RL 5w20 11958 miles Focus
- Thread starter Cyclops
- Start date
- Status
Looks great. Is that really a 30wt? You've got my curiosity, I'm going to check out the microgreen filter.
Wow, thanks for the link on the turbo'd focus Pablo. I wouldn't have thought the oil results would have been as good as the results showed. Impressive! I now suspect, as mentioned a few times, that the duratec motor is pretty easy on oil.
And you are right as well O.M., the 50mile one-way commute is definitely an advantage on producing good used oil analysis for extended miles. My speeds are also primarily in the 55-65mph with occasional 75mph bits. RPM is generally between 2 and 2.8k with an occasional redline burst when passing or merging but it's not common. So I'm not putting the stress to this motor as much as you are. Your results with your driving style are impressive.
I also see what you mean ARCO, the viscosity is a bit high for 20wt at 100 C. Looks like it brackets between 20 and 30wt on the chart.
Doug
And you are right as well O.M., the 50mile one-way commute is definitely an advantage on producing good used oil analysis for extended miles. My speeds are also primarily in the 55-65mph with occasional 75mph bits. RPM is generally between 2 and 2.8k with an occasional redline burst when passing or merging but it's not common. So I'm not putting the stress to this motor as much as you are. Your results with your driving style are impressive.
I also see what you mean ARCO, the viscosity is a bit high for 20wt at 100 C. Looks like it brackets between 20 and 30wt on the chart.
Doug
Doug - You are a wonderfull technical writer - refreshing!
A good report on a light 30wt oil.
I'm sure similar results could have been achieved from a 5w20 conventional in this application.
I'm sure similar results could have been achieved from a 5w20 conventional in this application.
Very Good Report
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
A good report on a light 30wt oil.
I'm sure similar results could have been achieved from a 5w20 conventional in this application.
Could be but that is a lot of times the piston has been moving up and down. For extended runs , I have more confidence in synthetics.
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles. I'm also very curious to see the results comparing the two filters, because of this, I'm contemplating only going 12k before changing to the lower viscosity?
Doug
A good report on a light 30wt oil.
I'm sure similar results could have been achieved from a 5w20 conventional in this application.
Could be but that is a lot of times the piston has been moving up and down. For extended runs , I have more confidence in synthetics.
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles. I'm also very curious to see the results comparing the two filters, because of this, I'm contemplating only going 12k before changing to the lower viscosity?
Doug
Sounds like a good plan.
You may also want to try the new Castrol Edge 0W-20 when it becomes available or even their 5W-20 which has a VI of 175 vs 166 for RL's 0W-20. I'm sure it will be cheaper than RL.
You may also want to try the new Castrol Edge 0W-20 when it becomes available or even their 5W-20 which has a VI of 175 vs 166 for RL's 0W-20. I'm sure it will be cheaper than RL.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Sounds like a good plan.
You may also want to try the new Castrol Edge 0W-20 when it becomes available
I'm sure it will be cheaper than RL.
We haven't heard when it (0W20) will be available in NA...have we?
It may be less expensive but maybe not as much as we might think...at least initially.
Sounds like a good plan.
You may also want to try the new Castrol Edge 0W-20 when it becomes available
I'm sure it will be cheaper than RL.
We haven't heard when it (0W20) will be available in NA...have we?
It may be less expensive but maybe not as much as we might think...at least initially.
Originally Posted By: Cyclops
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles.
There's not really any point unless you're seeing very cold temps. The 5W-20 is actually a substantially more robust oil, and probably the better pick for any temp above 0.
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles.
There's not really any point unless you're seeing very cold temps. The 5W-20 is actually a substantially more robust oil, and probably the better pick for any temp above 0.
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Originally Posted By: Cyclops
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles.
There's not really any point unless you're seeing very cold temps. The 5W-20 is actually a substantially more robust oil, and probably the better pick for any temp above 0.
No argument that RL's 5W-20 is a robust oil, which is why RL often recommends it for 30wt applications. In reality it is a 30wt oil.
The OP wants to run a true 20wt oil for which his car was spec'd.
Originally Posted By: Cyclops
Anyway, after you taught me how to read viscosity index, I plan to change this oil out to their 0w20 after 15k miles.
There's not really any point unless you're seeing very cold temps. The 5W-20 is actually a substantially more robust oil, and probably the better pick for any temp above 0.
No argument that RL's 5W-20 is a robust oil, which is why RL often recommends it for 30wt applications. In reality it is a 30wt oil.
The OP wants to run a true 20wt oil for which his car was spec'd.
dnewton3
Staff member
This is a very good UOA.
A few things to note, and a question or two.
1) your wear results are very good for 12k miles, and it looks as though 15k miles is very plausible.
2) your OCI plan confirms that high-end synthetics are quite capable of extended OCIs
3) your filtration is doing well, but I don't think that it's any better than what a lot of filters can do. This is typically a result of the contamination rate. A tight, well-running engine simply won't soot up much. Your daily driving pattern gets everthing up to temp and it stays there; no reason to expect high insolubles. Therefore, no reason to praise a filter that isn't being heavily tasked. Your Green filter isn't doing a poor job, but it's also not doing a great job. Your engine is tight and running clean; that is what deserves praise. You mentioned particle counts, but were you referring to the insolubles from the Blackstone UOA, or did you actually get PC counts done and didn't post those results?
What is the "normal" OCI per the OEM for this engine? Is it 5k or 7.5k? Just curious, because it makes one ponder the cost ratio for the ROI.
Let's say you can safely go 15k miles on your RL before you OCI. I have no idea what you paid for the RL, but I suspect it wasn't cheap. Are you getting 2x or 3x the ROI as compared to a quality conventional product? That is where people typically loose all sense of value when comparing/contrasting oil analysis and longevity. It depends quite a bit upon your OEM OCI recommendations.
If you can go 7.5k miles on conventional oil, then you would only need two OCIs to equal your RL 15k miles. At 5k miles for conventional, you'd need three OCIs to equal your RL. Since you can get about any quality conventional on sale for $2/qrt at Walmart (currently it's QS for $10/5 qrt jug), the 15k miles on conventional would be equal $4/qrt. Or, at 5k mile intervals, it would be $6/qrt. What does your RL cost over that same 15k mile duration? Even if you're getting RL for $6/qrt, you're only breaking even compared to conventional at 5k mile intervals. If you're paying more than $6/qrt for the RL, then you're not even at the break-even point!
You certainly are not getting "better" wear protection with RL. You are getting "longer" wear protection with the RL. You can get the same wear results via shorter OCIs with conventional products.
So the real question becomes this: are you extending out the RL far enough to surpass the ROI?
There is one benefit to extended OCIs that, for some people, understandably makes a difference, and this is the matter of convenience. If you drive a lot (say more than 20k miles a year) then often using synthetics and extending the OCI saves time under the car. For some people, that savings is worth the extra cost, even if the ROI isn't exactly balanced out. I can see the validity with respect to this for some people. They consider the cost of the oil worth the extra price paid rather than dive under the car. Yet for other people, they enjoy the OCIs, and don't consider their time a "cost" but rather a pleasure (I'm one of those people).
Just comments, overall. Your UOA shows fine lubricant and engine performance. Only question is: are you getting your money's worth?
A few things to note, and a question or two.
1) your wear results are very good for 12k miles, and it looks as though 15k miles is very plausible.
2) your OCI plan confirms that high-end synthetics are quite capable of extended OCIs
3) your filtration is doing well, but I don't think that it's any better than what a lot of filters can do. This is typically a result of the contamination rate. A tight, well-running engine simply won't soot up much. Your daily driving pattern gets everthing up to temp and it stays there; no reason to expect high insolubles. Therefore, no reason to praise a filter that isn't being heavily tasked. Your Green filter isn't doing a poor job, but it's also not doing a great job. Your engine is tight and running clean; that is what deserves praise. You mentioned particle counts, but were you referring to the insolubles from the Blackstone UOA, or did you actually get PC counts done and didn't post those results?
What is the "normal" OCI per the OEM for this engine? Is it 5k or 7.5k? Just curious, because it makes one ponder the cost ratio for the ROI.
Let's say you can safely go 15k miles on your RL before you OCI. I have no idea what you paid for the RL, but I suspect it wasn't cheap. Are you getting 2x or 3x the ROI as compared to a quality conventional product? That is where people typically loose all sense of value when comparing/contrasting oil analysis and longevity. It depends quite a bit upon your OEM OCI recommendations.
If you can go 7.5k miles on conventional oil, then you would only need two OCIs to equal your RL 15k miles. At 5k miles for conventional, you'd need three OCIs to equal your RL. Since you can get about any quality conventional on sale for $2/qrt at Walmart (currently it's QS for $10/5 qrt jug), the 15k miles on conventional would be equal $4/qrt. Or, at 5k mile intervals, it would be $6/qrt. What does your RL cost over that same 15k mile duration? Even if you're getting RL for $6/qrt, you're only breaking even compared to conventional at 5k mile intervals. If you're paying more than $6/qrt for the RL, then you're not even at the break-even point!
You certainly are not getting "better" wear protection with RL. You are getting "longer" wear protection with the RL. You can get the same wear results via shorter OCIs with conventional products.
So the real question becomes this: are you extending out the RL far enough to surpass the ROI?
There is one benefit to extended OCIs that, for some people, understandably makes a difference, and this is the matter of convenience. If you drive a lot (say more than 20k miles a year) then often using synthetics and extending the OCI saves time under the car. For some people, that savings is worth the extra cost, even if the ROI isn't exactly balanced out. I can see the validity with respect to this for some people. They consider the cost of the oil worth the extra price paid rather than dive under the car. Yet for other people, they enjoy the OCIs, and don't consider their time a "cost" but rather a pleasure (I'm one of those people).
Just comments, overall. Your UOA shows fine lubricant and engine performance. Only question is: are you getting your money's worth?
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Yes, taken out of context, it does not make sense.
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
RL 5W-20 falls within the 20-weight spec (9.1 cSt), therefore in reality it is a 20-weight oil.
Disagree.
The 9.1 cSt at 100C spec' is the reason RL (barely) gets away with calling it a 20wt oil, but any discerning analysis of it's other viscosity measurements puts this oil clearly in the 30wt camp.
Besides this UOA measured it's 100C vis at 9.39 cSt; a 30wt oil.
RL 5W-20 falls within the 20-weight spec (9.1 cSt), therefore in reality it is a 20-weight oil.
Disagree.
The 9.1 cSt at 100C spec' is the reason RL (barely) gets away with calling it a 20wt oil, but any discerning analysis of it's other viscosity measurements puts this oil clearly in the 30wt camp.
Besides this UOA measured it's 100C vis at 9.39 cSt; a 30wt oil.
- Status
Similar threads
