you employ a significantly higher viscosity (5w20 for street to a 15w50 for the track) or racing oil where MOFT makes a real world difference. The constant passive aggressive scenario given on bitog of "you should be fine with xw20 only if you drive like grandma or benignly" is foolish. Occassional spirited drives is just fine. With this in mind, the difference in wear and mpg gain are probably a wash between 5w20 and 5w30. No meaningful benefit either way although each claim being technically true.
 
Originally Posted by wemay
Track use, with sustained, keeping it in the powerband high RPM driving doesn't occur on the streets unless you're seriously looking for jail time or you're reckless
with your equipment and trying to damage your car regardless of viscosity. This changes if you employ a significantly higher viscosity (5w20 for street to a 15w50 for the track) or racing oil where MOFT makes a real world difference. The constant passive aggressive scenario given on bitog of "you should be fine with xw20 only if you drive like grandma or benignly" is foolish. Occassional spirited drives is just fine. With this in mind, the difference in wear and mpg gain are probably a wash between 5w20 and 5w30. No meaningful benefit either way although each claim being technically true.

Well said Wemay.

And while we are here, an ILSAC 5W-30 is not a thick oil anyway. To me thick oils start at Euro A3 rated 30 grades (HTHS >= 3.5 cP), or a 40 grade oil and up. To be honest I can't see any modern car grind to a halt or bind up on something like M1 0W-40. It may even stay a bit tighter over the long run.
 
Originally Posted by Jackson_Slugger
ZeeOSix said:
Quote
Engine clearances have basically been the same for decades.


Based on?



Pull up a clevite bearing catalogue and see for yourself...
 
Originally Posted by SR5
Originally Posted by wemay
Track use, with sustained, keeping it in the powerband high RPM driving doesn't occur on the streets unless you're seriously looking for jail time or you're reckless
with your equipment and trying to damage your car regardless of viscosity. This changes if you employ a significantly higher viscosity (5w20 for street to a 15w50 for the track) or racing oil where MOFT makes a real world difference. The constant passive aggressive scenario given on bitog of "you should be fine with xw20 only if you drive like grandma or benignly" is foolish. Occassional spirited drives is just fine. With this in mind, the difference in wear and mpg gain are probably a wash between 5w20 and 5w30. No meaningful benefit either way although each claim being technically true.

Well said Wemay.

And while we are here, an ILSAC 5W-30 is not a thick oil anyway. To me thick oils start at Euro A3 rated 30 grades (HTHS >= 3.5 cP), or a 40 grade oil and up. To be honest I can't see any modern car grind to a halt or bind up on something like M1 0W-40. It may even stay a bit tighter over the long run.


Agreed.
 
^^^
"To be honest I can't see any modern car grind to a halt or bind up on something like M1 0W-40. It may even stay a bit tighter over the long run."


Yeah, tighter over the long run due to less wear because of better MOFT and HTHS viscosity.
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
"To be honest I can't see any modern car grind to a halt or bind up on something like M1 0W-40. It may even stay a bit tighter over the long run."


Yeah, tighter over the long run due to less wear because of better MOFT and HTHS viscosity.
grin2.gif


thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by Jackson_Slugger
ZeeOSix said:
Quote
Engine clearances have basically been the same for decades.


Based on?



Pull up a clevite bearing catalogue and see for yourself...


Exactly. Tighten the bearing clearance up too much and you're in for a bad time. Oil temps will be high and you risk spinning a bearing.
 
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
"To be honest I can't see any modern car grind to a halt or bind up on something like M1 0W-40. It may even stay a bit tighter over the long run."


Yeah, tighter over the long run due to less wear because of better MOFT and HTHS viscosity.
grin2.gif


thumbsup2.gif



0w40 is not a thick oil.

* I didn't see Z's quote was a quote within a quote. My bad.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top