0w20 higher visc than 5w20?

[hcbarger]

 

[OVERKILL]

Pretty normal.

 

[hcbarger]

Thanks. Probably going to do the 0 considering the abnormal cold we're expecting.

 

[dave123]

Originally Posted By: hcbarger

Thanks. Probably going to do the 0 considering the abnormal cold we're expecting.

it will never know a difference in Kentucky.

 

[Shannow]

HTHS is where the protection is, and they are about the same. It's a weird data sheet 'though

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: hcbarger

considering the abnormal cold we're expecting.

I don't think Kentucky ever gets cold enough to where someone genuinely needs 0w-20 Not like in North Dakota or Minnesota....

 

[hcbarger]

This vehicle is making a two week stint in Toronto in January. I know it's not like spending a lifetime there, but still...

 

[oil_film_movies]

Its not a "weird" data sheet. 0w20 uses thinner base oils than 5w20, although the 0w20's higher kv100 is due to use of more VII, which increases viscosity on that hotter end of things. Also, +0.4 cSt isn't much diff anyway. Kendall does seem to be great oil to use. I hear those oils can go a whopping 2,000 miles between oil changes, as the 2-finger logo touts. Revolutionary it is. Others will follow. Seriously though, the good amount of Ti in it is cool. (Castrol uses far less Ti.)

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

Its not a "weird" data sheet. 0w20 uses thinner base oils than 5w20, although the 0w20's higher kv100 is due to use of more VII, which increases viscosity on that hotter end of things. Also, +0.4 cSt isn't much diff anyway. Kendall does seem to be great oil to use. I hear those oils can go a whopping 2,000 miles between oil changes, as the 2-finger logo touts. Revolutionary it is. Others will follow. Seriously though, the good amount of Ti in it is cool. (Castrol uses far less Ti.)

Not necessarily. M1 EP and AP 0w-20, which you and I recently discussed, just has more PAO on it versus a 5w-20, which can be made with Group III for example Now of course that's likely not applicable here, but figured I'd mention it, as that's sometimes the case.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

Its not a "weird" data sheet.

OK then... look at the line that says "HTHS". Then look a the line straight after it that says [email protected] Then look at the values in the 30 grades

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

Not necessarily. M1 EP and AP 0w-20, which you and I recently discussed, just has more PAO on it versus a 5w-20, which can be made with Group III for example Now of course that's likely not applicable here, but figured I'd mention it, as that's sometimes the case.

I see what you're saying. For example, if you made a full syn 5w20 using entirely GroupIII, as I think Kendall has, you could "convert" that 5w20 product in to a 0w20 by substituting some PAO in for some percentage of the GroupIII, knowing that PAO would allow the cold cranking 0w maximum to be met. (PAO makes seals shrink, so alterations in seal swell chemicals may have to be made, and then you might need some esters for additive solubility... a can o' worms....http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/28601/switch-to-synthetic ). If staying with all-GroupIII for your 0w20, which is what I assume Kendall did here, you would have to use thinner oils and boost the hot kv100 upward via more VII added. Also, they might have over-shot the minimum new-oil kv100 knowing there probably would be VII permanent shear happening. Good idea to do that. So that kv100 might (likely will) shear down at mid- to later life of the oil in the sump, but your cold 0w cranking should still be OK since VII mostly affects the hot temperatures, not extreme cold cranking.

 

[mightymousetech]

The thinner the oil at startup the better. Period.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

Its not a "weird" data sheet.

OK then...look at the line that says "HTHS".Then look a the line straight after it that says [email protected] Then look at the values in the 30 grades

You're right. I saw that. So many data sheets from other makers have these stupid errors in it. How hard is it for a big oil company to get an engineer to review and edit these things before releasing it to the public? Thread subject was just looking at the kv100 line, and over-shooting the kv100 isn't a bad idea, so that part isn't weird.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: mightymousetech

The thinner the oil at startup the better. Period.

OK, got evidence of that ? If you are well within the pumpable range, then I disagree with you. If you are at the limits of pumpability...different matter...and this isn't

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

Not necessarily. M1 EP and AP 0w-20, which you and I recently discussed, just has more PAO on it versus a 5w-20, which can be made with Group III for example Now of course that's likely not applicable here, but figured I'd mention it, as that's sometimes the case.

I see what you're saying. For example, if you made a full syn 5w20 using entirely GroupIII, as I think Kendall has, you could "convert" that 5w20 product in to a 0w20 by substituting some PAO in for some percentage of the GroupIII, knowing that PAO would allow the cold cranking 0w maximum to be met.

Exactly. Or, if it is already PAO based, just use more PAO. Example: M1 EP 5w-20 MSDS: versus: M1 EP 0w-20 MSDS: Which would lead one to believe that the VII treat rate is likely quite similar, they just use more PAO in the 0w-xx IMHO.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: mightymousetech

The thinner the oil at startup the better. Period.

Certainly for fuel economy, thinner oil at startup is better. Studies have shown, and its intuitively obvious, that as your car warms up, the thinner the oil is at the start, AND as the car warms up, helps fuel economy. Also, there is the wear question. In general, oil is always too thick when its even slightly cool at startup. For example, a car sitting outside at 40degF (not real cold, but cool outside) has oil of around 200 cSt in the sump (guessing, but you get the idea). That 200 cSt is not ideal. I'd rather have a 50 cSt oil in the sump at startup in those conditions! (Then of course it eventually thins out to around 10 cSt or so at operating temperature.) I really want that thinner oil at start-up because I want the rings to get splashed well after starting, and the oil shooting through the galleys and hitting the cam lobes like quicksilver instead of like molasses.

 

[Merkava_4]

Isn't 0.4 cSt the margin of error from one test to the next ?

 

[Ram02]

Good oil bottom line

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

I really want that thinner oil at start-up because I want the rings to get splashed well after starting, and the oil shooting through the galleys and hitting the cam lobes like quicksilver instead of like molasses.

You haven't pulled many engines apart have you ? Rings are already packed with oil. Cams are already wet. AND if your oil is in the pumpable range, the Rocker Arm Oiling time is the same with 0W20 as SAE30... (mollasses...seriously ???)

 

[Crispysea]

Originally Posted By: dave123

Originally Posted By: hcbarger

Thanks. Probably going to do the 0 considering the abnormal cold we're expecting.

it will never know a difference in Kentucky.

I’m in TN, and can tell a difference with 0W-20 versus 5W-20. Definitely quieter, even above freezing.