Actually, that's not the point at all. The point is how can you say that 5W-20 is the best oil for the app when you have done NO comparative testing? What's funny is that I have seen 5.4L main bearing issues in heavily loaded bucket trucks that were run on 5W-20. Those trucks live their lives severely lugged, and sometimes 5W-20 doesn't appear to cut it.
5w20 in 4.6L Ford work van
- Thread starter FastSUV
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: erogers
My dealer told me that 10W-30 was "dangerous" to use in my 4.6, even though the official shop manual calls for it as the recommended oil, so don't go on the dealer's word. They'll tell you to use whatever they're selling. In Australia, they break in Ford modular engines on 15W-40 and specify other 40 weights for after break-in (10W-40, 5W-40, and 0W-40). Now I know this is because of the warmer climate, but still, heavier oils will run fine in these engines, provided they are used under the correct temperatures. Will modulars run fine on 5W-20? Sure. But don't get fooled into thinking that's the only oil for these engines, or even that it's the best oil for these engines. My car has been running great on 10W-30...much smoother than the 5W-20 I just drained out of it. Much quieter, too.
I searched TSB's and called two different dealerships, the people who sold me my Jeep, and one a friend works for. He searched their data base and said use the suggested 5W20 oil, nothing has changed. If FastSUV or anyone else can show me the TSB I'd appreciate it. My search shows no changes.
My dealer told me that 10W-30 was "dangerous" to use in my 4.6, even though the official shop manual calls for it as the recommended oil, so don't go on the dealer's word. They'll tell you to use whatever they're selling. In Australia, they break in Ford modular engines on 15W-40 and specify other 40 weights for after break-in (10W-40, 5W-40, and 0W-40). Now I know this is because of the warmer climate, but still, heavier oils will run fine in these engines, provided they are used under the correct temperatures. Will modulars run fine on 5W-20? Sure. But don't get fooled into thinking that's the only oil for these engines, or even that it's the best oil for these engines. My car has been running great on 10W-30...much smoother than the 5W-20 I just drained out of it. Much quieter, too.
I searched TSB's and called two different dealerships, the people who sold me my Jeep, and one a friend works for. He searched their data base and said use the suggested 5W20 oil, nothing has changed. If FastSUV or anyone else can show me the TSB I'd appreciate it. My search shows no changes.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: JonC
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Not according to a guy who has torn down dozens of these engines during OEM durability testing.
I must have missed this thread. What did this guy have to say?
Jon
While the guy was allegedly the real deal, I don't recall if the source was a bona fide article or just an internet based thing.
While everything that he alleged may have been true, I can't see where he established significance in his findings.
As an example. One might say that XYZ oil performed better in the GF4 Sequence III-G test than oil ABC and assert that the use of XYZ offered more protection than ABC. They both "PASSED" the test. What's not mentioned is that the Sequence IIIG test is something that no engine can endure without damage and has no relationship with actually working conditions that all but the most purposely abused engines will ever see.
So, even if you're speaking the absolute truth, it doesn't mean that you're NOT being disingenuous.
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Not according to a guy who has torn down dozens of these engines during OEM durability testing.
I must have missed this thread. What did this guy have to say?
Jon
While the guy was allegedly the real deal, I don't recall if the source was a bona fide article or just an internet based thing.
While everything that he alleged may have been true, I can't see where he established significance in his findings.
As an example. One might say that XYZ oil performed better in the GF4 Sequence III-G test than oil ABC and assert that the use of XYZ offered more protection than ABC. They both "PASSED" the test. What's not mentioned is that the Sequence IIIG test is something that no engine can endure without damage and has no relationship with actually working conditions that all but the most purposely abused engines will ever see.
So, even if you're speaking the absolute truth, it doesn't mean that you're NOT being disingenuous.
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Actually, that's not the point at all. The point is how can you say that 5W-20 is the best oil for the app when you have done NO comparative testing? What's funny is that I have seen 5.4L main bearing issues in heavily loaded bucket trucks that were run on 5W-20. Those trucks live their lives severely lugged, and sometimes 5W-20 doesn't appear to cut it.
It sounds to me (making a leap with the facts you provided) that someone needs to do a behavioral analysis before making fleet purchases with manual transmissions.
Workers who are in and out of their trucks daily are not motivated to shift properly. A bucket truck operator is likely working tens of locations a day and the tripsare extremely short to reposition the truck. In many fleets there is no monitoring of driver behavior that can improve accident rates and prevent unnecessary equipment wear. To the workers in such a situation they have no motivation to care for the truck, it is not their own to care about and in many cases the owners have not explained to them the consequence of improper driving techniques. A drive right device and drivers training would help but I am leaning towards equipment selection here.
The answer is to purchase equipment that does not complicate the task for the workers. That means fleet trucks that require multiple moves a day need to have an automatic transmission. This can be surmised via a reverse Causal analysis including antecedent predictors to the worker behaviors.
Without going further into boring behavioral analysis I would not label the lubricant viscosity as the causal factor. The primary causal factor is equipment selection; the secondary causal factor would probably come via a RCFA that would indicate the lugging of the engines against a manual transmission due to complacency of the workers who have to make multiple moves a day.
The antecedent for the improper equipment selection t would be initial cost savings on initial purchase by the purchasing decision maker with no regard to how it impacted the workers. The workers then operated in a manner with little regard to the equipment.
I do RCFA's(Using technical authorities) and Behavioral Analysis for a living and would never use the oil grade as a factor for failure with so many other obvious system failures.
The oil viscosity is simply not relevant in your argument.
Actually, that's not the point at all. The point is how can you say that 5W-20 is the best oil for the app when you have done NO comparative testing? What's funny is that I have seen 5.4L main bearing issues in heavily loaded bucket trucks that were run on 5W-20. Those trucks live their lives severely lugged, and sometimes 5W-20 doesn't appear to cut it.
It sounds to me (making a leap with the facts you provided) that someone needs to do a behavioral analysis before making fleet purchases with manual transmissions.
Workers who are in and out of their trucks daily are not motivated to shift properly. A bucket truck operator is likely working tens of locations a day and the tripsare extremely short to reposition the truck. In many fleets there is no monitoring of driver behavior that can improve accident rates and prevent unnecessary equipment wear. To the workers in such a situation they have no motivation to care for the truck, it is not their own to care about and in many cases the owners have not explained to them the consequence of improper driving techniques. A drive right device and drivers training would help but I am leaning towards equipment selection here.
The answer is to purchase equipment that does not complicate the task for the workers. That means fleet trucks that require multiple moves a day need to have an automatic transmission. This can be surmised via a reverse Causal analysis including antecedent predictors to the worker behaviors.
Without going further into boring behavioral analysis I would not label the lubricant viscosity as the causal factor. The primary causal factor is equipment selection; the secondary causal factor would probably come via a RCFA that would indicate the lugging of the engines against a manual transmission due to complacency of the workers who have to make multiple moves a day.
The antecedent for the improper equipment selection t would be initial cost savings on initial purchase by the purchasing decision maker with no regard to how it impacted the workers. The workers then operated in a manner with little regard to the equipment.
I do RCFA's(Using technical authorities) and Behavioral Analysis for a living and would never use the oil grade as a factor for failure with so many other obvious system failures.
The oil viscosity is simply not relevant in your argument.
Ben, I call severe Male Bovine Manure on your anectdote. Sorry but your credibility is nil with me now. Don't bother trying to explain it away. I am done with you.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Not according to a guy who has torn down dozens of these engines during OEM durability testing.
That "guy" hasn't provided any proof or measurements, or anything but the fact that he says so, has he?
So we can trust him to be lead systems engineer for the 2003 Aviator 4.6 4V and the 2005 Mustang 4.6 3V, but we can't trust his observations regarding the impact of different viscosity oils in severe usage based on actual engine tear downs? Willfull ignorance if I've ever seen it.
Ah, but I didn't say I trusted him to be anything. Show me some photos, some measurements, some numbers.
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Not according to a guy who has torn down dozens of these engines during OEM durability testing.
That "guy" hasn't provided any proof or measurements, or anything but the fact that he says so, has he?
So we can trust him to be lead systems engineer for the 2003 Aviator 4.6 4V and the 2005 Mustang 4.6 3V, but we can't trust his observations regarding the impact of different viscosity oils in severe usage based on actual engine tear downs? Willfull ignorance if I've ever seen it.
Ah, but I didn't say I trusted him to be anything. Show me some photos, some measurements, some numbers.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: FastSUV
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Son has used MC 5w20 and an MC filter in his 05 4.6L Explorer since new, now ~65k, no intention of switching. Ford did extensive testing under all conditions including heavy towing. Good enough for me.
Initially I was hesitant to pour 5W20 in my 08 Jeep calling for 5W20 only. I read that Ford Article, and a few others, searched this board, and went with the 5W20. It is working out well, so well that I use it in my back spec'd 93 Aerostar with 178,000 miles on it. I also read the article about the Ford guy who is opposed to using 5W20. He offered no proof other than his opinion. These topics always end in a thick vs thin debate.. To the OP, use whatever makes you happy, if it were my new Ford I'd use what they recommend and not look back. JMO
there is a TSB to use 5w30 in that Jeep my friend...do some searching and you will find it.
Would it be possible to post a link, or copy and paste it in a PM? It would be greatly appreciated. I have no problem making a change to 0W30. I just called my dealer and aksed about it unless they're pulling my chain they said use 5W20. Thanks
you can see here it was for the 'compass' model...my mother has a compass and step father has a liberty...they get 5w20 right now but I have made them aware that 5w30 might be better for our climate and also about this TSB...they will probably do whatever I recommend. I did not catch what model Jeep you had but this should say at least something about 5w20 & its protection in certain apps
http://www.wkjeeps.com/misc/Caliber/TSB/Caliber_2600107.pdf
be sure to scroll down on the PDF doc to see the addendum to the owner's manual
Originally Posted By: FastSUV
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Son has used MC 5w20 and an MC filter in his 05 4.6L Explorer since new, now ~65k, no intention of switching. Ford did extensive testing under all conditions including heavy towing. Good enough for me.
Initially I was hesitant to pour 5W20 in my 08 Jeep calling for 5W20 only. I read that Ford Article, and a few others, searched this board, and went with the 5W20. It is working out well, so well that I use it in my back spec'd 93 Aerostar with 178,000 miles on it. I also read the article about the Ford guy who is opposed to using 5W20. He offered no proof other than his opinion. These topics always end in a thick vs thin debate.. To the OP, use whatever makes you happy, if it were my new Ford I'd use what they recommend and not look back. JMO
there is a TSB to use 5w30 in that Jeep my friend...do some searching and you will find it.
Would it be possible to post a link, or copy and paste it in a PM? It would be greatly appreciated. I have no problem making a change to 0W30. I just called my dealer and aksed about it unless they're pulling my chain they said use 5W20. Thanks
you can see here it was for the 'compass' model...my mother has a compass and step father has a liberty...they get 5w20 right now but I have made them aware that 5w30 might be better for our climate and also about this TSB...they will probably do whatever I recommend. I did not catch what model Jeep you had but this should say at least something about 5w20 & its protection in certain apps
http://www.wkjeeps.com/misc/Caliber/TSB/Caliber_2600107.pdf
be sure to scroll down on the PDF doc to see the addendum to the owner's manual
That TSB is based on Exports only. Outside of the North American Market the availability and quality of 5w20 may be questionable while the 5w30 recommended in the TSB is a known quality that is available in the exported to countries. I see no explanation for why in the text of the TSB. I could deduce since it (the TSB in question) is not issued to the North American market it is not a mechanical issue but rather a market issue. Since the market for 5w20 is simply not vigorous outside of NA it is prudent to assign an oil Specification that is more commonly available to assure a minimum level of quality in the lubricants used to service the vehicle. The Factory did not stop using 5w20 as a factory fill. That itself is an indicator.
Last edited:
Well, I like to deal with my own experience when it comes to my vehicles. I'm a thick oil guy, especially when it comes to my Jeeps, but I am impressed with todays 20 wts and the vehicles ability to maintain controlled oil temps.
On my recent trip to Moab, UT, I changed the oil in my 5.4L F150 to mostly NAPA conventional 5W20 and some leftover Q-Torquepower 5W30 (which only made it about 8.8+/- cSt) prior to leaving.
I pulled 11,500-12,000 lbs of truck/parts/trailer/Jeep across the country and up/down the Rockies (those mountains are nuts - floored @ 40mph!). I didn't have one issue! No noises, no burps, no nothing. When I returned home, a check revealed that I didn't burn ANY oil. She was at the same level after 5,000 miles. I changed to Pennzoil Platinum 5W20 for the winter and am not looking back. 5W20 oils can work and work well!
On my recent trip to Moab, UT, I changed the oil in my 5.4L F150 to mostly NAPA conventional 5W20 and some leftover Q-Torquepower 5W30 (which only made it about 8.8+/- cSt) prior to leaving.
I pulled 11,500-12,000 lbs of truck/parts/trailer/Jeep across the country and up/down the Rockies (those mountains are nuts - floored @ 40mph!). I didn't have one issue! No noises, no burps, no nothing. When I returned home, a check revealed that I didn't burn ANY oil. She was at the same level after 5,000 miles. I changed to Pennzoil Platinum 5W20 for the winter and am not looking back. 5W20 oils can work and work well!
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
Why would they need a tear down?
That's the point.
To validate the wear or lack thereof.... I'm sure that's the reason Doug did period tear-downs when he was doing his fleet testing.
Why would they need a tear down?
That's the point.
To validate the wear or lack thereof.... I'm sure that's the reason Doug did period tear-downs when he was doing his fleet testing.
I am certain Doug did not tear the engines down just to see as a validation of oil choices. He has many years of experience but I imagine the reason he had tear downs were that they scheduled for component inspection/replacement as part of a PM schedule. He then made his observations.
We are now comparing apples and Oranges. A spark fired engine with a useful lifecycle of around a quarter million miles give or take and a duty cycle of less than 50% and an over engineered diesel that has a life cycle before rebuild of 4-5 times as much with a much greater use duty cycle almost always pushing near maximum output..
I respect Doug’s experience and will let hem speak for himself if he wishes but I think you speak for Doug too much. Rebuilding an engine in a light Truck after it has been in use is usually not as cost effective as replacement given the other components that are failing on a light truck at this time.
Anyone is free to teardown their own engines to inspect and buy two identical vehicles to compare for themselves. They would still have a large outflow of cash for a really small statistical sample.
If you wish to prove me wrong buy enough identical vehicles light truck Fords (that is 3.5 and less ton)and put them to work with different oils and report back with YOUR tear down results. You are free to do so if the information is of that much value to you. I look forward to seeing the data.
We are now comparing apples and Oranges. A spark fired engine with a useful lifecycle of around a quarter million miles give or take and a duty cycle of less than 50% and an over engineered diesel that has a life cycle before rebuild of 4-5 times as much with a much greater use duty cycle almost always pushing near maximum output..
I respect Doug’s experience and will let hem speak for himself if he wishes but I think you speak for Doug too much. Rebuilding an engine in a light Truck after it has been in use is usually not as cost effective as replacement given the other components that are failing on a light truck at this time.
Anyone is free to teardown their own engines to inspect and buy two identical vehicles to compare for themselves. They would still have a large outflow of cash for a really small statistical sample.
If you wish to prove me wrong buy enough identical vehicles light truck Fords (that is 3.5 and less ton)and put them to work with different oils and report back with YOUR tear down results. You are free to do so if the information is of that much value to you. I look forward to seeing the data.
Originally Posted By: FastSUV
and i stand correctd it is not TSB but still appears to be legit?
the problem with the internet and TSBs is that you are at the mercy of the person posting them. they may cut out some info. also TSBs get updated or become completely obsolete. i have seen people bring in printed out TSBs from webpages that when i check with Ford they are obsolete and technicians are to not perform them anymore.
and i stand correctd it is not TSB but still appears to be legit?
the problem with the internet and TSBs is that you are at the mercy of the person posting them. they may cut out some info. also TSBs get updated or become completely obsolete. i have seen people bring in printed out TSBs from webpages that when i check with Ford they are obsolete and technicians are to not perform them anymore.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
I am certain Doug did not tear the engines down just to see as a validation of oil choices.
He was evaluating wear because he was doing fleet testing FOR the oil manufacturers. It was in a thread when he posted the pictures of one of his Delvac 1 tear-downs.
These of course were not COMPLETE tear downs. He had one cylinder apart to examine the liner and bearings.
Quote:
He has many years of experience
50 years.
Quote:
but I imagine the reason he had tear downs were that they scheduled for component inspection/replacement as part of a PM schedule. He then made his observations.
As I stated above, his fleet testing was done FOR the oil companies to evaluate lubricant performance. He has worked for a number of them.
Quote:
We are now comparing apples and Oranges.
I wasn't attempting to make a comparison, just citing a reason for performing a tear-down. I do my own tear-downs for a completely different reason: Performance upgrades.
Quote:
I respect Doug’s experience and will let hem speak for himself if he wishes
I will send him a PM.
Quote:
but I think you speak for Doug too much.
I don't speak for Doug at all. I used his data as a point of reference in this thread. Nothing more. Often, he comments. If he had a problem with this, I am sure he would communicate this to me, as we talk a fair bit via PM.
Quote:
Rebuilding an engine in a light Truck after it has been in use is usually not as cost effective as replacement given the other components that are failing on a light truck at this time.
This is true. But again, I was not trying to draw a COMPARISON, I was simply citing an EXAMPLE of why somebody would tear into an engine, and used Doug as that example. I can use myself as another type of example, or BuickGN, or anybody that is into drag racing.
Quote:
Anyone is free to teardown their own engines to inspect and buy two identical vehicles to compare for themselves. They would still have a large outflow of cash for a really small statistical sample.
If you wish to prove me wrong buy enough identical vehicles light truck Fords (that is 3.5 and less ton)and put them to work with different oils and report back with YOUR tear down results. You are free to do so if the information is of that much value to you. I look forward to seeing the data.
I'm not sure where I challenged your data? I have ONE post in this thread and it was about why somebody would do tear-downs..... And yet you seem to be going "off" on me here.... Which I don't feel is deserved. And you have also accused me of "speaking for Doug", and implying I do so regularly.
My post deserved none of this perceived hostility......
I am certain Doug did not tear the engines down just to see as a validation of oil choices.
He was evaluating wear because he was doing fleet testing FOR the oil manufacturers. It was in a thread when he posted the pictures of one of his Delvac 1 tear-downs.
These of course were not COMPLETE tear downs. He had one cylinder apart to examine the liner and bearings.
Quote:
He has many years of experience
50 years.
Quote:
but I imagine the reason he had tear downs were that they scheduled for component inspection/replacement as part of a PM schedule. He then made his observations.
As I stated above, his fleet testing was done FOR the oil companies to evaluate lubricant performance. He has worked for a number of them.
Quote:
We are now comparing apples and Oranges.
I wasn't attempting to make a comparison, just citing a reason for performing a tear-down. I do my own tear-downs for a completely different reason: Performance upgrades.
Quote:
I respect Doug’s experience and will let hem speak for himself if he wishes
I will send him a PM.
Quote:
but I think you speak for Doug too much.
I don't speak for Doug at all. I used his data as a point of reference in this thread. Nothing more. Often, he comments. If he had a problem with this, I am sure he would communicate this to me, as we talk a fair bit via PM.
Quote:
Rebuilding an engine in a light Truck after it has been in use is usually not as cost effective as replacement given the other components that are failing on a light truck at this time.
This is true. But again, I was not trying to draw a COMPARISON, I was simply citing an EXAMPLE of why somebody would tear into an engine, and used Doug as that example. I can use myself as another type of example, or BuickGN, or anybody that is into drag racing.
Quote:
Anyone is free to teardown their own engines to inspect and buy two identical vehicles to compare for themselves. They would still have a large outflow of cash for a really small statistical sample.
If you wish to prove me wrong buy enough identical vehicles light truck Fords (that is 3.5 and less ton)and put them to work with different oils and report back with YOUR tear down results. You are free to do so if the information is of that much value to you. I look forward to seeing the data.
I'm not sure where I challenged your data? I have ONE post in this thread and it was about why somebody would do tear-downs..... And yet you seem to be going "off" on me here.... Which I don't feel is deserved. And you have also accused me of "speaking for Doug", and implying I do so regularly.
My post deserved none of this perceived hostility......
First, I apologize for the hostility. It was not intentional and you do not deserve that. I have been posting between online lessons (I am working on upgrading an AAS to a BAAS) and my fatigue with academic questions might have passed into a fed up attitude in my last posting. I am a moody, mean patronizing and a jerk..just ask my wife
. So please disregard anything that sounds to personal. I often take too much on at one time.
I appreciate you calling me on this. It has been some time since I read Doug’s article.
I appreciate you calling me on this. It has been some time since I read Doug’s article.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
First. I apoligize for the hostility. It was not intentional and you do not deserve that. I have been posting between online lessons(I am working on upgrading an AAS to a BAAS) and my fatigue with academic questions might have passed into a fed up attittude in my last posting. I am a moody, mean patronizing and a jerk..just ask my wife. So please disregard anything that sounds to personal. I often take too much on at one time.
I appreciate you calling me on this. It has been some time since I read Dougs article.
Hey, we all have bad days. I have sent Doug a link to this thread. I am hoping he will comment. Remember, he is often to first to state to use what the manufacturer recommends for the prevailing operating conditions
This does not go against what you are doing in ANY WAY.
And I had not posted anything that should have been percieved as challenging that mantra.... Hence my confusion when you "went off" and then asked me to do my own fleet testing
First. I apoligize for the hostility. It was not intentional and you do not deserve that. I have been posting between online lessons(I am working on upgrading an AAS to a BAAS) and my fatigue with academic questions might have passed into a fed up attittude in my last posting. I am a moody, mean patronizing and a jerk..just ask my wife. So please disregard anything that sounds to personal. I often take too much on at one time.
I appreciate you calling me on this. It has been some time since I read Dougs article.
Hey, we all have bad days. I have sent Doug a link to this thread. I am hoping he will comment. Remember, he is often to first to state to use what the manufacturer recommends for the prevailing operating conditions
And I had not posted anything that should have been percieved as challenging that mantra.... Hence my confusion when you "went off" and then asked me to do my own fleet testing
Just PM me and tell me not to be an orifice of the wrong end of a horse when you see me acting poorly. I look forward to Doug’s input if he wishes to give any.
- Status
Similar threads
