All this talk about Ford. Wait a minute is that you Mark?
0W-20 vs 5W-20
- Thread starter rraiderr
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
And when exactly did 30wts become thick? Some of the current blends have a HTHS of 3.0-3.2.
It became thick when 20W oils in the 2.6 range became popular! When I first started lurking on this site, 5W30 oils were the "thin, fuel economy oils" with lots of VI's that would leave deposits and hinder lubrication... That said, the hths of the average 30W oil is at least 15-20% thicker than the average 20W oil. So, the difference is reasonably significant.
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
And when exactly did 30wts become thick? Some of the current blends have a HTHS of 3.0-3.2.
It became thick when 20W oils in the 2.6 range became popular! When I first started lurking on this site, 5W30 oils were the "thin, fuel economy oils" with lots of VI's that would leave deposits and hinder lubrication... That said, the hths of the average 30W oil is at least 15-20% thicker than the average 20W oil. So, the difference is reasonably significant.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Your right. The manual says 5w-20,no exceptions.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Your right. The manual says 5w-20,no exceptions.
An interesting new thread. Thanks friendly_jacek
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
Originally Posted By: FoxS
So the govts of all European countries and Japan put in place strict rules on road worthiness which in turn helps fuel economy as older vehicles are forced off the roads and those on the road are running as designed?
I think that's an important point. Sure, a lighter oil can help fuel economy, but there are limits as to what can be accomplished, and there are diminishing returns. Keeping a vehicle in proper working condition (engine, tires, suspension) also is very important. That should not be forgotten.
Originally Posted By: Hounds
Nine pages so far (and countless others elsewhere) and we still are no closer to a consensus regarding 0W-20. We should run for Congress.
We can call it the Viscosity Cliff.
So the govts of all European countries and Japan put in place strict rules on road worthiness which in turn helps fuel economy as older vehicles are forced off the roads and those on the road are running as designed?
I think that's an important point. Sure, a lighter oil can help fuel economy, but there are limits as to what can be accomplished, and there are diminishing returns. Keeping a vehicle in proper working condition (engine, tires, suspension) also is very important. That should not be forgotten.
Originally Posted By: Hounds
Nine pages so far (and countless others elsewhere) and we still are no closer to a consensus regarding 0W-20. We should run for Congress.
We can call it the Viscosity Cliff.
Originally Posted By: Trav
An interesting new thread. Thanks friendly_jacek
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
Yep, you said it was due to CAFE...but really, it was the EPA and emissions standards all along. See? I told you that you were wrong!
An interesting new thread. Thanks friendly_jacek
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
Yep, you said it was due to CAFE...but really, it was the EPA and emissions standards all along. See? I told you that you were wrong!
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Your right. The manual says 5w-20,no exceptions.
Mine too, that's the oil they used to meet CAFE, EPA, etc.....
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Shannow
No, because the thin crowd always come out with "show us the pile of failed engines", refusing to acknowledge that there is a wear trade off to economy.
I have said many many times that this still may mean a long useable life, but that there's a trade-off.
I tend to agree with you Shannow however considering the cold temps we get here(-40) would say a 0w30 do anything for wear considering the oil barely gets to temp even after long run times.
I agree there is a trade off when temps are not severe but in my climate,in the winter,is a 20 grade ideal,then come summer move up to a 30 grade.
My hemi almost never sees 3000rpms and at highway speeds is only 2000rpms or less.
I want what is best for my engine and will take your advice.
And there lies what I took a lot of heat over a few weeks back. Matching the oil to the climate and how the engine is to be used. I think your plan is solid, however if you follow your owners manual its probably a one size fits all. IMO there is nothing wrong with a 20 grade oil for your harsh cold winters, and a 30 grade oil for summer. Now I'm pretty sure owners manual can only list the oil the mfg used for the CAFE testing.
Your right. The manual says 5w-20,no exceptions.
Mine too, that's the oil they used to meet CAFE, EPA, etc.....
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: Trav
An interesting new thread. Thanks friendly_jacek
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
Yep, you said it was due to CAFE...but really, it was the EPA and emissions standards all along. See? I told you that you were wrong!
Ok You got that one.
Originally Posted By: Trav
An interesting new thread. Thanks friendly_jacek
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2849703#Post2849703
Yep, you said it was due to CAFE...but really, it was the EPA and emissions standards all along. See? I told you that you were wrong!
Ok You got that one.
No he didn't.
The Mileage numbers are calculated based on emissions. They are one in the same for EPA purposes.
Ed
Ed
Yeah your right but the point has been made i think.
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
No comments of Fox's post ?
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
No comments of Fox's post ?
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
No comments of Fox's post ?
Why? I don't consider an internet post as "evidence". As I said, if someone (he or anyone else) has some real evidence in the form of published field testing or SAE studies I'd love to see it.
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Shannow has never stated there is an increased wear rate for lower viscosity lubricants. Rather he has argued that as viscosity decreases the engineering safety margin also decreases.
That's what I thought as well, but his post above implies otherwise, suggesting there's a "wear trade-off" (his words, not mine), not a "safety margin" trade-off
No comments of Fox's post ?
Why? I don't consider an internet post as "evidence". As I said, if someone (he or anyone else) has some real evidence in the form of published field testing or SAE studies I'd love to see it.
Actually I do need to correct myself here.
I thought I had read that the Ford spec for 20 weight allowed for more wear than 30 weight.
However, upon reading the engineering material spec for WSS-M2C929-A & WSS-M2C930-A, there is no apparent difference in wear spec parameters.
So the ASTM Sequence VG has equal wear spec parameters as does Copper Corrosion, TEOST, Ball Rust, Sequences IIIG, IVA, VII.
I presume these parameters have all been increased for SN GF5 but I can't find anything on them
I also don't pretend to understand if any of the parameters are stringent enough or not.
As I said, it would be great if the experts could critique the Ford spec because a) it has been around for more than a decade b) it seems to be as stringent on 20 weight as it is on 30 weight
I thought I had read that the Ford spec for 20 weight allowed for more wear than 30 weight.
However, upon reading the engineering material spec for WSS-M2C929-A & WSS-M2C930-A, there is no apparent difference in wear spec parameters.
So the ASTM Sequence VG has equal wear spec parameters as does Copper Corrosion, TEOST, Ball Rust, Sequences IIIG, IVA, VII.
I presume these parameters have all been increased for SN GF5 but I can't find anything on them
I also don't pretend to understand if any of the parameters are stringent enough or not.
As I said, it would be great if the experts could critique the Ford spec because a) it has been around for more than a decade b) it seems to be as stringent on 20 weight as it is on 30 weight
Originally Posted By: FoxS
Actually I do need to correct myself here.
I thought I had read that the Ford spec for 20 weight allowed for more wear than 30 weight.
However, upon reading the engineering material spec for WSS-M2C929-A & WSS-M2C930-A, there is no apparent difference in wear spec parameters.
So the ASTM Sequence VG has equal wear spec parameters as does Copper Corrosion, TEOST, Ball Rust, Sequences IIIG, IVA, VII.
I presume these parameters have all been increased for SN GF5 but I can't find anything on them
I also don't pretend to understand if any of the parameters are stringent enough or not.
As I said, it would be great if the experts could critique the Ford spec because a) it has been around for more than a decade b) it seems to be as stringent on 20 weight as it is on 30 weight
K.So am I to interpret this to mean ford found no additional wear when using a 20 grade over a 30 grade in their testing?
If so then thats an interesting tidbit of info.And was it their own motorcraft 5w-20 that was compared to the motorcraft 5w30 or what oils were tested?
I'd love to see something from an independent testing firm,with all big name oils included,so a consumer really could make an informed decision.I'd love to read more than just the words "suitable" or "adequate".
Fox
Where can I find this information? I tried google but I must not be typing in the right keywords.
Thank you
Actually I do need to correct myself here.
I thought I had read that the Ford spec for 20 weight allowed for more wear than 30 weight.
However, upon reading the engineering material spec for WSS-M2C929-A & WSS-M2C930-A, there is no apparent difference in wear spec parameters.
So the ASTM Sequence VG has equal wear spec parameters as does Copper Corrosion, TEOST, Ball Rust, Sequences IIIG, IVA, VII.
I presume these parameters have all been increased for SN GF5 but I can't find anything on them
I also don't pretend to understand if any of the parameters are stringent enough or not.
As I said, it would be great if the experts could critique the Ford spec because a) it has been around for more than a decade b) it seems to be as stringent on 20 weight as it is on 30 weight
K.So am I to interpret this to mean ford found no additional wear when using a 20 grade over a 30 grade in their testing?
If so then thats an interesting tidbit of info.And was it their own motorcraft 5w-20 that was compared to the motorcraft 5w30 or what oils were tested?
I'd love to see something from an independent testing firm,with all big name oils included,so a consumer really could make an informed decision.I'd love to read more than just the words "suitable" or "adequate".
Fox
Where can I find this information? I tried google but I must not be typing in the right keywords.
Thank you
This is what I was refering to
http://www.ilma.org/resources/ford_service_fill_specs.pdf
More on testing here
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1L0ANM7bTYEJ:www.dantheoilman.com/fordoilfaq.doc+ford/motorcraft+tests+5w20+oil+in+desert&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.ilma.org/resources/ford_service_fill_specs.pdf
More on testing here
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1L0ANM7bTYEJ:www.dantheoilman.com/fordoilfaq.doc+ford/motorcraft+tests+5w20+oil+in+desert&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: Clevy
We don't drive or have the autobahn like Europe though...
I'm not really sure you'll find any places in Europe to drive full blast for "hours on end". Between restricted zones, traffic and construction, I imagine the spec'd oil would be fine. I think this autobahn thing gets overplayed a bit. Yeah, there are sections on which you can drive really fast, but not for hours on end without slowing down.
You forget that Autobahn is only in Germany. Italy has Autostrada but that has speed limits too.
Most European countries has 130 km/h (~81mph) or less as speed limit on (4 lanes or more) highways/motorways.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
We don't drive or have the autobahn like Europe though...
I'm not really sure you'll find any places in Europe to drive full blast for "hours on end". Between restricted zones, traffic and construction, I imagine the spec'd oil would be fine. I think this autobahn thing gets overplayed a bit. Yeah, there are sections on which you can drive really fast, but not for hours on end without slowing down.
You forget that Autobahn is only in Germany. Italy has Autostrada but that has speed limits too.
Most European countries has 130 km/h (~81mph) or less as speed limit on (4 lanes or more) highways/motorways.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
