Observation: M1 0W-40 In 5W-30 Application

[AKhan87]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
The only meaningful change made besides the oil is that I'm idling less in the warmer temperatures.

That right there explains your change in MPG.


Big time, and the rise in temps.


Big reason would be the blend of gas, summer time I consistently get 3-4 mpg more in all three of my cars, at least the log proves it, there is no idling of any sort because of temperature changes...

Use to own a gas station for 6 years, and will be owning it again in 2 years, though we were never alerted when the distributor made in changes to the blend.

 

[kschachn]

Lol. Try again.

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
2. Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Sorry, but that is just not happening as a result of switching from 5w-30 to 0w-40.

Why not ? Maybe the 40 weight is lubricating better thus reducing friction. In the UOA section, those Chevy truck V8's always have high wear numbers with 5W-30. On 40 weights, the numbers are always way lower.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Glad that 0W-40 works well for you but that 23% gain in fuel economy is nothing but experimental error.

If you do the experiment correctly, 0W-40 will show less fuel economy because of more viscous (hydrodynamic) drag (oil's internal friction in bearings and also cylinders to some extent).

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Oil pressure is instantaneous even with the few just above freezing morning temperatures I've had here. I expected higher pressure readings both cold and hot but the gauge reads the same.

On the contrary, you would expect the synthetic 0W-40 to run thinner than a conventional 5W-30 in a cold engine due to higher viscosity index. In a hot engine, oil pressure with 0W-40 should be higher unless you are maxing out on the pressure (relief valve opening).

 

[Oil Changer]

I understand and never implied otherwise. I'm assuming the increase came from less idle time and the change to summer fuel. I can only hope my station didn't make the switch because as it stands now, this is the best MPG this vehicle has ever seen.

As for pressures, I assumed that even with the "0" rating that the 40-grade would be heavier across the board.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Glad that 0W-40 works well for you but that 23% gain in fuel economy is nothing but experimental error.

If you do the experiment correctly, 0W-40 will show less fuel economy because of more viscous (hydrodynamic) drag (oil's internal friction in bearings and also cylinders to some extent).

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Oil pressure is instantaneous even with the few just above freezing morning temperatures I've had here. I expected higher pressure readings both cold and hot but the gauge reads the same.

On the contrary, you would expect the synthetic 0W-40 to run thinner than a conventional 5W-30 in a cold engine due to higher viscosity index. In a hot engine, oil pressure with 0W-40 should be higher unless you are maxing out on the pressure (relief valve opening).

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
As for pressures, I assumed that even with the "0" rating that the 40-grade would be heavier across the board.

Nope, in addition to the "-40" or "-30" part, it depends on the viscosity index (VI). Here are the numbers:

M1 0W-40: KV @ 100 C: 13.5 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 75 cSt, VI: 185
PYB 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.6 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 63 cSt, VI: 158

Lower VI means that the KV increases more rapidly with decreasing temperature. M1 0W-40 has almost caught up with PYB 5W-30 at 40 C, and it will be thinner in a cold engine. Of course, not to mention that it will be a lot thinner in extreme cold ("0W-" or "5W-" part).

 

[geeman789]

The two grades are too close ... 0w40 is a relatively thin 40 grade. Maybe step up to M1 15w50 and see what happens...

I ran a small 4 cylinder on every grade over its life. 20s, 30s, 40s and even 50s a few times... the engine did not care....and lasted well over 500 000 kms until the head gasket let go...

The only thing I noticed was the engine was slightly sluggish on 50s, but very quiet...!

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: geeman789
The two grades are too close ... 0w40 is a relatively thin 40 grade. Maybe step up to M1 15w50 and see what happens...

Too close? Not at all. 0W-40 has HTHSV 3.8 cP vs. 3.0 cP of 5W-30. That's a huge difference in HTHSV. In comparison xW-20 is only 2.7 cP vs. 3.0 cP of 5W-30. The new xW-16 will have HTHSV of about 2.4 cP.

Of course, you could go higher with 15W-40, which has HTHSV ~ 4.3 cP, or xW-50, which could be even slightly higher, but I wouldn't recommend that thick, especially for winter use.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: 01_celica_gt
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
The only meaningful change made besides the oil is that I'm idling less in the warmer temperatures.

That right there explains your change in MPG.


Big time, and the rise in temps.


Big reason would be the blend of gas, summer time I consistently get 3-4 mpg more in all three of my cars, at least the log proves it, there is no idling of any sort because of temperature changes...

Use to own a gas station for 6 years, and will be owning it again in 2 years, though we were never alerted when the distributor made in changes to the blend.


No doubt in my mind about that either. If gas prices were the same week after week I was always able to tell the change over from summer to winter blend or vice versa, just by what it costs to fill up each week. Those two vehicles were driven the identical route every day.

 

[Volvohead]

M1 0w-40 is an excellent oil. We use it and the later formulae seems to put up with turbos and shear down much better than their '04-'07 brew did.

But unless you are doing heavy-duty towing, tracking, or some other extreme application with that 5.7, this is one of the very rare occasions in which I agree with Mr. Caterham.

M1 5w-30 in either variety is probably a better year-round street choice for your ambients in that engine.

But you can't beat the price you paid, and it certainly will do no harm at all.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Nope, in addition to the "-40" or "-30" part, it depends on the viscosity index (VI). Here are the numbers:

M1 0W-40: KV @ 100 C: 13.5 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 75 cSt, VI: 185
PYB 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.6 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 63 cSt, VI: 158

Lower VI means that the KV increases more rapidly with decreasing temperature. M1 0W-40 has almost caught up with PYB 5W-30 at 40 C, and it will be thinner in a cold engine. Of course, not to mention that it will be a lot thinner in extreme cold ("0W-" or "5W-" part).

Thinking about it, since 0W-40 is actually thinner than a conventional 5w-30 in a cold engine, this could explain why you are seeing better fuel economy with 0W-40 than with conventional 5W-30 in the winter! However, I expect any improvement to be much less than what you reported.

 

[Oil Changer]

I used PP 5W-30 all winter.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Nope, in addition to the "-40" or "-30" part, it depends on the viscosity index (VI). Here are the numbers:

M1 0W-40: KV @ 100 C: 13.5 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 75 cSt, VI: 185
PYB 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.6 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 63 cSt, VI: 158

Lower VI means that the KV increases more rapidly with decreasing temperature. M1 0W-40 has almost caught up with PYB 5W-30 at 40 C, and it will be thinner in a cold engine. Of course, not to mention that it will be a lot thinner in extreme cold ("0W-" or "5W-" part).

Thinking about it, since 0W-40 is actually thinner than a conventional 5w-30 in a cold engine, this could explain why you are seeing better fuel economy with 0W-40 than with conventional 5W-30 in the winter! However, I expect any improvement to be much less than what you reported.

 

[buster]

The additive package of the 0w40 is a lot different than the other M1 grades. So you're not just dealing with viscosity differences when you go from M1 SN 5w30 with a SA of .8 to M1 0w40 that uses their top of the line base oils and has higher levels of Ca, hence the SA of 1.2%.

Normally I would use a 5w30 in the Subaru 2.5, but my engine is older, so a 0w40 is ok and even allowed by the OEM. With Mobil 1 0w40 in particular, you're getting their best oil blend.

Quote:
It provides exceptional cleaning power, wear protection and overall performance. Mobil 1 0W-40 keeps your engine running like new in all driving conditions.



Features and Potential Benefits
Mobil 1 0W-40 is made with a proprietary blend of ultra high performance synthetic basestocks fortified with a precisely balanced component system.

Meets or exceeds the latest OEM and industry approvals
Is chosen for factory fill in many of the world’s finest vehicles
Provides excellent overall performance
Has excellent low temperature capabilities for rapid engine protection at start-up
Has enhanced frictional properties that aids fuel economy
Delivers fast protection for reduced engine wear and deposits even in the most extreme driving conditions
Provides exceptional cleaning power for dirty engines.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
I used PP 5W-30 all winter.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
Fuel economy went UP from 13.5 MPG to 16.6 MPG.

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Nope, in addition to the "-40" or "-30" part, it depends on the viscosity index (VI). Here are the numbers:

M1 0W-40: KV @ 100 C: 13.5 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 75 cSt, VI: 185
PYB 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.6 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 63 cSt, VI: 158

Lower VI means that the KV increases more rapidly with decreasing temperature. M1 0W-40 has almost caught up with PYB 5W-30 at 40 C, and it will be thinner in a cold engine. Of course, not to mention that it will be a lot thinner in extreme cold ("0W-" or "5W-" part).

Thinking about it, since 0W-40 is actually thinner than a conventional 5w-30 in a cold engine, this could explain why you are seeing better fuel economy with 0W-40 than with conventional 5W-30 in the winter! However, I expect any improvement to be much less than what you reported.

M1 0W-40: KV @ 100 C: 13.5 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 75 cSt, VI: 185
PYB 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.6 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 63 cSt, VI: 158
PP 5W-30: KV @ 100 C: 10.3 cSt, KV @ 40 C: 58 cSt, VI: 169

Due to higher viscosity index, M1 0W-40 will probably be thinner in a cold engine in the winter than PP 5W-30 as well. Nevertheless, yes, your fuel-economy data has a lot of error and/or bias.

 

[Oil Changer]

My fuel economy data is not in error or biased. I never once claimed the results were due to the oil but rather my station's switch to summer blend and less idle time. I will say the oil had little to no inverse impact on fuel economy.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
My fuel economy data is not in error or biased. I never once claimed the results were due to the oil but rather my station's switch to summer blend and less idle time. I will say the oil had little to no inverse impact on fuel economy.

That's what I meant by bias -- fuel economy being affected by driving conditions or other factors. There is error in every experiment.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
you will have better overall lubrication running the 5W-30


Can you elaborate on this? I can't see how this would be the case. Perhaps he'd had 0.001% better fuel economy, but I don't think that a 5w-30 is going to provide "better" lubrication


Fair request...

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
you will have better overall lubrication running the 5W-30


Can you elaborate on this? I can't see how this would be the case. Perhaps he'd had 0.001% better fuel economy, but I don't think that a 5w-30 is going to provide "better" lubrication than a 0w-40, particularly not M1 0w-40, which has more manufacturer certs and approvals than any other oil they make.

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
For the same reasons, M1 5W-30 is a better lubricate choice in the 638 HP Corvette ZR-1 than M1 0W-40.


For daily driver duty perhaps one could argue that it is a more appropriate choice for the oil temps encountered. For track use GM runs M1 0w-40 in their own Corvette Program cars.

You've answered your own question.
The specified M1 5W-30 is more appropriate for street use which is what we're talking about here.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
The oil I had in all winter was PP 5W-30.


And the big wigs are telling you that you need to go back to 5W-30.

0W-40 is inappropriate for your application. Don't do it again.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
you will have better overall lubrication running the 5W-30


Can you elaborate on this? I can't see how this would be the case. Perhaps he'd had 0.001% better fuel economy, but I don't think that a 5w-30 is going to provide "better" lubrication than a 0w-40, particularly not M1 0w-40, which has more manufacturer certs and approvals than any other oil they make.

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
For the same reasons, M1 5W-30 is a better lubricate choice in the 638 HP Corvette ZR-1 than M1 0W-40.


For daily driver duty perhaps one could argue that it is a more appropriate choice for the oil temps encountered. For track use GM runs M1 0w-40 in their own Corvette Program cars.

You've answered your own question.
The specified M1 5W-30 is more appropriate for street use which is what we're talking about here.


More appropriate for an application based on daily driver oil temps and an imperceptible increase in fuel economy doesn't equal "better lubrication", which was what you stated. I don't believe I answered my own question at all.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
you will have better overall lubrication running the 5W-30


Can you elaborate on this? I can't see how this would be the case. Perhaps he'd had 0.001% better fuel economy, but I don't think that a 5w-30 is going to provide "better" lubrication than a 0w-40, particularly not M1 0w-40, which has more manufacturer certs and approvals than any other oil they make.

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
For the same reasons, M1 5W-30 is a better lubricate choice in the 638 HP Corvette ZR-1 than M1 0W-40.


For daily driver duty perhaps one could argue that it is a more appropriate choice for the oil temps encountered. For track use GM runs M1 0w-40 in their own Corvette Program cars.

You've answered your own question.
The specified M1 5W-30 is more appropriate for street use which is what we're talking about here.


More appropriate for an application based on daily driver oil temps and an imperceptible increase in fuel economy doesn't equal "better lubrication", which was what you stated. I don't believe I answered my own question at all. All I've done is identified GM's reasoning for recommending their "across the board" synthetic oil (M1 5w-30) in the ZR1. That doesn't mean it provides "better overall lubrication", if it did, they'd run it in GM's Corvette Program cars, but they don't, they run the 0w-40, likely because under all of the conditions encountered with THOSE cars, the 0w-40 DOES in fact provide "better overall lubrication". If it didn't, they wouldn't use it. Simple as that.

The 0w-40 has a more robust additive package, better longevity, better base stocks, and in general is just a better oil than the 5w-30. The only difference is that it is a bit heavier. I mean I guess it is easy to discount the insane amount of durability, wear control, deposit control....etc testing that it had to go through to gain the Porsche, Mercedes, BMW, Audi....etc approvals, the fact that it is used in a myriad of actual race cars, used by factory race teams.....blah blah blah. And assume that because it is a few cSt heavier that it must provide "inferior" lubrication right?

I don't see how it is possible for you to legitimately back-up the statement "better overall lubrication" here. Perhaps if you had said that the 5w-30 was more appropriate based on oil temps observed in your average street car and that the 5w-30 offers a more appropriate operating viscosity and should provide slightly better fuel economy, sure. I think we can generally agree that your typical street car that spec's 5w-30 isn't going to see any sort of notable benefit from running an oil that is heavier than spec and likely, while being a bit heavier on additives, isn't going to provide any measurable increase in wear control over the spec lubricant. With those qualifiers noted I would argue that neither oil is going to, under these operating conditions, offer "better overall lubrication" than the other. Simply that the 5w-30 is more than adequate for the expected operating conditions and there is no real benefit to running the heavier-than-spec oil unless the operating conditions are somehow exceptional in a way that has not been described to us and that elevated oil temperatures have been observed.