The mandate for the 0w30 comes from the synthetic oil companies. I don't know of any oil companies that recommend that a 5w30 oil should be used for 5w20 applications. However there is an oil companies that recommend 0w30 as a replacement for 0w20 5w20 5w30 and 10w30 oil. And another oil company recommends 0w40 as a replacement for 0w20 5w20 5w30 5w40 and 10w40
Thinner oil = Increased wear?
- Thread starter djb383
- Start date
- Status
Usually your heavy weight oil enthusiasts that are running engines that recommend a 5w30 engine oil won't consider a 0w30 because they think it is too thin. However a heavyweight oil enthusiast might give consideration to a 0w30 oil for 5w20 applications.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
I don't know any oil company that recommends any other then 5w-20 where 5w-20 is specified.
Here's the flaw in that reasoning. EVERY 30 weight, at some point in the warming process (for the sake of discussion we'll use 100C as our "finish line") will fall within 9.3-12.9 CST.
You keep referring to a 0w-30 as somehow being thinner then a 5w-30 without specifically indexing which one you're talking about. Even then ..it's not anything assured that the 0w-30 is thinner in any practical sense then a 5w-30.
You too share this myth with the heavy weight enthusiast. You keep referring to a 0w-30 being thinner then a 5w-30 as though it doesn't require any qualification ...like it's a law or something. It's not ..outside of the confines of what defines a "0w" ..otherwise ..it's as much a 30 weight as any other multivisc. If it's compared to a "light" 5w-30 and is on the heavier end of the 30 scale..it will be heavier through most of the entire temperture spectrum.
What part about this don't you understand
You know, I just read a SAE paper about oil viscosity and bearing wear. 5-20W did not do well at all in protecting thrust bearings. It did reasonably well for main bearings unless "unusual" conditions were encountered, in which case the bearings failed. The 10-30W encountered no problems.Apparently there is less margin for error when using 5-20W for mainten;'A
"ance or those 1% extreme driving situations.
"ance or those 1% extreme driving situations.
I think this is one of the reasons there are still 30W holdouts. The good 20W UOAs are on newer engines from people who obiously are quite conscientious about maintenance.
When more 20W engines mature with extreme conditions/iffy to neglectfull OCIs/partial lubrication failures/etc, we could start to see a different picture.
Since my driving style allows me to use GC with no MPG hit, I see no downside to waiting it out.
fwiw, I'm useing GC in my 2006 RSX Base and getting 31.5, the same as with 5w-20 Havoline. IF there was an MPG hit, it'd be worth it as it runs as smooth as an electric motor. For winter, I have a blend of Mobil 1 0w-30 and a q of 0w-20 ready, so I'll re-test but I see myself going back to GC in spring.
Which specific paper are you referring to? Interesting that we don't see this bearing wear in the UOAs or other papers.
Auto-Union, what is the oil change history of your RSX?
Androbot I wasn't aware Detroit Diesel specs a 5W-20 for their applications.
One other thing besides numbers such as 20, 30, 40 weight oils are barrier strengths each oil will sustain. If a 0W-30 oil such as Brand X will sustain 600 psi it would not be as worthy as the same 0W-30 that could withstand 2-3000 psi would it?
One other thing besides numbers such as 20, 30, 40 weight oils are barrier strengths each oil will sustain. If a 0W-30 oil such as Brand X will sustain 600 psi it would not be as worthy as the same 0W-30 that could withstand 2-3000 psi would it?
"However there is still a delusion by the motoring public that 5w20 engine oil may have long term durability issues and the motorists that have these concerns may be using 5w30 motor oils instead of 5w20."
Some designers seem to suffer from the same delusion. In general Europe seems to provide a broader range of classifications, A1/B1, A5/B5, etc., while in the US we seem to see SM/GF4 with viscosity specified, and some makes still using either 5W30 or even specifying a synthetic oil.
Some designers seem to suffer from the same delusion. In general Europe seems to provide a broader range of classifications, A1/B1, A5/B5, etc., while in the US we seem to see SM/GF4 with viscosity specified, and some makes still using either 5W30 or even specifying a synthetic oil.
Thats true, but the way people drive in US, you are not going to see that 1% extreme. People buy V6 and V8 monsters and then drive 65-75mpg on hwy using only 60HP or so. Or use them in stop&go driving; avarage commuting distance is 10-20 miles.
One of the misconception that I hear is that stop&go driving heats the oil a lot. Not true, it stresses cooling system in hot weather but the oil temps are relatively low.
On the other hand, people in Europe buy small displacement engines (often tax is linked to displacement) and drive 100+mph on autoban. This is the real reason you are not going to see Xw20 oils in Europe anytime soon. Engines would see that 1% extreme and fail in no time.
Not sure about Australian driving patterns but people down there seems to like thick oils too. Maybe someone can chime in?
The Sequence IIIG test is roughly equivalent to driving on the Autobahn at 100+mph for 10,000 miles, and these engines aren't failing.
http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/GasTests/IIIGtest/default.htm
The most extreme situation for bearing wear is not redline on the autobahn, but something more like letting out the clutch from an uphill stoplight with a trailer. Another extreme situation is losing oil pressure from high cornering forces.
No brand/grade of oil is going to save you from this condition.
Got the reference to that paper?
And what military combat vehicles have current Ford or Honda emission compliant engines in them?
"The Sequence IIIG test is roughly equivalent to driving on the Autobahn at 100+mph for 10,000 miles, and these engines aren't failing."
Big deal. The fact that a 5W-20 oil passes this test, with its mere 10,000 mile run, doesn't convince me that the 20 weight is safe for the particular type of severe/extreme driving that the test is designed to test for, that is, a lot of miles of fast driving. Not when most engines are now good for 200,000 miles or more. I don't know about the rest of the country, but out here in the west people drive at high speeds on the freeways, sometimes way over the speed limit, all the time, and in the west its a long way from here to anywhere. I personally know people who drive 10,000 mi. or more, sometimes a LOT more, way over the speed limit, every year on the freeways of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming.
Big deal. The fact that a 5W-20 oil passes this test, with its mere 10,000 mile run, doesn't convince me that the 20 weight is safe for the particular type of severe/extreme driving that the test is designed to test for, that is, a lot of miles of fast driving. Not when most engines are now good for 200,000 miles or more. I don't know about the rest of the country, but out here in the west people drive at high speeds on the freeways, sometimes way over the speed limit, all the time, and in the west its a long way from here to anywhere. I personally know people who drive 10,000 mi. or more, sometimes a LOT more, way over the speed limit, every year on the freeways of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming.
The U.S. military diesel engine oil specification, MIL-PRF-2104G, covers engine oils suitable for lubricating spark and compression ignition internal combustion engines. Engine performance tests used for MIL-PRF-2104G qualification are the Caterpillar 1M-PC and 1N, Mack T-8, Roller Follower Wear and HUEI Oil Aeration Tests.
MIL-PRF-2104G implements API CG-4, CF and CF-2 diesel engine oil requirements. The specification also covers power transmission fluid applications in combat/tactical service by including the transmission test requirements of Allison C-4and Caterpillar TO-4. These requirements cover graphite, paper and bronze friction; friction retention; gear wear testing; and seal compatibility. It should be noted that compliance with the TO-4 test requirements in MIL-PRF-2104G does not constitute full compliance with the Caterpillar specification.
There is no mention of viscosty or base oil type in this particular mil-spec. The mil-46167 isn't even for engine oil, that is an ATF spec.
MIL-PRF-2104G implements API CG-4, CF and CF-2 diesel engine oil requirements. The specification also covers power transmission fluid applications in combat/tactical service by including the transmission test requirements of Allison C-4and Caterpillar TO-4. These requirements cover graphite, paper and bronze friction; friction retention; gear wear testing; and seal compatibility. It should be noted that compliance with the TO-4 test requirements in MIL-PRF-2104G does not constitute full compliance with the Caterpillar specification.
There is no mention of viscosty or base oil type in this particular mil-spec. The mil-46167 isn't even for engine oil, that is an ATF spec.
MIL-PRF-2104G has been replaced by MIL-PRF-2104H. Ever since I first became familiar with 2104 way back when it was about MIL-L-2104C or maybe D, it has always specified viscosity requirements.
Rev. H presently says right on the first page:
I used to have SAE 30 at an earlier revision level, but that appears to have gone away. It doesn't have any other viscosities listed. No 0W like the 'bot claimed. In the past Amsoil has claimed that various oils met mil specs when they didn't, that could be where the 'bot got his mis-info.
There is no such thing as Mil-46167. Mil-PRF-46167G is called "Lubricating Oil, Internal Combustione Engine, Arctic". It is also suitable for use in non-hypoid gear boxes. The only presently qualified source for it is Emery (who ever they are?) 2810A oil. Source of the Emory info is QPL 46167-14. MIL-PRF-46167G doesn't spill out any SAE visocisty grades, but the low temp pumpability, low temp crank, 100C and HTHS all match SAE J300 for a 0W-30. Since the don't put an upper limit on 100C viscosity, a 0W-40 or 0W-50 could also potentially qualify.
46167 also has some additional low temp viscosity requirements, so not any old 0W-30 will necessarily pass.
I bet you slept better knowing you were using 5W-30 in this heat wave.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked