5W-20 people - explain this please:

[427Z06]

Here's a good test report on a 4.6L Ford Truck. Multiple intervals over multiple seasons, 5w20 to 5w40.

http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=002975
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=001965

 

[johnsmith]

toocrazy2yoo, you said it all. Cheers.

quote:

---

I think it's more a matter of frustration than anger. It's frustrating to watch someone make decisions or take a stand on anything if they are guided solely by their emotions and refuse to take an open minded look at what the "other side" offers in the way of fact based disagreement.

---

quote:

---

Honest objective thought is not easy. The arguments you put forth are not original, you are going through the process. You may arrive somewhere that you do not think you are going if you are here to learn. The frustration with your tired argument is that many of us have seen and even argued the same points only to learn it is rationalization for a fear of change.

---

quote:

---

Accord2005NJ a year or so from now when you're a grizzled old veteran on BITOG some newbie will start a topic identical to this one. He will use the same arguments that you have with the same belief that he is arguing something new and original.It is part of the circle of life.

---

LOL! This thread is getting all philosophical.

Good stuff.

 

[Iain]

Huhwhye wrote:

quote:

---

2 UOA's 5w20 vs 5w30 in my Ford

2004 Ford Ranger w/ 3.0 Vulcan

Posted in UOA forum. I was skeptical on 5w20 too, but I gave it a try and like the results.

---

Nice UOA!!

I'm running Mobil 1 5W-20 SM as well in my 2001 Taurus, 3.0L Duratec with Amsoil EA011 filter. Currently at 2500 mile point of 7K OCI. I hope UOA of that turn out as well.

My oil seem much cleaner at this point than with previous OCI of 5W-30 M1. Could be filter.

I was highly sceptical of 5W-20 oil as well. It's why I decided on synthetic oil.

[ May 10, 2006, 11:21 PM: Message edited by: Iain ]

 

[Fernando R]

I believe there is a misconception that the european and North American 2.4 Liter engines are the same. The european 2.4 is found in the Acura TSX and even here, the recommendation for that engine is for 5W-30, not 5W-20. I do believe the European engine is run at higher operating temperatures, requiring thicker oil for similar operating viscosity.

The other thing I would love to see a Honda engineer explain is if viscosity plays any part in calibration of the VTEC cam timing hardware.

 

[1999nick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by javacontour:
When you look at where most wear occurs, which is at start-up, one would think a 5W20 or 0W20 would be a superior oil, protecting engines better, and giving longer life than the 5W30 and 10W40 oils.

Toyota, well actually Scion, indicates in their TSB about changing to 5W20 and in some cases 0W20 that one of their reasons for specifying this oil is for better protection at startup.

Like many have mentioned before, we ran 20wt oils 5 decades ago without drama, so why not today?

---

You are exactly right about 20W oils 5 decades ago. I personally drove a 1954 Ford V-8 from 0 to 140,000 miles from 1954 to 1959, a time period when I was 18 to 23 years old. It was a manual transmission with overdrive, and it was revved as high as it would go very frequently. It did not enjoy very frequent oil changes, either, but at 140,000 miles it was still quiet and did not smoke.

If the 20W oils of that era worked just fine, how much better would you expect the semi-synthetic 0W- and 5W-20s to work today? With the new ignition systems, fuel injection and unleaded gas used in today's cars, the 20W should be much better suited.

 

[Rodbuckler]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Accord2005NJ:
Again, I am being told that my argument is weak but most responses still ignore the facts that same engines gets different recommendations.

---

You a least need to look up the bearing clearances in the European and North American service manuals for this engine. Also, give the pin diameters and the journal widths and side clearances if you can find them. It would also be helpful if you could find the same data for Honda's previous similar engine series that spec'd 5W-30 in North America.

It wouldn't take much effort to jam some thinner bearings into the machine when engines slated for Europe were being assembled. If they don't have or use much 5W-20 over there, then I suspect Honda would supply looser engines.

 

[Accord2005NJ]

Roadbuckler,

I will see if my dad has it in his manual. Is there a web-site where we could pull this data?

 

[Rodbuckler]

I don't know of a free source for that data, but I am sure someone on a Honda forum could cough it up in short order. Also, what are the bore, stroke, deck height, and rod length?

 

[jmacmaster]

Great thread. In my opinion, no one has adequately answered the points that Accord2005NJ is making. Stating that we've been over this before in the past and that he should do his research is not an answer. Claiming that there's overwhelming evidence for the 5W-20 vs. other oil weights is not an answer. Let's see the evidence.

I'm not going to take ANYTHING the manufacturers tell me as gospel. I don't care whether its in their ads, their owners manuals, their bulletins and newspaper and trade journal articles, or anywhere else. Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone would, in view of the auto industry's long history of well documented deception. We've all read the news articles on the Corvair, the Pinto, the Firestone tires, and on and on.

I'd like to inject another issue into this discussion. Why is it that at a certain point in time (I believe it was 2001) the Big 3 stopped specing 5W-30 for many of their engines and started specing 5W-20 for those same engines? What changed? If we are to blindly trust the owner's manual, then which manual do we trust, the one that for years told us to use 5W-30 or the one that now tells us to use 5W-20 for the same engine? There's something very fishy here and I am convinced that we are not being given all the facts by the Big 3.

My 2003 Ford Ranger has the 3.0 liter V6 engine called the Vulcan that's been put in the Ranger (and other Ford vehicles) since sometime in the 1980's. All of a sudden, around 2001, the owner's manual switched from 5W-30 to 5W-20 as the speced oil. This is an old engine, and it does not have close clearances and close tolerances between the moving parts. It seems to me that 5W-20 may well be too thin and that Ford new that in the past when they recommended 5W-30 and continues to know it now even tho, for some reason that they will not divulge to us, they now spec 5W-20. I'm on 3 Ford Ranger website forums. This engine has an extremely high reputation for longevity and reliability on those forums. Many guys have run it 200,000 to 300,000 miles or more, and most of that mileage was of course under the old 5W-30 owner's manual recommendation. If this engine has repeatedly gotten that kind of mileage on 5W-30, why has Ford decided we should be running a thinner oil?

 

[Accord2005NJ]

Jmacmaster,

Great point about the switch in oil recs for the same engine. That is exactly my point (or one of them). What chnaged other then CAFE? How can a thinner oil better protect the same engine?

 

[JHZR2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Accord2005NJ:
I just told you (above) that my father's accord (Kentucky build I believe) in Europe recommends three different grades.

---

But wouldnt the accord sold in europe be the Acura TSX sold here? Are the engines offered different? Apples to apples, lets just be sure.

IMO, one issue is that viscosity is a bit more a quantifiable characteristic, as compared to chemistry. People can put faith and understand how viscosity will protect better, but they cannot see or understand how chemistry can do the same thing.

Cars did get 20w oil years and years back. Were tolerances and whatnot way different? I bet so!

But I cannot say for certain in this argument, same as anyone else. But I will make one guess: Joe Schmoe at wal-mart oil change shop isnt smart enough to figure out what kind of driving characteristics or temperature range a vehicle to be serviced will see. Joe Blow, the car owner doesnt care enough about anything for it to make a difference. Joe Blow also will not keep the vehicle more than 5 years anyway, so longevity is a moot point. As a consumer base whole, if cars are going to be turned over every 5 years anyway, and the resources and whatnot are going to be expended to produce new goods for the folks who like to rapidly turnover their cars anyway, than what is the one thing that can be adjusted in the amount of fuel consumption that is occurring during the use of that vehicle.

Cars are being made, cars are being scrapped. Cars have some typical usable life, and consumer sentiment will have a good deal of effect on how long a car's usable life is, and that is one of the few metrics that can easily be quantified. So, given all the pollutiuon to produce and scrap, and given the relatively short lifespan, as compared to what the car could really do... why care? The manufacturers know how long people keep cars, and how many miles they typically extract. It is in fact irrelevant of the quality of the vehicle, it is a consumner issue. SO, if they can up theif CAFE numbers, and the country can use a few less gallons of fuel, why not?

What everyone needs to understand is that anytime that you engineer anything, it is a tradeoff. There are tradeoffs that need to be considered and balanced. It just turns out that we are an abnormal bunch that is irrelevant to any tradeoff study or similar thing, and so we have these arguments.

JMH

 

[427Z06]

 

[Auto-Union]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Auto-Union:
Idemitsu Racing 4-Cycle Engine Oil 5W-20

(Synthetic)

Formulated Specifically For High Performance Racing Engines

Enhanced Film Strength Provides Excellent Durability and Wear Protection

Special Additives Reduce Carbon Deposits on Piston Rings, Minimizing Compression Loss and Maximizing Power Output

Superior Shear Stability Decreases Viscosity Breakdown, Which Ensures Consistent Quality Performance Over the Life of the Oil

Special Molybdenum Agents Reduce Friction, Boosting Horsepower & Torque

Formulation Exceeds API SM Standards

http://www.idemitsu-usa.com/page_255.htm

---

So, what is this oil used for....if not cars that spec it?

 

[JHZR2]

That chart tells me that according to Honda, only startup viscosity is an issue, and that the thickness at the bearings given by a 20wt is sufficient for use anytime... higher will do fine, just not as good economy wise.

IMO, this is what has been determined all along.

IMO, the only reason why 20wt oils have made it to the scene now is that the chemistry has become much more robust, so that, as I mentioned above, chemistry can make up for viscosity...

JMH

 

[Auto-Union]

Food for thought.

What could possibly be gained by a mfg back-specing 5w-20 in regards to CAFE?

 

[Frank D]

Accord2005, this same arguement existed 15-16 years ago when 5W-30 became a recommended oil and I was one of the naysayers about 5W-30. Slowly but surely I came around to 5W-30 putting 240,000 miles on a 96 Nissan Sentra with a 1.6 4 cyl and 5 speed stick. In 2002, I purchased a new Ford Windstar for the wife and it recommended 5W-20 which I have been using and with 87,000 miles on the Windstar it does not use any oil in 5000 mile OCI and from what I can see through the oil filler, is remarkably clean inside. A year ago I purchased a used 2000 Mercury Cougar with a 2.5 Duratec V6 for my son. The first two oil changes were with 5W-30 but with his short trips back and forth to school and cold winter weather and this engine being on Ford's list of back spec'd engines for 5W-20, I switched to 5W-20. What have I noticed with 5W-20 in this engine? The very slight sludge on the dip stick and inside the filler neck is now gone. Could this have been cleaned up by the 5W-20's better base oils and add packs? I don't know but it would appear to be. I will be sticking with 5W-20 in this engine. Heck, 10-15 years from now we will hear the same arguement when 0W-10 oils are recommended. New and better technology will bring new and better oils. But the bottom line is that it is your car and you can use whatever oils you choose because it is your car and I can use whatever oils I choose. That's the American way.

 

[johnsmith]

AU, I've actually wondered how that works too. I sent the NHTSA an email just now, hopefully they will get back to me...

From their website:

What are CAFE credits?
Manufacturers can earn CAFE “credits” to offset deficiencies in their CAFE performances. Specifically, when the average fuel economy of either the passenger car or light truck fleet for a particular model year exceeds the established standard, the manufacturer earns credits. The amount of credit a manufacturer earns is determined by multiplying the tenths of a mile per gallon that the manufacturer exceeded the CAFE standard in that model year by the amount of vehicles they manufactured in that model year. These credits can be applied to any three consecutive model years immediately prior to or subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned. The credits earned and applied to the model years prior to the model year for which the credits are earned are termed “carry back” credits, while those applied to model years subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned are known as “carry forward” credits. Failure to exercise carry forward credits within the three years immediately following the year in which they are earned will result in the forfeiture of those credits. Credits cannot be passed between manufacturers or between fleets, e.g., from domestic passenger cars to light trucks.

From this, you would think that if they could get better numbers on previous model years somehow, then they would get more credits, but who knows. Apparently, fuel economy calculated for the consumer, and fuel economy calculated for CAFE are two different things. In other words, when the EPA revised their testing methods a while back (that actually lowered the rated fuel economy for most automobiles), I don't think they penalized the manufacturers and said: "Hey! Now that we revised the test, half of you don't pass the CAFE mandates, so pay up!" That being the case, it wouldn't seem fair for them to be able to go the other way with it and have the manufacturers be able to demand more credits just because the revised numbers fell in their favor. It's my understanding that the CAFE numbers are more set in stone than what you see quoted on the web or on a window sticker.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/dearmfr/gasmgdc.pdf

Do NHTSA’s CAFE values differ from EPA’s fuel economy data?
Three different sets of fuel economy values- NHTSA’s CAFE values, EPA’s unadjusted dynamometer values, and EPA’s adjusted on-road values exist. NHTSA’s CAFE values are used to determine manufacturers’ compliance with the applicable average fuel economy standards and to develop its annual report, the Automotive Fuel Economy Program Annual Update. The EPA’s unadjusted dynamometer values are calculated from the emissions generated during the testing using a carbon balance equation. EPA knows the amount of carbon in the fuel, so by measuring the carbon compounds expelled in the exhaust they can calculate the fuel economy. EPA’s adjusted on-road values are those values listed in the Fuel Economy Guide and on new vehicle labels, adjusted to account for the in-use shortfall of EPA dynamometer test values.


However...if one of them back-speced an oil that resulted in lower emissions somehow, maybe they get a treat for that?

And maybe (sorry to stoke this fire again...) the 5w20 weight oils just actually work BETTER in some of those engines than the 5w30 weight oils they were originally speced for.

Yeah, yeah. Heresay and speculation, I know. Good question though. New thread?

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnsmith:
What are CAFE credits?
Manufacturers can earn CAFE “credits” to offset deficiencies in their CAFE performances. Specifically, when the average fuel economy of either the passenger car or light truck fleet for a particular model year exceeds the established standard, the manufacturer earns credits. The amount of credit a manufacturer earns is determined by multiplying the tenths of a mile per gallon that the manufacturer exceeded the CAFE standard in that model year by the amount of vehicles they manufactured in that model year. These credits can be applied to any three consecutive model years immediately prior to or subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned. The credits earned and applied to the model years prior to the model year for which the credits are earned are termed “carry back” credits, while those applied to model years subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned are known as “carry forward” credits. Failure to exercise carry forward credits within the three years immediately following the year in which they are earned will result in the forfeiture of those credits. Credits cannot be passed between manufacturers or between fleets, e.g., from domestic passenger cars to light trucks.

---

I don't see anything in there that says they get “carry forward” credits for back specing on prior year models. But I guess anything is possible with our current lobbyist dominated gov't.

 

[Accord2005NJ]

Hi All,

Thank you for participating in this topic. It is certainly very divisive. Yes, I agree that it would be great to have a Honda engineer explain why 5-20 here and not anywhere else?

Also, as I mentioned in one of my previous posts which I translated from croatian (http://www.hondafanclub.hr/content/read/117/) Mr. Ichisime (not a Honda engineer but a honda VTEC world insider)recommends 15-40 or 10-30 for VTEC engines.

Now, I don't know if Mr. Ichisime is actually an engineer but he is known within Honda VTEC fan and circles. I think his comments regarding best oil for VTEC engines should not be simply dismissed just because they differ with the US Accord Manual.

And yes, 5-20 might be the new 5-30. However, there are some discrepancies in Honda's recommendations for oil weights for same engines around the world and I would love for a Honda engineer to simply put this to rest and explain.

However, since we (as far as I know) have no Honda engineers here, we are discussing it amongst ourselves. I see nothing wrong with that.

Some of you scold me for having a different opinion. That is not very democratic or productive for that matter. I have yet to receive a shred of conrete evidence (other then few oil analysis on relatively new engines) explaining to me clearly why 5-30/10-40 in Japan and 5-20 in US?

I am pushing this issue not because I am stubborn but because it honestly has not been properly answered (or so I feel).

Cheers.

 

[Bill in Utah]

quote:

---

same engines around the world

---

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME ENGINES!

(how many times must this be said?)

Engines today are controlled by computers and the computers are programmed for different areas and smog levels (Like CA gets different than other states).

Different injector maps and fuel require engines to run different.

They are NOT the same engines.

[ May 11, 2006, 04:37 AM: Message edited by: Bill in Utah ]