HDEO trends

Status
Not open for further replies.
4WD - I must confess now I'm confused ... perhaps based upon my own poor assumptions.
Your first post had this quote: "Both can make a snack of a 7500 mile OCI (all I care to run in 5.3L) So why should I pay 30% more for T6 if weather is not an issue (it is not) ?
I didn't read your signature line; I presumed your vehicle was a 5.3L Vortec truck engine (about the only 5.3L engine I know of commonly available). Are you referring to a different vehicle? one in your signature line? I don't see anything that would have a 5.3L engine. Did they offer the 5.3L in the Canyon? I was unaware, if so.

So you admit weather is not an issue, but you claim temps are a concern, but you admit your cooling system is generally OK.
You state you'd never had anything but syns in the engine, but now you're considering a dino lube, but only HDEO, whereas you've never tried a dino PCMO. Do I take this to mean it's only had syn PCMO to this point?

Regardless, I understand your question; which is "better"? Delvac 1300 or T6? TBH, I still think you're on a quest to have someone pat you on the back and make you feel that your subjective opinion (which you probably are withholding and secretly already have made a choice) is validated. You'd not be alone here in that regard, that's for sure.

However, I am challenging you to step out of your comfort zone and THINK about this. What is on the label or in the bottle is not nearly as important as what comes out of the crankcase. Do some UOAs with any fluid you choose, then switch up a few times and try some other options.

Don't ask us what is "best".
Tell us what worked for you, and why you believe it to be true, and back it up with real world data!


If there were an over-riding theme to your thread, it's one most people are actually missing. This isn't a topic of what oil trends are in favor. It's that fact that too many folks here like to bench race lube credentials, rather that actually test them in specific applications, review and analyze the data, and make informed decisions based upon logical criteria.
 
Last edited:
Yes - the LH9 variant of the 5.3L is aluminum block and heads with the lower end modified to fit the small truck without a significant weight gain.
I don't 'admit' anything - stop with your superiority stuff and with YOUR signature and your world record Dino runs - your mind is made up ...
Temperature was originally mentioned for the "BITOG bigots" that you mentioned who constantly debate 0w, 5w, 10w, 15w etc ... you turned the comment about my 4WD use on its head. That is harder work than towing, it is very remote ... I over heated in the past in 30 years of this - but only once in this truck due to hose fittings. I think the cooling is alright - what the point was this is a heavy load for miles to get to where I surf fish. Much more than when I pull my shallow skiff.
You think I'm looking for reassurance - what is abnormal about that. One of my favorite and most knowledgeable members is BrocL ... he is no fan of Mobil but runs Delvac Dino in an old style Bronco in the sand. Convince him to run PCMO.
To your last comment - any oil I would consider has been tested many ways - and I actually value (not look down on) feedback here- BTW - I have posted several times that my BIL's 5.3L did 400k on Mobil Super (he would have no clue what an UOA is) so to your point there is plenty good Dino PCMO around ... only I was not asking about that.
 
Originally Posted By: chilson450
Is the new line of Rotella oils going to be suitable for mixed fleets? I see on their website the new T6 5w30 multivehicle has the SN rating. The other oils (T4,T5,T6) only have the diesel ratings. The oil jugs i have seen around here either have the older CJ4/SM rating or CK4 rating with no gasoline rating.


Shell Rotella T6 Multi-Vehicle 5W-30 is the only product of the new family of oils that is suitable for mixed fleets. - The Shell Rotella Team
 
Originally Posted By: 4WD
... So why should I pay 30% more for T6 if weather is not an issue (it is not) ?


Asked and self-implied answer in your own first post; you should not.
The rest of this is just typical BITOG behavior. No substance; just bottle-label banter.


I apologize for disturbing you, or upsetting you. I was only trying to raise the bar; attempting to get one out of the comfort zone and really, truly being analytical about this.
My mistake.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Shannow
There's some data available on this topic.

First this one shows the energy wasted in shearing surfaces for the first few minutes after starting...
warmup.jpg


This shows the effect that we are talking about, the FMEP losses with viscosity and temperature

warmup%20shear.jpg


funnily, thicker oil warms up faster, more RPM warms up faster, just as intuition would have it.


Originally Posted By: JHZR2

Anyway, point is at 100c, the difference is not really there, per than minuscule differences in operating viscosity or shearing. In warm ambient temperatures, the time at higher viscosities is notionally shorter with the 5w than the 15w, so fuel economy may be improved for that segment in time. The benefit comes from how much time is at temperature vs in that regime. For passenger cars, a lot of time is spent in the transient regime, so regardless of loss mechanism, there is benefit to be had. For something like a long distance driver or OTR truck, it's much different...


I've never claimed that there's not an economy benefit due to precisely the above...


One has to wonder... was those startups only registered on cold engines that sat all night or on engines that start and stop after the engine was already run. And while this is all interesting, my dad's 1966 Chevy C10 283ci, 1974 Pontiac Catalina 400ci, 1983 Suburban 350ci, and his Honda Odyssey never got the memo. The first three got only a straight 30w oil for their entire lives, and the Honda got 10w30. The Honda was traded in a few years back by my mom. And all of them went over 250,000 miles without an engine problem. I have taken several commercial vehicles to over 1 million miles, and they got shut off and started several times a day, and shut off every night. They all got only 15w40 conventional. Only my recent one (659,000 miles thus far) has gotten 10w30, and then, only in the winter, otherwise a 15w40. So while this start up wear thing is interesting, I am not convinced it is as major of a deal as many would argue for. Like most things, the real world does not always match up with lab stats.

And my 2006 Cadillac CTS 3.6 and my 2015 Silverado 2500 6.0 get 10w30 now. The Caddy gets conventional and the pickup gets a syn. Year round.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top