Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
At least you're in a platform that's high enough in yield to actually tabulate the difference. You're getting about 94.5% of your former mileage. That would fall into the variance in a 20mpg car.
Where I think your results would be more confounded was in shorter trip stuff. The electric assist and auto-shutdown would tend to confound the calculations. On the longer trip/commuting usage, you tend to even out the process variables.
What I'm saying is that you may not suffer as much as a regular engine due to parasitic losses.
Gary:
I had been thinking the same thing. There's a nice stretch on my 17.5 mile (one way) commute where I can get pure "stealth" mode (electric only) for almost two straight miles. I suppose that when I'm doing stealth, I could have bunker oil in the crankcase, and it really wouldn't matter. And when the power is mixed gas and electric, there'd still be an attenuation of the "penalty" imposed by the thicker oil.
============================================================
Originally Posted By: addyguy
I'm suprised that Toyota put in such a vague statement regarding oil viscosity choice.
Theoretically, you could put in something like 20W-50, and say you thought it was 'better suited' if you ever had an engine problem......
Yeah, being an attorney myself, that statement really surprised me. It's sufficiently vague that I think any TCH owner could use any reasonably close oil grade, and win a legal fight, might one actually be necessary, over the failure of a warranty-covered engine. That said, I doubt I'd try a SAE 60 racing oil in the winter (especially if I lived in Montana. . .).
=======================================================
Originally Posted By: Jaymus
Sounds like 'high speeds' would be 65mph+, being that this IS America. And "extreme load conditions" could mean nearing the max GVWR (I'm sure that's probably only 600 pounds of people/cargo) OR just flooring it all the time. Thicker = better protection. Thinner = gas mileage.
I really don't think you can generalize that easily about oil grades and their relative protection. When I first came here five years ago, the 20 wt oil debate was raging. Well, I still don't see any pattern in the UOAs of the 20s not doing the job (in engines meant to use them), nor are we seeing massive numbers of failures of Fords or Hondas. They've been using the thin stuff for nearly a decade now -- and still no signs of early death in xw-20 cars as a whole.
======================================================
Originally Posted By: Silber Igel
Hi EK!!! Old Crows here....
Now this is very interesting. I'm running M1 5W-20 AFE in my HyCAM right now at 6300 +/- miles. (Ok, I'm fessing up all you BITOGERS ... comin' clean as it were ... I just couldn't stomach having the dealer's 5W-20 "almost synthetic' Conoco/Phillips/Motorcraft stuff {although its reported to be a very good oil on BITOG.}
Some how running a FORD recommended product in my Toyo was keeping me awake at night!!!
FWIW... I checked the oil temp after a 30 mile run to "Fritzville" yesterday. Ambient was 93-95 on outdoor tempy gauge. I wasn't sparing any AMPS getting to and staying at 65 -70 mph when getting back home. No pulse and glide work going on here. The oil temp was ~ 152F ... immediately after shut down. I take a 'good enough for gummint work' measurement of the oil on the tip of the dip stick using my IR thermometer.
Opinion...
I don't think these engines are going to get the oil hot enough most of the time to get your oil up to its rated hot viscosity. So a 'thicker oil' is not useful. Consequently, I'd think it would be better to use the 0W or 5W-20s as they are going to be in that intermediate viscosity between the cold and hot ratings almost all the time. IE... less pumping losses and better circulation.
After 30 years of running some type of synthetic oil in my wheels, I'm seriously considering going with a conventional SM rated 5W-20 oil on the next OC.
Just a thought!
Cheers Mate!
Eagle:
Nice to hear from another Crow
Mine's got just over 26k miles on it now. I have a Scangauge-II installed, but alas, it offers no data concerning oil temps (obviously, as there's no sensor, and thus, no data available from the port). That said, I've actually been pondering installing a stand-alone, off-bus oil temp sensor. Your reading is interesting, and would certainly suggest a return to the 20 wt oils.
BTW, if you're into such things, you might consider the SG-II. It makes available a huge amount of normally-hidden data from the diagnostic port (including codes, should your car ever generate one). I keep rpm, fuel flow (or mpg notwithstanding the panel gauge), water temp, on display at all times. I now see why there's no tach in this car -- rpms don't make any sense unless you really understand how the car does its business. Once you do, you can use the rpms together with the mpg display to maximize fuel economy (for example, I've found that accelerating at 2500 rpms +/- 200 or so produces the best results). It's a useful and fun device. Here's where I keep mine:
EK, You're probably right about the RPM read out. I don't think that will tell you much. However, that G/Hr readout could be handy... a more direct measurement of fuel use.