TGMO has a low VI. What's the MRV?
Found Ultra 0w20...go for it?
- Thread starter BTLew81
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
TGMO has a low VI. What's the MRV?
You mean TGMO 0W-20 has a very high VI (215-220).
We don't know the MRV of the Mobil made TGMO 0W-20.
If you're going to be routinely starting a vehicle unaided down around -30F or colder M1 0W-20 is probably the best bet in a cheap readily available 0W-20.
TGMO has a low VI. What's the MRV?
You mean TGMO 0W-20 has a very high VI (215-220).
We don't know the MRV of the Mobil made TGMO 0W-20.
If you're going to be routinely starting a vehicle unaided down around -30F or colder M1 0W-20 is probably the best bet in a cheap readily available 0W-20.
Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
It's funny how some people form such a strong opinion about an oil they have never used.
I don't use any oil, my wife might use a bit of KY now and then but thats it AFAIK.
I know enough about engines to know the engine doesn't give a rats rear about a little thinner, a little thicker or a little higher VI or any other such things.
I form my opinion based on 42 years of tearing engines apart and seeing the wear and tear first hand.
My father being the owner of a machine shop most of my life taught me to use micrometer and other measuring tools competently. I know the difference between wear you can see and wear you can measure and what it means.
If the engine is built for and specs for xw20 then it should wear okay regardless what brand or VI as long as it meet the spec.
I routinely run 5w30 and 0w40 in Honda 0w20 US spec engines and after 100K see no additional wear on the cams, cranks or cylinder walls. In the case of the iVTEC 3.5 i see less.
I ran a Honda 4 banger on 10w60 for 12 years and over quarter of a million Km and there was no wear outside of factory new spec. I had the engine apart to change an internal stretched chain. It was spec for 10w30.
Going thinner than spec can be risky while going a little thicker can bring better results in many engines like the VQ35De engine. In any case there is no risk going slightly thicker if you live outside the arctic circle.
The OP has a Honda not a Toyota why would he want to run the thinner Toyota oil?
Maybe Honda doesn't care what 0w20 you use.
The may be a small mileage hit from a light 20 to a heavy 30 but between a 0w20 and a another 0w20 its not going to be noticeable and it isn't going to make any difference to the engine whatsoever.
There is nothing magical or special about TGMO, nothing at all. Its just a light 0w20 oil nothing more and nothing less.
I am not bashing the oil, its a good oil but it is not any better than Mobil 1, PP, PU and a host of others in any way. The engine will likely outlive the body on any of them when the oil is changed at regular intervals which IMHO is even more important than what brand of oil you choose.
Change the oil at the proper interval and the engine will say thanks for that and keep on running happily.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm still waiting for evidence of the "real lubrication benefits" that keep getting claimed for TGMO, even over other 0W20s (some of which have other manufacturer approvals).
Surely there's something in the sequence IV wear test (warm-up wear), or any of the other tests that are recognized by industry that would demonstrate this clear superiority, and "real lubrication benefits" to high VI...and they should be easy for one so well versed in this, the oil which we know more about than any other, to wheel out and demonstrate them to us.
But we never get proof, just statements regarding "self evident", and "obvious", and later an insult or three thrown in.
Yea, and funny how none of those industry or manufacturer specs have minimum requirements for viscosity index. Meanwhile many have more stringent specs for wear than the standard API/ILSAC specs. IIRC the Ford spec (met by M1 AFE) runs the Sequence IV test twice as long with the same wear limits.
Quote:
It's funny how some people form such a strong opinion about an oil they have never used.
I don't use any oil, my wife might use a bit of KY now and then but thats it AFAIK.
I know enough about engines to know the engine doesn't give a rats rear about a little thinner, a little thicker or a little higher VI or any other such things.
I form my opinion based on 42 years of tearing engines apart and seeing the wear and tear first hand.
My father being the owner of a machine shop most of my life taught me to use micrometer and other measuring tools competently. I know the difference between wear you can see and wear you can measure and what it means.
If the engine is built for and specs for xw20 then it should wear okay regardless what brand or VI as long as it meet the spec.
I routinely run 5w30 and 0w40 in Honda 0w20 US spec engines and after 100K see no additional wear on the cams, cranks or cylinder walls. In the case of the iVTEC 3.5 i see less.
I ran a Honda 4 banger on 10w60 for 12 years and over quarter of a million Km and there was no wear outside of factory new spec. I had the engine apart to change an internal stretched chain. It was spec for 10w30.
Going thinner than spec can be risky while going a little thicker can bring better results in many engines like the VQ35De engine. In any case there is no risk going slightly thicker if you live outside the arctic circle.
The OP has a Honda not a Toyota why would he want to run the thinner Toyota oil?
Maybe Honda doesn't care what 0w20 you use.
The may be a small mileage hit from a light 20 to a heavy 30 but between a 0w20 and a another 0w20 its not going to be noticeable and it isn't going to make any difference to the engine whatsoever.
There is nothing magical or special about TGMO, nothing at all. Its just a light 0w20 oil nothing more and nothing less.
I am not bashing the oil, its a good oil but it is not any better than Mobil 1, PP, PU and a host of others in any way. The engine will likely outlive the body on any of them when the oil is changed at regular intervals which IMHO is even more important than what brand of oil you choose.
Change the oil at the proper interval and the engine will say thanks for that and keep on running happily.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm still waiting for evidence of the "real lubrication benefits" that keep getting claimed for TGMO, even over other 0W20s (some of which have other manufacturer approvals).
Surely there's something in the sequence IV wear test (warm-up wear), or any of the other tests that are recognized by industry that would demonstrate this clear superiority, and "real lubrication benefits" to high VI...and they should be easy for one so well versed in this, the oil which we know more about than any other, to wheel out and demonstrate them to us.
But we never get proof, just statements regarding "self evident", and "obvious", and later an insult or three thrown in.
Yea, and funny how none of those industry or manufacturer specs have minimum requirements for viscosity index. Meanwhile many have more stringent specs for wear than the standard API/ILSAC specs. IIRC the Ford spec (met by M1 AFE) runs the Sequence IV test twice as long with the same wear limits.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Trav
There is absolutely nothing about TGMO or any other that makes it better than PU in the engine other than someones fantasy.
It's funny how some people form such a strong opinion about an oil they have never used.
TGMO and the few other very high VI oils like it are best thought of as being in a different viscosity grouping than other 0W-20s.
They are simply much lighter on start-up at typical start-up temp's. There is a greater viscosity difference on start-up than there is between a 5W-20 and a 5W-30.
That means greater oil flow.
Now you can try and make the usual thicker oil case that the difference doesn't matter or you'll never notice it etc etc.
Then you could make the even more valid case
that there isn't any signicant difference between a typical OTC 0W-20 like PP, PUP or M1 at non extreme temp's and you'd right.
But why stop there. You could also make the case
that a 5W-30 isn't that much heavier than a 5W-20, certainly not enough that most can notice.
The point is, there are real lubrication benefits inaddition to fuel savings between an oil with a 220 VI and and one at only 170 or less. Or an oil with a 36cSt KV40 vs 46cSt.
Is it huge? No, but it's significant nonetheless.
Significant definition:
adjective
1.
important; of consequence.
Synonyms
1. consequential, momentous, weighty.
....of course one man's ruler may be another man's micrometer.
Originally Posted By: Trav
There is absolutely nothing about TGMO or any other that makes it better than PU in the engine other than someones fantasy.
It's funny how some people form such a strong opinion about an oil they have never used.
TGMO and the few other very high VI oils like it are best thought of as being in a different viscosity grouping than other 0W-20s.
They are simply much lighter on start-up at typical start-up temp's. There is a greater viscosity difference on start-up than there is between a 5W-20 and a 5W-30.
That means greater oil flow.
Now you can try and make the usual thicker oil case that the difference doesn't matter or you'll never notice it etc etc.
Then you could make the even more valid case
that there isn't any signicant difference between a typical OTC 0W-20 like PP, PUP or M1 at non extreme temp's and you'd right.
But why stop there. You could also make the case
that a 5W-30 isn't that much heavier than a 5W-20, certainly not enough that most can notice.
The point is, there are real lubrication benefits inaddition to fuel savings between an oil with a 220 VI and and one at only 170 or less. Or an oil with a 36cSt KV40 vs 46cSt.
Is it huge? No, but it's significant nonetheless.
Significant definition:
adjective
1.
important; of consequence.
Synonyms
1. consequential, momentous, weighty.
....of course one man's ruler may be another man's micrometer.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question