Engine Damage caused from 0W20/5W20?

[webfors]

Originally Posted By: AEHaas
Oh and "Grandpa" was on his 4th set of tires.

aehaas

The moral of the story is, install an oil pressure and oil temp gauge and we can stop relying on these thin/thick threads to make up our mind.

That being said, I won't go thinner than spec'd. There's simply no reason to.

Oh, and comparing 5w30 from 20 years ago to a current 5w20 is a stretch. We all know oil sucked back then compared to now.

 

[virginoil]

Originally Posted By: AEHaas
I have been running 20 grade oils in 600 BHP twin turbo cars for almost a decade, Bentleys, Maybachs and in non turbo cars, Lamborghini and an Enzo. Wear appears to be less than normal. All spec'ed 40 grade oils, the Enzo a 60 grade oil. Most recently the Enzo is running a 0W-30 grade oil that shows essentially no wear at all.

This might help as to why:
The first one is unedited:
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/faq.php?faq=new_faq_item#faq_haas_articles
Original (but edited by others) version:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/motor-oil-101/

aehaas


Was the oil filter cut open and its contents examined to confirm the no wear claim ?

 

[MrWideTires]

My SpecV specs 5w30, I ran it at the racetrack with 0w20 for years and over 100k miles. Now it has 140k and still doesn't even burn oil and has perfect compression. Deal with it..

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

The move in recent years to the 5W-20 and 0W-20 grade for vehicles that were previously spec'd for the 5W-30 grade obviously has nothing to do with tighter engine bearings and other engine design features but rather an improvement in the shear stability of multigrade motor oil generally. The quality of a 5W-20 dino (0W-20 even more so) is significantly higher than the 5W-30 grade of the 1990's and earlier.



THANK YOU for that statement. I've been arguing that engines last longer now and we can use thinner oil now because of the OILS more than the engines for many years. In the past and in various forums I've pointed out that the allowable clearances indicated in service manuals for my 1960s and 2000s vintage engines are almost without exception IDENTICAL. From the reactions sometimes you'd think I'd cussed in church.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

The move in recent years to the 5W-20 and 0W-20 grade for vehicles that were previously spec'd for the 5W-30 grade obviously has nothing to do with tighter engine bearings and other engine design features but rather an improvement in the shear stability of multigrade motor oil generally. The quality of a 5W-20 dino (0W-20 even more so) is significantly higher than the 5W-30 grade of the 1990's and earlier.



THANK YOU for that statement. I've been arguing that engines last longer now and we can use thinner oil now because of the OILS more than the engines for many years. In the past and in various forums I've pointed out that the allowable clearances indicated in service manuals for my 1960s and 2000s vintage engines are almost without exception IDENTICAL. From the reactions sometimes you'd think I'd cussed in church.

The "I know it all but really don't have a good idea about engine assembly" have grabbed the tighter tolerance spill and use it to say CLEARANCES are smaller, not the case...

Today's engines do have tighter tolerances(less variance in assembly), but recommended clearances are much the same as prior... Basically a older engine at the minimum specified clearance could be tighter than one of today's engines, or possibly looser...

 

[AEHaas]

"Was the oil filter cut open and its contents examined to confirm the no wear claim ?"
Yes and I do blot tests as well as the most revealing oil analysis. I have worked with several oil formulators, I have discussed things with some of the top research scientists in the automotive field and conversed and shared data with the likes of Ferrari North America.

What I have investigated is far from random data points. I apologize but I am just too busy any more to elaborate further.

aehaas

 

[AEHaas]

One more thing. People keep bringing up the idea that engines today are ”tighter”. I am not sure this is true. Clearances are similar but there are large differences in metallurgy and polishing. When the asperities of the bearing surfaces are less rough then oil film thicknesses can be reduced. If a surface was smooth to the atomic level then the thinnest oil would prevent contact with the heaviest load. It’s all about asperities.

What goes against this is that in the 60’s and 70’s oils were essentially uncontrolled as to viscosity claims. I got started in high school chemistry when I bought at least a dozen 10W-30 oils to compare viscosity claims at different temperatures. I had help from a friend of the family, a chemist at Shell. What I found was that some oils were 10 grade or 20 grade right out of the bottle and others were thinner yet. People used these products and yet no engines blow up that I know of. And these oils were in some cases probably minimally formulated. At best they were far inferior to the oils of today.

This again shows of the complexity of motor oil in gasoline engines.

aehaas

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: AEHaas
One more thing. People keep bringing up the idea that engines today are ”tighter”. I am not sure this is true. Clearances are similar but there are large differences in metallurgy and polishing.


Its NOT true, as has already been discussed. The MANUFACTURING tolerances are tighter so there's less engine-to-engine variation, but most of the critical rotating part clearance recommendations are identical, or only a small percentage different. I think you are right that asperities in some cases are better controlled, but I'm betting most of that is in the cylinder area- better control of the surface treatment providing enough asperity for oil retention, but not requiring such a metal-shedding break-in to achieve ring seal as the old days. Also hypereutectic pistons with coated skirts are allowing a much tighter cold piston-to-wall clearance, but the ring gap clearances aren't nearly as different as the piston skirt-to-wall spec is. Forged crank bearing journals have been polished and nitrided for 40+ years now, and I'm talking about production car engines like the ones in my sig. If the crank surfaces on newer engines are more tightly controlled, its not a huge difference from the old days.

But there are other differences that aren't related to either clearances OR tolerances. The ultra high contact pressure points are gone since sliding cams with very high valve spring pressures are no longer used. Some shearing sources are gone since there are either fewer or no gear drives. The gear drive for old-style oil pumps was a high shear/high point contact area that is now gone with the crank-snout driven oil pumps that are so common. And finally there are new engine features that EXPECT thin oil (or at least oil that stays in a narrower viscosity range). Things like small-orifice timing chain sprayers, piston sprayers, and various variable-valve-timing mechanisms. The engines are made to run with a fairly wide range of oil viscosity because that's going to happen at start-up, but its not optimal.

 

[CATERHAM]

440Magnum, well said.
BTW I didn't know they used forged cranks in the Jeeps and Dodge Ram of your sig'.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
440Magnum, well said.
BTW I didn't know they used forged cranks in the Jeeps and Dodge Ram of your sig'.


I'm actually not sure about the Jeeps . The Ram 4.7 has a forged crank and forged con-rods in 2008 and later. The first gen had powdered metal rods (ala Ford Modular), not sure about the crankshaft in the older engine.

My grammar was imprecise when I said 'forged... cranks have been used for 40+ years now in cars like the ones in my sig.' I should have used "in MANY cars, like SOME of the ones in my .sig. ;-) Since the early 60s, Chrysler has always used a mix of cast and forged cranks depending on application. I always find it funny that if you lay a cast and forged crank for the same engine side-by-side, the cast crank ALWAYS looks nicer and cleaner with beautifully shaped counterweights and clean crisp edges. The forged one looks gnarly with forging marks still on it unless its been cleaned up manually. Both my 440s have forged cranks, but that engine got almost all nodular iron from ~73 to end of production. the 340 always had a forged crank, as did the 383. Evey the 2-barrel 383 originally in my 66 had a forged crank. Both forged and cast cranks were nitrided from the factory after the journals were turned and polished, though. With all that effort, they still didn't bother with rounded fillets at the journal edges. Go figure.

 

[EyesofThunder]

In a sense bearing clearances are tighter appearing because engines use smaller bearing journals. A BBC with a 2.2" rod journal is going to use a wider spec than a 2" journal engine. Ring clearances are tighter because bore sizes are smaller. But then rules for the clearances aren't too much different. One case I have is my Lexus 1UZ-FE 4.0L v8. It has tighter bearing clearances than even the 2008 4.6L v8. Same size journals, but specs in 1998 are tighter. And 5w30 was the spec'd oil, but I feel that 5w20 wasn't around then, or not a good enough spec 5w20.

I still think it is odd that although Lexus did backspace my engine to 5w20, they did not spec to 0w20. Many other engines got spec'd to 0w20

 

[zerosoma]

I want to add to this discussion that I had some pretty nasty sounding engine clatter coming from my Prius while I had 5w20. Just noisy sounding. I did two different fills - one on Mobil Super Syn, the next on Havoline. I changed the filter to a Pure One and it helped significantly but the sound came back.

I switched to the manual-recommended 5w30 and I have not had those problems since; even 1,500 miles later.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Interesting observation. I came across a similar noise issue in my RAV4. However, going back to xW30 oil didn't fix the issue.

Sometimes specific viscosity is recommended based on noise concerns.

 

[lexus114]

when I ran PP 5W-20 after about 800 miles or so the engine got a little noisy. But man did it ever run good on that oil.

 

[Stephen_G]

Just my .02 Cents

If you want to see what oil is right for your engine, look at the development history.

For example, on my 3.0L Vulcan V6 (pushrod) in the Sable.

1986: Introduced with 5W30 and a Flat Tappet cam
1991: Reworked with reduced friction pistons, a strengthened block, roller camshaft among other things. Still 5W30
1996: Converted to run with a coil pack, Still 5W30
2000:Newer intake manifold, still 5W30
2001:Composite Intake Manifold, switched to 5W20. Engine given a knock sensor as well.
2004: Newer composite intake manifold.

So, I run 5W30 as that is what the engine ran for most of the production line. If it was good for 1986-2000 then it is good for a 2001-2008 production version of that engine.

If i had the DOHC Duratec I would run 5W20 all day, as that engine has closer tolerances than my OHV V6. And is also completely aluminum.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Stephen_G


If you want to see what oil is right for your engine, look at the development history.

For example, on my 3.0L Vulcan V6 (pushrod) in the Sable.

1986: Introduced with 5W30 and a Flat Tappet cam
1991: Reworked with reduced friction pistons, a strengthened block, roller camshaft among other things. Still 5W30
1996: Converted to run with a coil pack, Still 5W30
2000:Newer intake manifold, still 5W30
2001:Composite Intake Manifold, switched to 5W20. Engine given a knock sensor as well.
2004: Newer composite intake manifold.

So, I run 5W30 as that is what the engine ran for most of the production line. If it was good for 1986-2000 then it is good for a 2001-2008 production version of that engine.

If you were using an SJ 5W-30 from 1986 you argument would have some possible merit to it, but motor oil has improved a lot in the past 27 years. Today's dino 5W-20 is very much a superior oil to the 5W-30 dino of the mid '80's.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Chris Meutsch
If I remember right, didn't Dr Haas here run his exotics on thin oil on purpose to prove it would be OK?


Dr Haas has plenty of money to replace the engine in that Ferrari if need be.

The rest of us 47% people would rather not replace our engines if we don't have to.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: HyundaiGuy

Exactly. My wife's Accent specs 5W20, 5W30 or 10W30. We use 5W20 with no issues.

My Mini specs BMW LL01 approved 0W30, 5W30 or 0W40. I would never put 5W20 in the Mini.


If those were my cars, the Hyundai would be getting 10W-30 and the BMW would be getting 0W-40.

 

[Stephen_G]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Stephen_G


If you want to see what oil is right for your engine, look at the development history.

For example, on my 3.0L Vulcan V6 (pushrod) in the Sable.

1986: Introduced with 5W30 and a Flat Tappet cam
1991: Reworked with reduced friction pistons, a strengthened block, roller camshaft among other things. Still 5W30
1996: Converted to run with a coil pack, Still 5W30
2000:Newer intake manifold, still 5W30
2001:Composite Intake Manifold, switched to 5W20. Engine given a knock sensor as well.
2004: Newer composite intake manifold.

So, I run 5W30 as that is what the engine ran for most of the production line. If it was good for 1986-2000 then it is good for a 2001-2008 production version of that engine.

If you were using an SJ 5W-30 from 1986 you argument would have some possible merit to it, but motor oil has improved a lot in the past 27 years. Today's dino 5W-20 is very much a superior oil to the 5W-30 dino of the mid '80's.


True, but the fact that it used a still modern spec in 2003 (SL)And one still somewhat modern (SJ) for 1996-2001 and in 1986 it would have been SF not SG

 

[CIRHS]

I live in Australia and have V8 SS Commodore. Which has a 6L L77 GM Engine in it i think in the US its called the Pontiac G8 or something.

So the Engine is spec'd for a 5w30 oil. No thanks.

I left in for 1st 1000km for the break in. Changed it out 4 weeks ago with 5w60 Group 4/5 synth.

Wow what a difference.

Apart from Belt noise, injectors and exhaust, I cant hear the engine. Hot or Cold. Fuel consumption is identical as far as I can tell (not that I care much about fuel consumption if I did I would have bout a prius) but it runs a lot smoother and feels a lot better.

My 2001 Fireblade that runs on xw60 oil since about 1500km. Its a track bike and weekend fun bike. Had is since new 80,342km on it track / road (most road is almost like track when I go to the hills), I cant hear the engine just the zorst, and runs smooth. The engine has never been touched apart from valve clearance adjustments.
People seem to forget that Car manufactures need to meet the green ratings these days and they will do anything to get there.

My now wifes 2006 XR6 4L Turbo runs 5w-60. When I met her her car had about 6000km. Being a nice lad I am I changed the oil in it to 5w60 as 15000km from new is bit too long for my taste and the cars been using 5w60 ever since. When ford serviced it i supplied the oil and not once was anything said about it. Her car has 167000km on it. Fuel consumption on long trips that we take to see he grandmother identical. The drive is 617km from the petrol station we fill up at when we get o her grandmother town we fill up at the same service station and fuel going in almost the same 62-64L.

Before that I had a VL Turbo that had a RB30 and Garret T04 motor pushing about 350rwkw at the treads. Engine was rebuild and blue printed when I got the car after the 1000km bam 5w60. My brother has this car now engine has done about 180000km since rebuild. He had it dynoed about 8 moths ago at a mates work shop and when he told me it was pushing 343rwkw I was shocked.

Ask yourself why are piston aircraft engines running 50-60w oils single grade as well. Because of reliability.

Also people seem to forget that your engine oil operating temperature is not 100deg C. Its your coolant temp. The engine has varying temperatures throughout. Thats why aircraft are fitted with heaps of instrumentation readout so they can be monitored. Temperature in your cylinders is not 100deg.

Each to their own. I don't drive my car like a granny and I intend to keep my toys for a bit. I don't have any experience with low viscosity oil's as its out of my engines as soon as i get a chance. But for me xw60 seems like a sweet spot.

Dr hass Says that low viscosity has better flow, but he forgets to mention that flow, viscosity and pressure are related. Low Vis -> Lower Pressure, High Vic -> Higher Pressure. Flow is about the same. Except at higher revs when bypass valves opens.

Anyways g2g but this will be fun