I would think short-tripping would favour the thin oil moreso, but understand it working onthe highway too. That leaves the mid-length trippers of 10 miles or so like me.
Hoe-Lee-Cow -- 0w-20 Forever!!!
- Thread starter ekpolk
- Start date
- Status
Most of the driving I do is a minimum 25 mile round trip many are 40 to 60 on up . I change the oils at 10 months to a year oil change intervals.
I tried GC once, and got a record low MPG for any subaru I've driven. It has a whopping 3.6 or so HTHs viscosity, vs. 2.6 for 0w-20.
Originally Posted By: Dieseldoctor
I drove a TDI 09 6spd manual it got 48 mpg around mixed traffic blew me away the engine didnt sound like a diesel just a knock is about it when the turbo kicked in full tilt. Amazing cars coupled with bio diesel would be amazing for u.s. market. IDK they did have issues with cam lobe wear even with the 507 approved oil idk where that has went to.
I was toying around with getting a 1998/99 E300 Diesel and doing a bio diesel conversion. I have too many sides projects atm to get that started.
I drove a TDI 09 6spd manual it got 48 mpg around mixed traffic blew me away the engine didnt sound like a diesel just a knock is about it when the turbo kicked in full tilt. Amazing cars coupled with bio diesel would be amazing for u.s. market. IDK they did have issues with cam lobe wear even with the 507 approved oil idk where that has went to.
I was toying around with getting a 1998/99 E300 Diesel and doing a bio diesel conversion. I have too many sides projects atm to get that started.
With respect, please burn a few tanks, then get back to us.
Do you have gas logs that go back a while, covering your Wild-n-crazy THICKER days?
In my private little version of reality,
you might see an improvement of one MPG, two at the outside (If you drive around in first gear all day long!)
Do you have gas logs that go back a while, covering your Wild-n-crazy THICKER days?
In my private little version of reality,
Last edited:
That's what my Civic Hybrid takes, I have read enough stories of fellow hybrid owners changing to a heavier weight oil and taking a hit in the economy dept.
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Most people know that I'm a thick head. But a hybrid is the last car I would experiment with a thicker oil.
But remember, as I've posted before, the manual for this car, while seeming to be very direct in "recommending" 0w-20, also contains this mysterious little tidbit:
===============================================================
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
With respect, please burn a few tanks, then get back to us.
Do you have gas logs that go back a while, covering your Wild-n-crazy THICKER days?
To be perfectly clear, I'm not offering this as a global "look what I get with this oil" sort of statement. Obviously, this is a single datum point. I'll be happy if I get more like it, but still one tank or not, this is pretty good for a 3700 lb car chugging along nearly 80 mph.
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
In my private little version of reality,
you might see an improvement of one MPG, two at the outside (If you drive around in first gear all day long!)
Perhaps it's time to adjust your private reality?
How many members actually perform back-to-back "tests" like this? Some but not many. It just seems to have become the prevailing view that vis changes don't impact fuel economy very much.
A couple more thoughts on this result. An actual "total GC to total 0w-20 PP" might have resulted in a more dramatic shift. This car, per the Toyota tech pubs, retains 0.8 quarts of the old oil on a change (the undrainable oil). The oil-and-filter change spec is 4.5 US qts, the dry block amount is 5.3 qts. Therefore, the oil presently in the car is still roughly 15-17% thick GC.
Also, as noted by another poster, GC is nearly a 40 wt oil, at over 12 cSt, while the PP 0w-20 is way down at 8.5 cSt. Other viscosity changers may not have made such wide leaps when seeing "only" 1-2 mpg difference (or perhaps none at all).
Most people know that I'm a thick head. But a hybrid is the last car I would experiment with a thicker oil.
But remember, as I've posted before, the manual for this car, while seeming to be very direct in "recommending" 0w-20, also contains this mysterious little tidbit:
===============================================================
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
With respect, please burn a few tanks, then get back to us.
Do you have gas logs that go back a while, covering your Wild-n-crazy THICKER days?
To be perfectly clear, I'm not offering this as a global "look what I get with this oil" sort of statement. Obviously, this is a single datum point. I'll be happy if I get more like it, but still one tank or not, this is pretty good for a 3700 lb car chugging along nearly 80 mph.
Originally Posted By: Geonerd
In my private little version of reality,
Perhaps it's time to adjust your private reality?
A couple more thoughts on this result. An actual "total GC to total 0w-20 PP" might have resulted in a more dramatic shift. This car, per the Toyota tech pubs, retains 0.8 quarts of the old oil on a change (the undrainable oil). The oil-and-filter change spec is 4.5 US qts, the dry block amount is 5.3 qts. Therefore, the oil presently in the car is still roughly 15-17% thick GC.
Also, as noted by another poster, GC is nearly a 40 wt oil, at over 12 cSt, while the PP 0w-20 is way down at 8.5 cSt. Other viscosity changers may not have made such wide leaps when seeing "only" 1-2 mpg difference (or perhaps none at all).
Originally Posted By: BGK
The proof that it was the oil that made the mpg improvement will be when you make repeated identical trips and get similar mpg. I bet a new VW diesel would get closer to 50 mpg under same conditions...
Originally Posted By: hpichris
I need to buy myself a new VW diesel before they go the way of the dinosaurs.....
See above. I did NOT offer this as "proof" that such happy results will be an "everyday" happening.
As I noted above, these continuing comparisons with VW diesels really don't cut it. The presently available Jetta TDI weighs a quarter ton less than the hybrid Camry. And the Camry is much larger inside. Would you ding an Accord because it gets lower mileage than a Civic? Take a look at the just-released 2010 Gen-III Prius (saw one for the first time yesterday, coincidentally). That's a more Jetta-sized car, and with its improved HSD system, it actually IS getting Jetta-sized mpgs, on 87 octane gasoline.
The proof that it was the oil that made the mpg improvement will be when you make repeated identical trips and get similar mpg. I bet a new VW diesel would get closer to 50 mpg under same conditions...
Originally Posted By: hpichris
I need to buy myself a new VW diesel before they go the way of the dinosaurs.....
See above. I did NOT offer this as "proof" that such happy results will be an "everyday" happening.
As I noted above, these continuing comparisons with VW diesels really don't cut it. The presently available Jetta TDI weighs a quarter ton less than the hybrid Camry. And the Camry is much larger inside. Would you ding an Accord because it gets lower mileage than a Civic? Take a look at the just-released 2010 Gen-III Prius (saw one for the first time yesterday, coincidentally). That's a more Jetta-sized car, and with its improved HSD system, it actually IS getting Jetta-sized mpgs, on 87 octane gasoline.
You know, sir, this oil change means your days of hot-lapping Sebring are over, right?
Interesting. I recently did just the opposite experiment in my Mustang GT. I'm 600 miles into a run of M1 0W40 in my Mustang GT and have seen NO drop in fuel mileage from the 5W20. My commute is 30 miles one way at 70-75 mph all highway. 5W20 averages 21.5 to 22.0 mpg every tank depending on traffic tie ups. Both tanks on the 0W40 have been 22.6! The engine is smooth and quiet and I can see no drop in power or peppiness. Heck who knows....this oil stuff will give you a headache!
I see your point but am disappointed in your hybrid. I had a 07 Honda Civic LX sedan Auto that got 32 MPG until 1500 miles when I switched to the Civic's Hybrid smaller aero wheels and low resistance tires and started getting 36. This was on FF oil.
""smaller aero wheels""
and you corecte th speedometer, how?
I think you are just logging more miles--not more MPG
Steve
and you corecte th speedometer, how?
I think you are just logging more miles--not more MPG
Steve
Originally Posted By: Gurney
You know, sir, this oil change means your days of hot-lapping Sebring are over, right?
No way! I mean, if I saw some indication in the UOAs, or in reports of real world failures chargeable to the use of 20 wt oil, maybe. Beyond that, some of my runs down the Interstate in the summer-time are probably darned near as stressful as being on a racetrack. OK, ok, that might be a tad bit of an exaggeration, but you get the idea.
You know, sir, this oil change means your days of hot-lapping Sebring are over, right?
No way! I mean, if I saw some indication in the UOAs, or in reports of real world failures chargeable to the use of 20 wt oil, maybe. Beyond that, some of my runs down the Interstate in the summer-time are probably darned near as stressful as being on a racetrack. OK, ok, that might be a tad bit of an exaggeration, but you get the idea.
I have a 06 Gran Marquis 4.6.At 30k swapped entire car over to Amsoil fliuds.Trans(full exchange),rear axle and oil.Oil was the full synthetic 10w30.Saw no real change in fuel mpg.On a previous 2000 Marquis I did see a 1 plus or more mpg gain. It was obvious when it was swapped over.Wife observed this also as she drives the car more then I.Anyhow on the 06 it ran a year with the 10w30, mileage escapes me.Then changed that oil out for Amsoils 0w20 and then again have seen no obvious gain over the 10w30.
Originally Posted By: joflewbyu2
I see your point but am disappointed in your hybrid. I had a 07 Honda Civic LX sedan Auto that got 32 MPG until 1500 miles when I switched to the Civic's Hybrid smaller aero wheels and low resistance tires and started getting 36. This was on FF oil.
Shoot, you should be disappointed in your Civic. This year's Civic LX Auto weighs in at a lean 2750 lbs (per the Honda site as of today). Once again, my Camry Hybrid is almost a half-ton heavier, at 3700 lbs. Hybrids do not defy the laws of physics, they just make arguably better use of the energy involved in moving from one point to another. ANY car that weighs a thousand pounds less than my car (hybrid or not) should really be giving me a run for the money in the mpg dept.
I see your point but am disappointed in your hybrid. I had a 07 Honda Civic LX sedan Auto that got 32 MPG until 1500 miles when I switched to the Civic's Hybrid smaller aero wheels and low resistance tires and started getting 36. This was on FF oil.
Shoot, you should be disappointed in your Civic. This year's Civic LX Auto weighs in at a lean 2750 lbs (per the Honda site as of today). Once again, my Camry Hybrid is almost a half-ton heavier, at 3700 lbs. Hybrids do not defy the laws of physics, they just make arguably better use of the energy involved in moving from one point to another. ANY car that weighs a thousand pounds less than my car (hybrid or not) should really be giving me a run for the money in the mpg dept.
Ekpolk,
I'm heapy for your MPG. No doubt 0W20 helped some, but not the 33-39 jump. Lets see, it was raining hard, you slowed down some, didn't you? Then it was cooler, and AC didn't work as hard. And then, maybe a wind difference, like you alluded to. Here is you difference.
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science. What you have is just an anecdote, and not a good one.
When I switched to all synthetic fluids (and not just engine oil, ATF, and diffs x2) in my Subary, I saw no change in MPG whatsoever. That is my anecdote.
I'm heapy for your MPG. No doubt 0W20 helped some, but not the 33-39 jump. Lets see, it was raining hard, you slowed down some, didn't you? Then it was cooler, and AC didn't work as hard. And then, maybe a wind difference, like you alluded to. Here is you difference.
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science. What you have is just an anecdote, and not a good one.
When I switched to all synthetic fluids (and not just engine oil, ATF, and diffs x2) in my Subary, I saw no change in MPG whatsoever. That is my anecdote.
Originally Posted By: sciphi
And where did you find PP 0w-20? I'd love some of that to add to the stash, and my fiancee's Honda Fit.
Most people (perhaps not all) on this forum using PP 0w-20 get it from the same place, including myself. Google for oil-store.
-Bryan
And where did you find PP 0w-20? I'd love some of that to add to the stash, and my fiancee's Honda Fit.
Most people (perhaps not all) on this forum using PP 0w-20 get it from the same place, including myself. Google for oil-store.
-Bryan
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Ekpolk,
I'm heapy for your MPG. No doubt 0W20 helped some, but not the 33-39 jump. Lets see, it was raining hard, you slowed down some, didn't you? Then it was cooler, and AC didn't work as hard. And then, maybe a wind difference, like you alluded to. Here is you difference.
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science. What you have is just an anecdote, and not a good one.
When I switched to all synthetic fluids (and not just engine oil, ATF, and diffs x2) in my Subary, I saw no change in MPG whatsoever. That is my anecdote.
"Heapy", what's "heapy"??? That conjures some potentially ugly images...
Seriously though, I agree with you, in part, but with some "howevers". First, the rain involved was southern summer rain. The kind that lasts for five or ten minutes, like a wall of water, and then is abruptly gone. I would estimate that on the drive home, it was raining for maybe 20 min of the total 3-plus hours. Yes, I could see the obvious air cooling from the rain, and yes, I did slow to more reasonable speeds, appropriate to the moment. The rest of the time, it was my usual, which I have to admit, is right below 80 mph.
Second, and I should put this into a separate posting in this thread, but I also noticed from my ScanGauge-II that despite the temps being about the same, the engine was running somewhat cooler. With the GC, on the highway, I'd normally see something between 190-195F, with occasional deviations in either direction. I'd only rarely see north of 200F, but I'd occasionally see that while in motion. Yesterday, I was consistently seeing 185-190F. This seems strange, since with a healthy, modern thermostat, and a computer controlled engine, such a disparity shouldn't be. But there it was. Perhaps, and to be perfectly clear, this is supposition, maybe the engine was simply not working as hard to maintain a given speed, and that was showing up in the coolant temp.
Third, yes, there could have been a tailwind, but I'd think that would apply for only part of the trip, given the unstable weather. Moreover, a steady east-to-west tailwind would seen improbable. Possible, but improbable.
Now, as for this part,
Quote:
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science...
I must disagree (again, in part, but more "parts" here). You are overlooking several things. Your 20% figure reflects only one point in the "energy absorption continuum". Obviously, the amount of energy oils absorb through fluid friction varies with the grade involved. That's physics too. The real question is by how much. I'd also bet a fair chunk of change that the EPA studies you cite were performed on a limited range of vehicles. I'm pretty well convinced that one of the side effects of the hybrid drive train (at least the Toyota version) is that it effectively magnifies the differences involved, by layering on other factors that are not present with conventional cars. For example, these cars combine Atkinson-cycle running of the ICE with the hybrid system. That's going to distort the outcome some. Also, even in highway driving, the car continually cycles between some electric boost (and charges the TB while slowing or going downhill). More use of electric boost would also distort things.
And I didn't present this as anything but an anecdote, but I think it's not such a bad one. Really, how often have we see somebody do a back-to-back comparison with a near-4 cSt change in oil vis?
*** Darn, I have to run to a meeting. More later...
Ekpolk,
I'm heapy for your MPG. No doubt 0W20 helped some, but not the 33-39 jump. Lets see, it was raining hard, you slowed down some, didn't you? Then it was cooler, and AC didn't work as hard. And then, maybe a wind difference, like you alluded to. Here is you difference.
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science. What you have is just an anecdote, and not a good one.
When I switched to all synthetic fluids (and not just engine oil, ATF, and diffs x2) in my Subary, I saw no change in MPG whatsoever. That is my anecdote.
"Heapy", what's "heapy"??? That conjures some potentially ugly images...
Seriously though, I agree with you, in part, but with some "howevers". First, the rain involved was southern summer rain. The kind that lasts for five or ten minutes, like a wall of water, and then is abruptly gone. I would estimate that on the drive home, it was raining for maybe 20 min of the total 3-plus hours. Yes, I could see the obvious air cooling from the rain, and yes, I did slow to more reasonable speeds, appropriate to the moment. The rest of the time, it was my usual, which I have to admit, is right below 80 mph.
Second, and I should put this into a separate posting in this thread, but I also noticed from my ScanGauge-II that despite the temps being about the same, the engine was running somewhat cooler. With the GC, on the highway, I'd normally see something between 190-195F, with occasional deviations in either direction. I'd only rarely see north of 200F, but I'd occasionally see that while in motion. Yesterday, I was consistently seeing 185-190F. This seems strange, since with a healthy, modern thermostat, and a computer controlled engine, such a disparity shouldn't be. But there it was. Perhaps, and to be perfectly clear, this is supposition, maybe the engine was simply not working as hard to maintain a given speed, and that was showing up in the coolant temp.
Third, yes, there could have been a tailwind, but I'd think that would apply for only part of the trip, given the unstable weather. Moreover, a steady east-to-west tailwind would seen improbable. Possible, but improbable.
Now, as for this part,
Quote:
There is no way MPG goes up (in highway driving and hot weather) by 20% just by decreased oil viscosity. Simply, because the amount of energy absorbed by oil in a form of friction is less than 20% in highway driving. And that is physics. In EPA studies, change to lower friction lubricants accounts for only 0.5% decrease in CO2 emissions (and fuel consumption). And that is science...
I must disagree (again, in part, but more "parts" here). You are overlooking several things. Your 20% figure reflects only one point in the "energy absorption continuum". Obviously, the amount of energy oils absorb through fluid friction varies with the grade involved. That's physics too. The real question is by how much. I'd also bet a fair chunk of change that the EPA studies you cite were performed on a limited range of vehicles. I'm pretty well convinced that one of the side effects of the hybrid drive train (at least the Toyota version) is that it effectively magnifies the differences involved, by layering on other factors that are not present with conventional cars. For example, these cars combine Atkinson-cycle running of the ICE with the hybrid system. That's going to distort the outcome some. Also, even in highway driving, the car continually cycles between some electric boost (and charges the TB while slowing or going downhill). More use of electric boost would also distort things.
And I didn't present this as anything but an anecdote, but I think it's not such a bad one. Really, how often have we see somebody do a back-to-back comparison with a near-4 cSt change in oil vis?
*** Darn, I have to run to a meeting. More later...
I recently changed over from 5W-20 to a blend of 3:1 15W-50:5-20 in my v6 Honda. I thought for sure I would notice a change in fuel mileage. I don't detect any difference in mileage but the engine is extremely quiet with the thick stuff in the crankcase.
- Status
Similar threads
