Good read on 0w20 from Honda

[Trav]

Quote:
Mr Twister at it again


You own medicine doesn't taste good does it it?
Trying to pass of min and max temps ever recorded to make England look like a harsh environment instead of the average which is realistic.
Sure New Orleans was under 15ft of water but does that mean thats the average storm surge and to visit you better take a rubber dingy with you.

Quote:
Do those pages say anything about racing?

No and it sure doesn't spec 0w40 only for every MB engine in every country in the world does it.
Quote:
I said Mercedes recommends Mobil 1 0w40 everywhere. In every country for small engines, for medium engines, for AMG 6.5L engines on Black Series CLK's, SL's.

Sure 0w40 maybe included but there is a wide range of oils that can be used.

You were implying 0w40w was the only or you would have mentioned the the other weights as well as Shannow quickly pointed out. Busted.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock
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.


Yes, you are limited to using any of the numerous oils holding the necessary certification for your application.

That is how they design and test their vehicles. If you don't like it, don't buy a German car. It really IS that simple.

I think this is a far safe approach then just giving the North American consumer the benefit of the doubt, as we've already discussed how well that worked out.

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: Trav
You were implying 0w40w was the only or you would have mentioned the the other weights as well as Shannow quickly pointed out. Busted.


You are too funny!

I'm not using SAE grades at all in my thinking. I'm trying to point out to you that you're overly relying on SAE grades as a proxy for choice when the correct measurement of viscosity is HTHSV.

Your German engineering Gods are using the HTHSV measurement to specify viscosity requirements. You think that because it can fall into two different SAE grades, that this gives you a choice, when it doesn't really. Your understanding is lacking here. When you argue with Caterham about thick 30 and thin 40, it's because he's explaining in SAE terms for people like you who haven't gotten their thinking around HTHSV even when their countrymen Gods have.

Because I am using HTHSV not SAE grades, I said the minimum HTHSV was 3.5 and the recommended was 3.8. What the oil manufacturers end up providing could fall into 30 weight or 40 weight, but that's just an SAE categorization that we're not in fact interested in.

The good news for you is that there is no maximum HTHSV so there is no maximum SAE grade. You can be as thick as you want! You should be happy! I know my point is proven on your desire to be thick!

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

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.


While they may not be saying "one size fits all" with respect to kinematic viscosity, the hths requirements of the various certifications certainly do limit choice of oil viscosity. As far as BMW, all of the approved oils are in the 3.5-3.8 range, which is a similar range to Ford's 2.6-2.8 (implicit in the API specs). So, in essence they do also seem to by saying "one size fits all"; it's just that all of Ford's sizes happen to fit under the 20W umbrella, and BMW's span over 2 different ranges (30W and 40W). The requirements are just as rigid.

Which, of course, begs another question: why doesn't BMW offer its North American customers other options which may be more suitable for their driving conditions, e.g. no extended high-speed driving. Obviously the spec'd oil has to be suitable for driving on the autobahn. Why should a customer in NA have to have the same headroom?

 

[bubbajoe_2112]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
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.


Nah, that wasn't Ford documentation...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock
Originally Posted By: Trav
You were implying 0w40w was the only or you would have mentioned the the other weights as well as Shannow quickly pointed out. Busted.


You are too funny!

I'm not using SAE grades at all in my thinking. I'm trying to point out to you that you're overly relying on SAE grades as a proxy for choice when the correct measurement of viscosity is HTHSV.

Your German engineering Gods are using the HTHSV measurement to specify viscosity requirements. You think that because it can fall into two different SAE grades, that this gives you a choice, when it doesn't really. Your understanding is lacking here. When you argue with Caterham about thick 30 and thin 40, it's because he's explaining in SAE terms for people like you who haven't gotten their thinking around HTHSV even when their countrymen Gods have.

Because I am using HTHSV not SAE grades, I said the minimum HTHSV was 3.5 and the recommended was 3.8. What the oil manufacturers end up providing could fall into 30 weight or 40 weight, but that's just an SAE categorization that we're not in fact interested in.

The good news for you is that there is no maximum HTHSV so there is no maximum SAE grade. You can be as thick as you want! You should be happy! I know my point is proven on your desire to be thick!


Actually, many of the past discussions between CATERHAM and Trav have revolved specifically around HTHS and its relevance on how the vehicle is being used vs what the manufacturer specifies. These discussions happened long before you joined this board.

Trav doesn't need me to stick up for him here, but you are being overly obtuse trying to make a point that quite frankly is nothing but rudely conveyed bashing of another member on a topic that they certainly DO understand.

And for the record, up until the SN version, Mobil 1 0w40 had an HTHS of 3.6cP, not 3.8.

And you certainly DO have a choice. There are significant differences between oils like GC 0w30, M1 0w40 and Valvoline MST 5w40 for example, even though they all meet similar spec's. They have different VI's, different cold temperature performance and are in general, just very different lubricants by design. But they all guarantee a minimum level of performance because of the spec's they meet.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: bubbajoe_2112
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
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.


Nah, that wasn't Ford documentation...


Gotcha. Sorry, I don't have any. But we DO know they monitor it, as it is available on the screen and we've had a member observe it happen at the track. If that isn't enough to confirm its existence for you, I welcome you to contact Ford yourself and find out.

On the other hand, the presence of such a system shouldn't surprise you, as Nissan has used it for years to protect cars like the GT-R, which manage to overheat their oil surprisingly quickly......

 

[Trav]

Quote:
two different SAE grades,

0w30, 5w30 0w40, 5w40, 5w50, 10w30, 10w40, 10w50, 10w60, 15w40, 15w50, 20w40, 20w50.
Two grades? How much choice do you want?

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: MarkStock
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.


There was another point behind this, which was that Trav did this:

1) He claimed that only in the US did Toyota spec 0w20
2) Then when it was pointed out that the UK spec'd only 0w20 he said the UK had mild weather but the US was incorrectly spec'd
3) When it was pointed out that 0w20 was allowed in Australia as per Castrol Australia website, he said he would defer to Australian posters, rather than believe an oil website which he himself is using as reference for his own points including the order in which alternative oils are listed as some sort of preference

All of the above was as proof that Toyota was running away from 20 weight oil.

I pointed out to him that Toyota allows 0w20 in Germany but spec 0w30 because of the autobahn, not because they are running away from 0w20. In other countries, they don't have the driving conditions that they have in Germany, hence they can recommend 0w20.

You've confirmed that ie

1) Japanese cars spec 0w20 as their primary market is not Germany. But in Germany they spec 0w30 but don't disallow 0w20.

2) German cars spec HTHS higher (VW 2.9 which is not that high but MB 3.5) because of the autobahn. They don't change that spec outside of Germany.

So globally speaking, the autobahn is pretty much the only factor altering oil spec. Toyota recognize that and match oil viscosity to use. But Germans don't recognize that in reverse and do not match oil viscosity in reverse.

(Even though Trav believes that xw30 and xw40 are some sort of choice when the MB, BMW, VW, Porsche specs constrain that choice and the 30/40 designation is narrower in viscosity than the range of viscosity allowable within a single SAE grade)

 

[MarkStock]

Your friend already posted on this. Please find anything outside 30 or 40 weight that is allowed by MB229.5.

I know that you don't read my posts correctly, but you might want to learn from your friends.

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
two different SAE grades,

0w30, 5w30 0w40, 5w40, 5w50, 10w30, 10w40, 10w50, 10w60, 15w40, 15w50, 20w40, 20w50.
Two grades? How much choice do you want?


Originally Posted By: Shannow
As to choice...

http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten/229.5_en.html

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but there are a couple of grades in there aren't there ?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock


There was another point behind this, which was that Trav did this:

1) He claimed that only in the US did Toyota spec 0w20
2) Then when it was pointed out that the UK spec'd only 0w20 he said the UK had mild weather but the US was incorrectly spec'd
3) When it was pointed out that 0w20 was allowed in Australia as per Castrol Australia website, he said he would defer to Australian posters, rather than believe an oil website which he himself is using as reference for his own points including the order in which alternative oils are listed as some sort of preference

All of the above was as proof that Toyota was running away from 20 weight oil.

I pointed out to him that Toyota allows 0w20 in Germany but spec 0w30 because of the autobahn, not because they are running away from 0w20. In other countries, they don't have the driving conditions that they have in Germany, hence they can recommend 0w20.

You've confirmed that ie

1) Japanese cars spec 0w20 as their primary market is not Germany. But in Germany they spec 0w30 but don't disallow 0w20.

2) German cars spec HTHS higher (VW 2.9 which is not that high but MB 3.5) because of the autobahn. They don't change that spec outside of Germany.

So globally speaking, the autobahn is pretty much the only factor altering oil spec. Toyota recognize that and match oil viscosity to use. But Germans don't recognize that in reverse and do not match oil viscosity in reverse.

(Even though Trav believes that xw30 and xw40 are some sort of choice when the MB, BMW, VW, Porsche specs constrain that choice and the 30/40 designation is narrower in viscosity than the range of viscosity allowable within a single SAE grade)


Mark:

You must realize though that it doesn't work in reverse.

If I design an engine to run on 5w20 with an HTHS of 2.6cP, it isn't going to blow up if i run GC 0w30 in it with an HTHS of 3.5cP.

But on the other hand, if I design an engine to run on M1 0w40 with a minimum spec'd HTHS of 3.5cP and somebody runs 5w20 in it, depending on how they use the car, they may exceed the ability of the lubricant to protect the engine and they spin a rod bearing.

Basically, the safety margin thing only works in one direction. You can design an engine to run on thinner and thinner oils by increasing oil pump volume and bearing size and still run that engine without issue or catastrophic failure on a heavier lubricant. It may not be optimal, but it isn't going to hurt anything.

But you design an engine to run on a heavy lubricant and then dump something thin in the pan, if that oil gets too hot and thins enough, bad things are going to happen. The bearings won't be wide enough to carry the load with the thinner oil and contact happens. When contact happens either you are lucky and the EP additives save you, unlucky, and you spin a rod bearing, or REALLY unlucky and the rod bearing spins, seizes, and the rod windows the block.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
[/quote]
but once you get below the 2.6cP area (remember, HTHS is measured at 150C) the potential for wiping a bearing becomes incredibly high. So if you start with a lubricant who's HTHS is 2.6cP at 150C, you start off with a VERY narrow safety margin once temperatures climb.

friendly_jacek posted an interesting link a few months ago (sorry I can't find it, perhaps he could dig it up again) giving the HTHSV values at different oil temp's for some oils plus the bearing wiping points. I don't know what the test engine was but IIRC for a 2.6cP 5W-20, bearing wiping occurred at 130C, for a 3.1cP 5W-30 it occurred as oil temp's approached 140C, and for a 3.5cP rated oil as the bulk oil temp's approached 150C.

So getting back to the stock Mustang GT, I would suspect that the engine management safeties would limit maximum oil temp's to somewhere in the 125-130C range. So for the sake of argument, lets assume the maximum safe oil temp' would therefore be 129C, and the minimum optimum viscosity on the spec' 5W-20 oil would be at that temperature. The operational viscosities at all oil temp's below that point would be heavier than necessary.
Now even 120C is a high oil temperature that is rarely seen on the street, and even at the track in most situations. Consiquently the typical GT owner is likely never going to experience his car in a fail-safe mode and will enjoy full power whenever he wants it. The spec' 5W-20 oil will not likely be spoiling his fun in any way, plus he will enjoy all the efficiencies of running the a relatively light 20wt oil.

Now lets say he trades his Mustang GT in for a Boss 302, the 444hp version, with the spec' 5W-50 oil. This is certainly a much more track ready car and without doubt he could thrash it all day long at the track just stopping to refill with more premium gas and going out again for some more high speed full throttle fun. The management safety bar will be set far higher so that he could likely visit 150C oil temp's without issue. The problem is, unless he is constantly seeing oil temp's well above 130C he's not benefiting in any way from the heavier oil in the sump.
On the street he's now running much heavier oil than necessary, which through increased oil drag is eating up most of the extra 24 hp he paid so dearly for, plus the insult of noticeably reduced fuel economy. If this guy was a BITOG member and he asked for an oil recommendation I'd tell him to install a decent set of oil gauges,and if he never sees oil temp's above 120C then go back to the 5W-20 spec' oil used in the GT (warranty concerns notwithstanding).

 

[MarkStock]

For Trav & demarpaint

Grade Viscosity Range at 100c HTHSV at 150c

20 5.6-9.3 2.6
30 9.3-12.5 2.9
40 12.5-16.3 3.5 for 0w/5w/10w 3.7 for 15w/20w/25w
50 16.3-21.9 3.7
60 21.9-26.1 3.7

 

[bubbajoe_2112]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: bubbajoe_2112
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
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.


Nah, that wasn't Ford documentation...


Gotcha. Sorry, I don't have any. But we DO know they monitor it, as it is available on the screen and we've had a member observe it happen at the track. If that isn't enough to confirm its existence for you, I welcome you to contact Ford yourself and find out.

On the other hand, the presence of such a system shouldn't surprise you, as Nissan has used it for years to protect cars like the GT-R, which manage to overheat their oil surprisingly quickly......


2011 Mustang Owner's Manual

Sure looks like limp mode is based on coolant temp and not oil temp. Start at pg. 283.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

friendly_jacek posted an interesting link a few months ago (sorry I can't find it, perhaps he could dig it up again) giving the HTHSV values at different oil temp's for some oils plus the bearing wiping points. I don't know what the test engine was but IIRC for a 2.6cP 5W-20, bearing wiping occurred at 130C, for a 3.1cP 5W-30 it occurred as oil temp's approached 140C, and for a 3.5cP rated oil as the bulk oil temp's approached 150C.

So getting back to the stock Mustang GT, I would suspect that the engine management safeties would limit maximum oil temp's to somewhere in the 125-130C range. So for the sake of argument, lets assume the maximum safe oil temp' would therefore be 129C, and the minimum optimum viscosity on the spec' 5W-20 oil would be at that temperature. The operational viscosities at all oil temp's below that point would be heavier than necessary.
Now even 120C is a high oil temperature that is rarely seen on the street, and even at the track in most situations. Consiquently the typical GT owner is likely never going to experience his car in a fail-safe mode and will enjoy full power whenever he wants it. The spec' 5W-20 oil will not likely be spoiling his fun in any way, plus he will enjoy all the efficiencies of running the a relatively light 20wt oil.

Now lets say he trades his Mustang GT in for a Boss 302, the 444hp version, with the spec' 5W-50 oil. This is certainly a much more track ready car and without doubt he could thrash it all day long at the track just stopping to refill with more premium gas and going out again for some more high speed full throttle fun. The management safety bar will be set far higher so that he could likely visit 150C oil temp's without issue. The problem is, unless he is constantly seeing oil temp's well above 130C he's not benefiting in any way from the heavier oil in the sump.
On the street he's now running much heavier oil than necessary, which through increased oil drag is eating up most of the extra 24 hp he paid so dearly for, plus the insult of noticeably reduced fuel economy. If this guy was a BITOG member and he asked for an oil recommendation I'd tell him to install a decent set of oil gauges,and if he never sees oil temp's above 120C then go back to the 5W-20 spec' oil used in the GT (warranty concerns notwithstanding).


Somewhat similar to the BMW situation with the M5. I've only briefly seen 100C oil temps. But I DO have a factory oil cooler that is pretty big.

But the guys running TWS 10w60 are giving up power in regular use over those of us using an LL-01 oil like M1 0w40 (which of course you know I run).

The BOSS 302 has some slight internal changes that would prevent me from recommending 5w20 in it (IIRC, the deletion of piston squirters is one of those things) but I would consider something lighter than the 5w50, say M1 0w40, GC 0w30...etc being a more appropriate general lubricant for this application.... confirmed with oil temperature and pressure tracking of course.

That being said, the guy who buys the BOSS 302 likely isn't going after fuel economy. So the impact that the 5w50 has on fuel economy is likely inconsequential to him in application.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock
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.


So you have a choice don't you?

 

[CATERHAM]

[/quote]
Quote:


Gotcha. Sorry, I don't have any. But we DO know they monitor it, as it is available on the screen and we've had a member observe it happen at the track. If that isn't enough to confirm its existence for you, I welcome you to contact Ford yourself and find out.

On the other hand, the presence of such a system shouldn't surprise you, as Nissan has used it for years to protect cars like the GT-R, which manage to overheat their oil surprisingly quickly......


2011 Mustang Owner's Manual
Quote:

Sure looks like limp mode is based on coolant temp and not oil temp. Start at pg. 283.

Yes that is if the coolant goes into the red; the engine is actually overheating due likely to a loss of coolant.
When driving at constant high rev's on the track, your coolant temp's can be perfectly normal as your oil temp's rise. So based on the Ford engineers comments, their is also a fail-safe system to deal with high oil temp's.

 

[MarkStock]

But look, there's a track version of the Boss 302 and a street version.

So if you take the street version onto the track and your power gets cut off, it's because you're driving the street version beyond what you paid for.

If it happens with the track version, then you're just a great driver and you can't blame CAFE.

Seems like the engineers thought this one through as well.

 

[Flashlightboy]

While reading this read it seems like I'm watching

vs.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: bubbajoe_2112

2011 Mustang Owner's Manual

Sure looks like limp mode is based on coolant temp and not oil temp. Start at pg. 283.


If you are talking about this:

Originally Posted By: Ford

If the engine reaches a preset over-temperature condition, the engine
will automatically switch to alternating cylinder operation. Each disabled
cylinder acts as an air pump and cools the engine.
When this occurs the vehicle will still operate. However:
• The engine power will be limited.
• The air conditioning system will be disabled.
Continued operation will increase the engine temperature:
• The engine will completely shut down.
• Steering and braking effort will increase.
Once the engine temperature cools, the engine can be re-started. Take
your vehicle to an authorized dealer as soon as possible to minimize
engine damage.
When fail-safe mode is activated
You have limited engine power when in the fail-safe mode, so drive the
vehicle with caution. The vehicle will not be able to maintain high speed
operation and the engine will run rough. Remember that the engine is
capable of completely shutting down automatically to prevent engine
damage, therefore:
1. Pull off the road as soon as safely possible and turn off the engine.
2. Arrange for the vehicle to be taken to an authorized dealer.
3. If this is not possible, wait a short period for the engine to cool.
4. Check the coolant level and replenish if low.
WARNING: Fail-safe mode is for use during emergencies only.
Operate the vehicle in fail-safe mode only as long as necessary to
bring the vehicle to rest in a safe location and seek immediate repairs.
When in fail-safe mode, the vehicle will have limited power, will not be
able to maintain high-speed operation, and may completely shut down
without warning, potentially losing engine power, power steering assist,
and power brake assist, which may increase the possibility of a crash
resulting in serious injury.


That has been a standard feature on Ford engines for what has got to be at least 15 years.

That is not the feature we are discussing in this thread, which limits power output once oil temperatures get too high.

BTW, Ford has all of their manuals on the Motorcraft website:

http://www.motorcraftservice.com/pubs/content/~WOCMUS/~MUS~LEN/42/12musog3e.pdf

Extremely useful if you own a Ford vehicle.