didnt realize there was that much difference at idle in a diesel, but, gasoline engines are also much more precise when it comes to fuel. if its too lean by even 2 points in a certain RPM range, there's detonation.
euro honda oil viscosities
- Thread starter oilcanboyd
- Start date
- Status
quote:Fine (and welcome to the board, BTW), but you're still not addressing my point. Even if what you're proposing is true, why do identical engines in Europe recommend thicker oils than the same engines here? Are engines in Europe somehow magically immune to the "lean load idling" you're talking about? Obviously, there is a difference in philosophy, policy, or opinion that is fueling the difference, not manufacturers' engineering requirements. Which is better, lighter or thicker? I don't know, but the manufacturers must have an opinion on the subject and I don't think you can discern that opinion based solely on what is recommended for cars in the US or what is recommended for cars in Europe.
Originally posted by Durrr:quote:well, if a car is idling, its using a higher Air to fuel ratio by default, and that, as a result results in more carbon due to the higher oxygen content of the combustion. If you put a load onto the engine it wasnt designed for at that RPM, then it adds a bit more air, and the same amount of fuel, resulting in even more undesirable emissions. Light oils allow it to idle w/ considerably less load.
Originally posted by 427Z06:quote:I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by "lean load idling". My experience with that term is when it's associated with diesel engines. If you simply mean the additional load put on a engine due to minutely thicker oil, I believe tests in a scientific setting are showing about a .1 MPG improvement in fuel economy with these "new" oils. How much more emissions could be contributed due to this additional load? .5%?
Originally posted by Durrr: First time posting, but, ever think this is the way that the car companies here in the US appease the EPA and their fuel standards? If your engine requires more torque to idle, your hydrocarbons instantly go up due to lean load idling..
It is simple. 1) Lack of strong Cafe like consortiums(changeing though). 2) Automotive manufactures set the engine oil spec.'s for their product.3) THe oil must be able to protect the engine when it is running at 180+ KPH even though it might well see more in town use then autobahn use.
I hate to see what prolonged 180KPH speeds would do to 0W20 or 5W20 oils in a engine especialy if iti s turbocharged or super charged.
When ever my German friends come to visit I have to remind them that they can not tool around at 120+++ MPH. THey do not much care if they get a ticket since they only vistit ever couple of years. They forgett that the traffic around them is not accoustomed to their style of driveing and they do not know what the flashing left hand blinker means!
Imagine 3 men and my wife to be in a Colt or sprint going 120 down I95S! This was when I lived in Georgia. Talk about scary!!!! I kept telling Gunter to slow down!!! It is hard to tell a ex-field marshal anyting. When I was 21 he was about 45 so in his I was just a kid!
Kev99sl: agrred that vehicles have a mix of sppeds and loads, but the mfr doesn't know whether the driver is the blue rinse type, or pushy rep. who lives on the autobahn or mway. The vehicle has to cater for both. As for "heavy" oils, the fuel consumption of small engined cars seems to be perfectly OK on the diet provided by 10w-40 etc. However, if your vehicle population includes a large proprtion of 4x4's with a large frontal area and 2 ton weight, then somehow there has to be a compensatory reduction. Albeit minute, when you consider returns like 10-15mpg from gasoline engined SUV's. What improvement in mpg will a 20 weight oil give? Raise the mpg to a range 11- 16.5mpg? Just curious.
quote:Just to clarify, my point is that thicker oils in most engines are OK, and likely better long-term for engine wear. I'm saying that the reason engines in the U.S. "require" thinner oils has more to do with CAFE and/or selling consumers vehicles based on MPG figures, and not much to do with what's actually best for the engine. Nobody has shown that cars in Europe are routinely driven at such high speeds or loads that would justify the gap between what is recommended in Europe vs. what's recommended here. So cars in Germany go 120 MPH? Fine. All that tells me is that a 40, 50, or even 60 weight oil must surely be just fine when that vehicle is also driven at lower speeds. Not all vehicles in the world are routinely driven 120 MPH, but they are all driven at speeds lower than that. In other words, manufacturers must believe that the heavier oils are just peachy for a wider range of speeds/loads. Hence, it doesn't make sense that such weights in identical engines over here will do any harm. And, logically speaking, one can conclude that the heavier weights are actually better long-term in terms of wear. Yeah, your mileage will suffer. Big deal. Some of us don't care about the 1-3 MPG we lose with thicker oils.
Originally posted by nortones2: Kev99sl: agrred that vehicles have a mix of sppeds and loads, but the mfr doesn't know whether the driver is the blue rinse type, or pushy rep. who lives on the autobahn or mway. The vehicle has to cater for both. As for "heavy" oils, the fuel consumption of small engined cars seems to be perfectly OK on the diet provided by 10w-40 etc. However, if your vehicle population includes a large proprtion of 4x4's with a large frontal area and 2 ton weight, then somehow there has to be a compensatory reduction. Albeit minute, when you consider returns like 10-15mpg from gasoline engined SUV's. What improvement in mpg will a 20 weight oil give? Raise the mpg to a range 11- 16.5mpg? Just curious.
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon}
It’s been said here before, but it’s worth saying again. 20W oils are CAFE driven and have nothing to do with engine protection or bearing clearances. The cost to manufacturers for failure to meet CAFÉ are HUGE. Go to NHSTA’s website and see for yourself. For example, a manufacturer who fails to meet the CAFÉ requirement of 20.7 MPG average for light trucks pays a serious penalty. Missing the 20.7 MPG requirement by just 0.1 MPG (20.6MPG) will cost a manufacturer of 400,000 trucks $2.2M in penalties ($5.50 per vehicle per 0.1 MPG under the CAFÉ requirement).
Ford’s case proves what it’s all about. They wanted to use it to help meet CAFÉ. The EPA said OK as long as you 1) Ensure customers use it, 2) Make sure it’s readily available, and 3) You demonstrate it’s actually being used through oil sale numbers. So Ford not only recommends it (if not actually requiring it) for nearly all it’s new engines, but goes even further and makes the recommendation retroactive back 7+ years on many older vehicles to help sell the oil.
The oil may be fine in some engines. It may even be great in a few others. But when you combine the fact that it’s current recommendation was born in an attempt to meet CAFÉ fuel economy standards, with the lack of any manufacturer claiming the oil provides engine protection superior to existing oils, there is little reason for the individual interested in maximum engine protection to use it.
It’s recommended for my Ranger, and I’ve used it. It seems to work fine, especially in the winter. But in the summer, I can’t tell any difference in fuel economy between Motorcraft 5W20 and Mobil 1 5W30. Good 30 weight oils have a proven track record with regard to engine protection. Is there any evidence that a good 20 weight offers engine protection superior to a good 30 weight for summer use? If not, and if there is no significant difference in fuel mileage, what’s the benefit to anyone other than the manufacturer?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked