Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: Best F100
I believe, Patman had good results using GC in a Civic, if I remember.
I did get good wear numbers in my wife's 2000 Civic (1.6L 106hp engine) with GC, however her engine definitely feels better now that I've switched it to 5w20. The wear numbers with GTX 5w20 are quite good too, and now that GC is almost $9 a liter here (when I stocked up in the past I got a ton of it for $5 or less) I am enjoying the lower cost of a conventional (I often find the 4.4L jug on sale from $11 to $13 here)
GC is a great oil, but I would never recommend it for an engine that calls for 5w20. It's a heck of a lot thicker at 40c for example (close to 70cst, while a lot of 5w20s are 50cst or less)
Not so fast. (I had to get the last word on this one).
Question 1) Were your wear numbers actually better with the thicker GC or the thinner, cheaper 5W20? I don't have them in front of me. It really doesn't matter to me, but after all, the guy said he want to "keep his Honda forever".
Question 2) Is it better for the driver to "feel happy" because the engine is more "rev happy with a thinner oil", OR is it better for the engine to "Be happy" because it is wearing at a slower rate?
There is a recent thread asking "Is 0W30 safe for an engine spec'd for 5W20? In it, a guy named Jim 5, in Calgary, has a higher mileage Acura 3.2 TL which calls for 5W20. He ran Mobil 1 0W20, Pennzoil 5W20 and Esso XD-3 0W30 (which is almost a 40 wt oil). Well, long story short, the thicker Esso XD-3 0W30 was hands, down the appropriate oil (on a wear numbers basis). Someone wish to explain why? Try EPA fuel mandates calling for 5W20.
We all have taken high school science laboratory classes, where we performed a science experiment. We think we knew what the obvious outcome would be. When it did not happen, we had to sit down and explain "what went wrong". So I say, keep an open mind, unless you are suffering from a fuel economy penalty of using a thicker oil.
I rest my case. Case closed.