New car, 2014 Mustang 5.0 Track Pack

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM


Now if you're not going to track your car, let alone race it, then the oil that's spec'd for the same engine without the track package would seem to be a better lubricant choice.


+1 It would, which is why I disagree with the one size fits all mentality. Most people were smart enough years ago to match the oil to the temps and how the vehicle was going to be used, I think they can do it now too. A little blurb in the OM, a sticker under the hood and/or in the glove box to remind them to use a different oil for racing wouldn't hurt either.

You're absolutely right but here's the problem from the OEMs point of view. If you give the consumer any choice a certain percentage will screw it up and leave the light oil in the sump then go racing with the oil likely down a couple of quarts at the same time. I can give you a litany of unbelievable lubricant mistakes that otherwise intelligent people make.
That is why it is better for the OEM to spec' just one grade for the most extreme use that still allows it to be usable in sub-freezing conditions. Synthetic oil allows the OEMs to do that.
Is it the ideal situation? No but it minimizes warranty claims and keeps most consumers happy.

In this case with the Ford Mustang GT with the track option, if owner doesn't track his car running the Motorcraft 5W-20 would seem to make sense just don't expect a typical Ford customer service rep' to give you the okay. The advantage in doing so are a more optimized operational viscosity especially during start-up and warm-up. And most importantly you're no longer giving up the power loss associated with running a 3 grades heavier than necessary motor oil at normal oil temp's.
If you want to play very conservatively I'd still recommend installing some properly calibrated oil pressure and temp' gauges just so that you know for a fact when your driving fast on the back country roads on a hot summer day that your still operating within the maximum limitations of the oil.

The following April 23/13 9,500 mile UOA of a 2012 Mustang GT running M1 0W-20 including some track days may prove interesting:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2981823/2012_Mustang_5.0,_9500mi_+_tra#Post2981823

Maximum on track oil temp's were 230F without an oil cooler. That wasn't hot enough to trigger the ECU nannies the none track optioned car has.
If your oil temp's stay below 230F on the street, which is likely the case, you're operating well within the scope of an appropriate 0W/5W-20 grade oil.
And if one is still concerned about the warranty PM me.


I agree, but in this case we here at Bitog know better.

Take a senior citizen that buys the exact car we're speaking about here because he likes it, nothing more, He drives it normally around town and lives in a cold climate. He's locked into an oil [warranty fears] that is certainly not the best for his user pattern, and longevity of his vehicle. This is all because the mfg wants to cover their arse.


How do we know the added effect of the increased HTHS and viscosity of the 5w-50 is detrimental in any way to the longevity of this engine? I mean by that logic PU 5w-40, M1 0w-40....etc must all be detrimental to the lives of the Euro engines they are in

Will it have some impact on fuel economy? Sure. But that's probably about it.

 

[demarpaint]

Is 5W50 the optimal viscosity for someone who drives this car like an old lady driving to church on Sunday? All the reading I've done on Biotog tells me otherwise. Especially when the same engine minus the track pack uses 5W20.

I'll go back to what I said earlier. IMO all this proves is this engine will run on a 20, 30, 40 or 50 grade oil, and so will the neutered version that calls for 5W20 only.

 

[CATERHAM]

I agree running a synthetic 0W/5W-40 or 5W-50 grade oil where a 0W/5W-20 grade oil is specified or is otherwise heavy enough should not appreciably increase engine wear particularly if one is careful during the warming up period, but it certainly is a drag, pun intended.
And I don't think the reduction in fuel economy is the main concern of owners of sporty cars but rather the reduction in power and driveability especially when the engine is cold. That's the main reason I choose to run oils no heavier than necessary.
Anyone who has experimented in running a 2 or 3 grade difference in the same engine, especially a back to back comparison can always notice the difference, many claiming it entirely transforms the nature of an engine; as if it had a lighter flywheel or simply a bag load of more power.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I agree running a synthetic 0W/5W-40 or 5W-50 grade oil where a 0W/5W-20 grade oil is specified or is otherwise heavy enough should not appreciably increase engine wear particularly if one is careful during the warming up period, but it certainly is a drag, pun intended.
And I don't think the reduction in fuel economy is the main concern of owners of sporty cars but rather the reduction in power and driveability especially when the engine is cold. That's the main reason I choose to run oils no heavier than necessary.
Anyone who has experimented in running a 2 or 3 grade difference in the same engine, especially a back to back comparison can always notice the difference, many claiming it entirely transforms the nature of an engine; as if it had a lighter flywheel or simply a bag load of more power.




True, but, like my M5, it has an air-to-water oil cooler, so the oil will be brought up to coolant temp quite quickly at least, which I think should be noted, as this is NOT the case for the regular GT that spec's 5w-20.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I agree running a synthetic 0W/5W-40 or 5W-50 grade oil where a 0W/5W-20 grade oil is specified or is otherwise heavy enough should not appreciably increase engine wear particularly if one is careful during the warming up period, but it certainly is a drag, pun intended.
And I don't think the reduction in fuel economy is the main concern of owners of sporty cars but rather the reduction in power and driveability especially when the engine is cold. That's the main reason I choose to run oils no heavier than necessary.
Anyone who has experimented in running a 2 or 3 grade difference in the same engine, especially a back to back comparison can always notice the difference, many claiming it entirely transforms the nature of an engine; as if it had a lighter flywheel or simply a bag load of more power.




True, but, like my M5, it has an air-to-water oil cooler, so the oil will be brought up to coolant temp quite quickly at least, which I think should be noted, as this is NOT the case for the regular GT that spec's 5w-20.

That should help although the cooler will also suppress the rise in excess oil temp's once the oil has attained it's normal operating temp's. All the more reason to use the reg' GTs 5W-20 oil for a car that isn't track driven and possibly even one that is taken out for an occasional track day.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Anyone who has experimented in running a 2 or 3 grade difference in the same engine, especially a back to back comparison can always notice the difference, many claiming it entirely transforms the nature of an engine; as if it had a lighter flywheel or simply a bag load of more power.


That should be very easily quantifiable....is "bag load more" similar to the "huge" improvements in economy that have been claimed previously ?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Anyone who has experimented in running a 2 or 3 grade difference in the same engine, especially a back to back comparison can always notice the difference, many claiming it entirely transforms the nature of an engine; as if it had a lighter flywheel or simply a bag load of more power.




I've run everything from M1 5w-20 to D1 5w-40 in the Expedition and didn't notice a a difference between any of them in terms of power output, LOL!

 

[virginoil]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
You're absolutely right but here's the problem from the OEMs point of view. If you give the consumer any choice a certain percentage will screw it up and leave the light oil in the sump then go racing with the oil likely down a couple of quarts at the same time. I can give you a litany of unbelievable lubricant mistakes that otherwise intelligent people make.
That is why it is better for the OEM to spec' just one grade for the most extreme use that still allows it to be usable in sub-freezing conditions. Synthetic oil allows the OEMs to do that.
Is it the ideal situation? No but it minimizes warranty claims and keeps most consumers happy.

In this case with the Ford Mustang GT with the track option, if owner doesn't track his car running the Motorcraft 5W-20 would seem to make sense just don't expect a typical Ford customer service rep' to give you the okay. The advantage in doing so are a more optimized operational viscosity especially during start-up and warm-up. And most importantly you're no longer giving up the power loss associated with running a 3 grades heavier than necessary motor oil at normal oil temp's.
If you want to play very conservatively I'd still recommend installing some properly calibrated oil pressure and temp' gauges just so that you know for a fact when your driving fast on the back country roads on a hot summer day that your still operating within the maximum limitations of the oil.

The following April 23/13 9,500 mile UOA of a 2012 Mustang GT running M1 0W-20 including some track days may prove interesting:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2981823/2012_Mustang_5.0,_9500mi_+_tra#Post2981823

Maximum on track oil temp's were 230F without an oil cooler. That wasn't hot enough to trigger the ECU nannies the none track optioned car has.
If your oil temp's stay below 230F on the street, which is likely the case, you're operating well within the scope of an appropriate 0W/5W-20 grade oil.
And if one is still concerned about the warranty PM me.

Caterham in the last statement I take it that you are prepared to advise others regarding warranty on behalf of the OEM based on your experience. I believe you are over stepping the mark here and responsibilities as a forum member. Despite being knowledgeable on matters the OEM is the sole source of concerns regarding warranty issues and members should be pointed in that direction whilst under warranty IMO.

Plenty of advice going back and forward with no indemnity insurance provided by the proponent of the advice, the insurance aspect of the advice I infer falls back onto the owner and and at full risk tothe owner and then if anything goes wrong mostly likely back onto the OEM.

 

[turtlevette]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
I've worked with some of the engineers at Ford that engineered the Coyote. They're quite satisfied with the results of their work.


Cool, See if you can get them to log on here and straighten us out.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: SlipperyPete


I'll take the education, training and experience of the people who actually built and tested the engine over "common sense" offered by some anonymous user name on the internet.

The bean counters? Hate to break it to you. Engineers don't work in a vacuum. I'm sure engineers would have built the coyote from the ground up instead of basing it on the mod if they had total control.


I've worked with some of the engineers at Ford that engineered the Coyote. They're quite satisfied with the results of their work.
Your statement has nothing to do with mine. I'm pretty happy with the coyote too.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Fuel economy improvements relative to viscosity changes get smaller as the engine displacement increases.

At best they are very difficult to quantify...

 

[CATERHAM]

It shouldn't come as surprise that the usual thick oil crowd will minimize the advantages of running a 20 grade oil.
Oil is cheap and we are in the middle of winter so if the OP is curious, what better time to dump the 5W-50 and try the Motorcraft 5W-20 then he can judge the difference for himself.
Use the same oil filter, just drain it, and maintain the recommended OCI based on the last 5W-50 fill (or purchase receipt) resuming the next 5W-50 oil change on schedule. This will preclude any warranty documentation issue if that's a concern.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
It shouldn't come as surprise that the usual thick oil crowd will minimize the advantages of running a 20 grade oil.


Not minimising the advantages, just asking you to quantify "huge", and "bucket"...they imply "lots"...and are your claim.

 

[wtd]

According the my 2014 Mustang brochure, the one you can get at the dealer that has all of the features and options for the cars, the GT Track Package consists of: All contents of the Brembo brake package which consists of 14" Brembo vented front rotors with Brembo 4 piston calipers, unique electronic stability control suspension tuning, and special 19" wheels with summer only tires. The rest of the track package has 3.73:1 gear ratio with TORSEN helical gear differential, BOSS 302 radiator and engine oil cooler(manual coupes only).

Everything I have read online says that the engines in both the regular GT's and the track pack cars are the exact same with no internal differences at all. I also have never read that the track pack cars don't have the fail safe mode that the regular GT's have when the oil temps reach a certain temp. I have read that if you run the track pack cars long enough at higher rpms, that you will still exceed the safe oil temps because the Boss radiator and oil cooler can only do so much.

I think Ford's recommendation for using the 5W-50 in the track pack cars is just to cover their [censored] in case the owner's do decide to track their cars. I think that if you just drive it normally and don't track it, you would be fine with the 5W-20. There are plenty of people who run their regular GT's hard with the factory recommended 5w-20 with no problems.

With that being said, I would run the recommended 5W-50 during the warranty period to cover your [censored] in case of an engine issue.

Wayne

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
OP - OVERK1LL's comments on Page 4 of this Thread says it all

Sound advice IMO when under any form of Warranty in this litigious world we all (most) live in today

Pages 287/8/9 in the O Manual show you the quite limited options, particularly Ford's Own Spec

During 2014 we should all expect to see more Manufacturer driven lubricant Specifications. The GM Dexos system simply follows what many Euro makers have done for many years. The rapid developments in engine design and production is driving this too

The problems of Marketing in the likes of China and India has been a prime motivator - unclassified or poor quality lubricants have cost them all a lot of money in the last several years

This is somewhat similar to the diesel engine issues of the 1970s-1980s when the API fell asleep at their desks.............

Thank goodness ACEA was formed!!!

 

[virginoil]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
It shouldn't come as surprise that the usual thick oil crowd will minimize the advantages of running a 20 grade oil.


Not minimising the advantages, just asking you to quantify "huge", and "bucket"...they imply "lots"...and are your claim.


Caterham posts should finish by saying "this advice is In My Opinion" as there is a departure from the OEM's Opinion during warranty for the vehicle rather than try to present it as established fact in this instance.

 

[jaj]

The ECU programming is very sophisticated in this engine - the cam timing programming has tables that depend on the oil viscosity. The engine itself doesn't care about the vis, but the ECU is expecting specific viscosity values at specific temperatures.

 

[SteveSRT8]

That alleged "sophisticated" ECU programming has been in use since mfgrs started moving cams for VVT.

Many makes had it long ago, it is neither new or unusual any more...

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
That alleged "sophisticated" ECU programming has been in use since mfgrs started moving cams for VVT.

Many makes had it long ago, it is neither new or unusual any more...


So is it true like many of us have said over the years basically these engines can run on anything from 5W20-5W50 in their neutered form, or in the track pack form using some common sense? Although they strongly recommend against anything but the grade they state in the OM and on the fill cap. Still many of us old timers would like to have a choice and match the oil to the conditions. But having said that I'd stick to the mfg's recommendation since they'd be footing the bill if something oil related goes wrong.

 

[SteveSRT8]

The last line says it all.

The mfgr has PROVED that the engines can tolerate almost any weight of oil by their own specs!

Unless you have the moolah to buy a new Coyote engine out of pocket I'd be sure to use the correct oil.