Something to think about, Old vs. New

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
3,966
Location
Daytona Beach
This from a GM powertrain engineer specializing in engine design. I thought it might be sort of thought provoking for those of us looking for the "perfect oil" for their beloved classic car.

"Older engines had rubbing element tappets with relatively high contact stresses that use up the antiwear additives in the oil, spur gear oil pumps that shear the oil viscosity down, distributor drive gears for the distributor and oil pump that shear the oil as well as use up the antiwear additives. Things like rocker arms that pivot on bushing style bearings or spherical supports also use up the antiwear properties of the oil. Older engines had PCV systems that were often not nearly as efficient at purging the crank case. Carbureted engines put much more fuel into the oil on cold starts due to the relative inaccuracy of fuel delivery cold and the greater amount of fuel needed to be delivered due to "wet" intake manifolds.

All of these factors shear the oil viscosity down faster, use up the antiwear additive in the oil (the ZDP) faster and contaminate the oil more requiring more frequent oil changes. Similarily, these engines are much more dependent on "good" oil to live as the various rubbing elements need high amounts of ZDP in the oil to live and the engines will fail sooner if the oil is not changed more frequently and are much more sensitive to the quality of the oil used.

Modern engines have eliminated most all of the rubbing elements inside the engine by use of roller tappets, roller rocker arms, etc... The elimination of the distributor negates the need for a distributor drive gear eliminating that source of oil degradation. Mounting the oil pump drive off the crank and switching to gerotor style oil pumps also negates the need for the distributor gear and the gerotor pumps do not shear the oil viscosity nearly as bad. Port fuel injected engines dramatically minimize the amount of oil contamination during cold starting and short trips as the amount of extra fuel needed on cold starts is minimized and good driveability is maintained during warmup with little extra fuel due to the "dry" manifold designs.

Similarily, the modern engines do not "wear out" the oil nearly as quickly and they are not as dependent on oil quality to survive. Reduced levels of the antiwear compounds are fine since there are few areas in the engine as dependent on them as the older flat follower engines with distributor gears were. Also, with all the rolling element parts the current engines can easily live on thinner oils which are good for fuel economy and do not jeapordize engine life as the oil ages and thins."
 
Jelly , Good answer and Quick too.
grin.gif
G.M. probably builds the crappiest cars on the road, should we believe their engineer?
 
I'd believe the engineer and not the manuf.

They can't help what the manuf. does with their designs and specs. Blame the bean counters and management for helping to produce crappy cars.
 
What the engineer is saying makes sense to a point. Yes, new engines are more efficient through the use of less frictional areas, like the valve train and lack of geared distributor. The flaw in his reasoning lies in the engine block. Few changes have been made to the design of the cylinder and pistons, yes things can be machined closer to spec these days. The fact still remains that once broken in things are still sealing and rubbing at pressures and coefficients of friction similar to cars of 15 years ago. By using a thiner oil I believe the piston/cylinder area will not be protected as well. Lets also not forget that main bearings in engines have not changed all that much these past few years, so why has the oil thickness requirment? I maintain that the only reason for recommending 5W20 is for fuel milage, not engine life.
 
100% true and accurate. Are you guys denying that engine design has improved? Please. Any engine now days should last 200,000 without any oil related problems, because of the improvements listed. Sorry to burst you import owners bubbles but GM was actually ahead of most automakers in adapting many of these technologies.

-T
 
Horses for courses.

Some are high tech but are gonna die early with 7.5K intervals,especially ones that have a small sump and tend to run hot.Look at Toyota and VW's problems.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Alan:
Some are high tech but are gonna die early with 7.5K intervals,especially ones that have a small sump and tend to run hot.Look at Toyota and VW's problems.

I would be running Redline in these.
 
quote:

Originally posted by salesrep:

quote:

I maintain that the only reason for recommending 5W20 is for fuel milage, not engine life. Agreed.


I am not aware of any GM powerplant that recommends 5W-20 or 0W-20.
nono.gif
My dealer only will put in synthetic and synthetic blends in 5W-30 and 10W-30 normally. Am I missing something?
 
The engineer has some good points. As far as I know all the modern PCEO GF-3, GF-4 ect. anymore are only tested with roller cams and FI. I'm with Jelly. 15w-40 HDEO is the only oil I use anymore in my flat tappet solid lifter forged piston 780CFM equipped 68 Z/28s.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Steve S:
G.M. probably builds the crappiest cars on the road...

Hey, I resemble that remark....
lol.gif


I have always had pretty good luck with my Chevy trucks.

However, I believe that no matter who the manufacturer is, they need to sell *new* cars, so they will always recommend lonmger OCI's.

Just my 0.2ppm...

Bob W.
 
Haley10: I mention the 5w20 because some auto makes, like Ford and Honda, are recomending it now. I am just using it as a point that the oil is IMO too thin for an engine.

While oil tests here have shown some decent findings for 5w20 oils I maintain that after 100,000 miles the engine will show more wear if broken down. I have talked with many a good automotive tech and am always told to stay away from such thin oils. While I do not deny that 5w30 will shear to 5w20, with 3000 mile oil changes this is not too much of a concern. One big thing I believe some here forget is that oil is cheaper then a new engine or car. While I could perform the recomended 7000 mile oil changes on my new Toyota it makes a lot more sense to change out every 3000, be on the safe side, and let the thing run for 200,000 miles. Why try to push and oil at the expense of an engine?
 
quote:

many 5W-30 dino's sheared to a 20 weight anyway

I think that this is factored into the GM 7500 OCI scene. I think that they accept this drgradation ..and maybe even plan on it.

They may be unable to spec a 5w-20 ..since they already do via proxy, so to speak.
 
The author makes several good points, but fails to mention that newer engines run much hotter because of leaner burning, more power per displacement, and ring lands closer to the piston crown. These changes put more heat stress on the oil.

As far as 20-weight oils go, my UOAs and those of many others prove that using heavier oil just wastes fuel in engines designed for 20-weights. Heavier oil doesn't reduce wear.
 
Just a quick question. Most everyone BITOG rely on oil testing to measure engine wear but what about the oil filter? What I mean by this is we see the oil analysis data with how much metal is in it but what about all the particles picked up by the filter? Seems to this lowly engineer that comparing the metal ppm of one oil to another, even in the same car with same oil change intervals, may be different with different filters. Now lets be honest and admit that comparitive oil analysis data here rarely are from the same car, same oil change intervals, and with the same filter.
Now that I have that off my chest, about the idea that motor companies design cars for 5w20. Some of them have done no engine redesign from when 5w30 was recommended, I know that Ford has done this and believe Honda has too but don't hold me to that. So, if nothing is changed in an engine first designed to have 5w30/10w30 in it but now they say put 5w20 on in I would have to think twice about it. Then I think even more knowing that greater fuel milage can be had with the 5w20, especially considering how gas prices are and will be soon. Now do I know that they changed oil recommendations only because of fuel econ., no, but I wouldn't put it past them. Very few people keep a car past the 150,000 mile mark these days before selling it so why worry if it lasts past 200,000 when better fuel econ. can be had, and that seems to sell cars very well these days.
 
quote:

What I mean by this is we see the oil analysis data with how much metal is in it but what about all the particles picked up by the filter?

The testing method allegedly doesn't read particles big enough to be filtered out. Naturally bypass filtration would have some impact ..but the submicronic particles will still be there. It can only be used for "comparative data". It mainly tells us how the oil is doing. Naturally if one uses one oil under equal terms and the results yield measurably higher metals ..then it would tend to indicate that another oil, one that produces less metals, would be preferred.
 
I don't think we can generalize that modern engines are easier on oil than older ones. Leaving my VW 1.8T oil frying machine out of the discussion, I can't believe the current production 147hp, 16-valve 2.4L DOHC Chrysler powerplant is any easier on oil than its 100hp, 8-valve 2.5L roller tappet SOHC predecessor, which powered the K-cars and K-car derivatives from the early 1980s through the early 1990s. I use the same oil (5W-30 Castrol or Pennzoil dino in the winter, 10W-30 in the summer) and OCI (3K miles or 6 months) on the 2003 Stratus that I did on the 1988 Aries and 1989 Spirit, neither of which ever had even a hint of a powertrain problem.
 
quote:

Originally posted by salesrep:

quote:

I maintain that the only reason for recommending 5W20 is for fuel milage, not engine life. Agreed.


You say that only because Schaeffer's doesn't sell a XW-20 wt oil
grin.gif
. Just kidding
wink.gif
! Up until recent changes in the new SM grade oils many 5W-30 dino's sheared to a 20 weight anyway. And you cannot deny that in engines spec'd for 5W-20 the UOA's we've seen here are really decent. I use but I'll admit it's only advised for most Ford, Honda and some new DC engines. So that would be a small market for a niche player like Schaeffer's.

Whimsey
 
You're right whimsey.Mostly.
grin.gif
imo That said we are developing a 5-20. My guess is it will be out by spring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom