Boy, looks like someone put skyship in his place! Thanks for telling it like it is fdcg27!
READ PLEASE! 5w20 vs 5w30 engine life? opinions ?
- Thread starter dedonderosa
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
You should go look at what the CAFE regs mean in business terms, as they result in US car manufacturers doing anything possible to cut fuel consumption regardless of long term (Outside of warranty) implications. Light oil use is OK for hybrids and some new block designs but they should be listing other grades and oil types for severe service use as they do outside the US and Japan and listing longer OCI options, but the CAFE bean couting game prevents that.
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
You should go look at what the CAFE regs mean in business terms, as they result in US car manufacturers doing anything possible to cut fuel consumption regardless of long term (Outside of warranty) implications. Light oil use is OK for hybrids and some new block designs but they should be listing other grades and oil types for severe service use as they do outside the US and Japan and listing longer OCI options, but the CAFE bean couting game prevents that.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
I am a bean counter and I can assure you that we're very good at math.
I direct this post generally, not at you yonyon.
There is nothing to indicate that cars last longer in thick oil zones than they do in the thin oil zones.
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Cars are routinely scrapped in the EU at mileages we here would consider laughably short.
What we should really be talking about is vehicle life.
Engine life is only a part of this, and very few cars are scrapped beacuse the engine is worn beyond further use.
You want to talk inspections?
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather.
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
The EU specs for most makes recommend thicker grades of oil than do the recommendations for the same engines in North America.
The cars don't last as long in the EU.
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
You can't compare different continents in car life terms. Japan has been using light oils for longer than the US and has a much shorter car life cycle, Russians use heavy oils and have very long lasting cars.
The cars in the EU are very different to those in the US, they are on average smaller, more are diesels and we have a lot less small trucks. The average distance per trip is much shorter and the EU climate worse in humidity terms.
The biggest factor in reducing vehicle life is the cost of parts and repairs and both are about double those in the US and that does result in a lot of cars that could be repaired getting scrapped.
I've spent 6 years in the US and it is the easiest environments for a car in the world.
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
I am a bean counter and I can assure you that we're very good at math.
I direct this post generally, not at you yonyon.
There is nothing to indicate that cars last longer in thick oil zones than they do in the thin oil zones.
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Cars are routinely scrapped in the EU at mileages we here would consider laughably short.
What we should really be talking about is vehicle life.
Engine life is only a part of this, and very few cars are scrapped beacuse the engine is worn beyond further use.
You want to talk inspections?
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather.
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
The EU specs for most makes recommend thicker grades of oil than do the recommendations for the same engines in North America.
The cars don't last as long in the EU.
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
You can't compare different continents in car life terms. Japan has been using light oils for longer than the US and has a much shorter car life cycle, Russians use heavy oils and have very long lasting cars.
The cars in the EU are very different to those in the US, they are on average smaller, more are diesels and we have a lot less small trucks. The average distance per trip is much shorter and the EU climate worse in humidity terms.
The biggest factor in reducing vehicle life is the cost of parts and repairs and both are about double those in the US and that does result in a lot of cars that could be repaired getting scrapped.
I've spent 6 years in the US and it is the easiest environments for a car in the world.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: skyship
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
I am a bean counter and I can assure you that we're very good at math.
I direct this post generally, not at you yonyon.
There is nothing to indicate that cars last longer in thick oil zones than they do in the thin oil zones.
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Cars are routinely scrapped in the EU at mileages we here would consider laughably short.
What we should really be talking about is vehicle life.
Engine life is only a part of this, and very few cars are scrapped beacuse the engine is worn beyond further use.
You want to talk inspections?
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather.
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
The EU specs for most makes recommend thicker grades of oil than do the recommendations for the same engines in North America.
The cars don't last as long in the EU.
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
You can't compare different continents in car life terms. Japan has been using light oils for longer than the US and has a much shorter car life cycle, Russians use heavy oils and have very long lasting cars.
The cars in the EU are very different to those in the US, they are on average smaller, more are diesels and we have a lot less small trucks. The average distance per trip is much shorter and the EU climate worse in humidity terms.
The biggest factor in reducing vehicle life is the cost of parts and repairs and both are about double those in the US and that does result in a lot of cars that could be repaired getting scrapped.
I've spent 6 years in the US and it is the easiest environments for a car in the world.
Did I just read that European cars average ten years before their toast? 10 years?
That's unreal.And makes this discussion so much more interesting. My truck is 8 years old with 255000kms on it. It looks and rides like new and still shreds rubber at will. What makes cars there dies sooner.
Is it that bodies end up rotting off around a good running engine tends to e the norm around here too.
In the end we get roughly the same life out of an engine but we burned less fuel doing it by running thinner oil.
If the cars on both continents are scrapped who cares if the engines any goog anymore honestly.
And I routinely see mid 70s chev and ford pick ups around here but we use basically no salt whatsoever. Just gravel. So there's very little rust formation unlike where its a bit warmer and they have to salt them.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
I am a bean counter and I can assure you that we're very good at math.
I direct this post generally, not at you yonyon.
There is nothing to indicate that cars last longer in thick oil zones than they do in the thin oil zones.
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Cars are routinely scrapped in the EU at mileages we here would consider laughably short.
What we should really be talking about is vehicle life.
Engine life is only a part of this, and very few cars are scrapped beacuse the engine is worn beyond further use.
You want to talk inspections?
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather.
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
The EU specs for most makes recommend thicker grades of oil than do the recommendations for the same engines in North America.
The cars don't last as long in the EU.
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
You can't compare different continents in car life terms. Japan has been using light oils for longer than the US and has a much shorter car life cycle, Russians use heavy oils and have very long lasting cars.
The cars in the EU are very different to those in the US, they are on average smaller, more are diesels and we have a lot less small trucks. The average distance per trip is much shorter and the EU climate worse in humidity terms.
The biggest factor in reducing vehicle life is the cost of parts and repairs and both are about double those in the US and that does result in a lot of cars that could be repaired getting scrapped.
I've spent 6 years in the US and it is the easiest environments for a car in the world.
Did I just read that European cars average ten years before their toast? 10 years?
That's unreal.And makes this discussion so much more interesting. My truck is 8 years old with 255000kms on it. It looks and rides like new and still shreds rubber at will. What makes cars there dies sooner.
Is it that bodies end up rotting off around a good running engine tends to e the norm around here too.
In the end we get roughly the same life out of an engine but we burned less fuel doing it by running thinner oil.
If the cars on both continents are scrapped who cares if the engines any goog anymore honestly.
And I routinely see mid 70s chev and ford pick ups around here but we use basically no salt whatsoever. Just gravel. So there's very little rust formation unlike where its a bit warmer and they have to salt them.
Interesting that increasingly the threads are turning to "who cares, as long as the engine lives longer than the car". It's a fair assessment...and acknowledges that there's a potential reduction in life (which as I've said repeatedly may not mean anything to the owner who sells early, lives in the salt belt etc. etc.)
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
Except that the immediate financial benefits of CAFE are given to the manufacturer now, and any potential future costs (like replacement) are born by the buyer in the future.
It's not a proper cost/benefit analysis at that point.
Ford Pinto proved just how readily beancounters are willing to push costs onto others when it helps their balance sheet.
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
Except that the immediate financial benefits of CAFE are given to the manufacturer now, and any potential future costs (like replacement) are born by the buyer in the future.
It's not a proper cost/benefit analysis at that point.
Ford Pinto proved just how readily beancounters are willing to push costs onto others when it helps their balance sheet.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Interesting that increasingly the threads are turning to "who cares, as long as the engine lives longer than the car". It's a fair assessment...and acknowledges that there's a potential reduction in life (which as I've said repeatedly may not mean anything to the owner who sells early, lives in the salt belt etc. etc.)
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
Interesting that increasingly the threads are turning to "who cares, as long as the engine lives longer than the car". It's a fair assessment...and acknowledges that there's a potential reduction in life (which as I've said repeatedly may not mean anything to the owner who sells early, lives in the salt belt etc. etc.)
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
Originally Posted By: skyship
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Canada has one of the harshest environments for car operation in the world. Yet, people that rust proof their cars, seem to have no problems getting their car into 300,000+ km ranges with the cheapest dino oils usually in 5w30 or 5w20 grades. We also have to pass emission test every two years which I never had any problems with and most people I talk to have no problems with passing these tests either.
In Ontario the failure rate was so low that they decided to go to the OBD2 scanner tests only, to lower the costs of operating dyno machines I guess. If oil was such a big deal, it surely would show up in Canadian climate. Yet everybody just keeps on chugging along and piling on miles on their rides.
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Canada has one of the harshest environments for car operation in the world. Yet, people that rust proof their cars, seem to have no problems getting their car into 300,000+ km ranges with the cheapest dino oils usually in 5w30 or 5w20 grades. We also have to pass emission test every two years which I never had any problems with and most people I talk to have no problems with passing these tests either.
In Ontario the failure rate was so low that they decided to go to the OBD2 scanner tests only, to lower the costs of operating dyno machines I guess. If oil was such a big deal, it surely would show up in Canadian climate. Yet everybody just keeps on chugging along and piling on miles on their rides.
Hermann
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: Hyde244
Chances are, my engine will not be the death of my car. Rust is my biggest enemy.
Yes, you are right. But this is BITOG where .000000001% increased engine wear and the thin vs thick debate will go on till the end of the next Mayan calendar cycle.
Chances are, my engine will not be the death of my car. Rust is my biggest enemy.
Yes, you are right. But this is BITOG where .000000001% increased engine wear and the thin vs thick debate will go on till the end of the next Mayan calendar cycle.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
IM240 was never implemented in Europe for the same reasons many states have abandoned it here.
I worked in this industry for some years when i first came to the US and can tell you for a fact the IM240 was problem test from the get go.
Simple maintenance items like cleaning the filters and draining the hose of water by the operators failed cars that should have passed with ease.
VMAS calibration issues plagued these programs also failing cars for no reason.
It got so bad the in some states the company implementing the program at the time, the RMV and State EPA had to set up a compliance and equipment audit program.
I spent many months in Chicago and Atlanta implementing their emission programs and State auditing systems.
The Europeans did use TSI as they did here in many places for AWD vehicles that could not be put on a dyno and now also use a similar OBDII emission test just like the Americans.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
You want to talk inspections?
There is no comparison. Western European inspections are a nightmare for the motorist.
Brake dyno's are used, rust checks with pointed hammers, brake line and hose, tire data, every suspension part and bushing checks are all on the menu.
A very high percentage of cars 4 yrs and older in the US would fail miserably.
Once a car reaches a certain age like 8 yrs for the sake of argument a 3K repair can put many of them in the junk yard or sold in Eastern Europe or Africa.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather
Most Euro countries use salt heavily. The exception would be the Mediterranean countries but many these cars live in a salt air laded environment similar to parts of the UK.
The Scandinavian countries, Southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland, etc can have savage winters as bad as any found here in the US.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
No they don't. For the most part its just the junks are allowed to remain on the road here longer thats all.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
Yep.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Absolutely. The question is how cut up do you let it get before you put it out of its misery.
We have emissions tests in many areas of this country.
Are any required in the EU that involve actual dino runs?
We have those in many areas here.
IM240 was never implemented in Europe for the same reasons many states have abandoned it here.
I worked in this industry for some years when i first came to the US and can tell you for a fact the IM240 was problem test from the get go.
Simple maintenance items like cleaning the filters and draining the hose of water by the operators failed cars that should have passed with ease.
VMAS calibration issues plagued these programs also failing cars for no reason.
It got so bad the in some states the company implementing the program at the time, the RMV and State EPA had to set up a compliance and equipment audit program.
I spent many months in Chicago and Atlanta implementing their emission programs and State auditing systems.
The Europeans did use TSI as they did here in many places for AWD vehicles that could not be put on a dyno and now also use a similar OBDII emission test just like the Americans.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
You want to talk inspections?
There is no comparison. Western European inspections are a nightmare for the motorist.
Brake dyno's are used, rust checks with pointed hammers, brake line and hose, tire data, every suspension part and bushing checks are all on the menu.
A very high percentage of cars 4 yrs and older in the US would fail miserably.
Once a car reaches a certain age like 8 yrs for the sake of argument a 3K repair can put many of them in the junk yard or sold in Eastern Europe or Africa.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We also have more areas with really bad winter weather than does the EU, and we salt our roads heavily to make them safe to drive on in freezing weather
Most Euro countries use salt heavily. The exception would be the Mediterranean countries but many these cars live in a salt air laded environment similar to parts of the UK.
The Scandinavian countries, Southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland, etc can have savage winters as bad as any found here in the US.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cars still last longer here in miles than they do in the EU.
No they don't. For the most part its just the junks are allowed to remain on the road here longer thats all.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
I'd invite anyone to blow that through their thicker is better trumpet.
Yep.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
Absolutely. The question is how cut up do you let it get before you put it out of its misery.
Last edited:
i had been using 5w30 on the 2002 Odyssey where manufacture recommended 5w20 cause i had a stash of 5w30. the engine was extremely quiet and smooth. even when i've got rid of it, the van had 270k km on it and the engine still run like new(i used mostly PP, M1 5w30 and Fram OCOD due to availability at WM Canada back then).
when i've got the 2008 Odyssey i put manufacture recommended 5w20 (Castrol Edge) in, and immediately i hear the "valve noise" coming from the engine for the first two minute after start. i thought that happen because the cold start (-20C). however, when i switched to Synpower the noise disappeared. i notice that the engine on the 2008 Odyssey with 5w20 never run as smooth or quiet as the 2002 Odyssey with 5w30 even though it has much less mileage on it.
sometime manufacture recommendation does not necessarily translate into the best interest for end user. awhile back, i used Mobil 1 ATF for my Accord V6 while Honda strictly recommend "only use Honda ATF". i know for sure that at that time Honda did not have Synthetic ATF. (Honda just introduced synthetic ATF recently). almost all of the Accord V6 that follow manufacture recommendation using Honda ATF had problem with the transmission. However, i did not have any problem with the transmission with my Accord at nearly 300k
so, could running 5w30 instead of 5w20 be a factor contribute to increase engine life? i have no primary nor secondary data to back it up. but 5w30 definitely makes the engine go much smoother & quieter. and i will use 5w30 at the next OC.
a question while browsing the oil section. have you notice that: even though most Honda vehicle recommend 5w20, most of the oil that state that it meets Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 (M1, PP, QSUD... 5w30 meet Honda /Accura HTO-06 while 5w20 does not)why ???
when i've got the 2008 Odyssey i put manufacture recommended 5w20 (Castrol Edge) in, and immediately i hear the "valve noise" coming from the engine for the first two minute after start. i thought that happen because the cold start (-20C). however, when i switched to Synpower the noise disappeared. i notice that the engine on the 2008 Odyssey with 5w20 never run as smooth or quiet as the 2002 Odyssey with 5w30 even though it has much less mileage on it.
sometime manufacture recommendation does not necessarily translate into the best interest for end user. awhile back, i used Mobil 1 ATF for my Accord V6 while Honda strictly recommend "only use Honda ATF". i know for sure that at that time Honda did not have Synthetic ATF. (Honda just introduced synthetic ATF recently). almost all of the Accord V6 that follow manufacture recommendation using Honda ATF had problem with the transmission. However, i did not have any problem with the transmission with my Accord at nearly 300k
so, could running 5w30 instead of 5w20 be a factor contribute to increase engine life? i have no primary nor secondary data to back it up. but 5w30 definitely makes the engine go much smoother & quieter. and i will use 5w30 at the next OC.
a question while browsing the oil section. have you notice that: even though most Honda vehicle recommend 5w20, most of the oil that state that it meets Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 (M1, PP, QSUD... 5w30 meet Honda /Accura HTO-06 while 5w20 does not)why ???
Originally Posted By: Odyssey
a question while browsing the oil section. have you notice that: even though most Honda vehicle recommend 5w20, most of the oil that state that it meets Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 (M1, PP, QSUD... 5w30 meet Honda /Accura HTO-06 while 5w20 does not)why ???
Because this spec is for deposit control around the turbo charger's shaft for their turbo engines. Since Honda doesn't use 5w20 or 0w20 oil in their turbo charged engines, it makes no sense to put this spec on those oils.
That spec has nothing to do with engine wear or oil viscosity.
a question while browsing the oil section. have you notice that: even though most Honda vehicle recommend 5w20, most of the oil that state that it meets Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 (M1, PP, QSUD... 5w30 meet Honda /Accura HTO-06 while 5w20 does not)why ???
Because this spec is for deposit control around the turbo charger's shaft for their turbo engines. Since Honda doesn't use 5w20 or 0w20 oil in their turbo charged engines, it makes no sense to put this spec on those oils.
That spec has nothing to do with engine wear or oil viscosity.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
I've had two engines die before the car did. Mainly because the car was less than 15 years old & had not yet had time to fall apart, and also because I don't abuse my equipment. (I still have a TV that was purchased in the 70s, a computer from the 80s, and so on.)
OP's question: It appears only MPG conscious Japan and USA use the thin oils. The rest of the world runs 30, 40 or even 50 weights (the latter if the temperature remains above approximately 10 F). Knowing that I would trade lower MPG for longer engine life.
One other thing:
In California PZEV cars are warrantied for 150,000 miles. Basically they have to keep running clean & passing emissions tests for 150k else the owner is entitled to a free repair by the manufacturer (to put it back within CARB's specification).
Cars die of a thousand cuts, or a failed automatic tranny, not from worn out engines.
I've had two engines die before the car did. Mainly because the car was less than 15 years old & had not yet had time to fall apart, and also because I don't abuse my equipment. (I still have a TV that was purchased in the 70s, a computer from the 80s, and so on.)
OP's question: It appears only MPG conscious Japan and USA use the thin oils. The rest of the world runs 30, 40 or even 50 weights (the latter if the temperature remains above approximately 10 F). Knowing that I would trade lower MPG for longer engine life.
One other thing:
In California PZEV cars are warrantied for 150,000 miles. Basically they have to keep running clean & passing emissions tests for 150k else the owner is entitled to a free repair by the manufacturer (to put it back within CARB's specification).
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Odyssey
a question while browsing the oil section. . . . even though most Honda vehicles [now] recommend 5w20, [most that] state [they] meet Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 . . . while 5w20 does not. Why ???
Odyssey, if you are still out there, I think this is what you were looking for. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=202063.
a question while browsing the oil section. . . . even though most Honda vehicles [now] recommend 5w20, [most that] state [they] meet Honda/Acura HTO-06 requirement are the 5w30 . . . while 5w20 does not. Why ???
Odyssey, if you are still out there, I think this is what you were looking for. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=202063.
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: skyship
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Canada has one of the harshest environments for car operation in the world. Yet, people that rust proof their cars, seem to have no problems getting their car into 300,000+ km ranges with the cheapest dino oils usually in 5w30 or 5w20 grades. We also have to pass emission test every two years which I never had any problems with and most people I talk to have no problems with passing these tests either.
In Ontario the failure rate was so low that they decided to go to the OBD2 scanner tests only, to lower the costs of operating dyno machines I guess. If oil was such a big deal, it surely would show up in Canadian climate. Yet everybody just keeps on chugging along and piling on miles on their rides.
Ontario is the toughest province in the country as far as vehicle inspections too.
From what Trav just posted though he is correct that we have less fit vehicles on the road as compared to Europe. You should see the reservation vans around here. The brake pedal is for show,they stop with both feet like the flintstones.
The thick thin thing is mute when a vehicles lifespan is a decade and the body,not the engine sends it to the crusher.
If we use 10 years as the average,then in that 10 years,in North America,we use less fuel in a comparable engine over that 10 year lifespan vs a European vehicle. If the body sends it to the crusher then who cares if the engine is worn out or not,the car is a boat anchor.
So if a thin oil maintains the whole cars lifespan and uses less fuel doing it,before it gets crushed then where is the issue.
And I know from experience the scrapyard is filled with vehicles where the engine runs mint,but the car is rotted away,using thinner oil.
I am now lost as to the point of this debate. In a decade the cars are dead anyways,does the engine even matter anymore,its going to get melted down whether it runs stellar or not.
Originally Posted By: skyship
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Canada has one of the harshest environments for car operation in the world. Yet, people that rust proof their cars, seem to have no problems getting their car into 300,000+ km ranges with the cheapest dino oils usually in 5w30 or 5w20 grades. We also have to pass emission test every two years which I never had any problems with and most people I talk to have no problems with passing these tests either.
In Ontario the failure rate was so low that they decided to go to the OBD2 scanner tests only, to lower the costs of operating dyno machines I guess. If oil was such a big deal, it surely would show up in Canadian climate. Yet everybody just keeps on chugging along and piling on miles on their rides.
Ontario is the toughest province in the country as far as vehicle inspections too.
From what Trav just posted though he is correct that we have less fit vehicles on the road as compared to Europe. You should see the reservation vans around here. The brake pedal is for show,they stop with both feet like the flintstones.
The thick thin thing is mute when a vehicles lifespan is a decade and the body,not the engine sends it to the crusher.
If we use 10 years as the average,then in that 10 years,in North America,we use less fuel in a comparable engine over that 10 year lifespan vs a European vehicle. If the body sends it to the crusher then who cares if the engine is worn out or not,the car is a boat anchor.
So if a thin oil maintains the whole cars lifespan and uses less fuel doing it,before it gets crushed then where is the issue.
And I know from experience the scrapyard is filled with vehicles where the engine runs mint,but the car is rotted away,using thinner oil.
I am now lost as to the point of this debate. In a decade the cars are dead anyways,does the engine even matter anymore,its going to get melted down whether it runs stellar or not.
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Wow! You got that backwards!
The crusade is against medium viscosity oils, like 5-30 and 10-30. (Heavier oils are 5-40 and 20-50, etc).
The crusade is manned by Government, auto manufactures, and the "intelligent" ones
who hate 5-30's and up.
So why the crusade against thin oils then?
Wow! You got that backwards!
The crusade is against medium viscosity oils, like 5-30 and 10-30. (Heavier oils are 5-40 and 20-50, etc).
The crusade is manned by Government, auto manufactures, and the "intelligent" ones
Lots wrong with that article.
The 30% increased engine wear thing is just goofy. Show me the science. Document it. Hyundai/Kia warrants their engines for 100,000 miles if 5W-20 oil is used. Lots of Hondas have several hundred thousand miles with 5W-20 oil.
The latest SAE J300 table is dated November 2007 to take effect on July, 2010, always an 18 month transition period.
Although the figures were posted, no mention was made in the text of the change to very low temperatures for testing the W viscosities. 0°F for testing has long been superseded.
I agree, the 150°C HTHS viscosity is most important for wear results. But not 30%. What's this guy going to say when more diesels spec 10W-30 or 5W-30 diesel engine lube? What would he say about very large diesel engines using 30 wt crankcase oil in engine producing 7,500 hp per cylinder and life time fill of the oil? (No, no word of the diesels switching to 20 wt yet. The turbochargers on these engines do use ISO64 hydraulic oil, about 20 wt. And jet engine oil in the airliners we travel in is ISO25, about 10 wt.)
The 30% increased engine wear thing is just goofy. Show me the science. Document it. Hyundai/Kia warrants their engines for 100,000 miles if 5W-20 oil is used. Lots of Hondas have several hundred thousand miles with 5W-20 oil.
The latest SAE J300 table is dated November 2007 to take effect on July, 2010, always an 18 month transition period.
Although the figures were posted, no mention was made in the text of the change to very low temperatures for testing the W viscosities. 0°F for testing has long been superseded.
I agree, the 150°C HTHS viscosity is most important for wear results. But not 30%. What's this guy going to say when more diesels spec 10W-30 or 5W-30 diesel engine lube? What would he say about very large diesel engines using 30 wt crankcase oil in engine producing 7,500 hp per cylinder and life time fill of the oil? (No, no word of the diesels switching to 20 wt yet. The turbochargers on these engines do use ISO64 hydraulic oil, about 20 wt. And jet engine oil in the airliners we travel in is ISO25, about 10 wt.)
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
Except that the immediate financial benefits of CAFE are given to the manufacturer now, and any potential future costs (like replacement) are born by the buyer in the future.
It's not a proper cost/benefit analysis at that point.
Ford Pinto proved just how readily beancounters are willing to push costs onto others when it helps their balance sheet.
And absolutely no evidence that 5W-20 has led to a lower life expectancy as I know several with Fords and Hondas well over 150K miles...
These redundant [censored] threads are just silly...
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Skyship, if it is true (and I certainly have my doubts) that these bean counters are the driving force behind the thin oils, isn't it still possible that they're right? What I'm proposing is this:
They've got the studies and done the math and worked out that the fuel savings over the life of a vehicle outweighs the costs of replacing the vehicle more frequently. Now, for those who choose to keep their vehicle longer there is the option of an engine rebuild which costs considerably less than replacing the complete vehicle.
One thing about these people you call bean counters is that they're usually pretty good at math.
Except that the immediate financial benefits of CAFE are given to the manufacturer now, and any potential future costs (like replacement) are born by the buyer in the future.
It's not a proper cost/benefit analysis at that point.
Ford Pinto proved just how readily beancounters are willing to push costs onto others when it helps their balance sheet.
And absolutely no evidence that 5W-20 has led to a lower life expectancy as I know several with Fords and Hondas well over 150K miles...
These redundant [censored] threads are just silly...
Originally Posted By: skyship
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
Everything lasts longer on cars, including engines running 5W-20.
If you guys WANT to believe that that vehicles will somehow get more engine life using a 5W-30 than a 5W-20, go ahead. But there isn't the evidence from Australia or the UK to base this assessment on, there is much in North America to the contrary.
You're just rationalizing a largely impulsive, emotive belief with selective anecdotes and B.S...
Car bodies do last a lot longer than they used to but modern cars have some very expensive parts that wear out some time after the warranty that are something of an issue in terms scrapping cars that could be repaired. Self levelling shocks and expensive exhaust systems are top of the list, although the ECU and other electronic boxes fitted to the new generation diesels are also very expensive to replace.
Everything lasts longer on cars, including engines running 5W-20.
If you guys WANT to believe that that vehicles will somehow get more engine life using a 5W-30 than a 5W-20, go ahead. But there isn't the evidence from Australia or the UK to base this assessment on, there is much in North America to the contrary.
You're just rationalizing a largely impulsive, emotive belief with selective anecdotes and B.S...
- Status
Similar threads
