going over my mpg records and thick oil did not hurt mpg's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
175
Location
Ooooooooklahoma
I have used Mobil 1 10W-30, Synpower 10W-30, Delvac 1, Syntec 5W-40, and Delo 400 15W-40 in my 94 Toyota pickup(22RE). I calculated the average mpg over their interval's and the data is below: C. Syntec 5W-40... 27.2 mpg Valvoline 10W-30... 26.2 Delvac 1 5W-40... 26.0 Mobil 1 10W-30... 25.5 Delo 15W-40... 25.3 V. Synpower 10W-30... 24.1 All intervals were a combination of warm and cold weather except the Syntec which was run from April through November(I believe this explains the jump). No mechanical problems or major tune ups during these intervals. Also, the Delo sample saw very little highway driving which had to hurt its average some. All samples were run between 3 and 4K miles. Anyway, the point of my post is that my records on this vehicle do not support the claim that lower viscosity oils and/or synthetic oils provide better fuel economy(of any significance). I was surprised. FYI I'm currently about 2000 miles into an interval of Mystik 10W-30, and my average is a lousy 22.6 mpg, with more than normal highway driving. I will be testing Pennzoil HD30 this summer.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
526
Location
Manitoba Canada
You should NOT be surprised. I purchased new a 1990 Toyota 4Runner with 3.0 V6 and 5spd. A very heavy underpowered SUV. When I moved to Salt Lake City 1993-1998, driving I-15 and I-80 at 75-80 MPH I never exceeded 17 MPG. I ran Mobil 1 15W-50 year round. I did try a short OCI from May to July with Mobil 1 5W-30. Know what my "gain" was? ZERO. Nothing. Except I had WAY more valvetrain noise. I should have "expected" some gain going from a 15W-50 to a 5W-30, right?? Remember that according to API/SAE J300 and ILSAC GF-3 VIB fuel economy test protocols, the "fuel saving" oils will give you 0.6% to 2% (Maximum) over the "reference" oil. When tested at the mandatory 96 hour aging, the "gain" is dramatically lower. At even 2%, it's statistically "noise" and you won't notice it. Unless your car already gets 100 MPG. In my fleet, Running Cummins ISX motors and Eaton Dana HP-40 tandems, I've also never noticed any fleet difference just by using different oils. Want to save fuel? 1. Buy a small efficient car, say a Toyota Echo or Prius 2. Keep the suspension in perfect alignment 3. Keep the motor in good tune 4. Use good all season tires properly inflated. Even +40 psi if the tire allows 5. Drive gently I don't "bash" light oils. They have their place. When it dips to -42, you can bet I've got Mobil 1 0W-30 in my sump. I wouldn't be at all afraid to run Mobil 1 0W-20 in winter if I thought it had better MRV performance at colder than -20. Jerry
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
23,591
I'm not surprised, because I've never noticed any difference in mileage due to the oil. I know however, that fuel with MTBE gives me 15% worse mileage than fuel without it.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
2,569
Location
College Dorm...
Thanks for posting your results toyvwbenz. Just once again goes to back up what I've said in the past.. Thinner viscosity oils do show small fuel economy improvements during O.E. testing, but in actual service, the difference is too small to notice given day-to-day variations in operation. Like I've previously said, I'll take a good viscosity and high HT/HS numbers over a thin oil with low HT/HS that will give me a very small increase in fuel economy that I'll most likely never notice.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
526
Location
Manitoba Canada
quote:
Originally posted by moribundman: I'm not surprised, because I've never noticed any difference in mileage due to the oil. I know however, that fuel with MTBE gives me 15% worse mileage than fuel without it.
I'm glad you brought up the fuel blending. The EPA claims to be improving local emissions, such as PM10, by using this witches brew of oxygenates and additives. When I lived in Salt Lake City, due to the high elevation and the valley trapping all the smog, they had quite a few non-compliant days, especially in winter. So they required the blended gas with MTBE to control smog and PM10. Yet I also got at least 10% less MPG. So please carefully explain to me how I'm "helping" the environment by burning 15% MORE fuel running MTBE?? You can tell when the government offers a "solution" can't you? This must be some sort of "new math" my college calculus didn't cover, sort of like "Enron math." Jerry
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
23,591
heyjay wrote:
quote:
So please carefully explain to me how I'm "helping" the environment by burning 15% MORE fuel running MTBE?? You can tell when the government offers a "solution" can't you? This must be some sort of "new math" my college calculus didn't cover, sort of like "Enron math."
I'm not a professional mathematician, so I can't comment on that. [Wink]
 
Joined
May 28, 2002
Messages
2,480
I don't think this is an accurate test though. Try this...at -10F run 15-50 and then a 5-30or 0-20 of the same brand at the same temperature. You WILL notice a difference per tankfull of each grade. ie. don't piddle with a 30 vs. 40 comparison....we' already established that some actually overlap...eg. GC is almost a 40 anyway.
 

toyvwbenz

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
175
Location
Ooooooooklahoma
quote:
I don't think this is an accurate test though.
There is no question about the accuracy. I double checked the math. I think you mean it is not relevant to someone dealing with frequent subzero F. temps. Yes, I will agree with that. I'm not telling anyone what oil to use. I am just sharing my data. FYI.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
23,591
Dr. T wrote:
quote:
Try this...at -10F run 15-50 and then a 5-30or 0-20 of the same brand at the same temperature. You WILL notice a difference per tankfull of each grade.
My dear doctor, when am I going to find insanely low temperatures like -15 degrees (Celcius or Fahrenheit, for that matter) here? I don't even encounter +15 degrees F! [Wink]
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
46,589
Location
New Jersey
I think the key is that the small difference over a large population makes a semi-significant difference. the small bit of reduced protection from going to a 30 wt when a 40wt is better is nearly unnoticed person to person... Over 100 million cars on the road, maybe 0.5% have to have an engine replaced because of excessive wear... The small bit of fuel saved by going to a 30 wt instead of 40wt is unnoticed by the regular driver. But that 0.1 gallon saved each tankful, multiplied by 100 million cars, multiplied by howmany tankfuls we buy as a year probably turnbs out to be a reasonably significant number. Even if its 100k gallons, thats a lot of barrels of crude that werenot importing, or a lot less emissions were not putting out. Its hard to expect a miracle from one person/one engine. But lots of people with lots of engines can make a significant difference. Its like in that movie office space, where they stole the fractions of a cent that were ususally rounded. In no time they stole a LOT of money, because of the number of transactions going through. JMH
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
451
Location
Bribie Island, Oz
Another side of that coin, is ,by changing to a lighter weight oil, how much is consumed by the engine? You may save a couple of gallons of gas, but find the need to top up the oil by a half a quart every 3,000 miles. Dave
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
46,589
Location
New Jersey
Ive never seen any consumption of 30wt oils in vehicles suggesting the use of them. Maybe Im just lucky, but between my 98 chevy truck, my mothers 97 plymouth and my fathers 94 toyota, there has been NO evidence! On my 83 MB 300D (daily driver) and my 91 BMW, both of which are specced for heavier oils, I do see a bit of usage (not 1/2qt/3k) JMH
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
2,095
Location
IL
quote:
Originally posted by DavoNF: Another side of that coin, is ,by changing to a lighter weight oil, how much is consumed by the engine? You may save a couple of gallons of gas, but find the need to top up the oil by a half a quart every 3,000 miles. Dave
That's exactly why I went back to 10w-40 Red Line, tried 10w-30 a few intervals and consumption was much higher. Get about 1500 more miles out of a quart with the 10w-40.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
526
Location
Manitoba Canada
quote:
Originally posted by JHZR2: I think the key is that the small difference over a large population makes a semi-significant difference. the small bit of reduced protection from going to a 30 wt when a 40wt is better is nearly unnoticed person to person... Over 100 million cars on the road, maybe 0.5% have to have an engine replaced because of excessive wear... The small bit of fuel saved by going to a 30 wt instead of 40wt is unnoticed by the regular driver. But that 0.1 gallon saved each tankful, multiplied by 100 million cars, multiplied by howmany tankfuls we buy as a year probably turnbs out to be a reasonably significant number. Even if its 100k gallons, thats a lot of barrels of crude that werenot importing, or a lot less emissions were not putting out. Its hard to expect a miracle from one person/one engine. But lots of people with lots of engines can make a significant difference. Its like in that movie office space, where they stole the fractions of a cent that were ususally rounded. In no time they stole a LOT of money, because of the number of transactions going through. JMH
I would like to see ANOVA, Chi Square, DFFITS, etc, run on the data to verify that. If the EPA is correct, then the Europeans should jump on board the "thin is better" boat to help save their drivers money. I don't "bash" light oils. Indeed, I believe in matching a viscosity to the season, so at -40 you can bet I have a 0W-30 in the sump. Jerry
 

toyvwbenz

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
175
Location
Ooooooooklahoma
quote:
the small bit of reduced protection from going to a 30 wt when a 40wt is better is nearly unnoticed person to person... Over 100 million cars on the road, maybe 0.5% have to have an engine replaced because of excessive wear...
maybe this will help. "Short-term Thinking As wear increases, the efficiency of an engine declines. Valve train wear slightly changes valve timing and movement. Ring and liner wear affect compression. The wear hurts fuel efficiency and power output by an imperceptible amount at first, but then the difference in fuel economy between an SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-20 is hardly noticeable. Efficiency continues to decline as wear progresses. Perhaps optimizing wear protection is the way to reduce fuel consumption over the life of the engine." [ March 04, 2004, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: toyvwbenz ]
 
Joined
May 28, 2002
Messages
2,480
I wasn't questioning the scientific method utilized. The statement of accuracy was with respect to conclusions drawn from the materials utilized [Cheers!] .
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2003
Messages
2,602
Location
The Tropics of Antartica
quote:
Originally posted by toyvwbenz: I'm currently about 2000 miles into an interval of Mystik 10W-30, and my average is a lousy 22.6 mpg, with more than normal highway driving. I will be testing Pennzoil HD30 this summer.
You are using this oil Diesel and with an additive pack like that it comes as no surprise that even though it's a 30wt you mileage suffers . Not trying to pick your observations apart but I only noticed one 15w-40 listed with the VI at 40c " the 5w-40's don't count [Smile] " over 110 or thereabouts along with no accounting for what winter gas would have done to decrease the mileage in any of your listings . I think your mileage will pick up when you start using the Pennzoil [ March 05, 2004, 07:26 AM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top