Motor Oil 105

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
1,693
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Fifth in a series:

Motor Oil 105
Part Five. Let’s use top gear:

Let’s go racing. I will discuss driving in traffic jams in the Florida summer as well as racing in Sebring though there is no commonality. People lump these two driving situations together but there is no overlap.

On the race track one usually uses all the BHP their engine can give them. You briefly step on the brakes for the corner then put the pedal to the metal the rest of the time. Your oil will get up to 302 F, but your cooling system is around 212 F. The engine produces tremendous heat but can only pass it off so fast to the cooling system. There is a lot of air moving past the cooling radiator so the antifreeze / coolant is able to get rid of the extra heat from this part of the system with relative ease.

The temperature of oil on your gauge is not as hot as it really gets. This temperature is an average with oil from different parts of the motor. Some parts are hotter than others. It is said that some of the oil gets as hot as 400 or 500 F in these racing situations.

In an earlier section I said that thicker oils are usually needed in racing situations but not necessarily. Remember that a major function of oil is to cool the inside of your engine. In ASTM D 4485 3.1.4: “Terminology: Engine oil- a liquid that reduces friction and wear between moving parts within an engine, and also serves as a coolant.” Since the oil with a viscosity of 10 cS at 212 F thins to a viscosity of 3 cS at 302 F we will get more flow. The pressure will go down some as well. This is OK as long as we have a minimum of pressure to move the oil.

This increased flow will result in increased cooling by the oil. This is a good thing. You would probably want more oil flow in these situations and you get it. The hotter oil thins and this increases flow. The higher flow works harder to separate the engine parts that are under very high stress. It all works out for the better. Higher revving engines need thinner oils. You do not necessarily need to go to a thicker oil while racing. Only experimentation will tell.

The best way to figure out what viscosity of oil you need is to drive the car in the conditions you will use. Then use the oil viscosity that gives you 10 PSI per 1,000 RPM under those circumstances. For some reason very few people are able to get this simple principal correct. I cannot explain further.

These same rules apply to engines of any age, loose or tight. Just because your engine is old does not mean it needs a thicker oil. It will need a thicker oil only if it is overly worn, whether new or old. Yet the same principals of 10 PSI per 1,000 RPM still apply. In all cases you need to try different weight oils and see what happens. Then choose the correct viscosity.

I am using 0W-20 in my Ferrari 575 Maranello right now. It has over 5,000 miles on the clock. There will be a day (my estimate is 50,000 miles) when I will have to go to a 0W-30. In the future I will have to increase the viscosity to a 0W-40, then a 0w50, maybe. I will use whatever it takes to give me 75 PSI at 6,000 RPM during the lifetime of my engine. This formula works in all situations.

Some people have tried this and occasionally get a somewhat low oil pressure while at idle. This is fine. There is no stress on parts at idle, the smallest oil flow will do the trick. It is at higher RPM where more BHP is produced. This is where we need the flow. Remember that Ferrari uses 75 PSI at 6,000 RPM as the place to test your oil viscosity needs. If your oil gives this value under your driving conditions then your lubrication system has been maximized. Period.

Do not go 5,000 miles with the same oil if you are racing your car. You should change the oil every 1 or 2,000 miles. If you drive your car around town then you need to change the oil for that situation. Use racing oil on the track and urban oil around town. The best situation as described by Ferrari is to use the 0W-40 around town and the 10W-60 “racing oil” on the track. It has to be that “hot” track though. A compromise situation would be to use the 5W-40 for both but this may not be optimal. Certainly, if you are just an urban driver as me use the 0W-40 or even a thinner oil as I do in my Maranello. Again, I use the 0W-20.

FYI. The Formula 1 cars that run at 15,000 RPM and higher use straight 5 and 10 weight oils.

Now let me discuss what people think is a similar situation to racing. That is hot summer traffic jam driving. Your car should be able to handle this. If you have problems then you have a problem with your car, most likely in need of a cooling system overhaul.

When you drive that car down the road mid-winter in upstate New York or mid-summer in Florida the engine and oil temperatures will be around 212 F. But your Florida vacation is suddenly altered by a hurricane. You have to get out of Tampa, but so do a million other people. It is now 95 F and you are in a snarl. Everyone thinks they need a thicker oil for this situation. This is false.

Your engine is not producing much heat at low RPM and low BHP output. The production of heat is relatively slow. It can easily be transmitted to your cooling system. The problem is that your cooling system has trouble getting rid of the heat. The oil and the coolant will slowly rise in temperature. They both rise together. The increase is no big deal for your oil. It goes to 220, then 230 F. The problem is that the cooling system can only handle heat up to 230 F. After that you overheat the cooling system and the car must be shut off. The oil never got that hot, It was just that the water got a little hotter than its system design.

You now see that overheating in traffic is a cooling system problem and not an oil system problem. Do not change to a thicker oil based on your traffic situation.

aehaas
 
There was a statement made earlier that an oil at 302 F with a viscosity of 6 is twice as thick as one with a viscosity of 3. I do not agree with this. For example here is water compared to a 10 wt. oil using several methods at one temperature:

.....................Viscosity by:
.....................Centipoise...Centistokes...Saybolt Second
...............................................................Universal (SSU)
Typical liquid:
Water................1....................1...................31
Fuel oil #4.......12.6...............15.7...............40
SAE 10 oil........88..................110...............500

Source: The Engineering ToolBox.

Is the 10 wt. oil 88, 110 or 16 times thicker than water? I have studied this and it is my feeling that when I went from a 30 wt. oil in my Ferrari to a 20 wt. oil It only thinned 10 percent, maybe less. I do not think there is an in vivo formula for this because of the many different ways to measure oils. I am simply not afraid to experiment with lower viscosities. I do not think the jump from the various grades is that much at higher temperatures whereas the difference at start-up is significant. My recommendation- Pick the viscosity grade your application requires then choose the multi-grade oil with the lowest start-up viscosity. As it turns out you would need a synthetic oil.

aehaas
 
quote:

Originally posted by AEHaas:
There was a statement made earlier that an oil at 302 F with a viscosity of 6 is twice as thick as one with a viscosity of 3. I do not agree with this. For example here is water compared to a 10 wt. oil using several methods at one temperature:

.....................Viscosity by:
.....................Centipoise...Centistokes...Saybolt Second
...............................................................Universal (SSU)
Typical liquid:
Water................1....................1...................31
Fuel oil #4.......12.6...............15.7...............40
SAE 10 oil........88..................110...............500

Source: The Engineering ToolBox.

Is the 10 wt. oil 88, 110 or 16 times thicker than water?


There should be no confusion. SUS is a viscosity number determined by how long it takes a specified sized sample to drain through a certain orifice from a specified container. It is an emperical test and the results can be converted to cP, but it isn't a true viscosity

cP is simply cSt x specific gravity.

You shouldn't be using SUS at all in real world calculations. It also doesn't much matter whether you use cP or cSt in the comparison you made of the 3 cSt and 6 cSt oils as long as you stick to one unit of measurement.

6 cSt oil is twice as viscous a 3 cSt oil. It doesn't matter if you agree or not. 6 cSt based on sump temps is a reasonable viscosity for most engines, 3 is really streatching it.

You are obviously an intelligent person with some knowledge of engine oil, but the large number of erroneous statements you make greatly reduces the value of your posts.
 
Aehauss...you're way smarter than I am. But what you're doing isn't a discussion ..it's a dictation of your "assumed truths" that you state as fact. You don't respond to the critiques of your assertions and tend to respond with more rhetorical dictation of like "assumed truths" ..as in more of them.

If this was a political forum ..I'd sware you were from the third world and blind to outside input.

It you do have the capacity to defend and debate your statements ..please .any time soon would be nice for someone else to get a word in edgewise and get you to answer them. Now if you're just quoting chapter and verse of some publication ..then please just give a link and sit back and discuss it with "the body". If this is indeed works of your creation ...step back from the podium ..chaulk board ..and respond to your audience/class PEL-EEZ
smile.gif


There is no way I can follow your presentations ..they're beyond my capacity to read through ..but the rest of the strata dwellers, if allowed to participate (as in you let them), will provide the little slivers of stuff that many of us plebes can digest.
 
AE, were you a student in a 3 day Skip Barber professional road racing course at Moroso motorsports Park graduating March 19, 1998.


I seem to remember someone there that fits your alias.
 
Terry, I was at a Skip Barber school a longer time ago.

Gary, these chapters were written to explain the point they make with data to support it. I showed for example that a 0w30 is the same wt. as a straight 30 oil but thickens less at shut down. Most think a 10w30 is thinner than a straight 30 and that the 5w30 is thinner yet.

In a post in the middle of chapter 104 I answered questions. It is hard to answer when somebody says the whole chapter is wrong. Also, many cannot see the forest, only the tree. They argue that the 0w30 IS thinner because it is 10 cS instead of 10.5 at 212 F. They lose the point. One can argue all day as to whether a difference that small is significant at all.

Ask me a question and I shall try to answer.

aehaas
 
I can't ask you questions since your posts are so long I can't integrate the text. It would be like being questioned by a lawyer who asks you 15 questions ..and then 25 minutes later asks you to form a conclusion based on all 15 sub elements. Very few can keep all that "aligned" in thought.


..but you can start by resolving your debate with XS650. He disputes your assertion. Effectively defend your assertion ...reference other outside sources to support it and discount his...

..and after a little beating and perhaps participation from a few others in discussion one or the other yields to the likely truth ..or agree to disagree. Right now I see 90 minutes of dictation ..and 30 seconds of defending ..and then you move on to the next chapter in the seminar. (comically this is the format that my wife uses
grin.gif
)

Keep in mind that I'm a working class wise guy in the cheap seats here
grin.gif
. I don't have the moxie to discuss, much less dispute, what you say. For that I'm totally dependant upon those dozen or so members with higher caliber intelects.

So ..by all means continue. Just consider this a plea from the rabble that we be offered something in this exercize besides "cake".
smile.gif
This isn't a theater ..and you aren't THX ..many of the audience can't hear you.
grin.gif


Don't forget that you've got some post maintenance to do on the 101 thru 104 posts as well. There are a few unanswered challenges there too.
smile.gif
 
AE, I'll take that as a no on the 1998 school. Thanks, I think..


cit1991 not wn1991, was the member I wish would contribute more on tribology here since he is actively engaged in both automotive fuels and lubes issues and is succinct in posting.
 
103 seems to be off-line. Can one of the moderators check?

I have been enjoying these posts and I will not nit pick them to death. However, there is such a combined wealth of knowlege here that anything any of us posts is subject to intellegent debate and that should not be discouraged.
 
AEhaas, is the 10 cst somewhat arbitrary? Can you explain why the LT1, LS1 seem to do better with a 12 cst oil??? Although, 0W is important some engines seem to also like a bit more HT/HS on the top end.

As long as an oil like GC is 0W, might it not also heat up faster to 12cst than say another 0w30 to 10 cst with a different basestock? Time should also be a factor.
 

quote:


FYI. The Formula 1 cars that run at 15,000 RPM and higher use straight 5 and 10 weight oils.
AE, I find this VERY interesting...if the cSt of straight 30wt oil at 302F is 3, then what would the temperature be in these ultra-hot running engines? ...as a result, what would the cST be in the 5 & 10 wt oils at those temps?
shocked.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom