30w in a 20w engine (2GR-FKS)

Status
Not open for further replies.
you keep forgetting that a single "weight" 20 has the same HTHS (protecton) as an ilsac 30, and a 30 grade mono is higher HTHS than the 0W, 5W, and 10W minimum HTHS all the way up to 2013.

Looking at those recommendations doesn't stack up the same as today's grades...
 
Here's Nissan's recommendation for the 510 in the '60s...

5106973.jpg


As one poster has pointed out...5W20 WAS specified for that engine...LOL
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: tig1
What's wrong with 0-20 if your engine calls for it? I've used 0-20 for years with great success. One member here used it in his engine for 300K and it called for 5-30. There is no indication that 0-20 causes more engine wear according to the many UOAs we see here.


From what I gather from many posters is something like 0w20 affects their comfort level. I can see that. Unless I lived in the Arctic, I would just use 5w20 if I was going to stick with 20w. While 0w20 may be just fine, 5w20 would fit my comfort level better if I used a 20w oil. But I don't and have nothing that requires it. But in one of my engines that calls for 5w30, I run a 10w30 in it and it runs great. A 2006 Cadillac CTS 3.6L that called for a M1 5w30 by GM, but all it gets is a Pennz 10w30 conventional. That oil meets the 6094M standard that GM requires for the engine, and it does a stellar job. And that 11 year old car is not showing any sign of a problem. Tons of threads on other forums of that 3.6 LY7 engine experiencing timing chain issues and such, but not a hint of that in mine.


M1 0-20 AFE carries the GM 6094M rating.


And that means what? The engine never called for 0w20, and I have no motivation to use it. The engine called for M1 5w30 per GM and I use a 10w30 conventional. For an 11 year old car, that is doing great, warranty is not an issue.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
What's wrong with 0-20 if your engine calls for it? I've used 0-20 for years with great success. One member here used it in his engine for 300K and it called for 5-30. There is no indication that 0-20 causes more engine wear according to the many UOAs we see here.



This statement should be in your sig !
 
Originally Posted By: steve20
does anyone remember if they ever saw 5-20 on the shelf in the 60's or 70's ? I sure don't remember ever seeing it
Steve


Well I certainly saw Mobil 1 5W-20 in the late '70s at Mobil gas stations.
 
Originally Posted By: steve20
does anyone remember if they ever saw 5-20 on the shelf in the 60's or 70's ? I sure don't remember ever seeing it
Steve

Maybe Mobil 1. That was back when they recommended it for a wide range and extended drain". They justified it with a claim if higher thin film strength.
 
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: steve20
does anyone remember if they ever saw 5-20 on the shelf in the 60's or 70's ? I sure don't remember ever seeing it
Steve

Maybe Mobil 1. That was back when they recommended it for a wide range and extended drain". They justified it with a claim if higher thin film strength.


In some of the marketing materials they specifically recommended it as a replacement for 10W-40, which I did in my 1974 Buick Regal. After I sold that car I started using it in my Plymouth Horizon (no comment).
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: steve20
does anyone remember if they ever saw 5-20 on the shelf in the 60's or 70's ? I sure don't remember ever seeing it
Steve

Maybe Mobil 1. That was back when they recommended it for a wide range and extended drain". They justified it with a claim if higher thin film strength.


In some of the marketing materials they specifically recommended it as a replacement for 10W-40, which I did in my 1974 Buick Regal. After I sold that car I started using it in my Plymouth Horizon (no comment).


This was all pre HTHS minimums in J300...which largely came about because the 10W40s of the day were typically useless...and when they were given an HTHS minimum, it was 2.9, same as the minimum for 30 multigrades.

Everything I've been able to find about the 5W20 M1 was that it was all basestock, no VII...which would make it somewhat similar to redline 5W20, or the monograde 20s in terms of HTHS...i.e right around the 2.9 mark.

If, as certain people like to state (not you) , Redline 5W20 is "really a 30", then so was M1 back in the day, and it's not really the oil to be using to prove that a modern 20 is what was in the manuals in the '60s.
 
Shannow thanks for the historical perspective on 1960's weights and how they compare to modern oils. I had always wondered why 20-weights were in owners manuals. Back in the day (as my teenage sons likes to put it) I just headed blindly to the 10-40s & 20-50s---like all guys who knew what they were doing, used. (we didn't know any better)
Steve
 
A 0W-20 weight oil will destroy the engine. A 5W-20 will cause excessive, early wear. A 10W30 is OK but a 10W-40 would be ideal. A 20W50 will give you the best protection from wear especially in New Hampshire.
 
Originally Posted By: NissanHauler
...I'm not totally sold on the 20w craze that has been going on every time CAFE regulations get stricter....


Yeah, I mean it's only been around for nearly 20-years now. Let me know when you run into the Elephant graveyard of dead Fords and Hondas prematurely killed by XW-20 weight oils. Some of those poor victims of CAFE-fascism only made it 400-500,000 miles while dying of non-oil related problems....
frown.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
you keep forgetting that a single "weight" 20 has the same HTHS (protecton) as an ilsac 30, and a 30 grade mono is higher HTHS than the 0W, 5W, and 10W minimum HTHS all the way up to 2013.

Looking at those recommendations doesn't stack up the same as today's grades...


Are we talking synthetics? Or Group I/II's?
 
Originally Posted By: steve20
Shannow thanks for the historical perspective on 1960's weights and how they compare to modern oils. I had always wondered why 20-weights were in owners manuals. Back in the day (as my teenage sons likes to put it) I just headed blindly to the 10-40s & 20-50s---like all guys who knew what they were doing, used. (we didn't know any better)
Steve


You still don't.

How about the 1960 landmark paper that determined the vast majority of engine wear occurs at start up?
 
2 things. 1. The 0w-20 is café driven. 2. If your motor doesn't burn the 0W-20 then the 0w-20 won't harm your engine. Jmo.
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: Shannow
you keep forgetting that a single "weight" 20 has the same HTHS (protecton) as an ilsac 30, and a 30 grade mono is higher HTHS than the 0W, 5W, and 10W minimum HTHS all the way up to 2013.

Looking at those recommendations doesn't stack up the same as today's grades...


Are we talking synthetics? Or Group I/II's?


http://www.technologylubricants.com/MSDS/CITGO/PDS/C500 single visc_pds.pdf
https://www.redlineoil.com/content/files/tech/Motor Oil PDS 5-13.pdf
 
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: steve20
Shannow thanks for the historical perspective on 1960's weights and how they compare to modern oils. I had always wondered why 20-weights were in owners manuals. Back in the day (as my teenage sons likes to put it) I just headed blindly to the 10-40s & 20-50s---like all guys who knew what they were doing, used. (we didn't know any better)
Steve


You still don't.

How about the 1960 landmark paper that determined the vast majority of engine wear occurs at start up?


What did that paper tell you about 30 or 20 ?

It doesn't occur "at start up" it occurs in the first minutes after start-up, mostly in the period where the oil is flowing freely, not the miniscule period of time with no oil pressure (which viscosity doesn't really change as long as the W grade selected is appropriate)

But you knew that, didn't you ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top