"thin" oil debate and strawmen

[Shannow]

Why do the thin is best crowd keep resorting to strawman arguments when it's discussed ?

"why hasn't my engine blown up at 231,462 miles ?"

"So you are saying that 0W-20 is destroying engines, show me a pile of melted metal"

There are plenty of logical and rational statements and arguments out there, but the thin crowd (tend to) want to put strawman arguments into the other's mouths, and then beat them down.

"My SUV is painted the same colour as an econocar, and both use 0W-20, proving that CAFE has nothing to do with thin oils."

 

[tommygunn]

Who cares?

 

[demarpaint]

Interesting points. Can you prove that an engine that calls for 5W20 is better served using 0W40? I get a little tired of hearing what's used in other parts of the world, I live and drive in the USA. The thin guys also hear about how the thick oils aren't piling up cars on the sides of the roads either. I'm just playing Devil's Advocate and twisting the argument a bit. This is either going to be on good topic or get locked. JMO

 

[daves87rs]

For some of the same reasons the thick is better crowd does.


Though oil is not the only factor in a engine having a long life..

 

[Shannow]

I would never argue that an engine that's designed for 0W-20 should be run on anything 40...It's not my burden of proof, as it's not my argument.

However, asking to see the pile of 0W-20 "destroyed" engines, and to make statements of "so you are saying that my engine won't make it off the showroom floor" are by nature a strawman.

Please provide proof that the engine that's specced for 0W-20 last as long as if it were run on 0W-40 is another.

Remember, my L67 is specced for 20W-50 in Oz, 15w40 in cold conditions, and I'm running 5w30.

No person in Oz would have ever accepted that an engine would consume 1qt/1000 miles as it came out of the factory, nor that additive levels should be controlled to prevent that level of consumption on a new engine affecting the emissions system.

Holden didn't have to redesign the L67 to recommend 20W-50, however, Ford have acknowledged having to increase bearing areas and reducing radial clearances as a response to xW-20.

The only people mentioning 20s, and "destroying" are the pro 20s.

 

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Who cares?


Agreed.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: daves87rs
For some of the same reasons the thick is better crowd does


Haven't seen the thick is better placing strawman arguments in the mouths of the thinner folk.

Got some examples ?

e.g. "so what you thin folk are saying is that you could invert everest on a pin-head, spin it slowly, and actually replace the previously worn metal ?

Well I beg to differ."

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Who cares?


Agreed.


ROFL

 

[DemoFly]

Thin oil crowd? You mean people that bought cars that are speced for 5w20?

Why did you have to make a new thread? Was the other one too full of contradictory straw arguments from both sides inevitably providing no value? I think so.

 

[Shannow]

The thread is about strawmen...e.g. the requirement for someone who points to an Australian owner's manual, for exactly the same engine (and "tolerances (sic)) to have to provide an island full of burned down motors on 20 oils to be allowed discuss the merits of a 20, 30, or 40 weight oil.

 

[demarpaint]

Sorry I see the Strawman arguments from both sides too.

You said: "Please provide proof that the engine that's specced for 0W-20 last as long as if it were run on 0W-40 is another."

Why would I have to prove that? If an engine in the US calls for a 20 grade oil, and no other options why would I argue that fact? The mfg is the one who has to handle my warranty claim if the oil fails to protect the engine. IMO the MFG already proved the oil works. To add to that if that same engine in Australia calls for 5W30 or 5W40, why should I care? I live and drive in the USA. I'm not going to Australia for warranty work, and the Aussies aren't coming here with their warranty work.

 

[Silk]

I think they balance out - no ruined engines with 0-20....and no ruined engines with 20-50. I've heard noisier engines on thin oil, and bad shifting on motorcycles with thin oils, but no premature engine failures. You also get bad shifting with thick oils in motorcycles too....and good shifts with a non recommended grade.

 

[Shannow]

You asked for proof that 0W-40was better than 0W-20, which I've never asked...why's the opposite question wrong ?

Personally, I care what the manufacturer of my engine says in other markets...and well beyond warranty, as I've only ever owned a single vehicle with new car warranty, and probably never again.

General Motors told me to use 20W-50 in the L67, with 15w40 "allowable" in sub freezing conditions.

Knowing both that (General Motor's recommendations), and that General Motors specs something different in another of their markets, and the age at which that recomendation was made in terms of technology, I've chosen a 5w30 synthetic.

My Nissan is "specced" for a 15w40, has a table with a range which includes 0W-20 below -18C, and as I recently found out, they ship 10w30 from the factory...

Why does someone questioning the xW-20 have to provide "proof" of "destruction", when clearly, immediate and catastrophic failure has never been part of the argument ?

 

[demarpaint]

We're going in circles and will continue to. Forget proof of destruction how about proof that the ticker oil is better in an application calling for a 20 grade oil? Why can't people use what is spec'd in their area of the world and call it a day? I'd also be willing to bet that once the 20 grade oils become more easily available and competitively priced in other parts of the world you'll see them used and recommended more. How about we check in, in about 5-10 years and see?

As a side note if all goes well I will be buying a 2013 vehicle calling for a 30 grade oil. You can bet the farm it will only see a 30 grade oil.

 

[mechanicx]

Similar strawmen arise when discussing other things like whether dexcool/dexclone can sludge in certain conditions and applications, FRAM oil filters etc.

So when someone suggest that thinner oil compromises engine wear and engine life and is all about CAFE and fuel economy you might get strawman.

If there was a difference between engine wear it would most likely be subtle, insignificant and mostly undetected. In reality there doesn't seem to be a difference. API/ILSAC oil is tested under sequnce IIIG and VIII etc high heat/load tests not to mention the real world high milage and long engine life of the US fleet.

Any difference between "thin vs thick" oil standrds would probably be academic/laboratory measurement. In comparison charts between SN vs some ACEA there appears to be some wear advantage to the latter. How much is the difference really and due to just thicker oil though?

The US has been using thinner oil way before CAFE and fuel economy was ever a concern, so that seems like a weak argument.

In is interesting that a similar vehicle will call for a thicker oil outside of the US. But it could be for other reasons besides CAFE and allowing more engine wear in the US. It could be much to do with just tradition and the market.

 

[virginoil]

We have the best oils and grades in OZ.

No thin anorexic models to choose from, the well balanced sporty and sexy models only.

Not too thin and not too thick.

The Oz and the Eurozone oil grades rule.

 

[mechanicx]

But on the other hand we have readily available $3/qt "thin" oil that will go 8K+ miles and the engines typically outlast the useful life of the car, so which is really better

?

 

[buster]

http://www.penriteoil.com.au/tech_pdfs/1166 THE EXTRA 10.pdf

Interesting link.

 

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Who cares?


Agreed.


ROFL


By the way, it is a "straw man" argument, not strawman or strawmen. It is two words, and if it's plural it is straw man arguments, not strawmen or straw men.

 

[LeakySeals]

In the 80's end earlier engines failed +-100k primarily from owner neglect and mechanical failure. Those that survived were junked anyways, rust would claim the body. Why are engines lasting longer today? Better design. Better manufacturing quality. Better oil chemistry.

Easy to prove neglect, prove an engine that failed because of thick oil.

I don't have a problem with thin oil anymore. Like many I used to think 0w20 was a watered down 10w40. Not true. People on BITOG have proven countless times that 0w20 has advanced chemistry different from the thicker oils, in some cases exceeding the quality of thicker oils.

There definitely is a thin oil or die crowd on here. Driving old clunkers for city commutes I read most of the new topics asking for a recommendation on cars with oil consumption problems related to high mileage and neglect. Usually within 3 responses a recommendation for a thin oil will appear. Reckless? Didn't read? Crowd following? Some are so stubborn that they recommend a teardown and rebuild on an old junker just to run thin. That falls under obsessed.

Leave you with a unrelated straw man..

I used to smoke when it was cool to do, was promoted, advertised. I didn't die, so it must be ok.