My point was that it is good that we are saving fuel (overall) and at the same time getting good engine protection.
Any Reason For 5w-20 besides CAFE?
- Thread starter Jelly
- Start date
- Status
My post says nothing about the actual commodity price of oil on the world market at any given time. But obviously consumers pay a very different price for the final product(s) depending on where they live.
I'm just stating that I'd rather have the situation in the USA with CAFE, than in places like Europe and Japan, that discourage the use of petrolem with $4-$5/gallon prices.
I'm going to agree with Patman too with an additional thought some might consider. The reliability of euro cars is documented to be poor compared to Japanese and many US cars used here in the same environment. What lessons should we learn from them again?quote:
Originally posted by sbc350gearhead:
I agree with patman. The phenomenal used oil analysis posted here on 5w20's, just goes to prove that ford and honda aren't smoking crack.The same oil that works best for stop and go city driving, and 55-65 on the highways and freeways.........might not be the best oil for an hour long cruise at 140mph at 5000rpm on the autobahn.
April 2004 issue of Consumer Reports. 10 "Best Models" categories:
Small Sedan = Ford Focus (trim line = ZTS
)
Family Sedan = VW Passat/Honda Accord
Upscale Sedan = Acura TL
Fun to Drive = Ford SVT Focus
Three-Row SUV = Honda Pilot
Hhmmm.....I wonder how Ford and Honda can comprise 50% of the winners when their engines are breaking down because of their "thin oils"?
Also, as of a 2003 subscriber survey, U.S. automakers were experiencing lower problem rates than European automakers, while Asian automakers experienced lower rates than U.S. automakers. Here, I'll make it simple for some of you:
Rates of Reported Problems:
1) Asian automakers (at least one recommending 5w-20 motor oil)
2) U.S. automakers (at least one recommending 5w-20 motor oil)
3) European automakers (at least one....oh, wait a minute.)
Hhmmm.....That suprises me considering all those Europeans who know so much about cars.
In addition, EVERY Ford and Honda vehicle tested/surveyed/listed by CR has shown a steady reliability increase in the "Engine" category of their reliability ratings, with every single model from both Manufacturers now achieving a ranking of "Few" trouble spots for engine reliability (except for the Ford Excursion). Funny, I would think engines that can't last and are breaking down because of -20 weight oils would have more problems being reported. But that's just me.
Now, am I saying that this is ALL contributed to Ford and Honda recommending 5w-20 oil? Absolutely not. But I am saying that if the use of thinner motor oil was a stupid, baseless move based solely on the gov't, WITH NO ENGINEERING TESTING/INPUT BEHIND IT, I doubt these results would be the same.
[ March 16, 2004, 06:06 PM: Message edited by: ZiTS ]
Small Sedan = Ford Focus (trim line = ZTS
Family Sedan = VW Passat/Honda Accord
Upscale Sedan = Acura TL
Fun to Drive = Ford SVT Focus
Three-Row SUV = Honda Pilot
Hhmmm.....I wonder how Ford and Honda can comprise 50% of the winners when their engines are breaking down because of their "thin oils"?
Also, as of a 2003 subscriber survey, U.S. automakers were experiencing lower problem rates than European automakers, while Asian automakers experienced lower rates than U.S. automakers. Here, I'll make it simple for some of you:
Rates of Reported Problems:
1) Asian automakers (at least one recommending 5w-20 motor oil)
2) U.S. automakers (at least one recommending 5w-20 motor oil)
3) European automakers (at least one....oh, wait a minute.)
Hhmmm.....That suprises me considering all those Europeans who know so much about cars.
In addition, EVERY Ford and Honda vehicle tested/surveyed/listed by CR has shown a steady reliability increase in the "Engine" category of their reliability ratings, with every single model from both Manufacturers now achieving a ranking of "Few" trouble spots for engine reliability (except for the Ford Excursion). Funny, I would think engines that can't last and are breaking down because of -20 weight oils would have more problems being reported. But that's just me.
Now, am I saying that this is ALL contributed to Ford and Honda recommending 5w-20 oil? Absolutely not. But I am saying that if the use of thinner motor oil was a stupid, baseless move based solely on the gov't, WITH NO ENGINEERING TESTING/INPUT BEHIND IT, I doubt these results would be the same.
[ March 16, 2004, 06:06 PM: Message edited by: ZiTS ]
Ray:
"Therefore, prior to using GF-3 oils in test vehicles, manufacturers should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that these oils will be used in the field. This letter lays out a process which manufactureres can use to assure EPA that GF-3 oils WILL be used in the field"
"Limits on the sum of 16 hour plus 96 hour fuel economy improvement factors ... The limits were calculated as the SUM of the 16-hour and 96-hour limits PLUS 0.5 percent. The 0.5 percent was represented by the Alliance as covering about two standard deviations of the distribution of fuel economy "improvement" rates measured by the ASTM procedures."
"Additional Requirements specific to the use of 5W-20 GF-3 oils ... Provide EPA with copies of materials that the manufacturer sent to its dealers pertaining to the use of 5W-20 GF-3 engine oil in customer vehicles"
"Follow up survey of 5W-20 usage ... acquire and provide to EPA data on the retail prices of 5W-20 and the highest SELLING oils identified in a. above. Prices of non-synthetic, partial synthetic and synthetic oils are to be INCLUDED."
Like I said, the Sequence VIB test is SO full of s*** that an oil that does NOTHING will still "earn" Starburst approval as it has the minimum theoretical 0.5% "gain."
I had to take all four years of college calculus and college Stats, so I'm well aware of what sort of numbers game you can play with raw data to get the results you "need" to convince somebody of your argument. Good luck trying to see the EPA data on Chi Square, ANOVA, F & T tests, DFFITS, etc pertaining to the raw data.
Again, this is all marketing bulls*** otherwise the EPA would NOT need to know retail prices of ALL oils. Especially the "highest selling" oils. What does THAT have to do with fuel economy?
Since the EPA can dictate what is done, all the car maker has to do to get off the hook is say "it's for CAFE and we'll void your warranty if you run any other oil."
Yet in most other countries if you ran a 5W-20 that would ALSO void your warranty.
Want to save gas? Trade the giant SUV for a tiny car. Use efficient all-season tires properly inflated. Keep the suspension in perfect alignment. Make sure the plugs and filters are clean.
On my 2000 GMC Sierra, I gained almost 2 MPG just by going from the factory "off road" Firestone POS tires to Michelin LTX M/S all-season tires. In winter when I slap on the Bridgestone Winter Dulers, I lose 3 MPG.
Anytime the gov gets involved to "protect" us you really have to question their true motives and especially the end results.
Look at how quietly the EPA is getting MTBE out of gasoline.
Oooops, guess we should have told the guilable public that MTBE would get into their drinking water. Nah, why bother ...
Jerry
"Therefore, prior to using GF-3 oils in test vehicles, manufacturers should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that these oils will be used in the field. This letter lays out a process which manufactureres can use to assure EPA that GF-3 oils WILL be used in the field"
"Limits on the sum of 16 hour plus 96 hour fuel economy improvement factors ... The limits were calculated as the SUM of the 16-hour and 96-hour limits PLUS 0.5 percent. The 0.5 percent was represented by the Alliance as covering about two standard deviations of the distribution of fuel economy "improvement" rates measured by the ASTM procedures."
"Additional Requirements specific to the use of 5W-20 GF-3 oils ... Provide EPA with copies of materials that the manufacturer sent to its dealers pertaining to the use of 5W-20 GF-3 engine oil in customer vehicles"
"Follow up survey of 5W-20 usage ... acquire and provide to EPA data on the retail prices of 5W-20 and the highest SELLING oils identified in a. above. Prices of non-synthetic, partial synthetic and synthetic oils are to be INCLUDED."
Like I said, the Sequence VIB test is SO full of s*** that an oil that does NOTHING will still "earn" Starburst approval as it has the minimum theoretical 0.5% "gain."
I had to take all four years of college calculus and college Stats, so I'm well aware of what sort of numbers game you can play with raw data to get the results you "need" to convince somebody of your argument. Good luck trying to see the EPA data on Chi Square, ANOVA, F & T tests, DFFITS, etc pertaining to the raw data.
Again, this is all marketing bulls*** otherwise the EPA would NOT need to know retail prices of ALL oils. Especially the "highest selling" oils. What does THAT have to do with fuel economy?
Since the EPA can dictate what is done, all the car maker has to do to get off the hook is say "it's for CAFE and we'll void your warranty if you run any other oil."
Yet in most other countries if you ran a 5W-20 that would ALSO void your warranty.
Want to save gas? Trade the giant SUV for a tiny car. Use efficient all-season tires properly inflated. Keep the suspension in perfect alignment. Make sure the plugs and filters are clean.
On my 2000 GMC Sierra, I gained almost 2 MPG just by going from the factory "off road" Firestone POS tires to Michelin LTX M/S all-season tires. In winter when I slap on the Bridgestone Winter Dulers, I lose 3 MPG.
Anytime the gov gets involved to "protect" us you really have to question their true motives and especially the end results.
Look at how quietly the EPA is getting MTBE out of gasoline.
Oooops, guess we should have told the guilable public that MTBE would get into their drinking water. Nah, why bother ...
Jerry
Hi Jerry,
of course you are correct
Us fellows down under just hope that the USA's EPA don't do a fictious "free trade deal" with our EPA here! We have some overpaid and underworked GOVT Officials down here - and many such Politicians too!
Many live in our La La land called Canberra!
The real world goes on around them!
What an issue - its almost as bad as the infamous "FMVSS 121" concerning anti-lock truck brakes that hit the USA about 1974-5!
Regards
[ March 16, 2004, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Doug Hillary ]
of course you are correct
Us fellows down under just hope that the USA's EPA don't do a fictious "free trade deal" with our EPA here! We have some overpaid and underworked GOVT Officials down here - and many such Politicians too!
Many live in our La La land called Canberra!
The real world goes on around them!
What an issue - its almost as bad as the infamous "FMVSS 121" concerning anti-lock truck brakes that hit the USA about 1974-5!
Regards
[ March 16, 2004, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Doug Hillary ]
I'm doing my part. I'm running Red Line 10w40 in a '03 Civic that calls for 5w20 and I've posted results.
Of course the data doesn't mean jack squat until I can run Red Line 10w30 and then Red Line 5w20.
I plan on doing 10k mile OCI's so it takes a few years to say "I told you so".
Now I challenge you. Run M1 SUV/minivan/Pinto/truck/ 5w40 in your GM.
Patman
Staff member
Everyone automatically assumes that just because Europe recommends the thicker oils in these cars, that they are the final word on this subject. Europeans make some great cars, that's for sure, but that doesn't mean we should take everything they say as gospel.
This subject is going to go round and round with no resolution ever. I stand by my beliefs that every engine is different, and has a different viscosity requirement, and used oil analysis is the best way to figure that out. So I challenge the thick oil users to start posting some UOA reports for us to view.
I'll even go on record here as saying that if GC 0w30 disappears from the store shelves up here and I cannot get it anymore, I'm going to do a couple of intervals with a 5w50 or 15w50 oil in my Firebird just to see how it does.
This subject is going to go round and round with no resolution ever. I stand by my beliefs that every engine is different, and has a different viscosity requirement, and used oil analysis is the best way to figure that out. So I challenge the thick oil users to start posting some UOA reports for us to view.
I'll even go on record here as saying that if GC 0w30 disappears from the store shelves up here and I cannot get it anymore, I'm going to do a couple of intervals with a 5w50 or 15w50 oil in my Firebird just to see how it does.
I agree with patman. The phenomenal used oil analysis posted here on 5w20's, just goes to prove that ford and honda aren't smoking crack.
The same oil that works best for stop and go city driving, and 55-65 on the highways and freeways.........might not be the best oil for an hour long cruise at 140mph at 5000rpm on the autobahn.
People seem convinced that because other countries are into thick oils then they must be better.
Is it remotely possible that we have discovered that thin oils are GOOD/BETTER in some applications, and it's going to take some time for these other markets to buy into it?
I'm no guru, just pointing out another possibility. The used oil analysis seem to indicate that thin oils are not the end of the world. Actually, no motor oil issue is the end of the world but you know what I mean
Is it remotely possible that we have discovered that thin oils are GOOD/BETTER in some applications, and it's going to take some time for these other markets to buy into it?
I'm no guru, just pointing out another possibility. The used oil analysis seem to indicate that thin oils are not the end of the world. Actually, no motor oil issue is the end of the world but you know what I mean
I agree this topic are going round and round without a lot of new info posted.
At least in the southwest US, the slightly heavier grades are the status quo and already have a proven record. At least from my point of view in a hot climate, the relative newcomer lighter grades have to climb the hill of proof.
The way the engine is used is more important than the engine itself in regards to oil IMO (passenger car gas engines). A few exceptions for engines of unusual purpose or design.
Well, This friday I will be sending off an UOA of Redline 5W40 used all winter long in temps as low as -18F! It is the first run with Redline or synthetic in this car so we will see. I currently have 15W40 conventional in it and we will see how this does as well.I am planning to run M1R 0W30 this winter. I already have a case of it for testing. Dad just put 15W50 in the Tacoma last sunday. We will see how this does as well. I lost the two previous samples when I moved into ny house. I did apoligise for that and will make it up to the group!
To date I have been labled as part of the "THick Oil Crowd"? Well if that is the case why am I running 5W40 and next winter 0W30? Seems to me that these are not that thick! The fact that I am open minded enough to run 15W40 in the warm months and 5W40 and 0W30 dureing colder months just makes sense. I prefer the title "Ambient Temp. Oil Selection Crowd" !!
P.S. I am just glad that I only recomend what I will actualy use in my vechiles! If I will not put it in my car then I will not recomend it in your car!!
P.P.S. If 5W40 qualifys as a thick oil then Doug Hillary has posted a lot of UOA to prove his point! He has posted UOA of Subarus, BMW's, Porsche's and Tractor Trailer diesel engine UOA all running Dlevac 1!!
To date I have been labled as part of the "THick Oil Crowd"? Well if that is the case why am I running 5W40 and next winter 0W30? Seems to me that these are not that thick! The fact that I am open minded enough to run 15W40 in the warm months and 5W40 and 0W30 dureing colder months just makes sense. I prefer the title "Ambient Temp. Oil Selection Crowd" !!
P.S. I am just glad that I only recomend what I will actualy use in my vechiles! If I will not put it in my car then I will not recomend it in your car!!
P.P.S. If 5W40 qualifys as a thick oil then Doug Hillary has posted a lot of UOA to prove his point! He has posted UOA of Subarus, BMW's, Porsche's and Tractor Trailer diesel engine UOA all running Dlevac 1!!
Patman
Staff member
I'm very happy with GC so I won't be switching, but as mentioned above, if it goes away, my first test will be with a 50wt oil, most likely 5w50 Syntec. If I'm gonna try something thicker, I might as well go all the way and try one of the thickest ones out there. Honestly though, after seeing how well GC did, with it's low 40wt final viscosity, I can't see how it could be improved upon. A lot of wear occurs during the first five minutes of operation, and having the better flow of the 0w oil definitely helps here.
heyjay
The executive summary of the document you quote might be something like: "If you (automaker) use a thin oil to get less fuel consumption on the EPA test, you (automaker) must ensure that buyers of your cars actually use the same oil."
One thing you CAN infer from the document is that the standard deviation of test oils in that VIB sequence is .25% In order to get the energy conserving rating, I think the minimum improvement is 1.5%. That means that to be in the ball park your oil would have to show about 1.25% improvement to be within a standard deviation of 1.5%
Well it may be that the test is a little goofy, but once again you have quoted from a document that doesn't support this conclusion.
The executive summary of the document you quote might be something like: "If you (automaker) use a thin oil to get less fuel consumption on the EPA test, you (automaker) must ensure that buyers of your cars actually use the same oil."
One thing you CAN infer from the document is that the standard deviation of test oils in that VIB sequence is .25% In order to get the energy conserving rating, I think the minimum improvement is 1.5%. That means that to be in the ball park your oil would have to show about 1.25% improvement to be within a standard deviation of 1.5%
I've never had a problem meeting the EPA highway mileage on the stickers of my cars, including: '81 Honda, '84 S-10 Blazer, '87 Olds, '88 S10, '89 Safari, '93 Sierra, '96 Cherokee, '01 Venture, '02 Ranger.
If you drive smoothly and at the speed limit, you can do it easily. Most people drive fast and aggressive. They're the ones who complain about poor fuel mileage and wear out their brake linings and tires every 25K miles.
In the case of my '02 Ranger (where 5W20 is recommended), I can still beat the sticker with 5W30 M1, but get about 1 more MPG with 5W20.
If you drive smoothly and at the speed limit, you can do it easily. Most people drive fast and aggressive. They're the ones who complain about poor fuel mileage and wear out their brake linings and tires every 25K miles.
In the case of my '02 Ranger (where 5W20 is recommended), I can still beat the sticker with 5W30 M1, but get about 1 more MPG with 5W20.
Thin, Thick, A3, A1, CAFE, NO CAFE, Dino, Synthetic, 3K drains, 10K drains....it really doesn't matter all that much. You want long engine life? Buy a good car. This thread really reminds how ridiculous I get over this shiite at times. Thread of Truth
Hi Buster,
good one - keep a smilin'
I run Shell Helix Ultra synthetic 15w-50 in my Huskqvarna B&S ( not BS )powered ride-on mower - its been there for about four years and 100hrs.
Clean looking like new and none used!
The problem? - it doesn't go like a Ferrari
Regards
good one - keep a smilin'
I run Shell Helix Ultra synthetic 15w-50 in my Huskqvarna B&S ( not BS )powered ride-on mower - its been there for about four years and 100hrs.
Clean looking like new and none used!
The problem? - it doesn't go like a Ferrari
Regards
Hello Doug:quote:
Originally posted by Doug Hillary:
Hi Jerry,
of course you are correct
Us fellows down under just hope that the USA's EPA don't do a fictious "free trade deal" with our EPA here! We have some overpaid and underworked GOVT Officials down here - and many such Politicians too!
Many live in our La La land called Canberra!
The real world goes on around them!
What an issue - its almost as bad as the infamous "FMVSS 121" concerning anti-lock truck brakes that hit the USA about 1974-5!
Regards
Ah, you have had experience with FMVSS 121? My Uncle, who retired in 1984 after a long career as a HD mechanic, had quite a few humorous tales about THAT blunder!
I bet hundreds of thousands of otherwise perfectly good tires were sent to the landfill after the insane anti-lock brake module locked up the trailer brakes at 60 MPH and flat-spotted the new tires.
Of course, the insane and gibbering anti-lock brake module caused a few accidents too as the driver lost control of that trailer behind him.
Like any vast underworked and overpaid gov agency, they're quite good at covering up their mistakes. Of course, since taxpayer money is FREE, there is PLENTY MORE where that came from.
Ray: I suggest you reference the appropriate API/SAE GF-3, especially Sequence VIB, to verify the true performance requirements for 96 hour thickening, volitility, sludge, ring sticking, etc.
If thin oils truly save fuel, then why not run SAE 10W in summer? I have old shop manuals that list SAE 10W and 5W-20: "Not for high temperatures, sustained high-speed driving, or heavy loads ..."
The EPA eventually had to intrude and "limit" the magic fuel economy "gain" as even they realized there is a limit to the John Q. Public's "gullibility quotient factor."
Anytime you take separate tests, SUM the results, then tack on a "bugger factor" of something like 0.5%, you are "cooking the books." If I had tried that in College Stats or College Calculus I would have been tossed out.
AKA "Enron Accounting"
Just like how the EPA at one time had fuel economy tests so wildly inflated that NOBODY could ever achieve them, so folks simply ignored the EPA rated MPG figures. The EPA had to "deflate" the numbers to reflect "real world" useage, this was to restore some of their "credibilty."
So it's not the first time the EPA made an "oops" and expected all of us to believe in them. And to pay for their mistake of course.
As many local governments are now strapped for cash, they are eyeing extra fuel taxes as a quick and easy way to fill their coffers. So that means we will be soon be paying FAR more per gallon or litre of Regular Unleaded.
I'm all for Free Choice, such as it exists here. If somebody wants to purchase a giant SUV that gets 10 MPG, more power to them! Though don't p*** and moan to me about how much it costs to run.
Jerry
buster I'm one of the few here who can honestly say they have run 5W30 to 25W70 and everything in between over three decades. The only difference I could tell was that the engine gets quiter the thicker you go and turbo response slows the thicker you go. No more no less. I don't think the engine really cares as long as it has enough oil, it's reasonably clean, and filter isn't totally blocked. Maybe I'm being to simplistic?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked