If an Enzo can survive 0W-20 I bet most cars could survive 0W-16.
I remember following those experiments of AEHaas.
I remember following those experiments of AEHaas.
Here is my reasoning behind using M1 0W40: I have seen thousands of UOAs and testimonials here on Bitog since I joined that formed my thinking of "If an oil is good enough to meet Porsche A40, MB229.3/229.5, VW 502/505, then it should be more than enough to protect ANY of my daily driven cars". The fact that apparently many race teams use M1 0w40, regardless of what oil companies sponsor them, gives me piece of mind with that oil choice. I don't have the ability and resources to rebuild and remeasure my engine internals every few weeks, so I'll rely on the oil choice of those who do just that between races. Cheap insurance, so to say. Yes, daily driver is not a racecar, but still.
Here is the reason for this thread: I gave my friend plenty of reasons and examples behind why I am using M1 0W40 in all my vehicles, but he had a hard time explaining his reasoning behind why all cars should switch to 0w20. His main points were:
- It flows better when cold.
- Nearly all manufacturers switched to 0w20, so all cars made in the last 25 years have no reason not to use 0w20 as well.
Neither of his points were convincing enough, so I turned to the biggest oil forum to see if anyone shares and exercises the views of my friend, and could provide more convincing reasons, or factual proof, of why 0W20 grade is superior and should be used across the board.
If an Enzo can survive 0W-20 I bet most cars could survive 0W-16.
I remember following those experiments of AEHaas.
I have a absolutely beautiful 94 ford conversion van bought 3 years ago with 19,800 miles. Sitting at 33,000 now.
When I bought it I wanted the best so started looking up recommended grades and so on. Looked on Amsoil sight they was recommending 0w20?? or may have been 5w20. I was wondering why then checked what ford is recommending which was the same 20 weight while my manual and oil cap show 5w30. Manual also adds 10/30 as well for cooler weather. This totally made me question everything about manufacturers recommendations. If the engine was originally designed for 10w30 why have they now switched saying my engine should run this 0w20? I ended up choosing exactly what the OP is switching his vehicles to which is mobile 1 0w40 euro blend. What led me to this is the 5.8l engine up until 94 was a flat tappet design but some of the vans did not get the new roller setup until 95. Pretty sure mine is the roller setup but I chose a oil I figured would work for both. Loving it so far.
It's all about oil temperature. He doesn't track his cars and they have massive sumps. For tooling around town in them and never seeing WOT, the inherent risk is quite low. If he were to take them to Sebring and lap them, he might find his car deciding to play a game of rod "peek-a-boo".
I would also NOT recommend it. That advice ignores the required min. film thickness to support a bearing and also the piston skirt with high side thrust loads; also some engine still run direct DOHC with bucket tappets.AEHass
Same here.
Caterham and AEhass used to say you could do it , if you had a real oil pressure gauge, and observed that at full temp. Not a idiot type gauge. They claim as long as you have acceptable oil pressure at full operating temp, its ok.
I would not recommend it, too little return/advantage for the risk.
When Ford went 5W-20 they went back and tested their previous designs. The ones that did well with it they recommended it for.
....
I wouldn't do it. Going up, yes,as is always mentioned in FSM's for severe operating conditions, but I've never seen a recommendation for running thinner, but have seen many warnings about doing so.
I wouldn't do it. Going up, yes,as is always mentioned in FSM's for severe operating conditions, but I've never seen a recommendation for running thinner, but have seen many warnings about doing so.
These summarize my thoughts well. Many engines including my Tacoma 2TR-FE have seen updated specs, going from 5w30 in my 2006 truck to 0w20 for newer models with the same engine. I just don't see why Toyota would re-engineer such a good engine to run "better" on 0w20 vs the original 5w30 spec, and based on other discussions, I've concluded the upgraded spec is based on CAFE. Yes a little better MPG is appealing, but I have no reason to believe 0w20 is flowing significantly better in my climate, and certainly would not protect better than 5w30.I would not recommend it, too little return/advantage for the risk.
Caterham and AEhass used to say you could do it , if you had a real oil pressure gauge, and observed that at full temp. Not a idiot type gauge. They claim as long as you have acceptable oil pressue at full operating temp, its ok.
This I agree with which this which is why I don't run 5W-50 in my Mustang on the street. It's was in the car from factory because the standard cars have a 120C Derate and the Track Packs are 150C. Don't really see the point of 5W-50 with an oil cooler on the street.
Didn't think of that when the OP posted.
2014 Mustang 5.0 Track Pack
Recommended Oil - 5W50
2014 Mustang 5.0 Track Pack w/ Roush Supercharger Street Oil - 10W30
Who's to say what the minimum "acceptable oil pressure" should be at full operating temperature to prevent excessive engine wear (ie, inadequate MOFT)?
Oil pressure will decrease as viscosity and HTHS decreases from decreased viscosity and oil temperature. MOFT also decreases with decreased viscosity & HTHS.
Yep same here,I'm a thickie as well.I agree, I'm a thickie!