New Ravenol Ultra Fuel Economy 0W-8

[kschachn]

It is actually completely unnecessary for me to be specific here, as I have posted noteworthy UOAs.

The oil used produced very good results, and at very extended OCIs.

Still believing that you can make quality determinations through a $30 spectrographic analysis of randomly generated samples?

 

[kschachn]

There is a disconnect--even a schism-- between what ZeeOSix posted and what I posted.

Yes and there is a reason for that.

 

[OVERKILL]

There is a disconnect--even a schism-- between what ZeeOSix posted and what I posted.

It is a given that 0W8 motor oil operates largely outside of the realm of normal tribological concepts, and is largely dependent on clever design.

It remains a fact that in my circumstance, 12 ppm Fe were the result after nearly 20k miles of usage of 0W8.

Your engine originally spec'd 0W-16 though, correct? So it was already "tweaked" to tolerate an oil with an HTHS <2.5cP. Now, the 0W-8 has an HTHS of ~2.0cP, which is significantly lower still, but I assume Toyota used some liberal "fudge factor" in their design approach with this in mind.

 

[DirectRejection]

Still believing that you can make quality determinations through a $30 spectrographic analysis of randomly generated samples?

When do you anticipate my bearings failing, or of the typical Yaris Cross Hybrid ?

 

[DirectRejection]

Why did Ravenol come to market with a 0W8 motor oil ?
Did they forget about MOFT ?
Or film strength ?

 

[DirectRejection]

Your engine originally spec'd 0W-16 though, correct? So it was already "tweaked" to tolerate an oil with an HTHS

Yes. Actually, I haven't done anything all that wild here. It was slow, gradual and methodical.

I am looking forward to your results with the carefully crafted and utilized OVERKILL 0W20.

The obvious implication is that attributes obtained with very thin motor oil design are applied to other thicker grades offered by High Performance Lubricants.

 

[slo town]

The original Ravenol link no longer shows 0W-8. Weird.

Scott

 

[PimTac]

The original Ravenol link no longer shows 0W-8. Weird.

Scott

I checked both the US and German sites. It doesn’t show up.

Perhaps the demand was not enough to continue production?

 

[tyman]

I checked both the US and German sites. It doesn’t show up.

Perhaps the demand was not enough to continue production?

They probably saw a ton of traffic redirected from BITOG and were like, "oh ****, shut this **** down now"

 

[kschachn]

When do you anticipate my bearings failing, or of the typical Yaris Cross Hybrid ?

Yeah, still stuck on the spurious "piles of engine failures" thing I see.

Well if you are using a UOA to determine things then this is a reasonable notion I guess.

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

i tip my hat to the man if he does , i wouldn't have the balls to run 0w8 in any of the exotics he has

@AEHaas could probably make that work, I've been told repeatedly he drives his exotics in a manner so conservative that it would make any one of us blush and that he's gentler on his exotics then an old person is on their Buick.

 

[DirectRejection]

Yeah, still stuck on the spurious "piles of engine failures" thing I see.

Well if you are using a UOA to determine things then this is a reasonable notion I guess.

Now there is a schism here.

I have outlined a decade long history, with below spec'd oils, in several vehicles, and involving hundreds of thousands of miles.

The conditions are remarkably consistent, as in years and years @ ~80k miles per year.

I continue to search for whatever variables might be there.
--changes in fuel formulas ?
--new engine designs ?
--advances in oil formulations ?
That's about it.

In my case, there are now trends.

The laws of physics and generally accepted concepts of tribology are still there.

Since it is known that ILSAC GF-6B ultra thin oils rely on careful, precise add packs and base stocks, THAT is and ought to be front and center here.

 

[ZeeOSix]

There is a disconnect--even a schism-- between what ZeeOSix posted and what I posted.

It is a given that 0W8 motor oil operates largely outside of the realm of normal tribological concepts, and is largely dependent on clever design.

It remains a fact that in my circumstance, 12 ppm Fe were the result after nearly 20k miles of usage of 0W8.

There is no disconnect or schism from what I posted and what happens when oil becomes thinner - the physics of Tribology (which was the focus) don't change. Just because you don't see some big step function in a UOA or your engine didn't window the block yet doesn't mean your engine isn't wearing out faster by running a thinner oil than specified. You would have to give it more time/miles to manifest itself.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Still believing that you can make quality determinations through a $30 spectrographic analysis of randomly generated samples?

Just like the guy on YT I mentioned earlier that ran xW-20 on long track days that one day tore his motor down and the bearings were trashed. He said the UOAs didn't give him any warnings. Of course he sas beating that engine hard, not "hypermiling" a hybrid on the public streets.

 

[ZeeOSix]

When do you anticipate my bearings failing, or of the typical Yaris Cross Hybrid ?

The engine won't "blow-up", but as the MOFT headroom is reduced, then over time more wear will occur. That's how the physics of lubrication between moving parts works. That 0W-8 oil has more film strenght, so that's helping out, but film strength through AF/AW additives can only go so far to take the place of the film thickness created by viscosity.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Why did Ravenol come to market with a 0W8 motor oil ?
Did they forget about MOFT ?
Or film strength ?

They make it for engines specifying it - engines that have special design features. As @OVERKILL mentiined, an engines specifying 0W-16 also have design features for 0W-16. And yes they rely on the AF/AW film strength more and more as viscosity and MOFT decrease from less HTHS viscosity.

 

[Fahrvergnügen]

If the 0w16 is

Good question. Likely it would be viscosity due to film thickness during High Temperature / High Sheer driving.

The timing chain test would be using brand new oil. After a 20 weight or thinner oil has been in the engine for 5,000+ miles,
it will likely sheer down to a much lower HTHS and likely would fail that same timing chain test.

Ford recommends 5W-30 for most of its engines with start/stop technology (which is very hard on the oil).
If 20 weight oil protected an engine equal to better than 30 weight, Ford never would have switched back to 30 weight oil.

My main reason to use 30 weight oil is for the inevitable extreme conditions that may happen during an oil change interval, like going on a vacation with the family driving a few thousand miles cross country, which might include a minivan carrying 8 heavy people + heavy luggage with Air Conditioning on and going up mountain hills during parts of the trip. In this high temperature / high sheer situation, 20 weight or thinner oils would really sheer and get so thin as to not provide enough film strength and could allow for metal on metal contact inside the engine.

Toyota has surprisingly moved in the opposite direction, specing nearly all of their new cars for 0W-16.
Toyota also recommends 10,000 mile oil changes. This long drain interval should allow the 0W-16 to sheer down to a 0W-8 oil.
So far, no issues with that from what I can tell by google searches.

But my suspicion is that after 100k miles, these cars will show higher than normal engine wear / oil consumption.
It will be interesting to follow this over the long term to see if engines using 0W-16 can make it to 200,000 miles.
My expectation is no.

If the 0w16 is stretched to the 10,000 mile intervals, they usually start consuming oil at about 100,000 miles. I wouldn’t run it past 5,000 miles, much less use the 0w16.

 

[DirectRejection]

There is no disconnect or schism from what I posted and what happens when oil becomes thinner - the physics of Tribology (which was the focus) don't change. Just because you don't see some big step function in a UOA or your engine didn't window the block yet doesn't mean your engine isn't wearing out faster by running a thinner oil than specified. You would have to give it more time/miles to manifest itself.

You have a problem.
I will personally be running HPL PP 0W8 in my current vehicle for significant miles, and in relatively short order.

Substantiating's coming...

 

[ZeeOSix]

You have a problem.
I will personally be running HPL PP 0W8 in my current vehicle for significant miles, and in relatively short order.

Substantiating's coming...

And what's that problem? The science of Tribology doesn't change - that's the focus, but you seem to not believe in the physics.

 

[kschachn]

You have a problem.
I will personally be running HPL PP 0W8 in my current vehicle for significant miles, and in relatively short order.

Substantiating's coming...

So you’re performing ASTM D6891-21 or another one of the relevant Sequence tests? Cool, that should be interesting.