Just how badly do we need 0wXX and 5wXX?

[G-MAN]

I think everyone would agree that winters in North America are just as cold now as they were in the 50s and 60s. But I'd be willing to bet that in New England and across the upper mid-west the vis of choice back then for winter use was 20W (in the 50s) and 10w30 (in the 60s). Anyone from that area of the country want to confirm that?

In the rest of the country I think everyone got along fine running 20w20 or SAE 30 year round. And no matter where you lived, too thick oil was a starting issue in severe cold. I don't think there was a rash of blown engines each winter due to thick oil.

I guess my point is that modern 0wXX and 5wXX oils were and are the product of a quest for reduced operating friction and the resultant improvement in fuel economy. From a mechanical failure standpoint, absent near arctic conditions, modern engines will do fine, IMO, on straight SAE 20 or SAE 30 year round.

NB: I went to the grocery store last night around 11 pm. My Chrysler 300M has Valvoline SAE 30 in it and had been sitting all day. The temp was 33F and it started right up like it always does with no unusual noises or protests. (In fact, as I have posted before, startups with SAE 30 are actually quieter since I don't get any bearing rattle on the initial startup rev.)

Just some food for thought...

 

[bruce381]

The push for multi gradea came about NOT for fuel mileage improvment but for over head cam motors that would eat the cam when using straight grade oils up north in minus temps also back then the oils were all GPI at best and cold flow was a problem.
bruce

 

[G-MAN]

Originally Posted By: bruce381
The push for multi gradea came about NOT for fuel mileage improvment but for over head cam motors that would eat the cam when using straight grade oils up north in minus temps also back then the oils were all GPI at best and cold flow was a problem.
bruce


Bruce, I can't buy that. If we're talking about the development of multigrade oils in the 50s, there wasn't a single US carmaker producing OHC engines at the time. If we're talking about the push to highly friction modified 5w30 and 10w30 in the early 80s, once again not a single US carmaker produced any OHC engines at the time.

The goal in the 50s was to aid cold starting. The goal in the 80s was to increase MPG due to more stringent CAFE standards.

 

[Drew99GT]

Have you ever started your car when it's 20 below or colder, which is a pretty common occurrence in the northern tier or the inter-mountain west? I can assure you your 300M would be quiet...................cause it probably wouldn't turn over fast enough to start. And if it did, it would be LOUD.

Yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I think I'll stick to 5w/10w-30s thank you...

 

[BuickGN]

Not very scientific but I paid special attention to the oil idiot light on the TL before I swapped the 0-30 for 10-30/30. It still goes out before I even release the key for both oils. I may just leave it in until I see the light stay on longer. Yes, I know it can take longer to get pressure up to the valvetrain but the light is off before the engine actually fires.

 

[G-MAN]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Have you ever started your car when it's 20 below or colder, which is a pretty common occurrence in the northern tier or the inter-mountain west? I can assure you your 300M would be quiet...................cause it probably wouldn't turn over fast enough to start. And if it did, it would be LOUD.

Yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I think I'll stick to 5w/10w-30s thank you...


You're just making my point: My SAE 30 at 20F is probably thinner than your 5w30 at -20F.

What did you guys do up there in the winters 40 or 50 years ago?

 

[Gary Allan]

That may have been "overhead valve". That would match a little closer the the mutivisc emergence. Before that, "top end lube" was a non-issue.

 

[BullyT]

[/quote]

The goal in the 50s was to aid cold starting. The goal in the 80s was to increase MPG due to more stringent CAFE standards.[/quote]

With respect, I don't believe that 0W or 5W were developed to increase mpg. I believe mpg is based on oil viscosity at operating temperature, not cold-weather start up. As such, an 0W40 would not be as fuel efficient as a 10W30.

Where I live (north of Toronto) there are many days throughout the winter where I start my car in sub-zero temps. I now run both my BMW 740 and Ford Explorer on 0W30 synthetic, and the difference in cold weather starting is very noticeable.

Most engine wear develops during start-up, so it seems it would make sense to have an oil that flows better at lower temps. IMHO

 

[Drew99GT]

I was sperm 50 years ago...

Remember, viscosity has little relation to SAE tested cold cranking and cold pumping performance. So yes, perhaps the viscosities are the same, but put both oils in a rotary viscometer and see what happens.

Valvoline 5w-30 at -20 degrees is 6,530 cst; Valvoline SAE 30 at 20 degrees is 2,294 cst.

But you say even in the northern tier, 5w isn't needed? SAE 30 is 33,014 cst at 20 below. I agree in moderate climates like yours, SAE 30 is fine, maybe even preferable, but not when it gets below 20 degrees or so. It would be downright nasty below 0.

 

[Drew99GT]

Quote:

With respect, I don't believe that 0W or 5W were developed to increase mpg. I believe mpg is based on oil viscosity at operating temperature, not cold-weather start up. As such, an 0W40 would not be as fuel efficient as a 10W30.


With respect, that's totally false. It takes roughly 20 to 30 minutes, maybe even longer, for engine oil to reach operating temperature, especially in cold ambient temperatures. Most people do short to medium trip driving, so the oil is never up to operating temp (even when the coolant is). That is exactly where higher viscosity index oils are beneficial because they are significantly less viscous at temperatures below the average 212 degree operating temp of a modern engine.

Heck, driving down the highway when it's -10 degrees out, oil and coolant temps can plummet; I see it routinely in CO. You can feel the heater temps cool off.

 

[BarkerMan]

Bruce is correct, but it was overhead valve engines and detergents for hydraulic valve lifters. In the late 40's and early 50's there were lots of problems with valve train lubrication. Studebaker has the worst problems and the dealerships were doing a lot of valve train work. And remember a lot of the warranties in those days were 6 months. One common fix was an external oiler, that is an external oil line taken from a plug in one of the oil galleries up to and threw the valve cover to the rocker arm assembly. Individual rockers did not appear until 1955 with the Chevy V8. The problems were solved and oil was a part of the solution. The other part was better material and better manufacturing procedures and quality control. The problems were solved over a two or three year period. One of the reasons that the 49 Ford did so well was styling and a proven V8, a flat head.

 

[o2man98]

It was 14 here yesterday morning and I fired up my 5.3L Silverado, which is known for startup noise, without a hint of rattle. The truck sat from 5pm Wednesday until 6:30am-ish Friday morning. I am running TSO 0w-30 at this time.

 

[WishIhadatruck]

I had an '89 Plymouth Reliant that we had inherited from my wife's parents at the time back in '95. The first fall we had been using straight 30wt oil since it was free at my in-law's farm out of the drum they had for their equipment. The first really cold day we had the car hardly wanted to start early in the winter. I don't recall the exact temp but it was below freezing and not anywhere close to zero (F). I bought some 5W-30 or 10W-30 (I don't recall) and changed the oil out and had no more issues the rest of the winter. The only thing I plan to use 30wt on is my push mower.

 

[G-MAN]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
But you say even in the northern tier, 5w isn't needed?


No, I didn't say that. Clearly, when the temps routinely get down into the teens and single digits, not to mention below zero, multigrade oils are called for.

 

[G-MAN]

Originally Posted By: BullyT
With respect, I don't believe that 0W or 5W were developed to increase mpg. I believe mpg is based on oil viscosity at operating temperature, not cold-weather start up. As such, an 0W40 would not be as fuel efficient as a 10W30.


With respect, go back and read the journal articles about the development of friction modified 5wXX and 10wXX oils. These were, in effect, the first low HTHS oils and it was the lower HTHS vis at the bearings that gave the minuscule mpg increase despite the measured static vis at 100C.

 

[pmt]

It's not just oil flow that is a problem as you try to start engines below 0 F. You must crank the engine fast enough for it to start.
As far as in the old days, when I was a kid in the 1950s, most people in Iowa used SAE 10 weight oil in their engines in the winter, and it worked well. Of course it never got all that cold back then - the coldest I ever recall seeing on my folk's farm house thermometer was -35 F. The official low temperature that morning in the nearest medium size town to us was -29 F.
But I can testify to some combinations that didn't work in my cold weather experience; Ford pickup V-8 @ -13 F with SAE 20 oil. Chevy Impala V-8 @ -20 F with 10W-30. The engines would barely crank, a couple cylinders might fire occasionally, but the engines would not start. Both oils were dino, not synthetic. After I changed them to what I should have had in them that time of year (DEC - JAN), SAE 10, they started the rest of the season fine.
pmt

 

[JohnBrowning]

Here is the thing SAE 20 or SAE 30 would be like motor honey in Michigan and Canada when it hit's the -20°F to -30°F here in Michigan I am only talking about Mid Michigan were I live some part's of Michigan are like Canada and get much colder.... So I can see the where a good 0WXX or 5W30 would be a plus.... Now for all my friends south of the Mason Dixie Line and a good chunk of the West Coast could easily use just SAE 30 year round!!!

 

[Nederlander75]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Quote:

With respect, I don't believe that 0W or 5W were developed to increase mpg. I believe mpg is based on oil viscosity at operating temperature, not cold-weather start up. As such, an 0W40 would not be as fuel efficient as a 10W30.


With respect, that's totally false. It takes roughly 20 to 30 minutes, maybe even longer, for engine oil to reach operating temperature, especially in cold ambient temperatures. Most people do short to medium trip driving, so the oil is never up to operating temp (even when the coolant is). That is exactly where higher viscosity index oils are beneficial because they are significantly less viscous at temperatures below the average 212 degree operating temp of a modern engine.

Heck, driving down the highway when it's -10 degrees out, oil and coolant temps can plummet; I see it routinely in CO. You can feel the heater temps cool off.


My heat seems to get hotter on the highway actually. So much so on the highway I have to turn back the dial to pull in cooler air. 06 Alti SE-R, 07 Speed 6, and 03 Evolution. Could be the cars I guess. Sorry for the non scientific talk.

 

[mechtech2]

Concerning your quote above: I don't believe that higher viscosity oils are LESS viscous at ANY temperature.
They would have to be a LOWER viscosity for this to occur.

 

[Saab9-3]

Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning
Here is the thing SAE 20 or SAE 30 would be like motor honey in Michigan and Canada when it hit's the -20°F to -30°F here in Michigan I am only talking about Mid Michigan were I live some part's of Michigan are like Canada and get much colder.... So I can see the where a good 0WXX or 5W30 would be a plus....


Not sure what parts of Canada you are talking about, but for majority of Canada with large populations, it might see the occasional week or 2 of hitting the -30's C (-26F) and thats usually with windchill. If you're talking about up in the Artic, then sure they routinly see -20c - -40C.

Michigan is right on the border of Canada, and I am sure we share very similiar climits.