"Tight Engines" need 0W-20 he claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Justin251
I think top fuel dragsters use like a 10wt.

Redline and royal purple make one.


What would be the viscosity of these oils at the end of a 300 mile highway drive, versus 5 seconds into it from near cold ?

Even Redline say not to use the oil over 160F.


I have no idea. It was 0w5 and 0w10.

http://www.royalpurpleconsumer.com/products/xpr-racing-oil/

And it was prostock nor top fuel.
 
Yeah, Redline's "Nitro" is SAE 70, so not quite in the relms of the discussion...

Redline's 2wt drag oil (claimed 5W20 grade, cannot be on any number of reasons) is limited (by redline's words) to 150F oil temperatures is 3cst at 100C...NOACK above 50% clearly delineates it also from the topic...but at 150F, it's about 6cst

Sorry, I'm drifting here, but what was the top fuel reference to tight engines and 0W20 again ???
 
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
not true ... Engines are much tighter now then 80 years ago


Really? Here's the rod bearing clearances for a 75 year old John Deere. They are tighter than the current Ford 5.0 because the journals are larger diameter, making the effective clearance smaller.

1941 John Deere connecting rod: 0.001-0.003, 2.75 diameter
2011 Ford 5.0 connecting rod: 0.0011-0.0027, 2.086 diameter

Ed


Hey, interesting data you have here.
Thanks for sharing.
thumbsup2.gif


1941 conrod has specific clearance of 0.36 thous/inch.
That's way tighter than 2011's 0.53 thous/inch.
Having said that,2011 machines do have tighter tolerance range.

Many online writings often gets confused between tight tolerance and tight tolerance range.
 
The main bearing clearance on my Duratech engines are .0007-.0013. That's 6 ten thousandths of an inch. Very close.
 
Originally Posted By: DeepFriar
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: tig1
What tradeoffs?


* Volatility
* Lower Minimum oil film thicknesses
* Less hydrodynamic margin.


Those aren't trade offs for engines calling for 20Wt oils. If they were then engines simply would not last as long as engines using 30wt. I learned that nearly 40 years. Ford has called for 20wt oils for 14-15 years now with no adverse effects. In fact I use M1 0-20 for the protection of my engines for high temp operation, very low temp starting, excellent engine cleanliness, and obvious excellent engine wear protection.


In your earlier post you had said that you used the lighter weight for increased "performance". I am aware of competitive situations where that is indeed the case. I assumed you meant you did it to pull more horsepower out of the engine. That too is possible but there is obviously a point at which you must use a more appropriate product if you wish the engine to hold together. That's what I meant by tradeoffs. I don't know anyone going racing whose first thought is "I wonder which 0W20 I should use?" no matter what street oil was originally specced for the engine. And again, the discussion was about why OEM's are going to lighter weights. For CAFE.


Performance, as in engine longevity and maintenance free operation.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Yeah, Redline's "Nitro" is SAE 70, so not quite in the relms of the discussion...

Redline's 2wt drag oil (claimed 5W20 grade, cannot be on any number of reasons) is limited (by redline's words) to 150F oil temperatures is 3cst at 100C...NOACK above 50% clearly delineates it also from the topic...but at 150F, it's about 6cst

Sorry, I'm drifting here, but what was the top fuel reference to tight engines and 0W20 again ???


I think someone alluded to more power and mpgs from a 0w20. So I mentioned what I read about the 0w10 on the royal purple website.

I dunno I don't feel like reading it all over again. lol

Maybe thinner oil does help produce a little bit more power?
 
Last edited:
The best explanation I can find on why we are moving to thinner oils: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/518/motor-oils

Mostly, it is for fuel economy - but if the engine is kept cool enough there isn't any issue with the thinner oils. The problems occur in heavy towing or racing where the engine oils get above 240F, and in those conditions a 20wt oil can thin too much and cause excess wear. Under normal temperature ranges the 20wt is perfectly fine, and anything thicker doesn't help with wear but does create extra drag on the motor. Technically, thinner oils are more "frictionless" until the hydrodynamic barrier is broken which occurs during extreme circumstances.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
The main bearing clearance on my Duratech engines are .0007-.0013. That's 6 ten thousandths of an inch. Very close.


Hmm ......... the main bearing journal diameter is 1.16 inch ?
 
Originally Posted By: Dominic
The best explanation I can find on why we are moving to thinner oils: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/518/motor-oils

Mostly, it is for fuel economy - but if the engine is kept cool enough there isn't any issue with the thinner oils. The problems occur in heavy towing or racing where the engine oils get above 240F, and in those conditions a 20wt oil can thin too much and cause excess wear. Under normal temperature ranges the 20wt is perfectly fine, and anything thicker doesn't help with wear but does create extra drag on the motor. Technically, thinner oils are more "frictionless" until the hydrodynamic barrier is broken which occurs during extreme circumstances.


+1

This article made me abandon ILSAC and I went all the way for typically ACEA A3B4 spec'ed oils years ago.
blush.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Redline's 2wt drag oil (claimed 5W20 grade, cannot be on any number of reasons) is limited (by redline's words) to 150F oil temperatures is 3cst at 100C...NOACK above 50% clearly delineates it also from the topic...but at 150F, it's about 6cst


And this is the example, a good one among others, where a very lightweight oil is used in competition. And here the tradeoff is often that the engine is going to be rebuilt between runs with wear items replaced. Even if we were to talk about a Sprint race or a 200-500 mile race of some sort, the limited amount of time and massive amounts of sacrificial AW are enough to justify that tradeoff in order to liberate that HP while outrunning, if you will, fuel dilution. In many of these there are also exotic coatings and processes that go into the total "system" to enable just enough life. All in all a great area of exquisite voodoo engineering.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
The main bearing clearance on my Duratech engines are .0007-.0013. That's 6 ten thousandths of an inch. Very close.


Here's the data for a 1959 Alfa Romeo:

Main bearings: .0006 to .0023, 2.36 diameter
Rod bearings: .0010 to .0025, 1.77 diameter

Bearing clearances are what they have to be, and have been since the very first plain bearing was used. Any tighter than .0005 on mains or .001 on rods and you will seize due to thermal expansion. Any looser than .003 on either and you will pound the bearings out.

It's true that modern machining has decreased tolerances to where engines can be built more consistently in the ideal, middle of the range. But the fact remains that any given 80 year old farm tractor could have been out there plowing the field with bearing clearances as tight or tighter than the latest "built for 0W-20" cars.

Ed
 
Originally Posted By: Ram01
A 30wt is the way to go if you are doing a lot of highway driving. You will burn oil using a 20wt doing highway driving.


4000 mile OCI with 5W-20 Napa syn-blend in my Crown Vic, mostly highway miles. Burned less than a pint of oil.
 
I saved a stack of "Motor" hard cover books from the 50's to 80's that list all engine clearance specifications, with not much changing in that 30 year interval.
By converting 70's pickups, station wagons and vans to propane, they ran far more economically than they did with carburetors and gasoline. Less power, but cheap to drive and no monthly payments. Gone now are the LPG refill stations that used to be everywhere. I don't think even taxi companies use propane anymore.
Relative to this topic thread, the LPG did not dilute the engine oil no matter the outside temperature and number of cold starts. The engines would outlast the vehicles that were "pre owned" to begin with and I became handy at scrapping cars and moving the LPG systems from one project to the next.
One good thing about propane is the oil never needed changing, well maybe after 30,000 miles and even then the oil looked OK.
So as per crazyoildude's post, yes the new engines produce more power per cubic inch because of fuel injection, better breathing, higher compression ratios and engine controls "that you could not dream of 60 years ago".
Too bad we did not have engine oil tested in the 70's just to see the fuel dilution. Maybe we were running 0W20 all along.
 
There have been many fleet changeovers to LPG/propane system since the prices began dropping as a result of increased supply from fracking. My SIL operates a 36 van fleet locally that has saved a ton over the past couple of years.
 
Good. She can have my used systems that have been gathering dust for 10 years and all my Confederate money to go with them.

Politics killed LPG here by taxing it at the same level as a gallon of gasoline, then using the revenue to fund a beater buy back program to get polluting vehicles off the road. Go figure.
 
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Originally Posted By: tig1
The main bearing clearance on my Duratech engines are .0007-.0013. That's 6 ten thousandths of an inch. Very close.


Here's the data for a 1959 Alfa Romeo:

Main bearings: .0006 to .0023, 2.36 diameter
Rod bearings: .0010 to .0025, 1.77 diameter

Bearing clearances are what they have to be, and have been since the very first plain bearing was used. Any tighter than .0005 on mains or .001 on rods and you will seize due to thermal expansion. Any looser than .003 on either and you will pound the bearings out.

It's true that modern machining has decreased tolerances to where engines can be built more consistently in the ideal, middle of the range. But the fact remains that any given 80 year old farm tractor could have been out there plowing the field with bearing clearances as tight or tighter than the latest "built for 0W-20" cars.

Ed


Your example of the Alfa bearing clearance is by comparison much greater than my Duratech engines. Poor example. Also give an example of the 80 year old farm tractor bearing clearance(not relevant to this thread however).
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Your example of the Alfa bearing clearance is by comparison much greater than my Duratech engines. Poor example. Also give an example of the 80 year old farm tractor bearing clearance(not relevant to this thread however).


Bypassing the model A data I showed earlier ?
 
Originally Posted By: userfriendly
Good. She can have my used systems that have been gathering dust for 10 years and all my Confederate money to go with them.

Politics killed LPG here by taxing it at the same level as a gallon of gasoline, then using the revenue to fund a beater buy back program to get polluting vehicles off the road. Go figure.


LPG is quite popular over here. You use about 20% more fuel than petrol, but it costs 50% less, so overall you win.

You can buy a LPG car, factory new from Ford, and it has the same power as the petrol model now that they inject the LPG as a liquid instead of a gas.

BTW LPG is what we call a "gas" car in Oz

Here is a review for the Ford LPG Falcon

http://m.motoring.com.au/reviews/2015/la...15-review-48377
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Help me "over think" this as many of us here like to do - Mixing 0W-20 with 15W-50 to achieve close to 5W-30
Replies
18
Views
1K
JimPghPA
G
What's everyone's favorite 0w-20 these days?
15 16 17
Replies
324
Views
19K
rondhol
MuzzleFlash40
Switching from 0w-20 to 0w-30 experience
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
4K
NiwradND
S
Viscosity: Engine protection Vs. enhanced mileage
5 6 7
Replies
125
Views
4K
Carlostrece
R
Can I use 0W-20 in BOTH my cars?
Replies
18
Views
821
rbelloff
Back
Top Bottom