Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict

[Gokhan]

Come on, guys, 0W-20 is hardly thin. SAE 20 viscosity grade is old-school. Who is going to run the really thin stuff, preferably in a BMW?

Road version:

Racing version:

The full thin line:

 

[Shannow]

Well given your final verdict, and the attributes that you've espoused in getting to that conclusion...run it and post the results.

 

[PimTac]

I would like to see a UOA of that 0w-8 in the Corolla.

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given your final verdict, and the attributes that you've espoused in getting to that conclusion...run it and post the results.

I would be interested in xW20 results operating under :
a) Extreme duty (which I believe a xW20 isn't fit for it); or
b) Heavy duty (ditto ?) ; or
c) Medium duty.

I'm afraid I wouldn't be interested in results operating under :
d) Light duty in relation to one's (designed) capabilities , where a vast , vast majority of operating vehicles fall under.

Having said this, I'm real keen on Dr Haas' Porsche (?) current residual mechanical conditions and begging for updates..

 

[NGRhodes]

Originally Posted By: zeng
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given your final verdict, and the attributes that you've espoused in getting to that conclusion...run it and post the results.

I would be interested in xW20 results operating under :
a) Extreme duty (which I believe a xW20 isn't fit for it); or
b) Heavy duty (ditto ?) ; or
c) Medium duty.

I'm afraid I wouldn't be interested in results operating under :
d) Light duty in relation to one's (designed) capabilities , where a vast , vast majority of operating vehicles fall under.

Having said this, I'm real keen on Dr Haas' Porsche (?) current residual mechanical conditions and begging for updates..

I wonder if VW 508 rated xW20 would satisfy c, possibly b in your list ?

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: PimTac
I would like to see a UOA of that 0w-8 in the Corolla.

Given that there are more than twice as powerful of the 4A-xxx engines out there that still specify 10W-30 like my 4A-LC, I think mine would be OK with as low as 0W-12 but I don't know about 0W-8.

Needless to say the goal of my experiment wasn't to show that 0W-8 is better than 20W-60 but to see how common viscosity grades that have been available for many, many decades (SAE 20 through 50) perform and compare in my engine.

 

[ndfergy]

Thanks for your efforts Gokhan. Whether one agrees or not you maintained your objectivity in the face of some pretty harsh criticism. Being an oil newbie myself you gave me pause although I still fall on the thicker side of thin within the GF-5 spec. I would love to see you try a plain Jane 5W20 dino for a few runs and see how that compares. Regardless, thinner oils seem to be the future so we might as well get used to it.

 

[Kuato]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: FlyPenFly
If you look at the BMW M4 manual for international markets, you'll see they primarily recommend a 40w oil. I think this pretty much confirms that lighter oil requirements in the US are due to fuel efficiency standards not really engine protection. In the US, they recommend a 30w and make no mention of a 40w.

No, they require an oil that meets a specification. I don't read that to say BMW feels LL-01 is inferior to LL-01 FE. It is this spec that (among other things) defines the HTHS.


In addition to the specification; "ensure that the engine oil belongs to the engine grade SAE 0-40, or engine malfunctions and damage may occur" is right there in the image.

I also see that as an alternative, 0w30 may be used. Seems like BMW prefer 40 weight outside the US.

 

[LubeFiner]

Reading through the numerous pages of this thread I have come to one determination as how resolve this: Someone needs to buy 3-4 brand new cars, all the same make/model/options, and equip each vehicle with drivers that have nearly identical driving styles. After the initial break-in has occurred, drain the factory fill/break-in oil from each engine, tear apart the engines to spec all components, reinstall said engines in their respective vehicle, and then fill each with one brand and grade of oil per vehicle, i.e. M1 5W20, 5W30, 5W40, and 5W50. Each vehicle shall be driven in a follow-the-leader scenario for the sum of 50,000 miles in 1 year with UOA's done at every 7,5000 miles. At the 50K mark, each engine is to be removed, broken down, and full specs taken of all components. This is the only way IMHO that a true engine wear analysis can be full filled.

I just do not see anyone doing the above scenario to prove which is the best. Otherwise, just buy the brand/weight you like and run with it.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: LubeFiner
Reading through the numerous pages of this thread I have come to one determination as how resolve this: Someone needs to buy 3-4 brand new cars, all the same make/model/options, and equip each vehicle with drivers that have nearly identical driving styles. After the initial break-in has occurred, drain the factory fill/break-in oil from each engine, tear apart the engines to spec all components, reinstall said engines in their respective vehicle, and then fill each with one brand and grade of oil per vehicle, i.e. M1 5W20, 5W30, 5W40, and 5W50. Each vehicle shall be driven in a follow-the-leader scenario for the sum of 50,000 miles in 1 year with UOA's done at every 7,5000 miles. At the 50K mark, each engine is to be removed, broken down, and full specs taken of all components. This is the only way IMHO that a true engine wear analysis can be full filled.

I just do not see anyone doing the above scenario to prove which is the best. Otherwise, just buy the brand/weight you like and run with it.

Actually that wouldn't be necessary nor would it be definitive. You wouldn't use entire vehicles and the driving styles couldn't be "nearly identical".

 

[Nickdfresh]

Originally Posted By: zeng
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given your final verdict, and the attributes that you've espoused in getting to that conclusion...run it and post the results.

I would be interested in xW20 results operating under :
a) Extreme duty (which I believe a xW20 isn't fit for it); or
b) Heavy duty (ditto ?) ; or
c) Medium duty.

...


Ford has already done this, including a tow-test through America's hottest point in Death Valley...

 

[BobFout]

What LubeFiner and kschachn describe IS done by way of engine test cells.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: ndfergy
Thanks for your efforts Gokhan. Whether one agrees or not you maintained your objectivity in the face of some pretty harsh criticism. Being an oil newbie myself you gave me pause although I still fall on the thicker side of thin within the GF-5 spec. I would love to see you try a plain Jane 5W20 dino for a few runs and see how that compares. Regardless, thinner oils seem to be the future so we might as well get used to it.

Thank you ndfergy.

I would call 5W-30 and 10W-30 thin grades. Thick grades are 0W-40 and thicker.

I think the best oil suitable for your 2015 Toyota Yaris is TGMO 0W-20 SN. It's a full synthetic and very cheaply available in Canada. You can do longer OCIs with it than with conventional 5W-30 and 10W-30 and get all the benefits of a full synthetic. Remember that I run it in a much older Toyota with great success.

The performance difference between 0W-20 and 0W-40 in my application is like day and night. I feel like my engine is purring with 0W-20 and I felt like it was moaning with 0W-40. Thicker oil really steals your horsepower and makes your engine sluggish. On top of that, the oil pump and lubrication system has to work harder with thicker oil.

If some people think that they can make their wear less by going to a thicker oil in a car that specifies 10W-30 or thinner, they are fooling themselves. There is no such thing. The only engines for which you see wear benefits are high-performance engines driven hard that were designed for such oils or some older engines. In fact my application may be showing even less wear with thinner oil according to my UOAs.

Given that you don't see any wear benefits from using thicker oil, it's really silly to run thicker oil in engines that don't need it, as it results in sluggish performance and lower fuel economy and steals from the thrill of driving as you feel your engine putting more effort for the same driving conditions.

 

[PimTac]

NickdFresh

Was that done using Motorcraft oil or another brand? It's interesting that Ford did that rather than one of the oil companies.

 

[PimTac]

". Thicker oil really steals your horsepower and makes your engine sluggish."

Interesting. At what percentage? Do you have a source?

If a test comparing 20w to 40w is done running a 200hp engine I would guess the hp loss is very minimal, maybe a couple of horsepower or so. It wouldn't be noticeable.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Ford has already done this, including a tow-test through America's hottest point in Death Valley...


Is that why they have moved back to 30s on some models ?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Well given your final verdict, and the attributes that you've espoused in getting to that conclusion...run it and post the results.


I'd love to see someone run it and post the results. Me I'll pass, and stick with 5W30.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: PimTac
". Thicker oil really steals your horsepower and makes your engine sluggish."

Interesting. At what percentage? Do you have a source?

If a test comparing 20w to 40w is done running a 200hp engine I would guess the hp loss is very minimal, maybe a couple of horsepower or so. It wouldn't be noticeable.

You see less difference at high power outputs because the minimum oil-film thickness (MOFT) gets smaller, which reduces the viscous drag (hydrodynamic friction) by the oil. You see the biggest increase in horsepower and fuel economy during gentle cruising, when the MOFT is large and therefore the engine benefits from reducing the MOFT. From 0W-40 to 0W-20, I think you see about 5 - 7% benefit in horsepower and fuel economy during gentle cruising. Harder you drive, less you will benefit.

This guy studied it for high power outputs for a really old engine (Ford Y-block V8) and he saw a significant drop in power even in that case when he used 20W-50. Note that his statement in the introduction that the power loss comes from the oil pump, not the oil itself, is wrong. It does mainly come from the oil itself (viscous drag in the bearings).

http://www.eatonbalancing.com/2015/02/01/oil-viscosity-and-its-effect-on-engine-power/

 

[PimTac]

Interesting read. I think the author may have some credence in claiming the oil pump is the source. While it may not be the only source, there has to be some drag there. This was a typical oil pump driven off the engine. Mazda with their SkyActiv engines have changed the oil pump to a electric driven one with no connection to the engine mechanically. It's also a two stage pump. I assume other car makers are doing the same thing.

The test would have been better had they changed out the old Valvoline oil for a fresh batch with the same grade just to be fair.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: PimTac
Interesting read. I think the author may have some credence in claiming the oil pump is the source. While it may not be the only source, there has to be some drag there. This was a typical oil pump driven off the engine.


Typical PD oil pump, the difference between 60 and 80 psi (lower pressure with thinner oil) is of the order or 50 watts...you get more drag turning your lights on. If there's no change in oil pressure, there's no difference in power consumption.

The difference in the bearing areas (bearings and piston skirts) can be many hundreds...whole numbers of KW between cold and fully warmed oil.

The Oil Pump is the focus of too many people because they don't get what's going on there.