Good read on 0w20 from Honda

Status
Not open for further replies.
VW 502.00 HTHS 3.5 min 15k km / 1 year oci All gasoline engines model year prior to 2000

VW 503.00 HTHS 2.9 - 3.4 30k km / 2 year oci All gasoline engines model year after 2000

Newer oil spec is lower viscosity, double the oci.

One worldwide spec. All countries, all gasoline engines. No difference in the US so it can't be CAFE related. SAE grade is irrelevant otherwise the spec wouldn't be related to HTHSV.

So how can they go lighter and double the oci? Did all the engines change their design exactly in the year 2000?

Why are VW reducing their headroom and making you go twice as long on the oil? Do they know what they are doing?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Most manufacturers also have their own certs or approvals that they require an oil to meet in order to be suitable for use in their engines.

There is more than HTHS visc, @40c visc and @100c visc in play here. They only define the general behaviours of the lubricant and speak nothing to how the lubricant is additized, how it performs at extremely low temperatures....etc. Many of these OTHER characteristics are what the manufacturer cert/approval process is about.


So you're saying that when the Germans introduced / mandated their oil standards in the US after numerous engines ran into problems with regular US spec'd oil, it wasn't just the HTHSV minimum that enabled them to fix the issues. It was other things in the specs as well?

Do you think / know if any of these other specs help with headroom? Perhaps the fact that some oils became long life through other spec changes means they were more likely to protect as the oil aged?

Do you think that maybe when Ford and Toyota are introducing lower viscosity oils they are also looking at these other specs to offset the reduction in headroom? I mean why would Ford introduce their own standards at exactly the same time they introduced 20 weight oil?

Seems to me that in the acid test, ie how engines have performed in real life testing during the last decade in the US, Ford, despite CAFE, got their oil spec's right, and the Germans got it badly wrong.

I don't see Ford settling lawsuits and offering extended warranties on engines due to oil issues. Do you? But the Germans have been.

And those German car owners in the US surely put in 30 or 40 or even 50 weight oil into their engines, while those Ford owners were putting in 20 weight oil.

Maybe the German car owners were out in the desert doing their testing, and the Ford owners were in England.
 
Originally Posted By: Hounds


This particular letter is somewhat dated, but it is typical and describes the procedure followed with regard to emissions testing to include the type and weight of motor oil used by the vehicle manufacturer during emissions testing. Please see the attachment to the letter. You will note the EPA requires the manufacturer to specify the type and weight used in testing in the vehicles owners' manuals. www.ilma.org/advocacy/letters/gf4letter.pdf


Thanks for posting, that's the info for which I was looking. So, a question--here the verbiage:

"To achieve these benefits, it is of critical importance to EPA that pre-production vehicles used by a manufacturer in demonstrating compliance with emissions standards, and in measurements of fuel economy, accurately represent the fuel economy and emissions performance of production vehicles in actual use. Therefore, prior to receiving EPA approval for using the new improved performance GF-4 oil classification,a manufacturer should make reasonable efforts to demonstrate that GF-4 oils will be used by the models and under the in-use conditions for which it is recommended."

And then, there's this part here:

"The manufacturer provides instructions in the Owner’s Manual that clearly and unambiguously identify that GF-4 engine oil (identified by the presence of the American Petroleum Institute (API) “Starburst” logo) of a specific viscosity grade ( 5W20,5W30, 10W30) is to be used in the vehicle’s engine under normal ambient temperature and driving conditions."

Then, there are some additional requirements (clearly labeled on the filler cap or the engine, used as factory fill and the oil used has to be available to consumers). There's some specific language that precludes recommendation based on a range of temperatures if one wants to claim the lowest viscosity. However, look at the bolded part? It appears to me that there would be no implications in making an additional recommendation for conditions which fall outside of "normal operation", such as tracking the car or in "abnormal" ambient conditions.

So, I guess my question is "where does it either state or imply that there would be any implications in having additional viscosity recommendations for special circumstances which fall outside of normal operating parameters"? Because, I don't see it in this letter. The intent actually seems very clear: don't let OEM's sandbag the testing.

I do realize that this is somewhat dated, and maybe there's something else more relevant which has been since published. As an aside, in reading that letter it seems that Toyota dealers not carrying Service Pro 0W20 would be putting them out of compliance...
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock

JOD, several sources and other indicators, strongly point to the fact that this is the case. For example, Ford stated to their dealers that 5w20 was available in Walmart because they had an obligation to make it available.

Logically speaking also, CAFE want to improve fuel economy, so it would be pointless just requiring the testing without doing factory fill, writing 5w20 on the oil fill cap, making 5w20 available as bulk, in other words, asking the manufacturer to follow through as much as possible with actual usage of the fuel saving oil.


Mark, I agree with all of that stuff. However, the argument here seems to be that Ford would somehow be subject to additional requirements if they made *any* other recommendation, even for "atypical use", such as taking a passenger car to the track or driving the car in "abnormal temperatures".

To be honest, the link which was posted is really the only indicator I've seem. Mostly what I've heard is a lot of supposition from people on the internet--which is why I asked. I'm not being obtuse, I'm genuinely curious.
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: MarkStock

JOD, several sources and other indicators, strongly point to the fact that this is the case. For example, Ford stated to their dealers that 5w20 was available in Walmart because they had an obligation to make it available.

Logically speaking also, CAFE want to improve fuel economy, so it would be pointless just requiring the testing without doing factory fill, writing 5w20 on the oil fill cap, making 5w20 available as bulk, in other words, asking the manufacturer to follow through as much as possible with actual usage of the fuel saving oil.


Mark, I agree with all of that stuff. However, the argument here seems to be that Ford would somehow be subject to additional requirements if they made *any* other recommendation, even for "atypical use", such as taking a passenger car to the track or driving the car in "abnormal temperatures".

To be honest, the link which was posted is really the only indicator I've seem. Mostly what I've heard is a lot of supposition from people on the internet--which is why I asked. I'm not being obtuse, I'm genuinely curious.


Understood.

This focus on CAFE and atypical use is ridiculous. Taking the argument in that direction just shows that folks are looking for the exception to the rule.

If you go racing, unless you have a model designed for it, you're using the vehicle in a way that is not in keeping with the warranty. Oil choice is the least of your worries.

Here are some points to consider:

1) Forget about oil weight. If you race, your oci is compromised. You need to change oil regardless of weight.

2) My CLK550 manual also covers the CLK63 AMG. I can't find anything in there about racing usage. If you're racing, you need to find out a whole lot more about you car, not just the oil.

3) If a vehicle comes with a heavy oil like 50 and 60, and a very similar variant comes with 20 weight, the likelihood is that the former is set up for racing. I just took a look at the Boss 302 and it's available in a street version and a racing version. Ferrari etc supply the 60 weight designed for racing. This contention that I have been hard done by because I purchased the street version and didn't know better and now my power has been locked out is yet another piece of ludriocrity (in fact it's so ludicrous, I just invented a new adjective to describe it).
 
I'm still in for any definitive Ford documentation showing that the Mustang GT engine management system uses oil temp as a parameter for setting "limp mode"...
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock
VW 502.00 HTHS 3.5 min 15k km / 1 year oci All gasoline engines model year prior to 2000

VW 503.00 HTHS 2.9 - 3.4 30k km / 2 year oci All gasoline engines model year after 2000

Newer oil spec is lower viscosity, double the oci.

One worldwide spec. All countries, all gasoline engines. No difference in the US so it can't be CAFE related. SAE grade is irrelevant otherwise the spec wouldn't be related to HTHSV.

So how can they go lighter and double the oci? Did all the engines change their design exactly in the year 2000?

Why are VW reducing their headroom and making you go twice as long on the oil? Do they know what they are doing?


Also note that going from a minimum of 3.5 to 2.9 is double the drop in HTHSV as going from 2.9 to 2.6.

It represents a bigger reduction in headroom than Ford or anyone else did when going from 30 weight to 20 weight oil.

And, because I know what the response is going to be, you cannot automatically claim that Ford is closer to the minimum than VW.

Engines are different. The minimum headroom for one engine vs another engine is different. You cannot use 2.6 as a minimum across all manufacturers. We know that German engines operate at higher temps. We know that turbos run hotter.

The minimum HTHSV and headroom needs to be relative to the particular engine.
 
Huge scale of Oil Technology Advances

http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2011/9/12524.html

Quote:
“Over the last few years we’ve been working on the products we have and the oil chemistry,” says Neale. “And that’s given us a phenomenal efficiency improvement, like an 80 percent reduction in wear of metals. That means there’s more power available for the driver for longer. With engines and gearboxes needed to last for multiple races, it means that the power lasts.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock


OVERK1LL - this point that you make I've never disagreed with in principle. Take the same oils except with different HTHSV, take the same engines, and the lower HTHSV oil gives you less headroom. Simple principle.


Yes, except the minute you change the HTHS viscosity, they are no longer the same oils
wink.gif
HTHS is a fundamental component as to how an oil behaves in an engine relative to the bearings and subsequently, altering the HTHS viscosity, alters the oil's behaviour.

Quote:
I can't argue about what is enough headroom because I don't have the data that matters.


I don't know what the exact figure is for the engines in question, but Ford obviously does and subsequently limited power output at a level that still provides some (headroom). That being said, it is going to vary significantly between engines and engine families because the components that are effected the most by HTHS are the bearings.

Quote:
I do see that min HTHSV in German cars is 3.5. That's very high compared to 2.6.


Yes, and again, we've hashed this out before and this is due to oil temperatures that would be seen on the track or during high speed autobahn use. They do not necessary apply to North America. However, the engine would have been designed and tested with these lubricants and these lubricants will also be engineered to perform properly under the Euro-spec extended drains, so the manufacturers are married to their certifications and they aren't going to come out with a certification just for the North American crowd, because what if Joe takes his AMG to the speedway and spins a rod bearing because the American-spec oil wasn't up to the task?

Subsequently the Euro marques "make it easy" by demanding that you use a lubricant that meets their (stringent) specifications that do factor in Autobahn use.... Even if your car will never see it.

Quote:
But on the other hand I see the Japanese, whose engineering I respect the most, pushing down even lower.


1. Japan doesn't have an Autobahn.
2. Roads in Japan do not see the same sort of high speeds as are sustained in Germany.
3. Based on #1 and #2, it is completely worthless to compare what the Japanese spec "in general" from the Germans, because the cars are NOT designed for the same purpose.

Quote:
I see talk about lower friction engines and exotic oil that means the lighter oils have to be synthetic. Surely the headroom must have improved through engineering developments. Surely HTHSV of 2.6 in 2012 is not the same headroom as HTHSV of 2.6 in 1992.


Shannow covered this extensively recently when he talked about bearing SIZE in relation to the reduction viscosity and the Japanese in particular changing the size of their bearings to accommodate the use of these super thin oils.


Quote:
I also see the Japanese attaining engine efficiency through things like less friction, more precision, whereas the Germans are going the route of smaller engines with turbos. The former is an approach that generates less heat, the latter an approach that generates more heat.


Nissan, Subaru, Honda (RDX), Toyota, Mazda...etc have all made and continue to make turbcharged engines. I don't know where you are looking here?

Quote:
Just as the Germans realized their engine designs needed a certain amount of headroom, I think the Japanese also understand the headroom they need.


Yes, which is why Japanese cars like the Nissan GT-R spec 0w40
wink.gif
The Honda S2000 spec'd 10w30 or 5w40, the Lexus IS-F requires 5w30....etc

So even the Japanese step it up a notch or two when power density is increased and the potential usage profile steps outside of the grocery getter range.

Quote:
Now, onto the point of my post. It wasn't about Headroom!

It was about the assertion that it is impossible that one oil fits all.

My point was that Mercedes believes one oil does fit all. In every country, in almost every engine from 1.5L to 6.5L Black Series, M1 0w40 is the recommended oil. This suggests it's viscosity is appropriate for everyone in every operating condition. Grocery getter in mild England to autobahn blaster.


The difference you are seeing is that the Euro marques aren't saying one OIL, or even one VISCOSITY fits all. They are saying one certification, or set of certifications will properly protect the engine regardless of where it is operated. The grade is irrelevant as Trav pointed out, as many of the oils that meet many of the Euro spec's are 0w30, 5w30, 0w40, 5w40..etc. But they meet the spec's for the manufacturer in terms of extended drain capability, engine protection and cleanliness.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock

I just took a look at the Boss 302 and it's available in a street version and a racing version. Ferrari etc supply the 60 weight designed for racing. This contention that I have been hard done by because I purchased the street version and didn't know better and now my power has been locked out is yet another piece of ludriocrity (in fact it's so ludicrous, I just invented a new adjective to describe it).


The BOSS 302 in street or strip trim spec the exact same oil, are fitted with the exact same engine and have the exact same oil cooler. The difference is that the track version is a stripper model, lightened for dedicated track usage. They are both equally track capable, one just has more amenities than the other.

The two version of the BOSS 302 have NOT been compared in this thread, the comparison is between the Mustang GT and the BOSS 302.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock
Huge scale of Oil Technology Advances

http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2011/9/12524.html

Quote:
“Over the last few years we’ve been working on the products we have and the oil chemistry,” says Neale. “And that’s given us a phenomenal efficiency improvement, like an 80 percent reduction in wear of metals. That means there’s more power available for the driver for longer. With engines and gearboxes needed to last for multiple races, it means that the power lasts.




Good article. I like the part about XOM keeping all the research and tribologists in house. They have incredible resources and have really been a large part of McLarens success.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
My CLK550 manual also covers the CLK63 AMG

Are we reading from the same owners manual? Are you sure your not talking about the Taurus maybe?

http://723634aa8cde73188d4661bb3fe81ce4.diplodocs.com/new/external_light.php

Page 375&376


Looks like you can use 0W30 to 20W50 in that engine if I'm reading it right? The AMG is the only one spec'd for 0W40 or 5W40.


Not quite. That chart is confusing and you need to read it more carefully.

The only oils you can use are in the 229.5 spec sheet. The only oils that are available are 0w30, 5w30, 0w40, 5w40 and in each case, the HTHSV has to be 3.5 minimum.

Yes the AMG can only use 40 weight. But that happens to be the recommended oil for all MB vehicles ie M1 0w40 with HTHSV of 3.8.

Mobil 1 racing oil, used for Nascar, is available in 0w30 and 0w50. The 0w50 has a HTHSV of 3.8. The 0w30 has a HTHSV of 3.3.

Interesting that a racing oil has a HTHSV lower than the 3.5 minimum in the MB229.5 spec and that the racing 0w50 has the same HTHSV of 3.8 that is recommended for an A150 and all other Mercedes.

I thought racing was the ultimate test of oil protection and headroom but these aren't shockingly high HTHSVs.

Do you suspect that the manufacturer's understand more about the interplay of oil viscosity (as measured by HTHSV) and other oil characterstics than you do when just talking about SAE grade choice?

What do you think Audi is up to when they say you can go as low as HTHS of 2.9 compared to Mercedes minimum of 3.5? That's a bigger difference than going from 2.9 to 2.6 for the Domestic and Japanese marks.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock


So you're saying that when the Germans introduced / mandated their oil standards in the US after numerous engines ran into problems with regular US spec'd oil, it wasn't just the HTHSV minimum that enabled them to fix the issues. It was other things in the specs as well?

Do you think / know if any of these other specs help with headroom? Perhaps the fact that some oils became long life through other spec changes means they were more likely to protect as the oil aged?


The issue with the German manufacturers and in particular the quick lube and dealer network in North America was that they were using non-spec lubricants for spec-lube applications and these lubricants were being changed at spec intervals.

So you had an oil that was the wrong viscosity (oh, it may have been the right "grade", IE, it was 5w30 but it had a lower HTHS), wasn't designed or tested for extended drains and was being run in an application that demanded both.

This created sludge, varnish, resulted in oil break-down and ultimately there were plenty of engine failures that happened due to this.

The issue was compounded by the fact that America in general was ignorant to the fact that "Euro spec" oils were in fact quite different and that 5w30 wasn't just 5w30 when it came to their VW for example. On top of that, the Euro-spec oils were extremely difficult to obtain and were not stocked by the quick lube joints (which used whatever bulk oil they had that matched the grade on the oil cap) or even the dealer network.

Since that time period, Euro oils have become much more readily available in North America, GC 0w30 and M1 0w40 are two very good examples of these oils that are available pretty much everywhere.

The German manufacturers clamped down on their dealer networks here to ensure that proper lubricants were being used as well. Though I'm not sure what steps were taken to deal with the issues that occurred regarding the quick lube market........

Quote:
Do you think that maybe when Ford and Toyota are introducing lower viscosity oils they are also looking at these other specs to offset the reduction in headroom? I mean why would Ford introduce their own standards at exactly the same time they introduced 20 weight oil?


Ford's approach is a model as to how things should be done. They made their oil widely available right off the bat and made it VERY well known that the oil they spec'd is they oil that should be used.

But

Ford didn't extend their drain intervals or require more from the oil than the oils that were already in the market. IE, if you ran 5w30 in your 5w20 spec'd modular, nothing bad was going to happen.

The same applies to Toyota here.

The situation in Germany and I believe Europe in general was and still is significantly different than what goes on in North America. Oils are MUCH more expensive, and changed FAR less frequently. These extended drain intervals and expensive oils have little in common with what was available over here up until VERY recently.

This was a significant oversight by the German auto manufacturers marking their products here. They did not factor in having to make lubricants that met their spec's readily available in the North American market. And they did not anticipate the wrong oil being used in place of the spec'd lubricant, let alone by their own dealer networks.

So while I see the comparison you are trying to make between Ford and Toyota's adoption of low viscosity oils in North America and the massive failure encountered by the German auto marques and their long drain oil specs I must say that I can't agree with it.

As fuel prices have increased, there has a been a natural and gradual progression to lighter oils to aide in improving fuel economy. Well after this movement began, extended drain intervals using sophisticated oil life monitoring systems were employed based on widely available (read: not euro spec) lubricants. At the same time, consumer education was increased to stress the importance of using an oil with an "approved" label (like DEXOS for example).

But as I pointed out earlier, the key difference here is that even if you used the "wrong" oil in a thin spec application, you were not going to cause any damage. Quite the opposite of running too thin an oil in your twin turbo Audi which was designed and tested on a much heavier lubricant.


Quote:
Seems to me that in the acid test, ie how engines have performed in real life testing during the last decade in the US, Ford, despite CAFE, got their oil spec's right, and the Germans got it badly wrong.


This is Ford's home market. They took a progressive approach that had limited liability attached to it. They obviously had a much better grasp on the American consumer and his behaviours than the Germans did.

Quote:
I don't see Ford settling lawsuits and offering extended warranties on engines due to oil issues. Do you? But the Germans have been.


And so did Toyota actually.

Quote:
And those German car owners in the US surely put in 30 or 40 or even 50 weight oil into their engines, while those Ford owners were putting in 20 weight oil.

Maybe the German car owners were out in the desert doing their testing, and the Ford owners were in England.


As I mentioned earlier, it wasn't just the grade of oil. That's just a number on the bottle.
 
Originally Posted By: bubbajoe_2112
I'm still in for any definitive Ford documentation showing that the Mustang GT engine management system uses oil temp as a parameter for setting "limp mode"...


Ed posted it earlier.
 
Originally Posted By: MarkStock
VW 502.00 HTHS 3.5 min 15k km / 1 year oci All gasoline engines model year prior to 2000

VW 503.00 HTHS 2.9 - 3.4 30k km / 2 year oci All gasoline engines model year after 2000

Newer oil spec is lower viscosity, double the oci.

One worldwide spec. All countries, all gasoline engines. No difference in the US so it can't be CAFE related. SAE grade is irrelevant otherwise the spec wouldn't be related to HTHSV.

So how can they go lighter and double the oci? Did all the engines change their design exactly in the year 2000?

Why are VW reducing their headroom and making you go twice as long on the oil? Do they know what they are doing?


What does the oil weight have to do with OCI length? It is the additive pack and the oil's general robustness that determines how long it can go. Obviously the 503 spec has a more demanding long drain component to it.

The change in HTHS indicates a change in bearing design to deal with the lighter lubricant. VW has become a very global company with a significant North American presence. This may indicate a shift in focus on cars that spec 503 to achieve better fuel economy while still providing adequate protection.

Does this spec apply to their highest performance offerings or only their more pedestrian product lines?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Subsequently the Euro marques "make it easy" by demanding that you use a lubricant that meets their (stringent) specifications that do factor in Autobahn use.... Even if your car will never see it.


So without pressure from CAFE, Mercedes is limiting the choice in America. Interesting.

Indeed, everyone in the world is being held to the German standard.

Which means globally, we're not being given the opportunity to save fuel without invalidating our warranty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom