0W16 instead of 0w20?

Unless Toyota has back specified it for that engine, I wouldn't.

Apply a "worst regret" analysis. Not using 0W-16 means you give up a small (potential) saving in fuel, but by using 0W-16 you risk major engine repairs. So which would be regret more? I know which one I would.
 
I have had 3 Civics, most recently a 2013 with 1.8L.
Yes, 0W-20 on the cap.

My experience with 2 data points:

-> I used M1-EP 5W-20 year-round here in TN, since that's what my Accord uses (I know this is not a good reason).
Civic 1.8L started immediately and ran peppy and no noise even in the coldest weather, sitting outside.

-> Interestingly and puzzling, this was not the case with M1-EP 5W-30 in cold weather. Slower cranking, a bit of shaking, and lacked pep for the first 2 minutes, only in cold weather.
Several OCI with this experience.

All of the above was oil I purchased & changed myself.


My suggestion for you is to at least continue 0W-20 through the summer.

If you change to 0W-16, I hope you will stay with the same brand & type, then watch for normal stuff - oil consumption, leaks, noise, change in starting, cold pep, etc.
Then be sure to share your experience here!
 
Why would you use it in an engine not designed for it??? I can't imagine any measurable gain in mileage, and there's no price difference.
 
Originally Posted by Mter00s
Car calls for 0w20 on cap and am eager to try 0w16. Any harm in switching?

- '12 Civic 1.8L


Has Honda back-specified 0W16 for this range of engines and Model Years?

If not, Absolutely do not use it.

I would add that there would be nothing to be gained and much to loose.

0W16 is in the 20 grade range for KV100 but below range for MIN HTHS.

If you want to try a "thin 0W20" that is NEAR a 0w16 try Subaru Genuine (Idemitsu) 0W20 or

The MOTUL that I am running in my VW which is MOTUL VW 508 00/ 509 00

BTW pretty quickly, I had found the MOTULto be too thin for my use, the engine was burning it at a good clip,

so I Added Mobil 1 0W40 FS ( MB 229.5x, Porsche A40 ) to a sump that was down a 1/2 qt and the engine responded marvelously.

SO let the "thinnies" beware
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
I have some Vermont family members who are Subaru owners (yes, I'm sarcastically picking on them) who drive 10 under the speed limit at all times. They also believe that any perceptible acceleration is an affront to creation itself. I don't think I've ever seen the tachometer exceed 2000 RPM when riding with them.

The engines in these cars are so lightly loaded, that 0W-Water motor oil, WD-40 or Wesson vegetable oil, is just fine for their needs and they will never experience any lubricity related operational problems.

The rest of us operate in the real world and recognize that motor oil must perform a number of seemingly different tasks. From flowing very well when below ice cold, to providing adequate hydrodynamic connecting rod lubrication near redline and ring to cylinder lubrication during spirited hot summertime driving. All while keeping the pins and links on timing chains from excessive wear rates.

Test after test show that adequate viscosity is the driving factor behind lubrication. Additives can help, but it's viscosity that does the heavy lifting. Ultra low viscosity oils have but one goal, better economy. Engines must be designed for low viscosity oils. My attempt at improving high RPM HP by using 0W-20 in a Miata resulted in a 255 PPM Pb UOA and destroyed rod bearings. Yes, I was racing it, and yes I was looking for any advantage over my competitors. But the bottom line was insufficient viscosity resulted in failure.

Gas turbine engines use roller and ball bearings, that work perfectly with low viscosity synthetic ester oils. Piston engines have piston rings scraping down the cylinder walls, often have camshaft components that don't have rollers, sleeve bearings on the crankshaft and camshafts, timing chains made from pins and sheet metal links (fact, chains last longest with 30 viscosity oil) and the only thing keeping those parts "apart" is the oil's viscosity.
 
Last edited:
What are you looking to gain .00000001 mpg? Took me years to accept 0w20 now 0w16 wow that's like lily white sewing machine oil.
 
Originally Posted by OilReport99
We had a 2012 Civic 1.8L. Always used M1 AFE 0W-20 @ 10K OCI. No issues at all.


Honda has specd their own green oil for years, it is much thinner than 0w20
 
Originally Posted by Rmay635703
Originally Posted by OilReport99
We had a 2012 Civic 1.8L. Always used M1 AFE 0W-20 @ 10K OCI. No issues at all.


Honda has specd their own green oil for years, it is much thinner than 0w20


Yet, they recommended 0W-20 and that's what I used.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Mter00s
Car calls for 0w20 on cap and am eager to try 0w16. Any harm in switching?

- '12 Civic 1.8L

API/ILSAC have made the fuel-economy requirement stricter for xW-20 in API SP than in API SN/SN PLUS. The fuel-economy improvement over xW-20 will now be 0.3%/0.1% or more for new/used 0W-16 in API SP. It used to be 0.5%/0.3% or more in API SN/SN PLUS. See pages 71 and 74 in the official API document.

API 1509, Engine-Oil licensing and certification system, 18th edition, June 2019

0W-16 really pushes the viscosity limits toward the sudden-death zone. Well, it's actually the sudden-wear zone. I wouldn't run it unless the OEM allows it in a given powertrain configuration.
 
Quote
fact, chains last longest with 30 viscosity oil

why would that be?
the higher the viscosity, the higher the longevity ?
how about using a 0w-40?
better or worse than a 30 ?
 
Back
Top