Does grade REALLY effect fuel economy???
- Thread starter WMSmotorhead
- Start date
- Status
A difference between 20w & 30w? Yes.
A difference between same grades of conventional and synthetic? No.
A difference between same grades of conventional and synthetic? No.
"The U.S. Department of Energy estimates a 1 to 1.5% drop in MPG when using 5w30 versus 5w20."
I cannot imagine the US DOE admitting that viscositys make little or no difference in MPG's, even if the difference was flat out ZERO. This is a Federal CAFE world we are living in, so, the DOE will be in lockstep, regardless.
I cannot imagine the US DOE admitting that viscositys make little or no difference in MPG's, even if the difference was flat out ZERO. This is a Federal CAFE world we are living in, so, the DOE will be in lockstep, regardless.
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
Originally Posted By: pscholte
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
I do yearly OCI's and so a $400 savings would give me about 13 years of free oil changes using synthetic oil and a true extended drain oil filter. You really don't need to worry about wear since cars are lasting longer than ever.
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
I do yearly OCI's and so a $400 savings would give me about 13 years of free oil changes using synthetic oil and a true extended drain oil filter. You really don't need to worry about wear since cars are lasting longer than ever.
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
"The U.S. Department of Energy estimates a 1 to 1.5% drop in MPG when using 5w30 versus 5w20."
I cannot imagine the US DOE admitting that viscositys make little or no difference in MPG's, even if the difference was flat out ZERO. This is a Federal CAFE world we are living in, so, the DOE will be in lockstep, regardless.
Here is a link to the Alternative Fuels Data Center, which is managed by the Department of Energy's Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/conserve/vehicle_maintenance.html
It is because of the 1.5% decrease in MPG when using 5w30 vs. 5w20 that auto manufacturers have widely accepted 5w20 as their factory spec, to squeeze out every last bit of MPG.
"The U.S. Department of Energy estimates a 1 to 1.5% drop in MPG when using 5w30 versus 5w20."
I cannot imagine the US DOE admitting that viscositys make little or no difference in MPG's, even if the difference was flat out ZERO. This is a Federal CAFE world we are living in, so, the DOE will be in lockstep, regardless.
Here is a link to the Alternative Fuels Data Center, which is managed by the Department of Energy's Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/conserve/vehicle_maintenance.html
It is because of the 1.5% decrease in MPG when using 5w30 vs. 5w20 that auto manufacturers have widely accepted 5w20 as their factory spec, to squeeze out every last bit of MPG.
Originally Posted By: uart
Originally Posted By: needsducktape
For an Individual the biggest factors are: the left foot ...
The clutch???
Did you mean the right foot?
Maybe he means something more like driving an auto-trans car with two feet. The left foot works the brake pedal. Excessive and/or unnecessary braking is not good for fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: needsducktape
For an Individual the biggest factors are: the left foot ...
The clutch???
Did you mean the right foot?
Maybe he means something more like driving an auto-trans car with two feet. The left foot works the brake pedal. Excessive and/or unnecessary braking is not good for fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: Capa
Originally Posted By: pscholte
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
I do yearly OCI's and so a $400 savings would give me about 13 years of free oil changes using synthetic oil and a true extended drain oil filter. You really don't need to worry about wear since cars are lasting longer than ever.
While I recently ran an OCI much longer than I EVER have (about 8 months/5500 miles on Castrol Edge) I am not yet ready to push beyond that. Old habits die hard.
Originally Posted By: pscholte
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
I do yearly OCI's and so a $400 savings would give me about 13 years of free oil changes using synthetic oil and a true extended drain oil filter. You really don't need to worry about wear since cars are lasting longer than ever.
While I recently ran an OCI much longer than I EVER have (about 8 months/5500 miles on Castrol Edge) I am not yet ready to push beyond that. Old habits die hard.
I have 5w 30 in the elantra now, have not run enough tanks to really tell, but i don't notice a difference in mpg so far.
Originally Posted By: pscholte
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
$400 over 150,000 miles with 7,500 mile OCI is $20 off every oil change. Even at 5,000 mile OCI its $13.33 off. Not too bad without ever sending in a rebate.
If the actual savings is close to that number I can see it making sense. I doubt for myself I'd see the full savings. The rebates and sales deals outweigh the added fuel economy in many cases.
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
$400 over 150,000 miles with 7,500 mile OCI is $20 off every oil change. Even at 5,000 mile OCI its $13.33 off. Not too bad without ever sending in a rebate.
If the actual savings is close to that number I can see it making sense. I doubt for myself I'd see the full savings. The rebates and sales deals outweigh the added fuel economy in many cases.
Originally Posted By: pscholte
While I recently ran an OCI much longer than I EVER have (about 8 months/5500 miles on Castrol Edge) I am not yet ready to push beyond that. Old habits die hard.
You mean the Elves never granted you an extended OCI with the Green Velvet?
While I recently ran an OCI much longer than I EVER have (about 8 months/5500 miles on Castrol Edge) I am not yet ready to push beyond that. Old habits die hard.
You mean the Elves never granted you an extended OCI with the Green Velvet?
Originally Posted By: pscholte
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
Agreed.
Better fuels savings are usually achieved by:
1. Keeping tyres at correct pressure
2. Keep vehicle at minimum load eg remove extra cargo
3. Proper and timely maintenance eg spark plugs, air filter etc
4. Choosing traffic routes with less stop / start driving
5. Timing when go on the road eg avoid peak hour
6. Combine trips avoid duplication of travel
7. Run the air conditioner only when required
Yeh we know that low viscosity oils help, but is one poofteenth compared to other stuff that can be done.
I recently read an article that projected the savings using an oil marked "Fuel Conserving" over one that wasn't. About $400 over 150,000 miles. Not impressive in my book. Seems like the best bet is to bank on wear reduction but is that even a big difference given the paltry mileage improvement?
Agreed.
Better fuels savings are usually achieved by:
1. Keeping tyres at correct pressure
2. Keep vehicle at minimum load eg remove extra cargo
3. Proper and timely maintenance eg spark plugs, air filter etc
4. Choosing traffic routes with less stop / start driving
5. Timing when go on the road eg avoid peak hour
6. Combine trips avoid duplication of travel
7. Run the air conditioner only when required
Yeh we know that low viscosity oils help, but is one poofteenth compared to other stuff that can be done.
Originally Posted By: virginoil
Agreed.
Better fuels savings are usually achieved by:
1. Keeping tyres at correct pressure
2. Keep vehicle at minimum load eg remove extra cargo
3. Proper and timely maintenance eg spark plugs, air filter etc
4. Choosing traffic routes with less stop / start driving
5. Timing when go on the road eg avoid peak hour
6. Combine trips avoid duplication of travel
7. Run the air conditioner only when required
Yeh we know that low viscosity oils help, but is one poofteenth compared to other stuff that can be done.
IMO, anticipating red lights, stop signs, slow traffic, etc. is by far the most effective way to increase city MPG. Ease off early if you know you're going to have to stop/slow anyway. How often do you see someone barrel into a red light, jump on the brakes, then race down the block to do it all over again? If these people would just pay a little attention, and try to 'look' more than 5 seconds down the road, they'd see an instant 20~30% improvement.
A few years back I went through a mild hypermiling phase that included keeping fairly detailed notes. One summer I tried some Delvac 15w-40 in my Accord. The car was noticeably sluggish, particularly when cold, but city and freeway mileage averages both dropped by a only about 1/2 mpg.
Agreed.
Better fuels savings are usually achieved by:
1. Keeping tyres at correct pressure
2. Keep vehicle at minimum load eg remove extra cargo
3. Proper and timely maintenance eg spark plugs, air filter etc
4. Choosing traffic routes with less stop / start driving
5. Timing when go on the road eg avoid peak hour
6. Combine trips avoid duplication of travel
7. Run the air conditioner only when required
Yeh we know that low viscosity oils help, but is one poofteenth compared to other stuff that can be done.
IMO, anticipating red lights, stop signs, slow traffic, etc. is by far the most effective way to increase city MPG. Ease off early if you know you're going to have to stop/slow anyway. How often do you see someone barrel into a red light, jump on the brakes, then race down the block to do it all over again? If these people would just pay a little attention, and try to 'look' more than 5 seconds down the road, they'd see an instant 20~30% improvement.
A few years back I went through a mild hypermiling phase that included keeping fairly detailed notes. One summer I tried some Delvac 15w-40 in my Accord. The car was noticeably sluggish, particularly when cold, but city and freeway mileage averages both dropped by a only about 1/2 mpg.
Sometimes, theory and tests from laboratory environments poorly replicate real life performance.
I still can't understand how some people can think that one single parameter of an oil, extrapolated to extreme levels, can come at ZERO cost, or not even consider any movement in the performance equilibrium at all. And this is being observed in Ohio, not California or Florida.....
I still can't understand how some people can think that one single parameter of an oil, extrapolated to extreme levels, can come at ZERO cost, or not even consider any movement in the performance equilibrium at all. And this is being observed in Ohio, not California or Florida.....
Originally Posted By: jrustles
Sometimes, theory and tests from laboratory environments poorly replicate real life performance.
I still can't understand how some people can think that one single parameter of an oil, extrapolated to extreme levels, can come at ZERO cost, or not even consider any movement in the performance equilibrium at all. And this is being observed in Ohio, not California or Florida.....
Agree. My V6 accord lost 5-7% mpg going from EP 5w-20 to M1 5w-30. Ymmv.
Sometimes, theory and tests from laboratory environments poorly replicate real life performance.
I still can't understand how some people can think that one single parameter of an oil, extrapolated to extreme levels, can come at ZERO cost, or not even consider any movement in the performance equilibrium at all. And this is being observed in Ohio, not California or Florida.....
Agree. My V6 accord lost 5-7% mpg going from EP 5w-20 to M1 5w-30. Ymmv.
And I wonder if the Gov't acknowledges or accounts for the fact that slightly higher viscosity oils shear down to the lower grades anyway? Even if there is any miniscule MPG difference initially, it dissipates with use as the oil thins. Gov't numbers would only extrapolate with the very first data point, and ignore the reality of oils shearing thinner.
I tried M1 0w-30 AFE without MPG improvement.
My 130k mile 2.5L Jag does run markedly better on 5W-40 than it does on thinner oils. I suspect better ring seal (it certainly uses less with the 5W-40 TDT) and possibly the cam phasers perform better. (they do tick a bit on the thinner oils)
My 130k mile 2.5L Jag does run markedly better on 5W-40 than it does on thinner oils. I suspect better ring seal (it certainly uses less with the 5W-40 TDT) and possibly the cam phasers perform better. (they do tick a bit on the thinner oils)
- Status
Similar threads
