Using 0W-20 in a 2025 Corolla?

[RallyXaDSM]

IN the case of the 1UR-FE and allowing up to 20w-50 all over the world will insisting on 0w-20 in the USA, there is no difference in calibrations or ratings around the world that would be significant enough to insist on a KV100 reduction in the USA that is amounts of half the KV100 tolerated elsewhere.

Australia is hot, but Death Valley is even hotter. Yet Toyota tells Aussies they can run 20w-50 while insisting Americans use 0w-20. And whereas the international manual that allows 20w-50 resembles the guidelines long common (mapping viscosity to temperature ranges), the American manual has a useless graph just showing 0w-20 magically works at every temperature.

Critically, the international manual also highlights that many different viscosities can be used quite satisfactorily: 5w-30, 10w-40, 15w-40, 20w-50.

In other words, the international manual shows that viscosity is a tradeoff and that the engine can accept a fairly wide viscosity range. This is true and valid.

The American manual suggest there is no tradeoff, that there's no possible benefit to thicker oils or thinner oils; nope, 0w-20 is just the magic viscosity that works everywhere equally perfectly for all people all the time.


If anyone knows the basics of engines and has seen manuals older than the last 20 years, he knows the American manual is pure government reg baloney. The physics of tribology haven't changed just because the EPA is mandating higher MPG.

It's right out of the EPA's extor--I mean "guidance" on the subject from 2021. Note they give additional allowance for even thinner oils for low temperatures, and nothing for the other end of the spectrum

 

[TijY_]

First and last sentence says it all.
Haven't seen that in writing before, but makes more sense now.

 

[CleanSump]

Looking from the EPA's point of view, the companies would be cheating if their projected Fleet Fuel Economy was based on a special oil and then they turned around and told consumers to use something else that couldn't meet the projections.
Yes, the EPA is forcing higher Fleet MPG, but is not telling the manufacturers they have to use a thinner oil to get there. It's telling them they have to recommended the oil used to get the Fleet MPG test projection.

 

[kschachn]

First and last sentence says it all.
Haven't seen that in writing before, but makes more sense now.

Another good source of interest is one of the EPA award letters that’s been posted here before. It also gives good insight into what the manufacturer must do in regards to the specific oil that was used for testing.

 

[gigijane 0128]

No it DOES NOT state that in the 2025 Corolla or Camry owner's manual! Its clearly states to use 0W-8 but it not available you can use 0W-16, but you "must" change back to 0W-8 in the next oil change. READ the manual, please!

And the next recommend oil change is 10,000 miles? So...how bad can it be.

 

[Hohn]

Looking from the EPA's point of view, the companies would be cheating if their projected Fleet Fuel Economy was based on a special oil and then they turned around and told consumers to use something else that couldn't meet the projections.
Yes, the EPA is forcing higher Fleet MPG, but is not telling the manufacturers they have to use a thinner oil to get there. It's telling them they have to recommended the oil used to get the Fleet MPG test projection.

This is true. But if you Pareto out the levers available to improve fuel economy, thinner oil is far enough tot he left (and cheap enough to do) that it always makes the cut.

So while your point is technically true, it's a distinction without a difference. If an action you required has a predictable outcome-- so predictable that you must publish an order to countermand that predictable outcome-- then you have effectively mandated that outcome.

 

[TijY_]

Looking from the EPA's point of view, the companies would be cheating if their projected Fleet Fuel Economy was based on a special oil and then they turned around and told consumers to use something else that couldn't meet the projections.
It's telling them they have to recommended the oil used to get the Fleet MPG test projection.

That is not the issue IMO.
They are indirectly telling consumers that any other oil is not possible to use.
If you only specify one viscosity/oil in the book, it is in practice no longer a recommendation.
Especially if you tell them that you MUST change back to 0WX at next oil change. That wording does not exist anywhere else.

Just tell the consumer the truth like the ROW does. "Recommended" is for best fuel economy.

 

[GW.]

Also explains the loss of viscosity charts and severe service grade alternatives.

 

[tolian21]

Another words its ok to use thicker viscosity….

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Up North, Winter will do that for you, naturally.

 

[CleanSump]

That is not the issue IMO.
They are indirectly telling consumers that any other oil is not possible to use.
If you only specify one viscosity/oil in the book, it is in practice no longer a recommendation.
Especially if you tell them that you MUST change back to 0WX at next oil change. That wording does not exist anywhere else.

View attachment 310139
View attachment 310138

Just tell the consumer the truth like the ROW does. "Recommended" is for best fuel economy.

Exactly what I said. If you test with x oil, the manual has to say x oil.

 

[TijY_]

Exactly what I said. If you test with x oil, the manual has to say x oil. (ONLY)

Kind of. I am just trying to use precise language.
Your statement would be true for Europe as well.
Lowest viscosity is (almost) always recommended in the book. Add an only at the end and you get the EPA compliant version.

We pay tax on lowest possible emissions (tested on the recommended viscosity).

 

[kschachn]

Kind of.
But your statement would be true for Europe aswell.
Lowest viscosity is (almost) always recommended in the book. Add an only at the end and you get the EPA compliant version.

We pay tax on lowest possible emissions, still have thicker oils in the book.

Yes UK and EU rules are based on CO2 emissions, right? Not specific fuel consumption.

 

[TijY_]

Yes UK and EU rules are based on CO2 emissions, right? Not specific fuel consumption.

They go hand in hand, do they not?

 

[kschachn]

They go hand in hand, do they not?

CO2 would, but it’s just not how it’s regulated in the US. I was actually wondering if there was a NOx component to your rules as well.

 

[TijY_]

CO2 would, but it’s just not how it’s regulated in the US. I was actually wondering if there was a NOx component to your rules as well.

For EURO 5/6/7 yeah they have lots of components to comply with yeah. The consumer still get to chose the oil though.

And consumer road tax is still by CO2/g in most cases.

 

[altaylar]

Yes UK and EU rules are based on CO2 emissions, right? Not specific fuel consumption.

Or engine displacement

 

[TijY_]

Or engine displacement

Yes you pay tax by the regulations that were active when the vehicle was first sold/registered.
So older cars are by engine size and weight in some cases.

https://www.acea.auto/files/CO2-based_motor_vehicle_taxes_European_Union_2020.pdf

The EURO 5/6/7 emission compliance ends at the manufacturer though. As long as you pass the exhaust emissions test you are free to choose whatever oil.

 

[altaylar]

Yes you pay tax by the regulations that were active when the vehicle was first sold/registered.
So older cars are by engine size and weight in some cases.

https://www.acea.auto/files/CO2-based_motor_vehicle_taxes_European_Union_2020.pdf

The EURO 5/6/7 emission compliance ends at the manufacturer though. As long as you pass the exhaust emissions test you are free to choose whatever oil.

Yeah i think majority of EU countries based their taxation on displacement in the past, then many moved it to horsepower and then CO2 emission. But still at least some countries base their taxes fully/partially on displacement even on new cars, including Germany.

 

[wemay]

Toyota's spending a lot of money lately, don't give them an opportunity to save some off your back, if you have an engine issue and get a Service Writer with 'directives'.

With that aside, there is nothing wrong with 0W-16, 0W-20 or Xw-30 in that engine.