Accord oil specs,US vs Australia

[CharlieBauer]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
And on it we get to see overseas OEMs stating that the ability to entirely consume a sump volume inside the recommended service interval is entirely normal for a brand new engine...it's laughable.


The weird thing about that is the German OEM's are seriously over-represented in that problem, and they are the manufacturers who up until recently did not chase the CAFE credits and mostly specify the same thick oil everywhere in the world.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/06/excessive-oil-consumption/index.htm

Quote:
Certain Audi and BMW cars’ standards state that a quart burned every 600 to 700 miles is reasonable.

 

[SR5]

Yes there is no doubt that the German's have an oil consumption issue world wide and with thick oils. Tell me about it, I had an Audi.

But the Japanese oil consumption issue seems to be much lower in Australia, I don't know anybody who has the oil consumption issues I have read about here, and many in Oz drive Japanese cars. But I am prepared to acknowledge internet magnification of the issue as people tend to go online to complain more than they do to praise. Combine that with North America being a bigger market, and it may just be the reason.

But I still think if you regularly read SonofJoe's posts, he makes a valid point about fuel economy oils contributing, not to worn out engines, but to blocked piston rings due to their light and volatile bottom end.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: SR5
But I still think if you regularly read SonofJoe's posts, he makes a valid point about fuel economy oils contributing, not to worn out engines, but to blocked piston rings due to their light and volatile bottom end.

It's not a valid point at all. Thicker multigrades are usually thick not because they have thicker base oils but because they have more VII. In fact thicker multigrades often start from thinner base oils than thinner multigrades do. In addition, thinner oils tend to use higher-quality base oils.

Example: Shell Rotella T6 5W-40 has 12.8% NOACK while Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 5W-30 has 9.1% NOACK. In addition the base-oil-quality index for the 5W-40 is 26.0 while for the 5W-30 it's 53.9.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Honda in the US has always recommended 20wt oil since 2000. It went from 5W20 to 0W20. My owner's manual lists 0W20 and no other options. Curiosity got the best of me and I decided to see if that was a worldwide recommendation. Shell Australia's lube match recommends Shell Helix Ultra 5W40 for my car. I know this gets beat to death a million times over,but is a 20wt the best oil protection wise for the Honda 2.4? Or is it fuel economy-driven only? I'd thought about meeting it in the middle with a 5W30. Who here uses a 30wt in their Honda 2.4? Here's a copy and paste from Shell Australia Lube Match:

...

One thing that's overlooked in this discussion is that in addition to desertlike weather, there is a lot of road dust in Australia. Perhaps this is the reason for the 5W-40 recommendation there, as dust in oil requires higher minimum oil-film thickness (MOFT). I can't imagine why a modern engine without the additional power density provided by turbo would require an xW-40 oil.

5W-20 is fine for your engine and you don't need to worry about having too much VII in thicker 5W-xx grades. Use a synthetic if you still don't trust the Honda recommendation and you will have an additional margin of safety against oil thinning due to high temperatures or oil shear.

"Cold starts, hot running, dusty conditions and peak hour traffic are just some of the conditions the Maloo experienced in its travels around this wide brown land."

http://www.mobil1.com.au/performance/drivearound.aspx

Typical, albeit exaggerated, dusty driving conditions in Australia:

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
while Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 5W-30 has 9.1% NOACK.

While Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 10W-30 will have an even lower Noack volatility due to it's heavier bottom end. Best to compare like with like.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
while Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 5W-30 has 9.1% NOACK.

While Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 10W-30 will have an even lower Noack volatility due to it's heavier bottom end. Best to compare like with like.

Perhaps but not necessarily so. Also, what really matters is the base-oil quality, and NOACK alone doesn't predict it. Carbon buildup isn't caused by oil volatility but oil oxidation. A GTL oil will result in much less carbon buildup than a regular Group III oil with the same NOACK. That's why I tabulated the base-oil-quality index (BOQI). BOQI is a much better predictor of carbon buildup (oil oxidation) than NOACK. You can have a 20W-40 Group II oil with NOACK under 10% but it will still cause more oil oxidation and carbon buildup than a Group III oil with 15% NOACK.

Regarding PPPP 5W-30 vs. 10W-30, who knows what kind of base stocks go into one or the other. They may have chosen to use more expensive GTL base stocks in 5W-30 than in 10W-30. We know Mobil 1 uses more PAO in their thinner oils for example.

 

[Silk]

The dust would only concern those with K&N filters surely ? We recommend similar oil grades in New Zealand, and it's a different climate. If there is any difference, we would use smaller cars, and use them harder, as in pull the same load with a smaller vehicle. The most notorious sludging engine here is one I don't hear doing it elsewhere - the Nissan SR18/20. I've never seen any engine sludge up like these did.

 

[SR5]

Yes base oil makes a difference, that is why I said compare like with like, it was my whole point.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: SR5
Yes base oil makes a difference, that is why I said compare like with like, it was my whole point.

Here is a fair comparison, like with like, all from the same company.


http://content.valvoline.com/pdf/valvoline_full_synthetic_with_maxlife_technology.pdf

For Valvoline Full Synthetic with MaxLife (2016)
noack % for ILSAC grades
0W20 = 11.4 %
5W20 = 9.3 %
5W30 = 10.2 %
10W30 = 6.3 %

The lighter bottom ends (0W, 5W) all have higher Noack for the same grade with a heavier bottom end (5W and 10W respectively).

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: SR5
For Valvoline Full Synthetic with MaxLife (2016)
noack % for ILSAC grades
0W20 = 11.4 %
5W20 = 9.3 %
5W30 = 10.2 %
10W30 = 6.3 %

The lighter bottom ends (0W, 5W) all have higher Noack for the same grade with a heavier bottom end (5W and 10W respectively).

Back to my real point, what does lower NOACK translate into? NOACK means oil volatility. Oil that evaporates will burn in the engine as oil vapors. It will not lead to carbon buildup, which is oil oxidation. Vaporizing and burning (oxidation) are too different physical phenomena.

If the oils listed above are made from similar base stocks, their oxidation will be similar as well, regardless of their NOACK. In other words you won't have less carbon buildup with 10W-30 than with 0W-20. It may be that your oil consumption may be slightly lower if it's sensitive to NOACK but it's usually not the case.

People think lower NOACK will cause less oxidation because lower-NOACK oils tend to be made from higher-quality base stocks. However, within the same base-stock family, NOACK will make no difference in oxidation or carbon buildup. So, Valvoline MaxLife Full Synthetic 0W-20 and 10W-30 should have similar carbon buildup.

The reason I calculated and listed the base-oil-quality index (BOQI) for 5W-xx oils is because NOACK alone doesn't determine the base-oil quality. The index can actually tell the difference between GTL and Group III even if they have the same NOACK, and GTL has much, much, much, much less oxidation and carbon buildup than Group III regardless of how high or low the NOACK is.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
People think lower NOACK will cause less oxidation because lower-NOACK oils tend to be made from higher-quality base stocks.


Which people ?

Anyone in this thread stated that ?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Example: Shell Rotella T6 5W-40 has 12.8% NOACK while Shell Pennzoil Platinum PurePlus 5W-30 has 9.1% NOACK.

There is a Shell A3/B4 5w-40 option, for those who want it bad enough, and it will have a Noack representative of the OEM specs it meets.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
BOQI is a much better predictor of carbon buildup (oil oxidation) than NOACK.

What is your evidence of that? That's a very bold prediction, and I would expect some bold evidence.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
BOQI is a much better predictor of carbon buildup (oil oxidation) than NOACK.

What is your evidence of that? That's a very bold prediction, and I would expect some bold evidence.


OK, so the BOQI is based on the ratio of two viscosities divided by the dimensionless NOACK number. the arbitrary number HAS to be a viscosity unit, otherwise it's not a dimensionless number at the end...

And as we've learned in this thread, NOACK has nothing to do with oxidation and deposits.

So how can a number, that's the ratio of two viscosity figures, and INCLUDES NOACK be a predictor of oxidation/carbon build up ?

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
And as we've learned in this thread, NOACK has nothing to do with oxidation and deposits.

So how can a number, that's the ratio of two viscosity figures, and INCLUDES NOACK be a predictor of oxidation/carbon build up ?

I said NOACK alone doesn't determine the base-oil quality. For a fixed base-oil family (say a particular GTL family), NOACK will not affect the oxidation much.

For the explanation on how BOQI predicts the base-oil quality, I've already done that (link).

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
For the explanation on how BOQI predicts the base-oil quality, I've already done that (link).


That thread explains how you came up with a number, that YOU use to rank...doesn't explain "quality" nor why it's the best predictor of deposits...

 

[Garak]

I read that, but there's no data there for the relationship. Generally speaking, you need some data points to come up with a relationship. There's been nothing defined objectively as a "quality base stock."

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
For the explanation on how BOQI predicts the base-oil quality, I've already done that (link).

That thread explains how you came up with a number, that YOU use to rank...doesn't explain "quality" nor why it's the best predictor of deposits...

It predicts the API Group number (I, II, II+, III, III+, III++, IV ~ GTL, etc.), as the API Group number is inversely proportional to the BOQI according to the plots in that Chevron presentation.

Note that NOACK is not really dimensionless but has the units of inverse time, as it represents the evaporation rate (like percent mass loss per unit time). However, when it's expressed, the time period in which it's measured is omitted (or set to "1") for simplicity. So, the BOQI has actually the units of inverse pressure. It's therefore an intrinsic physical property of the base oil.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: SR5

But the Japanese oil consumption issue seems to be much lower in Australia, I don't know anybody who has the oil consumption issues I have read about here, and many in Oz drive Japanese cars. But I am prepared to acknowledge internet magnification of the issue ...


Stuff like this, which just appeared today

Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
I use about 1 qrt every 3k or less, give or take some so looking for something to reduce consumption.

_________________________
2001 Honda civic HX vtecE- 5 spd,210k+


That same car would be running a 10W40 semi-synthetic or 15W40 mineral in Oz, and probably without the consumption issue.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
It predicts the API Group number (I, II, II+, III, III+, III++, IV ~ GTL, etc.), as the API Group number is inversely proportional to the BOQI according to the plots in that Chevron presentation.

So you say, but we haven't got a lot of evidence of that.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Note that NOACK is not really dimensionless but has the units of inverse time, as it represents the evaporation rate (like percent mass loss per unit time). However, when it's expressed, the time period in which it's measured is omitted (or set to "1") for simplicity. So, the BOQI has actually the units of inverse pressure. It's therefore an intrinsic physical property of the base oil.

No, I would suggest that Noack remains dimensionless because the time is held constant in the test. It's not part of the measurement, per se, and it's definitely not part of the calculation. Time is part of the procedure only.

Take a look at the SAE paper. You should be able to find it readily, since some idiot posted it openly on the web.

 

[ndfergy]

For comparison I went on to Shell.au's oil finder for my Yaris with the 1nz-fe engine. Below is the results I got:

1999-2005

2006-2017

2012-2017


Apart from a change to DBW there has been no other mechanical changes to this engine. Goes to show engines are more flexible in acceptance of different viscosity oils than manufacturers lead you to believe. Having said that I find it very telling that ACEA-2016 no longer approves oils less than 2.9 mpas