RL 5w20 11958 miles Focus

[Gary Allan]

(imagine some morphing of "Come to where the flavor is. Come to Marlboro Country)

Yeah. Step DEEP into 20 land with Wolfshead SYN-PACK @ 6.8 cSt ....Click me too!

 

[CATERHAM]

Wolfhead's syn 5W-20 is similar to RP's XPR 5W-20 both having the same 100C vis of 6.5 cSt but RP has a slightly higher lower 40C vis of 36.7 cSt and therefore higher VI of 146 vs 38 cSt and 140 for Wolfhead.

But since both these oils have very low VI's they don't provide the lowest start-up viscosities which to my way of thinking is what really matters.
The best of the best in that regard is the new (and still unavailable) Castrol Edge 0W-20. It has a 40C vis spec' hardly higher than Wolfhead at 38.62 cSt but a much higher 100C vis of 8.85 cSt with a resulting VI of 220. Consiquently, at all temps' below 40C it will be a lighter oil.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, it would be a nice "global" attribute, but the time from -xxC to 40C in sump minutes is relatively short. You'll be shaving a variable fraction of that time in terms of visc (if I said that right). In my observations (when I specifically observed such things on a non-exchanged engine) it was just about all over within about 9minutes/9miles. The oil temp was around 155F-165F. At that point the up tick progressively slowed. Before that it appeared almost linear. Granted my gauges didn't read below 70F ..but the plateau was at the same point in each event regardless of ambient and assuming a true cold start. I will also grant that my starting temps were never below the single digit range and the majority were in the teens and above. They did span over 70F of difference in ambient, so I suggest that another 10-20F negative (maybe more) wouldn't alter that profile of warming.

That's why I view it as shaving a small time/distance factor off of the another event in comparison. It's got to be on the fringe for all but the most extreme cold conditions. It would form like appearances with some slight phase difference beyond a certain point as viewed by visc.

_first minute
____________\____________indistinguishable_______________________

But without a doubt such fluids are the vanguard of things to come. Once you can break into the 300VI range you're basically inside the entire span of sensible operating viscs of multiweights from 40C to 100C.

I don't think I'll live long enough to see a 900VI fluid that's just about whatever visc that they make it over all known ambient temps, but I have to figure that they're not going to stop and just quit at it.

 

[CATERHAM]

As you likely know PAO oils in the 300 VI range are used in formulating PCMO's but they are undoubtedly an expensive option to cheaper polimer based VII's.

VI is really the measure of a multi-grade oil. The higher the VI the more of a multi-grade the oil is.

In the Wolfhead case, at 0C it's 35% heavier than the CE 0W-20 and that's at least one SAE grade if you were comparing the oils at 100C.

The motivation for the ultra low start-up viscosities of the Toyota and Honda spec' 0W-20 oils is their hybrid car applications. Hybrid engines present a lubrication challenge since the engine is a supplimental power source. The repeated starts and stops frequently means the engine spends a lot of time operating without ever reaching normal operating temperature hence the advantage of an oil with a particularily low start-up viscosity without sacrificing a high viscosity at high operating temps.
Now that these low viscosity, high VI oils have been developed there advantages can be beneficial non hybrid applications as well.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
The motivation for the ultra low start-up viscosities of the Toyota and Honda spec' 0W-20 oils is their hybrid car applications.


Oh, without a doubt. As these intermittent internal combustion power plants take off there will be more market apparent evidence of the (surely) intense research going on in ultra broad VI lighter weight oils. They may have the holy grail as we ponder this, but can't bring it to market for either costs or needing some other concession from the market. Something like catalytic converters. They were around for a good bit. It took revolutionizing the fuel formulation and distribution for the entire nation to get them to work.

 

[CATERHAM]

What I find that's funny is Castrol outdoing Toyota (Nippon Oil)at it's own game.
Toyota's 40C vis' is 39.3 cSt with a marketing leading VI of 214. So Castrol not to be out done comes out with a 38.62 cSt vis and 220 VI 0W-20.
I'm sure in the coming months more oil formulators will join the fray with their version of an ultra-light high VI oil. I know RP is coming out soon with their own 0W-20 "hybrid" oil.

As you mentioned cost will be a factor in bringing to market shear resistant examples of these oils. So far no one can touch Toyota on price, yet.

 

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
... 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.
...


Yes, particle counts are listed on the report. The 16/15/13 ISO Code shows the levels are pretty low. The method of reading the code is a strange convoluted engineering parameter that is difficult to understand how it became an established method but basically the three numbers are divided such that the first number is the amount of particles larger then 4microns, the second is larger then 6microns and the last is larger then 14microns. Each numerical increase is a doubling of the number of particles.

Anyway, it will be interesting to compare with the current K&N filter. I believe the K&N is a good filter but the results will verify effectiveness between the two. I have a Windstar which is difficult to get a wrench around the filter so the 1" bottom nut of the K&N is very convenient.

As for the OCI, Ford recommends 7.5k in the manual.

Doug

 

[Cyclops]

Update at nearly the same mileage and same driving routine, however, ambient temperatures were warmer then previous run. Particle count shows the microgreen filter outperformed K&N by a significant amount.

Next analysis will be interesting as the oil filter mount was modified to allow for a much larger filter. Also, the oil was changed to redlines lighter 0w20 viscosity.

Doug

 

[panthermike]

Man, I love it! Very high Moly, very good wear numbers and TBN still at 4.4, what's not to love?

May I ask how much you pay for this per quart?

 

[SLCraig]

[censored] that is awesome.
I wish my cars didn't burn oil, I would so use Redline! haha

 

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted By: panthermike
...

May I ask how much you pay for this per quart?


It was just under $10/qt. However, price has gone up and I switched after this change to their 0w20, which cost a bit more. Right now I'm paying a fortune for oil changes and analyis but I'm also learning a lot and like having this community to expand knowledge and share with others.

The cheapest I've found RL online by the case and including shipping is from racerpartswholesale.

Doug

 

[Jim Allen]

That's a great UOA!. I presume the second CA (Contaminant Analysis) was the K&N and the first was the Microgreen? You can see the difference even in the insolubles but that's a BIG differnce in ISO codes. I'd be stickin' with the Microgreen and going to 15K!

 

[Ben99GT]

Very impressive!

 

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
That's a great UOA!. I presume the second CA (Contaminant Analysis) was the K&N and the first was the Microgreen? You can see the difference even in the insolubles but that's a BIG differnce in ISO codes. I'd be stickin' with the Microgreen and going to 15K!


Yes, I've gone back to the microgreen. It was good test to validate if the integrated bypass and its media were effective or merely marketing hype. I also found an adapter that allows for a larger diameter filter then stock. Hopefully, the greater surface area will increase filtering capacity and efficiency.

I'm still debating if I will go another 12k miles? I switched to 0w20 and I'm looking at blocking part of the radiator to increase coolant temp to 200 - 210f range. Last winter, coolant ran pretty cool in the 170f range. I'm not sure how well the oil will perform at a warmer temperature so may only go 12k again to test before pushing?

Doug

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: Cyclops
I switched to 0w20 and I'm looking at blocking part of the radiator to increase coolant temp to 200 - 210f range.


Why in the world would you do that? Why don't you just get a 195-200 degree thermostat?

 

[Cyclops]

Because that would be too simple!

What Ford and other manufactures are doing to newer cars is putting the t-stat into a housing unit that doesn't allow simple t-stat replacement. Where stat's typically cost ~$10, the unit on my focus is over $200. I might have to bite the bullet and buy the overpriced unit but thought it would be worth a shot at trying to block airflow as my t-stat is definitely opening at too cool a temperature - supposed to be 192f.

However, even here it's an issue as there's a cover on the bottom and top of the vehicle preventing access for a cardboard sheet. I believe the cover is designed to improve aerodynamics but in anycase it complicates things. It looks like my best option is to cut sheets and fill the bumper opening that allows airflow to the radiator.

Doug

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: Cyclops
The cheapest I've found RL online by the case and including shipping is from racerpartswholesale.


ogracing is cheaper if you buy by the case.

 

[OneEyeJack]

Tell us your driving habits for this long commute. Do you charge, get caught in traffic or cruse along taking it ez?

 

[slalom44]

This is great information, Cyclops. Your engine is doing very well with Redline, although you're spending quite a bit of money on the oil and filters.

I admit that the MicroGreen filter is doing a better job, but your wear numbers aren't statistically any better. The real question you have to ask yourself is whether you will ever see the benefit of your oil/filter combo. Long commutes like yours are very easy on oil, since it doesn't allow moisture to accumulate.

I'm very familiar with the MicroGreen filter, and I agree it's a decent filter but I have a tough time justifying the cost compared to a full bypass filter (admittedly it's much easier to use).

Here is my writeup and dissection of a MicroGreen filter for those interested.

Thanks for posting!

 

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Originally Posted By: Cyclops
The cheapest I've found RL online by the case and including shipping is from racerpartswholesale.


ogracing is cheaper if you buy by the case.


Wow, it’s quite a bit cheaper. Thanks for the heads up!

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Tell us your driving habits for this long commute. Do you charge, get caught in traffic or cruse along taking it ez?


50mile one-way commute twice a day. Generally taking it ez, however, sometimes hard burst to redline with merging or other traffic issues. Mostly no excitement, no ticket, typical commute riding style.


Originally Posted By: slalom44
This is great information, Cyclops. Your engine is doing very well with Redline, although you're spending quite a bit of money on the oil and filters.

I admit that the MicroGreen filter is doing a better job, but your wear numbers aren't statistically any better. The real question you have to ask yourself is whether you will ever see the benefit of your oil/filter combo. Long commutes like yours are very easy on oil, since it doesn't allow moisture to accumulate.

I'm very familiar with the MicroGreen filter, and I agree it's a decent filter but I have a tough time justifying the cost compared to a full bypass filter (admittedly it's much easier to use).

Here is my writeup and dissection of a MicroGreen filter for those interested.

Thanks for posting!


I agree, the cost to benefit is hard to justify, especially on a budget priced car. However, I was looking for a long OCI oil and don’t believe any groupiii or even highly processed groupiii synthetic would have the mileage capability of a PAO or ester. I thought about playing with Amsoil and would likely make greater distance but I also like the polar attributes of ester’s. For now, it’s a play, albeit expensive, with Redline.

I also agree with your thoughts on MicroGreen. I’m surprised wear metals showed no appreciable difference between the two filters when one showed significantly greater particles. I find this puzzling as I would expect particles to accelerate wear. It would be interesting if the particles makeup could be characterized. Anyway, I don’t know if I will continue with MicroGreens but it will be interesting to see if the larger filter proves to have greater filtering efficiency.

And yes, I did see your write-up on the MicroGreen. That was a really good and interesting post. I really liked seeing how it was constructed and the media.

Doug