Chrysler changes the oil spec for 2013

[Trav]

Quote:
Fords have a "Fail Safe Cooling System" that sets off chimes, CEL, computer message, and temp guage pegs to red zone when engine enters a preset temperature before an overheat develops. Then as the engine temperature continues to rise, the engine goes into limp mode with alternate cylinder air pumping to keep engine below another preset tempersture. And if engine temperature reaches another preset temperature, then computer shuts engine down and will permit restart when temperature goes below a preset. Even at the shut down temperature, there is still a margin of safety to prevent engine damage. There are also redundant control systems

You need to research a little more. That system was used by GM on the N* many years ago long before Ford thought about using it.
Oh wait, we all know how well that worked out once they got a little heated.
So much for engineering.
Quote:
One notable feature, advertised at the time, was the "limp home" fail-safe mode which allowed the engine to continue running for a limited time without any coolant. Supplying fuel to only one cylinder bank in turn, the engine would "air cool" the inactive bank. This technique, combined with its all-aluminum construction and large oil capacity, allows the engine to maintain safe temperatures, allowing a Northstar-equipped car to be driven with no coolant for about 100 mi (161 km) without damage.


That was introduced in 1991 which maybe a little before your time.

 

[modularv8]

Trav,
Good to know.


Friendly_Jacek,

Thanks for posting these charts. They come from SAE paper 932782, "Influence of Engine Oil Viscosity on Piston Ring and Cam Face Wear" (1993). The study was done by Toyota and Lubrizol of Japan. The measured wear was done with a radioisotope technique, highly accurate since the metal worn from surfaces are tagged at the atomic level. This and many other studies support the same conclusion that can be drawn from the posted charts.

 

[buster]

Quote:
Friendly_Jacek,

Thanks for posting these charts. They come from SAE paper 932782, "Influence of Engine Oil Viscosity on Piston Ring and Cam Face Wear" (1993). The study was done by Toyota and Lubrizol of Japan. The measured wear was done with a radioisotope technique, highly accurate since the metal worn from surfaces are tagged at the atomic level. This and many other studies support the same conclusion that can be drawn from the posted charts.


I remember this....good find.

 

[modularv8]

What is interesting, is that the oils used in this test are formulated without FMs. Generally, formulations without a FM give much higher wear rates for piston rings.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: modularv8
What is interesting, is that the oils used in this test are formulated without FMs. Generally, formulations without a FM give much higher wear rates for piston rings.


I always thought FM impacts only friction under boundary lubrication but not wear.

Do you sources for that info?

 

[Norm Olt]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
They probably don't feel the need to backspec to earlier engines because it wouldn't improve their CAFE figures. As I understand it, CAFE only applies to the then-current model year, so having a customer use 5W-20 in a two year old van won't benefit Chrysler any.

It will be interesting, though, to see if the EPA ratings improve with the move to 5W-20. The rule is that if the engines are run on a certain grade of oil during the fuel economy testing, then the manufacturer has to do everything in its power to ensure that customers are using that same grade of oil in the field. So they can't run the engine on 10 grade oil to get a good fuel economy number and then recommend a 30 grade oil in the owner's manual.


The 1st sentence says it all: why "backspec" for CAFE reasons?

The horse has left the barn!

"Elvis has left the building!"

Cheers!

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
They probably don't feel the need to backspec to earlier engines because it wouldn't improve their CAFE figures. As I understand it, CAFE only applies to the then-current model year, so having a customer use 5W-20 in a two year old van won't benefit Chrysler any.

It will be interesting, though, to see if the EPA ratings improve with the move to 5W-20. The rule is that if the engines are run on a certain grade of oil during the fuel economy testing, then the manufacturer has to do everything in its power to ensure that customers are using that same grade of oil in the field. So they can't run the engine on 10 grade oil to get a good fuel economy number and then recommend a 30 grade oil in the owner's manual.


The 1st sentence says it all: why "backspec" for CAFE reasons?

The horse has left the barn!

"Elvis has left the building!"

Cheers!


I'm not sure what you meant by your post, but you appear to be taking my first sentence out of context. The second paragraph goes on to explain that the manufacturer is compelled to ensure that the end user is using the same grade of oil in their vehicle that was used for fuel economy validation. They derive their CAFE figure from the required EPA fuel economy testing. Therefore, backspec'ing does not affect the auto maker who only cares about current-year CAFE.

If you are concluding that I wrote that CAFE is the only reason they would use a 20 grade compared with a 30 grade, that would be an incorrect conclusion.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
They probably don't feel the need to backspec to earlier engines because it wouldn't improve their CAFE figures. As I understand it, CAFE only applies to the then-current model year, so having a customer use 5W-20 in a two year old van won't benefit Chrysler any.

It will be interesting, though, to see if the EPA ratings improve with the move to 5W-20. The rule is that if the engines are run on a certain grade of oil during the fuel economy testing, then the manufacturer has to do everything in its power to ensure that customers are using that same grade of oil in the field. So they can't run the engine on 10 grade oil to get a good fuel economy number and then recommend a 30 grade oil in the owner's manual.


The 1st sentence says it all: why "backspec" for CAFE reasons?

The horse has left the barn!

"Elvis has left the building!"

Cheers!


I'm not sure what you meant by your post, but you appear to be taking my first sentence out of context. The second paragraph goes on to explain that the manufacturer is compelled to ensure that the end user is using the same grade of oil in their vehicle that was used for fuel economy validation. They derive their CAFE figure from the required EPA fuel economy testing. Therefore, backspec'ing does not affect the auto maker who only cares about current-year CAFE.

If you are concluding that I wrote that CAFE is the only reason they would use a 20 grade compared with a 30 grade, that would be an incorrect conclusion.


I agree with what you've said, but why did it take Chrysler a few years to change from 5W30 to 5W20 in the 3.6 Pentastar engine? If they were after better mpg, and keeping CAFE happy why not go for 5W20 as soon as the first engine rolled off the line? I have a feeling they went with 5W30, which they were more confident with in a newly designed engine, and were a bit afraid of trying 5W20. By doing so they could continue to test 5W20 in the application. Too bad they didn't test the design a little better and found the head problem before the consumers did.

It probably took a couple of years of their own testing to give the Pentastar the OK for 5W20. I better

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I agree with what you've said, but why did it take Chrysler a few years to change from 5W30 to 5W20 in the 3.6 Pentastar engine?


That I don't know. That's pretty much the question behind this entire post, and we don't seem to be closer to answering it now than we did earlier.

Something similar happened with the 3.3/3.8 V-6 engines nearly 10 years ago. They went from specifying 5W-30 to 5W-20 in the 2005 model year. Why not sooner? Who knows. No backspec either.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If they were after better mpg, and keeping CAFE happy why not go for 5W20 as soon as the first engine rolled off the line?


Right. Which is why I don't think that CAFE was a large factor.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I have a feeling they went with 5W30, which they were more confident with in a newly designed engine, and were a bit afraid of trying 5W20. By doing so they could continue to test 5W20 in the application.


I hope this is not the case. As far as I know, this engine is as close to a 'clean sheet design' as it gets these days. The engine oil would have, or should have, been an integral part of the design, and was likely known up front. I highly doubt they got the thing assembled and then said, "gee, what should we pour in?"

An alternative theory is this: I have the understanding that this engine was at least co-developed by Mercedes-Benz, when everyone was under Daimler. It could be that at the time, both manufacturers planned to use the engine and 5W-30 was the best compromise between the two manufacturers. We know that European manufacturers are very comfortable with heavier grades and we know that North American manufacturers are very comfortable with lighter grades. It could be that a 5W-30 was the only grade that both parties could agree to. Years go by, Chrysler and Daimler part ways, and you have a situation where Chrysler is sitting with an engine that they would have preferred to have 5W-20 in at the beginning, but they now can start testing it in the engine because they no longer have an engineering partner who can't wrap their head around a 20 grade...

I dunno...

 

[edhackett]

Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
They probably don't feel the need to backspec to earlier engines because it wouldn't improve their CAFE figures. As I understand it, CAFE only applies to the then-current model year, so having a customer use 5W-20 in a two year old van won't benefit Chrysler any.



The 1st sentence says it all: why "backspec" for CAFE reasons?

The horse has left the barn!

"Elvis has left the building!"

Cheers!



This is why. They can apply credits to prior or future years.

Quote:
Manufacturers can earn CAFE “credits” to offset deficiencies in their CAFE performances. Specifically, when the average fuel economy of either the passenger car or light truck fleet for a particular model year exceeds the established standard, the manufacturer earns credits. The amount of credit a manufacturer earns is determined by multiplying the tenths of a mile per gallon that the manufacturer exceeded the CAFE standard in that model year by the amount of vehicles they manufactured in that model year. These credits can be applied to any three consecutive model years immediately prior to or subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned. The credits earned and applied to the model years prior to the model year for which the credits are earned are termed “carry back” credits, while those applied to model years subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned are known as “carry forward” credits.


http://lobby.la.psu.edu/_107th/126_CAFE_...verview_FAQ.htm

Ed

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

I dunno...


Me either.......... I really feel they wanted more time testing with the 20 grade, they didn't have the time and rolled it off the line with ole faithful. All we can do is speculate, honestly I'd feel more comfortable with the 30 grade in that engine, and that's coming from a guy using 0W20 in an 08 Liberty.

 

[InhalingBullets]

We have several hundred, '08-'12 Chargers with the V6's in our fleet. We got a batch of cars a few years ago that went for their first oil change at 5k low on oil(5w-30). Not knowing if the factory fill was left a little short or if the new cars were actually burning oil, at about 7500 miles we rechecked the oil level and to our surprise they were indeed burning oil. About 1/2qt per 3k. Dodge said it was normal. We haven't had any further issues but I cannot imagine that going to a slightly lighter oil would help this out.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
That's an oil temp' virtually impossible to reach in any vehicle for which a 20wt oil is spec'd including driving flat out on the autobahn.

Here you go again. I am asking you to prove that statement!
Lets see some real documentation. Verifiable facts, not what you think, believe or think you know.

Toyota, Honda and Subaru for example uses the exact same engine sold in the US in Germany the oil spec is 5w30-0w40.
0w20 or 5w20 is not approved by Toyota/Honda/Subaru Japan for use in Germany unless its a hybrid (no Subaru hybrid).

If what you say is true..
Quote:
including driving flat out on the autobahn

Then why is it not approved?
Again provide facts not fiction.


I don't "provide fiction" in my posts and by the same token I'm not into "unproven" fear mongering unlike yourself.

130C is a very high oil temp' that I have personally never seen in any car that I've owned and tracked.
It's even uncommon on high output "pocket rockets" and the like that spec' light 5W-30 oil that I've seen at the track.
20wt oil is generally spec'd for vehicles of low specific output
where the possibility of high oil temp's is even more unlikely.
Having said that, I've raced with guys in Mustang GTs running the spec' 5W-20 and I know they can run flat out all day long on that syn/blend oil without issue.
But forget 130C oil temp's, I doubt even 120C oil temp's are likely crusing at high speeds in a vehicle for which a 20wt is specified here in NA.
In Toyota's owners manual, it does make reference to high speed driving (without defining it) and suggests a "higher oil grade may be more suitable". This doesn't in any way imply that bearing wiping is imminent if you stick to a 20wt oil.

Yes if you're routinely driving at high speeds a heavier 30wt or even a light 40wt oil is likely more suitable if for no other reason that to keep oil consumption at a more acceptable level.
The combination of somewhat higher oil temp's and high constant rpm's can significantly increase oil consumption and the longer OCI's specified in Europe doesn't help. An OEM can't count on the oil level being checked between oil changes and things can go bad fairly quickly when you start running at speed a couple of litres low on oil.
That's the main reason I believe heavier oil is specified in Europe.

 

[modularv8]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: modularv8
What is interesting, is that the oils used in this test are formulated without FMs. Generally, formulations without a FM give much higher wear rates for piston rings.


I always thought FM impacts only friction under boundary lubrication but not wear.

Do you sources for that info?



They do both. I have seen experiments where formulations with increased amounts of MoDTC reduce piston ring/cylinder wear considerably more than formulations with lower concentrations or completely without FM.

Yes, I will PM you the sources/info. Need some time to dig up.

 

[Trav]

Quote:
I don't "provide fiction" in my posts and by the same token I'm not into "unproven" fear mongering unlike yourself.


You are joking right or do you forget saying you would track a BMW M car on 20w. I never took any post you wrote seriously after that one.
Going up 1 grade is not going to kill or damage an engine, going too thin can. I prefer to play it safe. What you suggest sometimes is bad for the engine and can cause internal damage and you say i'm fear mongering?
Quote:
In Toyota's owners manual, it does make reference to high speed driving (without defining it) and suggests a "higher oil grade may be more suitable". This doesn't in any way imply that bearing wiping is imminent if you stick to a 20wt oil.


They have a reason, they don't publish this for fun. Even if it has nothing to do with bearings there must be a reason or they wouldn't say it. You wont admit the 20w may cause more wear, will you?
Quote:
I've raced with guys in Mustang GTs running the spec' 5W-20 and I know they can run flat out all day long on that syn/blend oil without issue

Unless the car has a lawnmower engine there is no way you can run it flat out all day on any track unless it is straight or a circle.
The other point you conveniently leave out here is that street engines cant change the oil after every high speed run or 30 min event.
Sure the 20w may work fine if i run the car down the autobahn for 2 or 3 hrs full pop at night then come home and change the oil. What about if i do this everyday without changing the oil for 5K?
Quote:
Yes if you're routinely driving at high speeds a heavier 30wt or even a light 40wt oil is likely more suitable if for no other reason that to keep oil consumption at a more acceptable level.

So engines running 20w oil tend to burn oil when run hard? I dont buy that an oil that has thinned down to that point can protect the engine at 6K+ RPM.
Thats more than enough reason to use a heavier oil.
Quote:
An OEM can't count on the oil level being checked between oil changes and things can go bad fairly quickly when you start running at speed a couple of litres low on oil.

Thats why they put oil level indicator lights in modern cars.
The most Germans check their oil religiously. Its importance is taught in Fahrschule. So there anyway its not a big issue.
Quote:
That's the main reason I believe heavier oil is specified in Europe

Like i said i knew at the end of the day its coming down to what you believe.

If its true what you say that in NA that oil temps will not see 130c then why is no turbo engine sold in the US is not spec's for 20w oil?
Could it be the same reason they don't spec 20w in Germany? The engine oil wont hold up running hot and hard?
Oh sorry i forgot it cant be because you see cars being tracked with 20w.

 

[CATERHAM]

I've never said I would track an M BMW or even my own BMW on a 20wt oil.
What I have said is that I have used a 20wt oil in the winter months for the past 8 years in my BMW. I thicken it up to the equivalent of a light 30wt in the summer.
My track car is my Caterham and yes I run a 20wt oil. The engine is spec'd for a 40wt oil. Recommended OCI is 3,000 miles but I frequently it out before that.

Where you're particularly mistaken is you're assumption that a 20wt oil "won't hold up running hot and hard". I don't like to generalize about oil grades but as grades go a 20wt is more shear resistant than heavier oil grades. And as with all oil grades if you like you can choose an oil with no VIIs at all.
For example, the FUCHS Titan GT-1 0W-20 (a long drain oil) that I'm current running in my Caterham was the oil that Porsche ran in it's GT-3 Cup car series a few years back.

If you can maintain adequate oil pressure on a "20wt oil for 2 or 3 hrs full pop" on the autobahn (a pretty good test) I don't see why you feel the oil would need to be changed any sooner than a 30wt or 40wt oil. Your 5,000 mile OCI under such conditions seems reasonable to me.


Oh, and regarding turbo engines, IIRC Ford does spec' their 5W-20 for one of it's Eco-Boost engined models. Additionally Ford of Europe recently up-graded it's oil recommendations for the cars it sells there and their 5W-20 spec' oil is specified for many of them.
When a OEM specifies a 20wt oil they've got a handle on maximum oil temp's under extreme conditions. I don't feel the need to second guess them like you do.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: modularv8
Fords have a "Fail Safe Cooling System" that sets off chimes, CEL, computer message, and temp guage pegs to red zone when engine enters a preset temperature before an overheat develops. Then as the engine temperature continues to rise, the engine goes into limp mode with alternate cylinder air pumping to keep engine below another preset tempersture. And if engine temperature reaches another preset temperature, then computer shuts engine down and will permit restart when temperature goes below a preset. Even at the shut down temperature, there is still a margin of safety to prevent engine damage.


Excellent engineering. Been on our GM fleet trucks since around 2000 I think. Nothing new at all.

Our trucks also pull spark at 6 psi oil pressure and cut power output for a variety of reasons if you abuse them.

Many vehicles do this.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint

Too bad they didn't test the design a little better and found the head problem before the consumers did.


The extremely small percentage of failures indicates it is unlikely a true engineering defect. Very peculiar things must happen repetitively for the Pstar failure.

Still of little consolation if you have a bad one.

 

[friendly_jacek]

There was some interesting discussion here, but seriously, does anyone seriously believe there is any significant difference between 5W30 oils (that usually shear down to 20 grade) and 5W20 oils?

Quote:
Limits applied to fresh oil may not reflect actual
performance in engine after even short periods of service.
– A 2.9 cP oil with a 50 SSI viscosity modifier will shear to 2.5 cP


ftp://ftp.astmtmc.cmu.edu/docs/diesel/hdeocp/minutes/2001/hdeocp.2001-05-25/052501ATT12.PDF

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: modularv8
Fords have a "Fail Safe Cooling System" that sets off chimes, CEL, computer message, and temp guage pegs to red zone when engine enters a preset temperature before an overheat develops. Then as the engine temperature continues to rise, the engine goes into limp mode with alternate cylinder air pumping to keep engine below another preset tempersture. And if engine temperature reaches another preset temperature, then computer shuts engine down and will permit restart when temperature goes below a preset. Even at the shut down temperature, there is still a margin of safety to prevent engine damage.


Excellent engineering. Been on our GM fleet trucks since around 2000 I think. Nothing new at all.

Our trucks also pull spark at 6 psi oil pressure and cut power output for a variety of reasons if you abuse them.

Many vehicles do this.

I agree, I'm sure most OEMs use some form of it now.
It certainly eliminates any reason to run anything heavier than the lightest oil specified. And I would add that if you never ever test the fail safe systems; i.e., go into limp mode when driven hard, an even lighter than spec' oil (lower HTHSV) could be considered.