Dealer using 5W20 in Phoenix AZ!!!!

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
On the back spec'ing. I doubt a car maker would do it.


Why not, is Ford some unique magic entity? They did it with a buttload of units.

Quote:
Well they would have to TEST a used engine to see if it would hold up to the new oil.


I don't think this is the case. They already tested the current engine to the point of failure MANY TIMES. If the current engine and the former engine are technically identical in terms of power density and whatnot in terms of lubrication requirements ..there's nothing to test.


I knew Ford would come into this discussion when I said it. Toyota too back spec'ed but not to the extent Ford did.

I think with Ford, it's more of a calculated risk. They probably don't believe many owners would actually move to 5W20. I think other car makers are not as willing to go out there and say it will work on their older engines without testing.

Since there is NO gain for a car maker to back spec, I really see little or no reason to do so.

Any EPA fines and penalties regarding CAFE have already been paid, so back spec'ing a car will not really help with that.

So what is the upside for any car maker to back spec an older engine that you and I believe would run just fine on 5W20? Make it easier for their dealers? Doubt it.

Yes, I know Ford did it. But I think it was an educated gamble, and not based on much testing.

I think the testing of older engines IS critical for a car maker to do this. If parts wear and an engine is unable to maintain oil pressure using a 5W20 engine after some number of miles, it seems like a mostly down side scenario for the car maker.

I can see it now, someone with 200K miles on their car is told they can use 5W20, and when the dealership installs that oil, the engine begins to knock, etc.

Customer sues, showing all his service receipts that he's been to the dealer for service, and now, after following the new recommendation, his previously problem free engine has become an very expensive and noisy paper weight.

So while Ford did it, I'm not sure what the upside is for them. I think they've largely been lucky.

If I were running the show, regardless of how good I believe 5W20 oils were, I wouldn't just back spec a bunch of 5 or 10 year old engines. Doesn't seem to be any upside for me to do that.

 

[M1Ark]

I agree with what you have said. Oil temp becomes a direct relationship to ambient temps once the design margins are eroded.

I work in power generation and I can tell you that process fluid temp goes up considerably once ambient temp gets around 115F. Our heat exchangers simply can't reject the heat. In my cars case the heat exchanger is the radiator and the process fluid is the cars oil.

 

[M1Ark]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
I would use the correct viscosity which is - Yes required - 5W-30/10W-30. I wouldn't try to get there via STP. Find a new shop if necessary.


The next dealer is 30 minutes away. Not even sure they stock the 10W-30 oil my car requires. I could DIY or use a quicklube but would prefer the dealer.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
On the back spec'ing. I doubt a car maker would do it.


Why not, is Ford some unique magic entity? They did it with a buttload of units.

Quote:
Well they would have to TEST a used engine to see if it would hold up to the new oil.


I don't think this is the case. They already tested the current engine to the point of failure MANY TIMES. If the current engine and the former engine are technically identical in terms of power density and whatnot in terms of lubrication requirements ..there's nothing to test.


I knew Ford would come into this discussion when I said it. Toyota too back spec'ed but not to the extent Ford did.

I think with Ford, it's more of a calculated risk. They probably don't believe many owners would actually move to 5W20. I think other car makers are not as willing to go out there and say it will work on their older engines without testing.

Since there is NO gain for a car maker to back spec, I really see little or no reason to do so.

Any EPA fines and penalties regarding CAFE have already been paid, so back spec'ing a car will not really help with that.

So what is the upside for any car maker to back spec an older engine that you and I believe would run just fine on 5W20? Make it easier for their dealers? Doubt it.

Yes, I know Ford did it. But I think it was an educated gamble, and not based on much testing.

I think the testing of older engines IS critical for a car maker to do this. If parts wear and an engine is unable to maintain oil pressure using a 5W20 engine after some number of miles, it seems like a mostly down side scenario for the car maker.

I can see it now, someone with 200K miles on their car is told they can use 5W20, and when the dealership installs that oil, the engine begins to knock, etc.

Customer sues, showing all his service receipts that he's been to the dealer for service, and now, after following the new recommendation, his previously problem free engine has become an very expensive and noisy paper weight.

So while Ford did it, I'm not sure what the upside is for them. I think they've largely been lucky.

If I were running the show, regardless of how good I believe 5W20 oils were, I wouldn't just back spec a bunch of 5 or 10 year old engines. Doesn't seem to be any upside for me to do that.


Hard to figure why they did it, that's for sure. I will say I've used 5W20 in my 174,000 mile 93 Aerostar and noticed less oil use than with 5W30, and the old Aerostar is running great. I'm currently running a 5w20 5W30 mix. I had some stray quarts around and wanted to use them up. So far I'm please with the switch to 5W20. I seriously doubt if Ford thought the back spec'ing would be destroying engines, they would have never done it. JMO

After chatting with the people at Pennzoil, they stated their conventional 20 grade oils are actually a synthetic blend where as the 5W30 is not. They said that could be the reason why I'm using less oil, and told me that I wouldn't have any problems making the change. Some engines develop a wear pattern and changing oils can either help or hurt the situation. I like to experiment, only after I've done my homework, and am pretty confident in the expected outcome. YMMV

 

[SuperBusa]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm

^^20W50 and 20W50 only my brutha!

.........see my sig

Do yourself a favor and get rid of those Nissan OEM filters.

Better come visit the oil filter forum more often.

BTW - it's amazing how fast these "Xw-20" topics go awild.

 

[SuperBusa]

Originally Posted By: M1Ark
I need advice on whether to continue using my Chrysler dealer. I drive a Chrysler Pacifica with a 3.5 litre HO motor that is clearly labeled on the oil filler cap as 10W-30. The Chrysler dealer here in Phoenix only has bulk 5W-20 and that's it. It's been around 115F for the past month and 5W-20 seems too light of a grade for the car. What do you guys think. I've read a lot on this forum but still unable to decide. I'm a 3k OCI kind of guy.

Need advice...Please


If it was my car I'd use the 10W-30 for sure since Chrysler specs it. They might even spec a different viscosity ... so check the owner's manual to see all options. If the manual does not spec a Xw-20 oil then don't use it.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
So what is the upside for any car maker to back spec an older engine that you and I believe would run just fine on 5W20? Make it easier for their dealers? Doubt it.


They had to show, with reasonable validity, that the oil would indeed be used as it was spec'd. I imagine (aka: speculate) that getting older engines to use it would bolster that position.

Quote:
I can see it now, someone with 200K miles on their car is told they can use 5W20, and when the dealership installs that oil, the engine begins to knock, etc.


So an engine, using the oil that clearly provides more (cough-cough) protection gets 5w-20 in it and starts knocking? I'd like to see it too. If anything, it should just be breaking in due to all the avoided normal wear

 

[ADFD1]

I'd be pist! I'd want what the fill cap says, not what some service writer tells me.

AD

 

[wiswind]

Reading through this thread, I have picked up 2006 3.5L Pacifica, 10W-30 on fill cap, dealer using 5W-20.
Dealership computer with genuine Chrysler Corporation information lists 5W-20 for this motor.
Maybe it is a mistake as suggested? or maybe there is a TSB for this motor/application?

As to the question of if the motor fails due to the oil used?
The OP has faithfully presented his vehicle to his local Chrysler dealer for service as sheduled (maybe more often than minimum requirement) so if the motor fails due to the oil used.....that is between Chrysler and the dealership as to which one pays for the customer's repair.

I can certainly understand the trust of using a particular shop, and YES there are GREAT dealership service departments out there.

On suggestion that I would have, if concerned about the 5W-20 oil (unable to track down specific published data from Chrysler that states that 5W-20 oil is appropriate for this motor/application) you could talk to them about using the specified viscosity, perhaps you provide the oil that you purchase? so that you are following the Chrysler specification?

In short, the dealership may be 100% correct. They even checked with another dealership.
So, maybe looking for a paper trail.......first place to check would be the TSBs for this particular vehicle.

My alldata subscription only lets me see specifics for my own vehicle.....but I looked up the TSB titles there for 2006 Pacifica.
Only title that I see that comes close is 26-003-07-MAR-07 "Maintenance - Fluid flushing Recommendations"
Does not say what fluids and I cannot see more than the title and number.

Like the OP and some others, I like to start with what the manufacter specifys, and only deviate when I have a specific reason to.

 

[wiswind]

Update:, looked up the owners manual at the Chrysler website.
440 pages.

If you don't have a owner's manual, you can download it for FREE from the Chrysler website.

I looked at the 2006 Pacifica, for the 3.5L motor,
10W-30 is Prefered for temperatures 0 degrees F and above.
5W-30 is acceptable in cold weather "to improve cold weather starting" listed in the chart as 32 degrees and colder.

Motor oil capacity with filter change 5.5 quarts.

Schedule B, Severe service, OCI (includes "desert operation") is 3K miles / 3 month, which is what the OP is doing.

Schedule "A" normal service OCI is 6K miles / 6 months

The 2006 Pacifica with the 3.8L motor lists 5W-20 oil for "All operating temperatures".

Please note that a TSB could have updated the information in the owners manual.

 

[Durango]

Originally Posted By: M1Ark
I need advice on whether to continue using my Chrysler dealer. I drive a Chrysler Pacifica with a 3.5 litre HO motor that is clearly labeled on the oil filler cap as 10W-30. The Chrysler dealer here in Phoenix only has bulk 5W-20 and that's it. It's been around 115F for the past month and 5W-20 seems too light of a grade for the car. What do you guys think. I've read a lot on this forum but still unable to decide. I'm a 3k OCI kind of guy.

Need advice...Please


M1Ark,

Newer Chryslers now specify the 5W-20 oil for better economy so like the other say it's most likely fine for your V-6. Your climate isn't that much different than Calfornia so don't worry about it. 3K OCI's are fine.

Durango

 

[wgtoys]

Unless Chrysler has back speced that car for 5W-20 I wouldn't use it. Ask the dealer to show you the official technical service bulletin which changes the spec for your Pacifica from 10W-30 to 5W-20. If no such TSB exists, don't do it. If Chrysler specifically didn't include your engine in the changeover to 5W-20 there is probably a good reason for it.

 

[Ken2]

Let's keep in mind how the engine oil is cooled.

--Air flow past the oil pan.
--Conduction through the block into the cooling system.
--Conduction through the block to air (how hot is the under-hood air???).
--Certain engines have a coolant-cooled oil cooler.

So...in that Arizona heat the oil will run very hot, especially including heat radiating up from the pavement.

I'd use 10W-30 at a minimum and maybe some variety of 40 wt. I'd TELL that dealership service writer what he had to do to satisfy this customer and accept nothing else. If he wants the business, he does what the customer requires. In very short order I'd find a good independent shop that will do what the customer requests.

There are significant differences in the hot viscosity between 20 wt and 30 wt...20 wt has a 100°C viscosity between 5.6 & 9.29 cSt and 30 wt 9.3 to 12.49 cSt. This is before the viscosity index improvers shear in that cheap bulk oil the dealership buys. He uses 5W-20 because most of the line calls for that, he has one bulk oil tank, and gets the lowest cost ordering just one type of oil in bulk (tank truck delivery).

 

[BuickGN]

Originally Posted By: Durango
Originally Posted By: M1Ark
I need advice on whether to continue using my Chrysler dealer. I drive a Chrysler Pacifica with a 3.5 litre HO motor that is clearly labeled on the oil filler cap as 10W-30. The Chrysler dealer here in Phoenix only has bulk 5W-20 and that's it. It's been around 115F for the past month and 5W-20 seems too light of a grade for the car. What do you guys think. I've read a lot on this forum but still unable to decide. I'm a 3k OCI kind of guy.

Need advice...Please


M1Ark,

Newer Chryslers now specify the 5W-20 oil for better economy so like the other say it's most likely fine for your V-6. Your climate isn't that much different than Calfornia so don't worry about it. 3K OCI's are fine.

Durango


I live in one of the hottest places in CA and I can tell you it's a huge differeence in Phoenix. Besides, what difference does it make comparing it to CA?

So some newer Chryslers recommend 5w-20. That has nothing to do with his 2006 3.5L.

 

[Gary Allan]

Ken you make it sound like it's used BUNKER oil that is suitable for some 3rd world tramp steamer as fuel. It's API certified and probably comes from a major supplier. It should also carry the OEM requirement (MOPAR ABCD-1234).

 

[Colt45ws]

Originally Posted By: Ken2
There are significant differences in the hot viscosity between 20 wt and 30 wt...20 wt has a 100°C viscosity between 5.6 & 9.29 cSt and 30 wt 9.3 to 12.49 cSt.

While this is true in theory, most GF-4 oils are running at the thin end of 30 or the thick end of a 20, depending on what it is specified for.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Let's not throw facts and performance against viscosity panic.

 

[Gary Allan]

Most oils fall between 8Cst and 10Cst. That happens to be the dividing line somewhere in the middle there between 20 and 30.

If I said 9.5 Cst +/- 1 Cst would that sound so intense?

For that matter, if a blender put out a 9.3 Cst 5w or 10w fluid ..would you feel "safer" than using a 5w or 10w fluid with 9.2??

Clearly ..the 9.3 offers more protection. Heck, it's a 30 weight!

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Stop the logic! 20wts are evil!

 

[Colt45ws]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Clearly ..the 9.3 offers more protection. Heck, it's a 30 weight!

WOOOOOOOO! *Waves hands in air*