A better way to make oils more Fuel Efficient

[buster]

I understand that lower vis. oils provide less friction and therefore more MPG. I think what would be more ideal, but costly is to make 30wt viscosity oils more friction modified. Something like Redline or S2k. Amsoil claims their 5w/10w-30's exceed OEM fuel efficient specs. I bet Red Line 5w30 has less friction and better gas mileage then some of these Xw-20 oils out their. Doing it this way ensure the best of both worlds.

If you notice in 3MP's study, the Amsoil as it thickend made the engine more sluggish. This is what Redline found when testing Amsoil S2k. Amsoil being mostly all PAO thickens over long drain intervals more so then other synthetics, or so it seems. As it does, you loose that MPG and HP. When 3MP went back to Mobil 1, he noticed how much better the car felt.

Biggest reason for me not to run Amsoil was if I'm starting with one of their 12cSt oils, and it becomes a 14cst, I'm now in the 40wt range. With Mobil 1, starting at 10.5cSt and a HT/HS of 3.2, I have more room for thickenning and less drag on the engine over a longer drain interval. Mobil formulates this way for fuel efficiency but it plays to their advantage in long drains IMO. The 0w-40 in a 20,000 mile drain would end up right around where it started or even higher I'd guess.

 

[TallPaul]

I wouldn't mind so much Ford specing 5w20 if they also would allow an appropriate 30 weight as you have described above as an option. Presumably the 5w20 is the cheapest way (as many consumers would bawk at having to buy full synthetic), but at least they should give us the option of using the more expensive oil and still having warranty coverage.

 

[darkdan]

Well it's obviously doesn't provide less friction or it should produce less wear.

I think it provides less parasitic drag against the crank and other moving parts (oil pump too I bet).

It's hard enough to convince people that synthetics won't ruin their engine or cause leaks, how are you going to convince every Ford and Honda owner in America they have to run synthetic? If you find a way I'm sure there's plenty of AMSOIL dealers that would love to hear about.

 

[JohnBrowning]

buster, Give them time! Once ZDDP is almost elimanated GM will claim that moly and boron are poisoning their catalytic conveters etc... I am just waiting to see what their excuse will be now tht ZDDP has been lowered and oils are now less volitile!!!!

Maybe GF-5 will look like Redline minus the ZDDP?

 

[teamDFL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TallPaul:
I wouldn't mind so much Ford specing 5w20 if they also would allow an appropriate 30 weight as you have described above as an option. Presumably the 5w20 is the cheapest way (as many consumers would bawk at having to buy full synthetic), but at least they should give us the option of using the more expensive oil and still having warranty coverage.

---

Interesting that you mention this. I read a Saab owners manual that actually said something like what you are suggesting. Basically (and this is from memory, so forgive me if it isn't right in every detail, but the message is what I am trying to convey), it said 10w30 and 5w30 could be conventional. 10w-40 could be used if it were semi-synthetic or full synthetic. 5w-40 and 0w30 could be used only if they were full synthetic. It seems that some manufacturers are forward thinking in terms of the abilities of different types oils. Of course, some of it is a moot point as I have never seen a 0w30 conventional oil...

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I understand that lower vis. oils provide less friction and therefore more MPG.

---

Is this always true ..or is it just that they require less hp to pump

. That is, are the two synonomous??