Looking for first person story: My warranty denied because of oil used

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are also Toyota engines that BURN MORE OIL THE THICKER YOU GO because of circulation issues. I've seen this first hand with the 1.8L, using 0W-20 significantly reduced consumption over a 10W-40 HM oil...
"Circulation issues" ... circulation of oil where and under what conditions? I'd like to hear the technical reason for that claim.
 
But there really isn't any real evidence of more engine wear. I don't have to "prove" anything, you're the one with the contrarian contention. The "CAFE is the devil" proof is on you, not me. You are selectively choosing ONE manufacturer having issues with consumption for your "MOFT agenda" when there are at least five using 5W-20 oil in appropriate applications not having significant issues using reasonable OCI's...
It's no mystery that more viscosity gives more MOFT between moving parts, and therefore added wear protection headroom - that has been the backbone of Tribology or 100 years. Anyone reading this chat board on a regular basis should have realized that by now. Plenty of wear studies show that the thinner you go, the lower the MOFT and the more potential for wear with all other factors held constant. Anyone can find lots of information on the subject matter if they want to do a little research.
 
Last edited:
I always wonder say the engine gave up a piston and there is a hole in the cylinder wall and all the coolant ended up in the pan. What is an oil sample analysis going to do? Or would they eve send in a sample?
 
"Circulation issues" ... circulation of oil where and under what conditions? I'd like to hear the technical reason for that claim.
You've been here long enough to know the issues with these engines not having proper pin holes, but maybe a few cst of VII's would fix that?
 
It's no mystery that more viscosity gives more MOFT between moving parts, and therefore added wear protection headroom - that has been the backbone of Tribology or 100 years. Anyone reading this chat board on a regular basis should have realized that by now. Plenty of wear studies show that the thinner you go, the lower the MOFT and the more potential for wear with all other factors held constant. Anyone can find lots of information on the subject matter if they want to do a little research.
Which studies when? Did they factor in that some 5W-20 oils actually use a thicker base oil since the manufactures don't have to account for adding VII's and meeting the spec's? But feel free to publish your studies from the 1980's/90s that aren't peer reviewed often fraught with bias....
 
You've been here long enough to know the issues with these engines not having proper pin holes, but maybe a few cst of VII's would fix that?
"Proper pin holes" ... pin holes where? I don't follow the design details of these engines.
 
Which studies when? Did they factor in that some 5W-20 oils actually use a thicker base oil since the manufactures don't have to account for adding VII's and meeting the spec's? But feel free to publish your studies from the 1980's/90s that aren't peer reviewed often fraught with bias....
Haven't you ever read any technical links ever posted in this forum? If you don't believe that MOFT isn't a function of HTHS viscosity, you've missed some basic fundamentals of Tribology. All the info is out there, it just takes your fingers to go find it.

HTHS is HTHS, which takes into account the final oil formulation (including VIIs) at a temperature of 150C and shear rate of 1M/sec. xW-20 oils pretty much all have a lower HTHS than xW-30 oils. Almost all xW-20 oils have a HTHS viscosity of 2.6 - 2.7 cP, which is around were some engine components start showing increased rates of wear. Most xW-30 oils have a HTHS of 3.1- 3.2 cP, which give more wear protection headroom. xW-20 is too close to the ragged edge for me and the way I drive ... simple as that.

1661075408722.webp
 
http://www.lube-media.com/wp-conten...lsposeachallengeforsolubilityandlubricity.pdf

"Due to their greatly reduced volatility and good low-temperature performance, new base oils of API Group II-IV allow the formulation of lighter automotive viscosity grade oils,such as SAE 5W-40, 0W-30 and even 0W-20, to achieve better fuel economy. However, as explained in Figure 4, the use of thinner base oils increases the risk of engine wear unless appropriate friction modifiers are simultaneously deployed in the formulations. By shifting the Stribeck curve to the left in Figure 2, friction modifiers cause an equivalent shift of the wear and the frictional losses curves in Figure 4. The result is that the“optimal viscosity” point corresponding to the greatest fuel economy also is shifted to the left, towards lower viscosities. In practice, however, it is wise to prefer a somewhat heavier oil to a somewhat lighter one to further minimize wear."
 
You should be a politician ... 😄
Oh no! My edit button has never been great and as I get older it's getting more sieve-like. I also use logical pragmatism when evaluating the important problems of the world and that typically just pisses off both sides of the argument. Lastly, my general attitude can best be described as misanthropic.

Those are a deadly combination for a politician.
 
"Circulation issues" ... circulation of oil where and under what conditions? I'd like to hear the technical reason for that claim.
Exactly. Talk about a vague and technically nonsensical statement.

Then he talks about “pin holes” which tells you all you need to know about the “circulation issues” comment. Sometimes I just don’t know where this stuff comes from.
 
I always wonder say the engine gave up a piston and there is a hole in the cylinder wall and all the coolant ended up in the pan. What is an oil sample analysis going to do? Or would they eve send in a sample?
I wonder why people bother with UOA's when you can just change the oil for less money than doing a largely meaningless exercise that is a one-off...

Just an aside and no offence to Blackstone...
 
Last edited:
"Proper pin holes" ... pin holes where? I don't follow the design details of these engines.
There was a senior Toyota tech that posted a lengthy explanation here a while back but I can't find it and it might have been deleted. But it's a well known issue with the 1.8L engine circa the mid-2000's. My nephew had a Celica that burned almost as much oil as it did gas and it only worsened when using 10W-40 HM oil (Pennzoil IIRC). He was told to try syn 0W-20 and the consumption dropped to a manageable level. But it was a while ago...
 
There was a senior Toyota tech that posted a lengthy explanation here a while back but I can't find it and it might have been deleted. But it's a well known issue with the 1.8L engine circa the mid-2000's. My nephew had a Celica that burned almost as much oil as it did gas and it only worsened when using 10W-40 HM oil (Pennzoil IIRC). He was told to try syn 0W-20 and the consumption dropped to a manageable level. But it was a while ago...
Are you talking about the oil drain holes in the oil control ring groove? "Pin holes" is pretty nebulous.
 
Haven't you ever read any technical links ever posted in this forum? If you don't believe that MOFT isn't a function of HTHS viscosity, you've missed some basic fundamentals of Tribology. All the info is out there, it just takes your fingers to go find it.

HTHS is HTHS, which takes into account the final oil formulation (including VIIs) at a temperature of 150C and shear rate of 1M/sec. xW-20 oils pretty much all have a lower HTHS than xW-30 oils. Almost all xW-20 oils have a HTHS viscosity of 2.6 - 2.7 cP, which is around were some engine components start showing increased rates of wear. Most xW-30 oils have a HTHS of 3.1- 3.2 cP, which give more wear protection headroom. xW-20 is too close to the ragged edge for me and the way I drive ... simple as that.

View attachment 113453
Is this the "study" where the conductors "formulated their own 0W-20" (prior to the release of oils like Mobil 1 AFE)? When was it conducted? If it's the one I am thinking of they were essentially critiquing the use of syn 0W-20's in racing oils (which predated the release of syn 20W oils for passenger cars by a long margin). The thinner oils were used in NASCAR to improve horsepower and fuel consumption with the understanding that the engines were rebuilt after a race or two Irregardless of wear issues or the lack of their in...
 
Is this the "study" where the conductors "formulated their own 0W-20" (prior to the release of oils like Mobil 1 AFE)? When was it conducted? If it's the one I am thinking of they were essentially critiquing the use of syn 0W-20's in racing oils (which predated the release of syn 20W oils for passenger cars by a long margin). The thinner oils were used in NASCAR to improve horsepower and fuel consumption with the understanding that the engines were rebuilt after a race or two Irregardless of wear issues or the lack of their in...
The link to where that graph came from is in the following post.

Can't compare using oils in a NASCAR to using it in a passenger car. Race cars are desined totally different for a different purpose, and race cars use lots of oil cooling to keep the oil from thinning out and blowing up engines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom