thin perhaps not as good as i thought

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: edhackett


Be a good sheep, follow the manual, mommy knows best.


yes, that's exactly what I'm doing. I believe everything I'm told and haven't spent any time on my own investigating whether or not the manufacturer's recommendations are ideal. I'll continue to march lockstep down to my path of ruin...

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Wow you're a real auto expert, at least from what you've been reading. You believe everything you read too. Why so much difficulty changing spark plugs?


You're getting a little personal now. It must be difficult for you when somebody comes along with reasoned facts rather than emotion. After all, as everyone else is realizing, your beef is an emotional one with the government, and you're projecting that onto CAFE via the warranty that you willingly entered into with Chrysler. And the ironic hypocrisy of this anti govt emotional bias? Your warranty has been subsidised by the govt who bailed out Chrysler and therefore subsidised by the taxpayer.

After all, CAFE didn't just come along in November 2012. You didn't just buy your car and enter into a warranty agreement that had transparency on what oil type you should use in November 2012. You weren't forced to buy that particular car - were you? What next? Are you going to complain that decades worth of mandated safety features in cars were introduced in November 2012 and they limit your freedom of choice?

Now onto the issue that I'm having problems with spark plugs. Again, how you misrepresent things! My post outlined that I needed a particular set of parts to reach the rear spark plugs. I was asking for brand and store recommendations to pick those parts up. It's problematic, but I'm not having problems. I may have problems, and if you take a look at the Taurus forums, many people have had problems.

Now onto whether I believe everything I read or hear. I actually have made a living from judging whether what people say is likely to happen or is just hopeful. I have a very keen sense for whether someone is competent in their field based on the evidence that is presented. My background is in economics and finance. In those fields you deal with theory a lot, including mathematical theory, and you deal with statistics in order to help prove or disprove theories. And you often deal with people who don't have the analytical rigour but instead go with their instincts. And you learn who are those people with good instincts based on the rational and who are those people with bad instincts based on the emotion.

So given that, I will cross reference a lot of information before coming to a conclusion. The Ford study is rigourous. It is performed by engineers who work in teams with peers from various backgrounds and with engineers from oil manufacturers. To deny it the way you do means you believe in conspiracy theory. It is something that deserves to be given a lot of weight since in the scheme of things it is statistically very significant.

On the other side we have mechanics, of various capabilities and competencies. This might sound snobbish, but unfortunately they didn't have the intellectual rigour to be engineers. Dealership mechanics are factory trained because they are not going to learn the right way of doing things from each other. And still they often lack the analytical and engineering rigour to do a good job. Now there are bad engineers and there are great mechanics. But typically the engineers know more, use real facts and analyze a lot of data, while mechanics learn some facts and then talk from unique experiences and hearsay.

And my personal experience with mechanics bears this out. In the UK I never had to learn too much about cars because I had a family friend who owned a successful garage. They looked after my car. In the US, mechanics, mostly factory trained, have consistently screwed up on my cars, in one case putting my whole families life in danger. If they can't get things right on the job they are paid to do, I'm hardly going to listen to them on their speculations on oil. I know far more and have been far more competent from an engineering perspective on my Taurus than several Ford dealers and mechanics who claim to specialize in Ford have been. Brakes, rotors, brake fluid, transmission fluid, fuel line, fuel system cleaning, catalytic convertor, coolant. You name it, a Ford or non Ford mechanic from at least 6 seperate dealers / garages has either given me completely wrong information or completely screwed up on all of these things over a 5 year period.

So yes, to your sarcastic comment on whether I'm an auto expert, I'm a certified genius compared to the factory trained people I've dealt with. So I'm certainly not giving their opinions a great deal of weight compared to engineers who deal with huge amounts of real life data for a living.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Explain to me how an article from 2004 that says all Fords will use 5W20, which is certainly not the case is valid in 2012?


It tells you that they established which engine designs were overall suitable for 5w20, and that they established what were some design parameters that were less likely to be suitable for 5w20. As part of that latter point, they excluded 15% of previous year models or engines from being suitable for 5w20.

They said that in some cases 5w20 performed better. I'm sure there were some elements in which it performed worse. The testing would give them information that they could use for future engine design / enhancements to retain compatibility or further improve compatibility with 5w20. They may have found that a certain part in one type of engine wore less with 5w20 while that same functional part in another engine wore more. They may have used their engineering knowledge to redesign the latter part. That's kind of what engineers do. They engineer things to be better. I'm sure they still test engine designs. The point of the 2004 information is that it was all to do with the switchover to a lighter oil. Having a rebuttal that it is not relevant to 2012 is eerily similar to how the conspiracy theorists argue.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Maybe Ford realized 5W20 just doesn't cut it in all applications.


Yes, and why don't you answer the multiple choice question:

A) This tells us that there is a conspiracy or
B) This tells us that there are engineers matching engine design and usage to oil technology

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Clevy

Explanations like this are exactly why I bought a mechanical op gauge and an oil temp gauge. Because it makes sense.
I understand dermapaints point in wanting to have a choice and not being held hostage by a warantee agreement.
Caterham takes the time to make a statement,and qualify it with a sensible explanation.
I've got boatloads of oil that I now know is to thick and I bought 6 jugs of pp 5w-20 to cut it all so it isn't wasted money on my part.
Yes Europe specs different oil but perhaps it's due to old habits dying hard,not because thicker is ideal.
I'm no expert however I am sensible,and when an explanation makes sense there is no point in arguing.
Thank you caterham for your wonderful explanations. I have learned much from you.
Old habits die hard,and perhaps I'm still on the fence,but I'm leaning a different way now.


Operating conditions, as I mentioned earlier, are different in Europe. At 150Mph on the Autobahn, my oil temp is going to be a heck of a lot higher than yours putting around on i-whatever at 70mph.

Believe it or not, the engineers who design these engines actually test them under a variety of operating conditions and then spec them for a lubricant (or lubricants) that will provide adequate protection under those conditions. They don't just slap on oil pressure and oil temperature gauges and go to town. They do controlled testing with tear-downs to determine what works and what doesn't. Some of these tests are extreme (Ford's Ecoboost test, the Porsche Nurburgring test....etc) but their purpose is to try and break things so that they can figure out how to make it so that things don't break under that usage profile.

Power density is a key component of what defines and engine's oil temperature operating range. Higher power density engines will heat the oil further. Often a combination of increased sump capacity, oil coolers and heavier oils are used to deal with this phenomena.

And every one of these things has a drawback.
-Heavier oil causes increased drag while heating up and can cause an engine to be sluggish
-Oil coolers, if not thermostatically controlled, will cause the oil to take longer to heat and thin, prolonging the time the lubricant is excessively heavy for the application
-Increased sump size again increases the amount of time taken for the lubricant to warm up, but it also acts as a heat sink and a larger sump allows for a thinner lubricant to be used, all things considered, as it will keep overall oil temperature lower.

This is also why oils like GC, M1 0w40....etc exist. They are relatively "heavy" with their higher HTHS values, but offer exceptional cold temperature performance compared to the 5w40, 10w40 and 15w40 lubricants they displaced.

Ford's sheer-happy 5w50 is another example of an oil designed to perform in a similar manner. Heavy enough to provide adequate protection for the BOSS 302 and Shelby engines under track-use conditions, whilst still being thin enough to function properly in daily driver use.


+1

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Wow you're a real auto expert, at least from what you've been reading. You believe everything you read too. Why so much difficulty changing spark plugs?


You're getting a little personal now. It must be difficult for you when somebody comes along with reasoned facts rather than emotion. After all, as everyone else is realizing, your beef is an emotional one with the government, and you're projecting that onto CAFE via the warranty that you willingly entered into with Chrysler. And the ironic hypocrisy of this anti govt emotional bias? Your warranty has been subsidised by the govt who bailed out Chrysler and therefore subsidised by the taxpayer.

After all, CAFE didn't just come along in November 2012. You didn't just buy your car and enter into a warranty agreement that had transparency on what oil type you should use in November 2012. You weren't forced to buy that particular car - were you? What next? Are you going to complain that decades worth of mandated safety features in cars were introduced in November 2012 and they limit your freedom of choice?

Now onto the issue that I'm having problems with spark plugs. Again, how you misrepresent things! My post outlined that I needed a particular set of parts to reach the rear spark plugs. I was asking for brand and store recommendations to pick those parts up. It's problematic, but I'm not having problems. I may have problems, and if you take a look at the Taurus forums, many people have had problems.

Now onto whether I believe everything I read or hear. I actually have made a living from judging whether what people say is likely to happen or is just hopeful. I have a very keen sense for whether someone is competent in their field based on the evidence that is presented. My background is in economics and finance. In those fields you deal with theory a lot, including mathematical theory, and you deal with statistics in order to help prove or disprove theories. And you often deal with people who don't have the analytical rigour but instead go with their instincts. And you learn who are those people with good instincts based on the rational and who are those people with bad instincts based on the emotion.

So given that, I will cross reference a lot of information before coming to a conclusion. The Ford study is rigourous. It is performed by engineers who work in teams with peers from various backgrounds and with engineers from oil manufacturers. To deny it the way you do means you believe in conspiracy theory. It is something that deserves to be given a lot of weight since in the scheme of things it is statistically very significant.

On the other side we have mechanics, of various capabilities and competencies. This might sound snobbish, but unfortunately they didn't have the intellectual rigour to be engineers. Dealership mechanics are factory trained because they are not going to learn the right way of doing things from each other. And still they often lack the analytical and engineering rigour to do a good job. Now there are bad engineers and there are great mechanics. But typically the engineers know more, use real facts and analyze a lot of data, while mechanics learn some facts and then talk from unique experiences and hearsay.

And my personal experience with mechanics bears this out. In the UK I never had to learn too much about cars because I had a family friend who owned a successful garage. They looked after my car. In the US, mechanics, mostly factory trained, have consistently screwed up on my cars, in one case putting my whole families life in danger. If they can't get things right on the job they are paid to do, I'm hardly going to listen to them on their speculations on oil. I know far more and have been far more competent from an engineering perspective on my Taurus than several Ford dealers and mechanics who claim to specialize in Ford have been. Brakes, rotors, brake fluid, transmission fluid, fuel line, fuel system cleaning, catalytic convertor, coolant. You name it, a Ford or non Ford mechanic from at least 6 seperate dealers / garages has either given me completely wrong information or completely screwed up on all of these things over a 5 year period.

So yes, to your sarcastic comment on whether I'm an auto expert, I'm a certified genius compared to the factory trained people I've dealt with. So I'm certainly not giving their opinions a great deal of weight compared to engineers who deal with huge amounts of real life data for a living.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Explain to me how an article from 2004 that says all Fords will use 5W20, which is certainly not the case is valid in 2012?


It tells you that they established which engine designs were overall suitable for 5w20, and that they established what were some design parameters that were less likely to be suitable for 5w20. As part of that latter point, they excluded 15% of previous year models or engines from being suitable for 5w20.

They said that in some cases 5w20 performed better. I'm sure there were some elements in which it performed worse. The testing would give them information that they could use for future engine design / enhancements to retain compatibility or further improve compatibility with 5w20. They may have found that a certain part in one type of engine wore less with 5w20 while that same functional part in another engine wore more. They may have used their engineering knowledge to redesign the latter part. That's kind of what engineers do. They engineer things to be better. I'm sure they still test engine designs. The point of the 2004 information is that it was all to do with the switchover to a lighter oil. Having a rebuttal that it is not relevant to 2012 is eerily similar to how the conspiracy theorists argue.

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Maybe Ford realized 5W20 just doesn't cut it in all applications.


Yes, and why don't you answer the multiple choice question:

A) This tells us that there is a conspiracy or
B) This tells us that there are engineers matching engine design and usage to oil technology


Still pretending to be an expert? We have real experts weighing in and their views differ from yours, why? I tend to take the side of real experts in this discussion, not a book worm, sorry if that offends you. I've got a real keen sense too, worked in the automotive industry, as well as a machine shop. I've been around the block a few times too. I do a fair amount of reading also, that Ford article is a lot of hype to ease the minds of concerned consumers. Obviously our opinions differ.

BTW no conspiracy, CAFE. You're the one who used the word conspiracy not me.

 

[tig1]

In the 70s when M1 5-20 came out, one of the selling points they had was better fuel economy than 10-40 and such. Of course this was long before CAFE.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: Shannow



Toyota can bring WHOLE CARS to Australia, and there's not enough camels to drag the oil around ?

ALL of which is imported ?


Shannow, stop being ridiculous. No one said that Australia can't implement widespread distribution but that they haven't---because it's true! So please stop pretending this is some sort of insult. You live there--so you obviously know this. I spend 2 weeks a year there every other year and I've never seen a 20W oil on the shelves at Sprint Auto parts. I'm sure that you can "get it", but that's not "wide-spread distribution".


It's as ridiculous as your continued assertion that the OEMs don't use xW-20 in Australia because it's not widely available. The majority of cars under warranty are serviced at the dealer.

If Toyota genuinely believed that xW-20 was "best" for their vehicles, under warranty, the oil would be here. Pure and Simple.

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

Operating conditions, as I mentioned earlier, are different in Europe. At 150Mph on the Autobahn, my oil temp is going to be a heck of a lot higher than yours putting around on i-whatever at 70mph.

Believe it or not, the engineers who design these engines actually test them under a variety of operating conditions and then spec them for a lubricant (or lubricants) that will provide adequate protection under those conditions. They don't just slap on oil pressure and oil temperature gauges and go to town. They do controlled testing with tear-downs to determine what works and what doesn't. Some of these tests are extreme (Ford's Ecoboost test, the Porsche Nurburgring test....etc) but their purpose is to try and break things so that they can figure out how to make it so that things don't break under that usage profile.

Power density is a key component of what defines and engine's oil temperature operating range. Higher power density engines will heat the oil further. Often a combination of increased sump capacity, oil coolers and heavier oils are used to deal with this phenomena.

And every one of these things has a drawback.
-Heavier oil causes increased drag while heating up and can cause an engine to be sluggish
-Oil coolers, if not thermostatically controlled, will cause the oil to take longer to heat and thin, prolonging the time the lubricant is excessively heavy for the application
-Increased sump size again increases the amount of time taken for the lubricant to warm up, but it also acts as a heat sink and a larger sump allows for a thinner lubricant to be used, all things considered, as it will keep overall oil temperature lower.

This is also why oils like GC, M1 0w40....etc exist. They are relatively "heavy" with their higher HTHS values, but offer exceptional cold temperature performance compared to the 5w40, 10w40 and 15w40 lubricants they displaced.

Ford's sheer-happy 5w50 is another example of an oil designed to perform in a similar manner. Heavy enough to provide adequate protection for the BOSS 302 and Shelby engines under track-use conditions, whilst still being thin enough to function properly in daily driver use.


What you say about autobahn kind of makes sense, but my Mercedes manual talks about choosing oil based on the lowest ambient air temperature, not the maximum highway speed.

And as far as I know, the MB229.5 spec is worldwide.

On another note, it does say lowest ambient air temp. It's interesting that the bars for 30 weight oil max out at 86f. If I were to interpret the chart as a range for both lower and upper temp, even though the text says to choose based on lowest ambient air temp, it would say I couldn't run GC 0w30 in many parts of the US in summer.

 

[cp3]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:

I'm sorry, I don't understand where the insanity is in this quote.

The guy has an 07 Honda it is spec for 5w20 and thats what ihe is running, Mobil 1 to boot which is considered by many a top shelf oil.
They back spec the engine to 0w20 but that doesn't mean 0w20 is preferred or that 5w20 is of the menu or too heavy it simply means it can use it.

Not only did he recommend moving to 0w20 which is okay but has to toss in that Mobil 1 5w20 is too heavy in the summer.
Come on now the oil being used is spec for this engine (AFAIK Honda doesn't put 5w20 with this HTHS in the owners manual) and even a 5w30 wouldn't be too heavy in summer.
If someone suggested he use 5w30 the fan club would go bonkers If you don't see the problem here there is nothing else i can say.



Well I can see where you're coming from but I still think insanity is a tad strong. As you said, recommending a 0w20 in a vehicle that has been backspec'd for it isn't insane. Doesn't is seem logical that if they now prefer and spec 0w20 in their engines and have backspec'd it to older engines that it would be preferred? If not, why bother?

M1 5w20 too heavy? OK maybe a bit extreme but if you read the rest of his ideas, you understand where he is coming from agree or not. If you're worried about someone coming in, taking that advice and going and filling their car with 0w20 when it was spec'd for 5w50, I would say they have more problems than Caterham.

I'm sure I'm considered part of the fan club and I can guarantee you I wouldn't have gone bonkers.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: MarkStock
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

Operating conditions, as I mentioned earlier, are different in Europe. At 150Mph on the Autobahn, my oil temp is going to be a heck of a lot higher than yours putting around on i-whatever at 70mph.

Believe it or not, the engineers who design these engines actually test them under a variety of operating conditions and then spec them for a lubricant (or lubricants) that will provide adequate protection under those conditions. They don't just slap on oil pressure and oil temperature gauges and go to town. They do controlled testing with tear-downs to determine what works and what doesn't. Some of these tests are extreme (Ford's Ecoboost test, the Porsche Nurburgring test....etc) but their purpose is to try and break things so that they can figure out how to make it so that things don't break under that usage profile.

Power density is a key component of what defines and engine's oil temperature operating range. Higher power density engines will heat the oil further. Often a combination of increased sump capacity, oil coolers and heavier oils are used to deal with this phenomena.

And every one of these things has a drawback.
-Heavier oil causes increased drag while heating up and can cause an engine to be sluggish
-Oil coolers, if not thermostatically controlled, will cause the oil to take longer to heat and thin, prolonging the time the lubricant is excessively heavy for the application
-Increased sump size again increases the amount of time taken for the lubricant to warm up, but it also acts as a heat sink and a larger sump allows for a thinner lubricant to be used, all things considered, as it will keep overall oil temperature lower.

This is also why oils like GC, M1 0w40....etc exist. They are relatively "heavy" with their higher HTHS values, but offer exceptional cold temperature performance compared to the 5w40, 10w40 and 15w40 lubricants they displaced.

Ford's sheer-happy 5w50 is another example of an oil designed to perform in a similar manner. Heavy enough to provide adequate protection for the BOSS 302 and Shelby engines under track-use conditions, whilst still being thin enough to function properly in daily driver use.


What you say about autobahn kind of makes sense, but my Mercedes manual talks about choosing oil based on the lowest ambient air temperature, not the maximum highway speed.

And as far as I know, the MB229.5 spec is worldwide.

On another note, it does say lowest ambient air temp. It's interesting that the bars for 30 weight oil max out at 86f. If I were to interpret the chart as a range for both lower and upper temp, even though the text says to choose based on lowest ambient air temp, it would say I couldn't run GC 0w30 in many parts of the US in summer.


Yes, because the ambient air temperature plays a key role in how hot the oil gets.

For example, now that it is cold out, I can't get my oil any hotter than 75 degrees or so in the exact same driving profile that was heating the oil to around 90 degrees only a month ago.

Same usage profile, simply the ambient temperature works to drive oil temperatures down.

Now, the touching on the MB oil spec is also key here, as it, similar to the BMW spec's, means that an oil meets a minimum level of performance as well as a number criteria required for the application like HTHS.

So basically, as long as you use an oil certified for the application, you are covered, as it is guaranteed to meet the minimum performance requirements required to protect the engine under various operating conditions. So be it 0w30, 0w40, 5w40...etc, as long as it has the MB seal on it, you are good

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Still pretending to be an expert? We have real experts weighing in and their views differ from yours, why? I tend to take the side of real experts in this discussion, not a book worm, sorry if that offends you. I've got a real keen sense too, worked in the automotive industry, as well as a machine shop. I've been around the block a few times too. I do a fair amount of reading also, that Ford article is a lot of hype to ease the minds of concerned consumers. Obviously our opinions differ.

BTW no conspiracy, CAFE. You're the one who used the word conspiracy not me.


I note you didn't answer the multiple choice question.

Conspiracy instead of CAFE. I'm using the word that describes your viewpoint, whether you realize it or not. I've already said that the 5w20 standard for Ford is in large part incentivized by CAFE but that doesn't mean that engineers didn't match engines to oil technology they created for it.

I mean 1) There is a Ford oil standard that they created as part of this and 2) There are exceptions such as Ecoboost that precisely suggest they don't use lighter oils because their engineering tells them not to. Btw, did you ever consider that for Ecoboost, they get CAFE credits for the improved fuel economy? As they could with more diesels. Both being European strengths and strategies and not until recently American and Japanese approaches. Are you going to complain now that CAFE has given you too much choice on how to get more fuel efficient vehicles?

You keep on picking on the evidence I and others bring forward. I'm generally limiting my comfort on 20 weight oil to my own personal requirements to run it in a 2004 Ford.

You have a wider argument you are making about your own personal situation, so you need to bring in your own facts to back those up rather than just state your feeling. You've spent all your time using conspiracy theory type techniques on others posts, without specifying really what your own personal concerns are. Especially since you've now admitted that you run 20 weight oil and you have a lifetime warranty. Consequently, as everyone is concluding, you're simply coming across as complaining about nothing except that this was somehow foistered on you, against your will, in November 2012. Oh woe is you.

Now about the information from Ford in 2004. That information was for dealers, not consumers (how easily you get simple facts wrong), and yes it is to make them feel better. Not because they are hiding information, but because the people they are dealing with have to undergo switching costs to 5w20, and as you know, dealers just care about money. Additionally, most of the service people at dealers hold totally irrational emotion based views. And it was no surprise to just hear from you that your background is similar.

What kind of views and expertise am I talking about? All those service folks who said that 5w20 was brown water. How about the service manager at one of my nearby Ford dealers who personally re-measured my 60k rotors after I said his tech was wrong to say I needed new rotors, and gave me new measurements that were more than the thickness of new Motorcraft rotors. How about the service manager at another Ford dealer whose factory trained technicians had incorrectly installed my fuel filter causing it to leak, after replacing the entire fuel lines from tank to engine, asking me why I wanted an independent inspection ("You don't trust us?"), after which we found 2 other points of failure in the work.

You can call me a book worm if you like. It doesn't insult me. What I know is that I've read a lot about all sorts of mechanical things, to know I have more knowledge than most mechanics and service people on many topics that are of interest to me.

And that I haven't read enough about many things that means I know more than several people here, and certainly not the engineers. And that I have enough skill to evaluate the evidence from people who do know more than me to come to the right conclusions.

I don't think you're anywhere near that level because you've misrepresented and misunderstood things so often.

And I'll give you an example of where being a bookworm helps a little. A lot of folks here speculate about fuel system cleaning. There's a lot of distrust about what cleaner contains what concentration of cleaner, there's talk about whether to use shock treatments or maintenance treatments, what driving cycle is best. I, the book worm, went and read the entire original Techron study from the 1970s.

- now, I hear you jump out of your seat, and immediately start penning a response about what does 1970 have to do with now, but anyway -

Reading that study as well as doing some investigation on different manufacturers, tells me which brands to use, which ones are most cost effective, how to use them, and when to use them.

Of course, you can be amongst those who'd rather look down on such approaches, and believe what they want to believe. It's obviously working out well for you as it led you to buy a Chrysler for which you're complaining about a lifetime warranty. Life must be good.

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
If Toyota genuinely believed that xW-20 was "best" for their vehicles, under warranty, the oil would be here. Pure and Simple.


Correct me if I'm wrong but in Australia, 0w20 & 5w20 are listed as applicable for Prius as energy conserving oils are they not?

So in Australia, Toyota makes no distinction between 0w20 or 20w50 from a recommendation perspective.

While in the US they now say 0w20 only on newer years, with some choice available for some prior years.

That's the issue you are all complaining about correct?

And the point is that they say what they say in the US because of CAFE.

But in Australia, they are not saying "0w20 Energy Conserving" & "20w50 Engine Conserving".

They are simply saying all can be used, but the lighter ones are Energy Conserving. No advantage or disadvantage in any other factor is being mentioned by Toyota Australia.

So Toyota certainly don't feel that lighter oils will compromise reliability in Australia in any significantly meaningful way. Unless you think they are hiding something?

 

[fauxchemist]

Depending on how you went by reaching 150mph, your oil is not hotter than my jeeps oil doing 80mph.........simply not true. as a matter of fact my oil temps spike in drive thrus and first ten minutes after shut down

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
I'm still waiting for a rational explanation of why oil reccomendations for the SAME car can vary by country.


I'd love to hear the rational explanation myself. The best I can tell you is CAFE is behind what's used in the USA.


Believe me; I'm on your side about wishing there were more oil choices available in manuals. However, I think we're looking at other cases with rose tinted glasses.

Obviously, the U.S. vehicles (and Canadian ones by proxy) tend to stick to the single choice. MB, VW/Audi, and BMW worldwide aren't a lot different, though, when you look at it carefully. While they offer choice in SAE grade, they don't offer a lot of choice in HTHS. I suggest that GC 0w-30 and M1 0w-40 are a lot more similar in viscosity under most conditions (particularly with respect to HTHS) than are PP 5w-30 versus a 5w-30 Euro or 5w-30 HDEO, even though those are all technically the same SAE grade.

And beyond that, alluding to what CATERHAM and I were discussing about lighter grades in diesels, the crux is that oils have improved and this has reduced the need to play around with seasonal oil changes and carefully matching oil choices to climate. A 0w-40 or 5w-40 meant that I was not required to run 15w-40 in the summer in my Audi and switch to a 5w-30 or a 5w-20 or a 20w monograde in the winter, as per the manual. Similarly, a 0w-30 eliminates the need for the old school 10w-30 summer and 5w-30 winter nonsense, when 5w-30 wasn't considered an appropriate year round grade.

With choice comes responsibility. Aside from CAFE, if a manufacturer allowed 20w-50 in appropriate weather conditions in a new, under warranty North American vehicle, you can be darn sure that someone would leave it in the sump in a North Dakota or Saskatchewan winter, and gripe to the dealer about some issue, all the while complaining that it wasn't necessary to change it out because he only had 1,000 miles on the oil.

You and I and the rest of us BITOGers could likely handle that responsibility. Lots of people would blame the manufacturer or the dealer, and I can understand why an automaker would want to greatly reduce the chance of that happening. Of course, it's not perfect, but I can't think of a perfect solution for imperfect people. I don't like it any more than you do.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fauxchemist
Depending on how you went by reaching 150mph, your oil is not hotter than my jeeps oil doing 80mph.........simply not true. as a matter of fact my oil temps spike in drive thrus and first ten minutes after shut down


I said sustained driving at 150Mph.

My car has an oil cooler, I have to beat the tar out of it to elevate the oil temperatures.

That being said, there are a number of videos on youtube of my car, and others like it, doing 190Mph. The increase in oil temperature as the car goes over 150Mph is very obvious. At speeds north of 150Mph, the car is working much harder, faster than that, harder still. I'm spinning 7K at 190Mph. The car is fully capable of sitting like that for hours, that's how it was designed. That's also why it has a large sump, spec's a relatively heavy oil and has an oil cooler.

 

[MarkStock]

Originally Posted By: Garak
You and I and the rest of us BITOGers could likely handle that responsibility. Lots of people would blame the manufacturer or the dealer, and I can understand why an automaker would want to greatly reduce the chance of that happening. Of course, it's not perfect, but I can't think of a perfect solution for imperfect people. I don't like it any more than you do.


So your conclusion would be it's really because of the American people we have a limited choice of oil weights spec'd in manuals.

 

[fauxchemist]

ok so if its so hard to get your oil hot, why are you talking about euro cars having higher temps.....your car in particular

 

[Trav]

Quote:
So in Australia, Toyota makes no distinction between 0w20 or 20w50 from a recommendation perspective.

While in the US they now say 0w20 only on newer years, with some choice available for some prior years.

That's the issue you are all complaining about correct?

And the point is that they say what they say in the US because of CAFE.


No. This is where i think your misunderstanding the point.
I use Germany as an example because i am familiar with the situation there.
20w is in fact spec for the Prius and that's fine as it is being sold as a oil for the hybrid by Toyota.

In this particular application i think its fine as the hybrids gasoline engine duty cycle is not a 100% in most cases.
Toyota studied the demographics and have determined that for the most part these are being bought as "around town" cars where their hybrid drive trains electric motor is in use much of the time.

The 0w20 is available at any Toyota dealer at the same price as 5w30, it is also in good supply as its German sourced.
No issues with obtaining or distribution the 0w20 or 5w20 for the older versions.

So here is my point in a nutshell.
The 1.8 used in the new Prius is also used in many other models obviously without the hybrid drive yet Toyota doesn't feel the need to spec them for 20w instead 5w30 is spec.

This raises some questions for me.
Most small displacement engines are not really bought as road cars (autobahn long trip) but more for daily run around mundane use.
For the first time in history German families now have more cars than those in the USA. Many have small town cars because of the size of the city streets in some old cities and towns and parking issues.

Climate in the part of Germany where i live is similar to New England.
If Toyota doesn't spec the 20w there has to be a logical reason. Not only do they spec a 30w but one with an HTHS of 3.5 like Mobil 1 ESP 5w30 3.56.
The question is what is it?

When i read something like this and dig deeper into it one has to wonder what effect this has had on the auto industry and the way the spec not only motor oil but other things like tires and other lubricants.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/why-toyota-and-ford-hooked-up-its-the-cafe-credits-stupid/

I know a lot of people pooh pooh the EPA argument but when one looks at the amount of money involved not just now but n the future there really seems to be something to it.
The best way i can describe my own feeling toward this is it seems to me anyway the manufacturers are playing a juggling act.

Believe me i am far from a rabid thick oil guy. I have run 20w in my Expedition in the winter, the conditions were perfect for it. Low RPM, cold temps, short trips.
I would not run a 30w or 40w anything in Arctic climates if 20w was available but on the other hand i wouldn't run 20w in the Southern US states or hot climates in the summer either.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fauxchemist
ok so if its so hard to get your oil hot, why are you talking about euro cars having higher temps.....your car in particular


I'm not. I'm saying Euro cars are designed for higher oil temps due to their potential autobahn use, which means extended periods of time at speeds that are twice the legal speed limit in America or higher.

This is the same reason Ford spec's 5w50 for the BOSS 302 and the Shelby, as they may see road course use that would elevate the oil temps in a similar manner.

 

[fauxchemist]

The Mercedes Benz spec your going on and on about was designated to better handle extended drain intervals, rather than extended high speeds on you tube

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: fauxchemist
The Mercedes Benz spec your going on and on about was designated to better handle extended drain intervals, rather than extended high speeds on you tube


I didn't go on and on about a Mercedes Benz spec, that was mentioned by another poster. However the BMW LL-01 spec, despite being a long life spec, also requires a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP to be met which is indeed geared toward extended high speed use and the potential for elevated oil temperatures. It is likely Mercedes has a similar requirement.

I mentioned youtube because you can get a good idea as to how many of these cars are driven in Europe by watching some of the videos there. If you have an issue with my example, I'm all ears as to why.