Any Reason For 5w-20 besides CAFE?

[Road Rage]

Well, it is too early to tell, but as others have pointed out, I am unaware of any Euro mfr who has endorsed this oil for high performance use. Let's see what happens in 5 years as cars that came with the low-vis oils start to run up some miles. Personally, I did not recommend nor use Ford's recommendation of 5w20 in my 2003 SVT Cobra. I used 30w, in either 0,5 or 10w winter ratings.

I do know that Ford went to it for the "green effect" of reducing emissions and increasing MPG. The oil will certainly get them through the warranty period. But I also found this:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/dearmfr/ccd0112.pdf

This pressures Ford to not recommend a synoil in 5w20. Why? They say why - to keep the price low, which they hope will motivate people to use it. Unfortunately, when one calls SVT, they say stuff like "the engine was not designed for synoil", giving the uninformed caller the impression that it is somehow "bad" to use synoils. The EPA letter shows why SVT makes the recommendation. The irony as I see it is that with a 5w30 synoil, one could go to 3x the change interval, reducing the effects of waste oil dumping, emissions, and scoring equal or better fuel economy, while still providing a higher level of protection in extreme conditions or loads. This is unfortunate.

Personally, I would not want to be the guinea pig if it turns out that low vis oils do not perform as well as their "thicker" colleagues over the log haul.

 

[cryptokid]

i think 5w20 is a fine oil IF and ONLY IF you have the oil pressure to back it up.
if youre cruising around at 3000rpm using a 5w20 and have 40 or more psi at that rpm on a fully warmed up engine, then 5w20 would be fine i believe. on my mazda at 2000rpm i have 30psi oil pressure using a 30weight oil. thats only 10psi of margin to the 10psi per 1000rpm rule. a 20 weight might not be so great in my mazda engine.

also, my low oil pressure light comes on in my porsche with anything thinner than a 40 weight oil. in this tired abused raced engine, a 20 weight would probably do alot of harm. it sees 10psi per 1000 rpm's with a 40weight.

i think maintaining the minimum (or better) required oil pressure is more important than the weight of the oil. so if you have excess oil pressure to spare, then a 20 weight is prefectly fine. some of you guys i have seen run upwards of 60psi at 2000rpm, heck i would run a 10 weight oil in one of these engines. that much oil pressure is basically useless imo.

 

[mikemc]

I am far from an engineer (except when I'm running my model trains

), but I am guessing that as long as an oil is stout enough to maintain a layer of lubrication between moving parts, it's not that important how heavy the oil is. Maybe because the 20 weights are made from such good base stocks and have a very minimal viscosity spread (as compared to 10w40) they are able to stay in there PLUS get to moving parts quicker at cold start.

 

[unDummy]

Sure, don't bother adjusting with new technology. How's that old AM tube radio holding up? Anyone here surfing the web on a 286?

1st, the number on the bottle is only for SAE J300. It is meaningless arguing viscosity without mentioning running oil temperatures.

All you have to do is lower the oil temp and ANY engine can run on a 20wt oil. There isn't even a need to play with engine clearances.
Some methods of doing this are increased oil capacity, increased oil cooling, pretty cast aluminum heatsink oil pan, cooler engines(AL blocks/heads....)......

According to this chart, a 20wt oil(this brand only) at 190F is the same viscosity as a 30wt at 220F and the same as a 40wt at 250F.
http://www.redlineoil.com/redlineoil/rovis.pdf

If the temperature is kept accordingly, a 20wt oil will provide the SAME protection as any other weight oil.

Also, improved cold start performance will reduce wear and improved flow at most temperatures will improve oil coolant properties. Sounds like a win-win situation.

I've seen improved engine cooling(airflow/waterflow), oil cooling, oil capacity and numerous other techs that allow these 20WT engines to keep the oil temp where it needs to be.
This can't be said for vehicles that require heavier weight oils(mainly to make up for ??$??) and foreign market vehicles that should NOT be compared to US spec vehicles.

And from the fuchs/silkolene/titan facts:
Lower oil's friction drag, higher shear and temperature stability, ......... the viscosity is lighter/thinner therefore better flow-rate and cooling rates due to higher oil circulation within the engine.

 

[Nosmo King]

I just got back from England. My family have three four cylinder cars and the names I can not spell so I will not try.

I was driven in two of the cars and the throttle seems to be in one of two position. Idle or full throttle. These guys are maniacs and while they seem to care about warming their cars up before WOT, they drive very fast and very well.
In all cases these cars required a minimum of *w-40 oil and one young tear away had 20w-50. He told me with pride that it was within the temp range and recommended for this car in winter.

One of these cars had 320,000 kilometers and was in excellent condition.

Since ridiculous speed limits have been introduced and we have allowed them to remain in place, the average North American driver puts absolutely no strain on his engine.

This trip I was also in Paris and was driven in a Mercedes taxi at 118 miles an hour ( not a typo...I know enough math to do the conversion ) into downtown at 11 pm one night. The driver was excellent and I throughly enjoyed the experience.
Europeans need thick oil to survive....i think.

[ March 11, 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: Nosmo King ]

 

[tpi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unDummy:


I've seen improved engine cooling(airflow/waterflow), oil cooling, oil capacity and numerous other techs that allow these 20WT engines to keep the oil temp where it needs to be.

---

Can you give specific examples re: Ford Modular of these improvements?

 

[darkdan]

With the exceptions of new heads in the past couple of years (PI, 3 valve) the mod motors haven't changed.

My 98 has an oil cooler, but that was before 5w20.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr. T:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman:
We've seen almost no evidence whatsoever which shows 5w20 oils are causing engines to wear out sooner.

---

But we are. BMW M3/M5 that originally were to use the 5-30 as "every other BMW" had the factory switch things to the same oil used in Europe...the 10-60.

---

Please explain how the switch from 5w30 in the M3 equates to us seeing evidence that "5w20 oils are causing engines to wear out sooner."

Burn off is not going to be an issue with 5w20 because of the Group II+ and Group III base oils used to make them. See my previous post above.

And I fully believe that under the right conditions, any 5w20 that meets Ford's specs could go 10,000 miles. However, your contention that 10,000 mile oil drains are the "norm" in Europe is simply wrong. On newer cars where synthetics are used, that may be the case. But for the vast majority of older vehicles using conventional oils, the OCIs in Europe are more like 5000 to 6000 miles.

 

[T-Keith]

A lot of good information here guys.

-T

 

[Schmoe]

OK, chew on this...... If 5W-20 is all that and a bag of chips....then why is it NOT recommended for Mercruiser/OMC/Volvo inboard engines? You know they don't give a rats @ss about mileage. I know I'll get hit with the engines work harder on water thing, but if the oil is so good, would it even matter? If it can't handle the high loads on a boat motor, your telling me you'd put that stuff in your car? I think not.

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr. T:
But we are. BMW M3/M5 that originally were to use the 5-30 as "every other BMW" had the factory switch things to the same oil used in Europe...the 10-60.

---

The switch from 5w30 to 10w60 was BMW's kneejerk reaction to what ended up being an engine design flaw, not an oil viscosity flaw that caused those blown engines.

Besides, even if it were true, this is just one engine design your citing here, and I'm not saying that all engines out there are best suited to run a 5w20, but the problem I have is that people on here are making blanket statements that 5w20 oils are going to cause shorter engine life in the engines that are now calling for them. And I for one simply believe that is not true at all. If your engine calls for 5w20, I feel it can safely be run in it and the engine can still live a long healthy life.

I also think that viscosity has nothing whatsoever to making an engine dirty or not. You can run a 5w20 or 5w30 oil and still have an internally clean engine. The base oil and the additives determine the internal cleanliness of the engine, NOT the viscosity of the oil. A 5w20 oil that is made with a good base oil, has a good add. pack, and does not contain VII in it and does not shear down is simply not going to dirty up your engine. Period.

 

[Kernel Potter]

It seems to me that 5w-20 oil was never meant to be a A3 spec oil for extended full throttle driving that can be done in Germany. Regardless, from reading BMW forums, they showed no correlation of e46 M3s having less tendency of putting connecting rods through the side of the block whether using 10w-60 instead of 5w30(not the oils' fault).

Besides the exellent used oil analysis of 5w-20, I don't see any reason why it should be expected to do 10,000 mile intervals, unless it's a full group 4 or 5 like mobil 1 or Redline. 5w-20 can be purchased for about $1.80/quart in most areas for the non group 4 and 5 varieties.

From my perspective, the difference from USA/Canda and Europe, is in Europe they try to deter you from using petroleum - period. In the USA/Canada they seem to say, use all you like just don't waste it needlessly on stone age 40 and 50 weights that 98% of vehicles don't even require. Of course we have the choice depending on special types of driving, weather, specific types of vehicles or other circumstances to change to different viscosities. I'd rather have CAFE collectively saving us millions of barrels of oil a year by recommeding the viscosity of oil best suited(protection and fuel savings) for 98% of vehicles, than pay four times the amount for gas and oil, as in other parts of the world. Or have oil change intervals of 2 years. Just think of the cerebral aneurysms some of the people on this board would have if North American auto manufacters had 2 year oil drain intervals like some manufactures do in Europe.

 

[hmeyer]

"I'd rather have CAFE collectively saving us millions of barrels of oil a year by recommeding the viscosity of oil best suited(protection and fuel savings) for 98% of vehicles, than pay four times the amount for gas and oil"

Good point, Kernel. As long as the new oils continue to protect, which they appear to be doing, then I'd say the result of CAFE is a good thing.

 

[heyjay]

Dr T brought up some good points, and perhaps Tenderloin will examine my points too.

First of all, even if you monitor the oil temp in the sump, the sump may be the coolest part of the motor. A few years back, Esso Canada did an elaborate and expensive test with a Cat 3406B 6 cylinder turbodiesel motor. This was a very popular HD motor for trucking.

They had instrumentation everywhere to measure actual oil temps, since this was when Top Grove Fill first became a huge problem. Regular UOA were all but useless to answer the HOW part of the question.

Don't ask me how, but they even had RTD's underneath the piston crown, against the Ring Land. They also had RTD's near the conrod bearings, the crank bearings, turbo bearings, etc etc.

They ran the Cat at 100% power and 100% load on a certified engine dyno for 6 hours, all while carefully monitoring the temps.

The Ring Land area will see +600 F, the Con Rod will see +350 F, and the oil sump will see 200 F thanks to the water-cooled oil cooler.

Granted this was an extreme test. But I'm sure you can see that under heavy loads and higher operating temps, an oil rated with a given SAE viscosity at 100 C will thin right out at a ring pack or at a conrod bearing.

Second, most oils will initially shear, some oils dramatically, then thicken with use. Remember that a "Starburst" SL oil may thicken +275% and still "pass" the test. Most ACEA A3, A5, and especially B4-02 oils have a max 50% rating. No makeup oil during the 200 hour test.

The older SG and SH oils could thicken +375% and still pass the API/SAE test with flying colors. The test technician is allowed to add 6.5 litres of makeup oil during the 96 hour test.

The Sequence VI-B for Fuel Economy has a "gotcha" in that it's for virgin oil. Age it 96 hours in a test and the "gain" is nothing.

I suppose this also helps perpetuate the 3 month / 3,000 mile OCI??

Third, the EPA CAFE has completely warped the entire "fuel economy" argument to where we have pickup trucks and giant SUV's getting 10 MPG as daily drivers.

So rather than encourage energy conservation, we have dramatically increased our fuel consumption. That makes sense, as we have given encouragement to giant SUV's.

The owner of such a vehicle is made to feel good about driving a gas guzzler as the EPA rates the much larger vehicle as a "green" vehicle, due to the tier emissions applied to GVWR ratings. And the owner is also made to feel good due to the theoretical 0.6% "gain" in fuel economy.

I'm all for freedom to purchase whatever car you want. If you want to buy something that gets 10 MPG, great. Just don't p*** and moan about what it costs to fill the tank. I've noticed that Chevy DOES sell the Tahoe in Europe. For those that can afford to keep the tank filled.

Fourth, a BITOG member posted awhile back a VERY good link to "Machinery Lubrication" a specialized maintenance journal sent to industrial plants and mills. The following link on EPA CAFE is VERY enlightening, especially the true facts behind the VI-B Fuel Economy reference oil:

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/article_detail.asp?articleid=518&relatedbookgroup=Maintenance

So the "reference oil" is already a synthetic? And the only reason why the VI-B oil can have the theoretical "gain" is due to shear ON PURPOSE?

Well, why not? As I explained above, the Sequence VIB is only for virgin oil, and after the 96 hour aging test, there IS not gain.

Since the very same "Starburst" oil is allowed to thicken +275%, I find it VERY contradictory that this can be considered a "fuel saving" oil.

Perhaps to "save" petroleum resources I should run a 5W-20 "Starburst" oil and change it once a week or every 500 miles? You know, to get the most out of that theoretical "gain."

ROTFLMAO

You sure can tell when the gov gets involved to give us a "solution!"

Jerry

 

[heyjay]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr. T:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman:
We've seen almost no evidence whatsoever which shows 5w20 oils are causing engines to wear out sooner.

---

But we are. BMW M3/M5 that originally were to use the 5-30 as "every other BMW" had the factory switch things to the same oil used in Europe...the 10-60.

I now have engine problems from using 5-30 for 10k mi. intervals after 150k of use.

What are the problems? Maybe we will find the used oil analysis hidden facts, but I think they are (assuming the engine doesn't blow up) is 1. increased burn-off and consuption leading to 2. carbon build-up and a dirty engine.

So, you have 2 solutions. 3k intevals or auto-rx. In other words, I still challenge anyone to do used oil analysis on 5-20's at 10k intervals for 100+k mi.'s (the standard OCI in Europe/Aus).

---

Well, here is my experiment performed on a truck I purchased new, a 2000 GMC Sierra with Vortec 5.3 litre V8, optional Towing Package, 4.10 gearing, IOW a "work" truck.

Dr T mentioned oil consumption as one issue and I think that is a VERY important issue. I've had some odd results with the oils I have used.

I've converted my oil consumption to U.S. quarts and miles, as most of the forum members appear to be residing in the U.S. :

Mobil 1 0w30 1 qt every 4,200 miles
Mobil 1 5w30 1 qt every 4,600 miles
Mobil 1 10w30 1 qt every 6,800 miles
Mobil 1 15W-50 0 qt over 7,000 miles

I suppose most folks would consider even 1 qt every 4,200 miles as very good oil control. However, I don't. My 1990 Toyota 4Runner with 3.0 litre V6 running Delvac 1 easily got 16,000 km with half a quart used.

The most obvious difference is that folks seem to think that all xW-30 oils are the same. They clearly are NOT all the same, even from the same brand. IOW I should NOT have noticed any difference running 0W-30, 5w30, or 10w30.

I use Mobil 1 0w30 in winter, since I've dipped to -42 a few times in Jan and early Feb. There was no heavy trailer towing in these conditions.

I tried the 15W-50 in summer of 2001 while towing +8,000 lbs trailer through the +110 F heat of southern Utah and Nevada. Motor was very smooth and quiet. I changed to the 15W-50 in April and kept it in until October.

In April of 2002, I tried Mobil 1 5w30 and was quite disappointed: noisy valvetrain and some oil use while towing. I did keep the oil in until that Oct when I changed to Mobil 1 0w30 again.

In April of 2003 I tried Mobil 1 10w30 and the valvetrain noise and oil consumption were both reduced. I still wasn't satisfied though.

Oh, and there was NO difference that I could detect, empty or loaded, running 0W-30, 5w30, 10w30, or 15W-50.

My local NAPA can get Mobil 1 Truck and SUV 5W-40 in time for my oil change in April, so I've decided to try it and see how it compares to the 15W-50.

Based on my previous experience running Delvac 1, I'm hopeful for good results.

Jerry

 

[Mark in NY]

I switched from Mobil 1 0w40 to Motorcraft 5-20.
Result? -
1) wear numbers similar or somewhat better,
2) using oil that costs 35% as much per qt
3) average MPG moved up approx 1.5 - 2.0 MPG on a low 20's car.
4) consumption zero either way.

Like they say, Whats not to like?

 

[buster]

Here is the thread Patman started that shows any oil can get you long life out of an engine.

Oil/Engine Life

 

[Jelly]

quote:

---

Originally posted by buster:
Here is the thread Patman started that shows any oil can get you long life out of an engine.

Oil/Engine Life

---

In terms of gas engines, is "long life" 250K or 450K??

 

[tpi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mark in NY:
I switched from Mobil 1 0w40 to Motorcraft 5-20.
Result? -
3) average MPG moved up approx 1.5 - 2.0 MPG on a low 20's car.

---

Mobil 1 0w40 wasted approx. 10% of the total fuel consumed by the vehicle?

 

[tenderloin]

My son used GC for a couple of oil cycles in his Ford Focus ZTS with the 2.0L DOHC Zetec.

Compared to the 20W oils he had been using, the mpg indeed went down between 1.5 to over 2 MPG (I have reported this before)

Once a 20W went back in (Torco) the MPG went back to "nornal". Butt dyno felt better and the engine revved easier.