Oil explained from F150 site...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
7,849
Location
Oklahoma
Got this off of fordf150.net site, interesting explaination.


For 1997 engines and newer: In all ambient temperatures, the goal should be the utilization a motor oil of the thinnest SAE grade viscosity rating which provides undegradable film strength at pressures down to 10 psig. The goal being the "thickest" viscosity @ normal operating temp, plus a 10% overshoot. The achieve this, the optimum centistoke viscosity @ 212 F, must be between 8.2, and 11.3 (the closer to 11.3, the better). Using an oil exhibiting cSt above 12, actually begins to generate some friction within itself. You won't lose film strength, but will begin losing efficiency (horsepower). In our lab, we measure this as volumetric and mechanical efficiency.

It is important to note, that our testing is only quanitfying the lubricative and efficency characteristics of these oils, and not the "total package" which includes contaminate retension, resistence to sludge, cold weather performance, etc.

We have only researched a few oil brands, but this is what our testing indicate to date relative to cSt @ 212 F:

Synthetics / semi synthetics:

Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5w30 - 9.7
10W-30 - 9.8
Mobil Dr Cl Blnd 5w30 - 10.5
10W-30 - 10.5

Pennzoil Syn Blnd 5w30 - 10.5
10W-30 - 10.5

Quaker State Synthetic Blend

5W-20 - 8.1
5w30 - 11.0
10W-30 -10.5

Motorcraft Syn Blnd 5W-20 - 9.0
Solvent refined base (conventional):

Mobil 5w30 - 10.5
10W-30 - 10.5

Quaker State 5W-20 - 8.1
5w30 - 10.7
10W-30 - 10.5

Hydrocracked refined base:

Conoco 5w30 - 11.0
10W-30 - 10.7
Motorcraft 5w30 - 11.2
10W-30 - 11.0

In summary, it may seem we are "splitting hairs" here, but it all comes down to the application, as the data would indicate all the above oils (except both Quaker State 5W-20s) accomodate the
aforementioned criteria.
In our applications we only recommend synthetics where high performance equipment experiences consistent operating temperatures above 264 F. This is usually an application where the manufacturer has deemed it cost prohibive to install an oil cooler. Today, many truck V-8s come equiped from the factory with oil coolers. I know for a fact most Ford 4.6 & 5.4Ls do.
It is our opinion, the oils constructed of hydrocracked bases represent the best combination of performance and cost.
 
These guys are on the right track from my way of thinking.

Exactly why I like the Motorcraft 5w-20 blend as a great oil for the Fords out there and currently being tested in a 1.6L Honda with LC for suitable operation.

Better being thin with good protection than fat with too much.
lol.gif
 
The fact that he is comparing low shear rate, "kinematic" viscosities, rather than HT/HS viscosities, should tell you this is "Voodoo Tribology"

1) "...the optimum centistoke viscosity @ 212F must be between 8.2 and 11.3 Cst". How were these numbers magically derived? That takes in everything from a mid range 20wt to a mid range 30wt ....

2) "Using an oil exhibiting Cst above 12, actually begins to generate friction within itself"
rolleyes.gif


3) "Undegradable film strength at pressures down to 10 psig"?
confused.gif


Certainly there is an optimum viscosity for every engine application, based on ambient temps,engine clearances,valvetrain loads, oil pump flow rates,total bearing area,sump capacity,expected oil temps, etc.

ALL these criteria went into Fords' 5w-20 recommendation, although truth be told, the 0.5% fuel savings over a 5w30 played the major role in this recommendation ....

I won't even comment on the grammar, except the phrase: "English as a second language" comes to mind ....
shocked.gif
 
Ted, I suspect the testing was done with a dyno and oil analysis. A common practice in race engine R&D.

Be careful getting too snooty about the technique or their results.
rolleyes.gif


Note very few JPL guys are working for Ford or NASCAR R&D.
pat.gif


I question #3 and its real meaning too ??????

A call for papers ???
wink.gif

I doubt they care about submitting their testing for peer review at STLE/ASTM/SAE.

Something may have gotten lost in the translation........

Bubba Gump Dyson

[ January 13, 2004, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom