Mazda 0-20 vs PU 5-20 ???

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: jake88
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: 05LGTLtd
Originally Posted By: M6ser

Does Mazda's 0-20 really present FE advantage over PU 5-20 ?


BTW, what does "FE" stand for?


Fuel economy in this instance. In a used oil analysis it would probably mean iron.


"Fe" would be iron. First letter always capital, second letter always lowercase. Sorry, but being a chemist that drives me crazy.


Good point, but in used oil analysis I've seen it both ways, and why I used the word probably.

 

[danthaman1980]

Originally Posted By: M6ser
What would be a better choice for a Florida driver of 2014 Mazda 6 and it's super high compression and DI engine... ?

Does Mazda's 0-20 really present FE advantage over PU 5-20 ?

Also if new Mazda6 is filled from a factory with Synthetic Moly 0-20 would it be better to dump it and use Valvoline conv. oil 5-20 to break it in for 2-3K miles ?


Earlier this year, I was told by a Mazda dealership parts deparment manager that people who have switched their SkyActiv engines to 5W-20 conventional have complained to him about reduced fuel economy. Switching back to Mazda's 0W-20 apparently fixes the problem. I'm confident he wasn't just trying to sell me 0W-20 since he told me this after I picked up a case of the Mazda/Moly 0W-20.

The digital fuel economy gauges are quite accurate in these new Mazdas - mine usually comes in within about 2% of the calculated value - so if people are complaining of MPG losses based on the gauge, I'd tend to believe them.

JMO, but I'd expect that the difference would be most pronounced for city/short trip driving where the Mazda's high VI/extremely low KV40 should contribute to better fuel economy before the car reaches operating temp... but for highway mileage, the difference would be less noticeable.

 

[Zeus33]

Originally Posted By: danthaman1980
Originally Posted By: M6ser
What would be a better choice for a Florida driver of 2014 Mazda 6 and it's super high compression and DI engine... ?

Does Mazda's 0-20 really present FE advantage over PU 5-20 ?

Also if new Mazda6 is filled from a factory with Synthetic Moly 0-20 would it be better to dump it and use Valvoline conv. oil 5-20 to break it in for 2-3K miles ?


Earlier this year, I was told by a Mazda dealership parts deparment manager that people who have switched their SkyActiv engines to 5W-20 conventional have complained to him about reduced fuel economy. Switching back to Mazda's 0W-20 apparently fixes the problem. I'm confident he wasn't just trying to sell me 0W-20 since he told me this after I picked up a case of the Mazda/Moly 0W-20.


I'm in FL, and the oil fill cap specifies 0w-20. Why would you run anything else while the car is under warranty?

 

[panthermike]

Originally Posted By: danthaman1980
Originally Posted By: M6ser
What would be a better choice for a Florida driver of 2014 Mazda 6 and it's super high compression and DI engine... ?

Does Mazda's 0-20 really present FE advantage over PU 5-20 ?

Also if new Mazda6 is filled from a factory with Synthetic Moly 0-20 would it be better to dump it and use Valvoline conv. oil 5-20 to break it in for 2-3K miles ?


Earlier this year, I was told by a Mazda dealership parts deparment manager that people who have switched their SkyActiv engines to 5W-20 conventional have complained to him about reduced fuel economy. Switching back to Mazda's 0W-20 apparently fixes the problem. I'm confident he wasn't just trying to sell me 0W-20 since he told me this after I picked up a case of the Mazda/Moly 0W-20.



Definitely no reason not to run the Mazda 0w20, but I doubt people were noticing an FE difference between 5/0w20(especially the average driver). I'm guessing the real world FE difference between the two would be .5-1%. Again, may as well use the 0w20 but a large FE difference seems unlikely.

 

[M6ser]

The same Mazda 6 with the same engine build in the same factory is recommended to use 5-30 in European market and 0-20 in US/CANADA market and many dealers in the SW use 5-20 or even 5-30 in this engine as 0-20 no matter how good it is does break up quickly in 110F heat.

My logic to dump FF is to avoid prolonged break in on the synthetic FF , I still think conventional oil like Valvoline 5-20 Conv. Oil (white bottle) with it's higher zinc contents will allow for quicker engine break in . My past Mazda/Ford engines did not feel broken in until around 15-20K miles on the odo, so I just want to speed up the process to enjoy the smoother, more powerful and better FE (Fuel Eco) in a new car. It really does not cost me much , OC done at the garage (15usd for jug of Valvoline) ...

Thank you all for great posts , I will monitor the Valvoline and if it becomes dirtier or engine will feel more strained as conventional oil burns I will change to Synthetic sooner ,now i'm leaning toward PU 5-20. 0-20 would be a real advantage in cold states , in Fla even winter is not a winter so 5-20 maybe a better match

 

[Flareside302]

So you ask for advice and go complete against it..

And Valvoline conventional doesn't have much zinc in it..

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: M6ser
.... many dealers in the SW use 5-20 or even 5-30 in this engine as 0-20 no matter how good it is does break up quickly in 110F heat.

.....now i'm leaning toward Pennzoil Ultra 5-20. 0-20 would be a real advantage in cold states , in Fla even winter is not a winter so 5-20 maybe a better match

The best 0W-20s do not break up in 110F heat of Florida, the grade is very shear stable.
The grade will provide all the viscosity protection you will ever need.
The benefit of the OEM 0W-20 grade applies in all climates. Even at 40C (104F) the Mazda 0W-20 is almost 30% lighter than Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 , 40% lighter at room temperature and 55% lighter at 32F.
The whole purpose of the high VI 0W-20 oils is to reduce the excess viscosity of the low VI 5W-20 grade. It's all about engine efficiency including reduced start-up wear.
If you still think the Mazda 0W-20 won't provide the same high temp protect of an oil like Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 then just substitute a pint of Mobil 1 0W-40 in your sump. That will give you a slightly higher HTHSV than Pennzoil Ultra while hardly affecting the cold start-up protection of the Mazda oil. Heck, you could substitute a full quart of Mobil 1 0W-40 to give you the protection of a very light 0w30 and the oil would still be 30% lighter at room temperature vs Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20.

So forget the misguided notion that a 0W-20 has nothing to offer in a hot climate and if you want more high temp' viscosity reserves there are better ways to achieve that without going back to the low VI 5W-20 grade.

 

[M6ser]

Thks again , I was told by a local engine shop that Valvoline Conv has better zinc content and is good for engine break in... ? Would it be a better for breakin than Mazda 0-20 synthetic ?
I really don't buy the fact that mass made engine like this had breakin done at the factory?
Sorry I really don't want to go against the advice of experts from this great forum. I just need to hear a convincing agrument why this engine is different and it is better to break it in with 0-20 mazda synthetic from FF ??? i really like the advice of mixing quart of Mobil 1 0w40 with Mazda's 0-20 . So if MAzda's 0-20 is that much lighter (more efficient ?) than what kind of FE increase over PU 5-20 can Mazda 0-20 offer.. is 1-2mpg gain realistic ?

 

[surfstar]

It was broken in before the first test drive.
You will not notice any difference either way, over the lifetime of the vehicle.

Why worry so much? Are you driving it to 200k, or 60k?

Follow the owners manual. It should cover 'breakin'. Use any oil that meets the specs, change when the OLM or manual tells you to, and worry about more important things.

 

[M6ser]

how was it broken in ? it is not hand build AMG or Corvete Z1 engine ... non of the mass made engines are broken in... it would cost too much.
what do you mean why worry so much , than why this forum exist ? So folks who care or worry can get advice and exchange opinions right ... it is not all about getting 200k miles from the engine (other parts of the car may fall apart by than) it is about getting max power and efficiency out of it after careful and proper engine breakin... does this answer your question ? I guess can of worms of should we breakin the engine or not just got opened

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: M6ser
Thks again , I was told by a local engine shop that Valvoline Conv has better zinc content and is good for engine break in... ? Would it be a better for breakin than Mazda 0-20 synthetic ?
I really don't buy the fact that mass made engine like this had breakin done at the factory?
Sorry I really don't want to go against the advice of experts from this great forum. I just need to hear a convincing agrument why this engine is different and it is better to break it in with 0-20 mazda synthetic from FF ??? i really like the advice of mixing quart of Mobil 1 0w40 with Mazda's 0-20 . So if MAzda's 0-20 is that much lighter (more efficient ?) than what kind of FE increase over PU 5-20 can Mazda 0-20 offer.. is 1-2mpg gain realistic ?

Regarding breaking in the engine, the only real question , is how long to leave in the FF. I don't have a strong opinion either way , but personally I'm inclined to change it fairly early. The Mazda 0W-20 is a high moly oil like many Japanese FFs so for that reason alone it should be a good first oil change choice.

Yes I think a 1-2% fuel economy gain is realistic depending on how you operate the car. If it's a high percentage of short trip then definitely is not more. If the car will be used for primarily long distance highway driving then the advantage will be minimized.

 

[M6ser]

Thank you that was convincing argument and it really justifies 0-20 Mazda Molly , as most of my driving is city and short distances...
Numbers you presented are eye opening , can we speculate that it will make the engine feel more powerful due to it's lighter formula ? It makes me think that Mazda should name this oil SkyO as it is a big part of this cars efficiency specs

 

[M6ser]

How safe would MAZDA 0-20 oil be in my
2013 CX9 3.7L asking for 5-20 ? That car does a ton of stop and go and short trips under 6 miles ....

 

[CATERHAM]

If the CX9 is spec'd for 5W-20 without a 0W-20 option then that's what you should use if you are concerned about your warranty.
Pennzoil Platinum 5W-20 would be a good option or Mobil 1 0W-20 which is actually intended for 5W-20 applications.

If you're less concerned about your warranty or rather are willing to take a more liberal interpretation of it, then yes use the Mazda (or TGMO) 0W-20 but substitute a pint of Mobil 1 0W-40.

 

[martinq]

How is it possible that a 0w20 could NOT be suitable for a 5w20 spec'd application?!

Does the CX9 have a special requirement in addition to the 20?

The 0w has better flow, everything else should be equal.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: martinq
How is it possible that a 0w20 could NOT be suitable for a 5w20 spec'd application?!

Does the CX9 have a special requirement in addition to the 20?

The 0w has better flow, everything else should be equal.

The OEM 0W-20s are formulated to be lighter on start-up vs the 5W-20 grade due to their much higher VIs and this also applies at normal hot operating temp's although to a lesser extent.
Since both grades have nominally the same HTHSV of 2.6cP that's the only oil temp's where there viscosity will be the same.
The ultra high VI 0W-20s will be progressively lighter as oil temp's drop below 150C. At normal operating temp's of say 90C the high VI 0W-20 will be noticeably lighter.
If you have a vehicle with an oil pressure gauge this difference is quite apparent.

Remember Toyota has back spec'd the 0W-20 grade many years for most vehicles but not all. There are some older models that are still spec'd for the 5W-20 grade but not the 0W-20.
For most vehicles for which the 5W-20 grade is specified the viscosity reserves are so high that it is not an issue running a high VI OEM 0W-20 but I wouldn't recommend it in all applications such as a Ford Mustang GT and then take the car to the track.
Of course I wouldn't recommend running a cheap 5w20 conventional in the Mustang either.

 

[M6ser]

caterham, thks much for great info ! CX9 is listed for 5-20,it is Ford's 3.7l overall very nice engine... I already bought 3 rounds of PU 5-20 so I guess I will use it. You don't seem like a fan of PU when recommending PP first, when comparing specs of PP vs PU , what oil will support better FE... ? I understand that PU is a totally new Shell synthetic formula and is a pure synthetic no a blend like PP ?

 

[panthermike]

Originally Posted By: M6ser
caterham, thks much for great info ! CX9 is listed for 5-20,it is Ford's 3.7l overall very nice engine... I already bought 3 rounds of PU 5-20 so I guess I will use it. You don't seem like a fan of PU when recommending PP first, when comparing specs of PP vs PU , what oil will support better FE... ? I understand that PU is a totally new Shell synthetic formula and is a pure synthetic no a blend like PP ?


In regards to fuel economy, there will be no difference between Pennzoil Ultra / Pennzoil Platinum in the same weights. PP is a full synthetic, PU is just their "top of the line" synthetic product.

 

[M6ser]

thks panthermike, did anyone post spec and formulation difference between PP and PU

 

[CATERHAM]

I prefer Pennzoil Platinum 5W-20 to Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 because it is a lighter oil, one of the lightest 5W-20s you can buy. It's about 15% lighter at room temperature and 20% lighter at 40F than Pennzoil Ultra.