I think both "sides" use strawmen to some degree. But really, doesn't the argument MOST OFTEN arise when someone (usually in North America) says something to the effect of, "I just don't think 5w20 that my manual calls for can possibly protect as well as 5w30, wouldn't I be better off running 5w30?" So naturally you see more defenses of thin oil since its more often questioned.
Now when someone asks about a 1960s big block and wants to run 0w20, you might see some strawmen on the other side ;-)
Generally I try to respond with reasoned arguments about engine architecture. 5w20 vs 5w30 really probably WON'T matter a hoot on most modern engines. But a thin oil in a vintage big-block Chevy or AMC 390 that only runs 40 psi oil pressure on thick oil and expects it to ooze over the rocker arm ball studs depending heavily on oil film strength... well, that might not be the best application for a thin oil.
What I get really sick of is people claiming that North American CAFE rules are the SOLE reason for thin oil. I agree those rules are a part of the reason, but I don't think they're the only reason by a long shot.
Now when someone asks about a 1960s big block and wants to run 0w20, you might see some strawmen on the other side ;-)
Generally I try to respond with reasoned arguments about engine architecture. 5w20 vs 5w30 really probably WON'T matter a hoot on most modern engines. But a thin oil in a vintage big-block Chevy or AMC 390 that only runs 40 psi oil pressure on thick oil and expects it to ooze over the rocker arm ball studs depending heavily on oil film strength... well, that might not be the best application for a thin oil.
What I get really sick of is people claiming that North American CAFE rules are the SOLE reason for thin oil. I agree those rules are a part of the reason, but I don't think they're the only reason by a long shot.