I know from looking at oil analysis that the Toyota 4.7 V8 is very easy on oil. What is the "best" engine when it comes to its effect on oil. Also could you assume that a engine that is very easy on oil is also a better engine and will last longer than a engine that is hard on oil?
What engine is easiest on oil?
- Thread starter Pitbull
- Start date
- Status
Yes I would say so. However the measure of "easy hard" is subject to interpretation. Another engine that is seemingly easy on oil is a 4 cylinder Honda.
The Japanese have also disguised some sludge monsters in their line ups, so one has to pick and chose and hopefully stay away from these.
The Japanese have also disguised some sludge monsters in their line ups, so one has to pick and chose and hopefully stay away from these.
LarryL, interesting observations. If I had to get a vehicle based on power plant, then for sure something with the V8 Toyota engine, Lexus line included. They do suffer in fuel mileage a tad due to DOHC configuration, but the engine has proven itself to be a stellar performer.
Oh gosh no! The DIC (drivers information center) has a host of onboard computer performance functions. One of them is the oils useful life remaining protocol. So for sure I triangulate the information. The conditions and the way I drive indicate between 14-14.5k OCI's
In my opinion, and based on my own experience, and listening to others, the Jeep 4.0 will run, and run well forever, on any kind of oil. It's certainly the least fussy, low-maintenence engine I've ever owned.
It would have to either be the Lexus V8's or the Toyota V8's. Their is not any oil that meets the minimum spec that does nto do well in these engine.My second choice would be DC's 4.7V8 as long as they are not leaking coolant they generate very low wear numbers and do not sheer the oil hardly at all. My third choice would the Buick 3.8 so long as you can keep it from leaking coolant into the oil they are easy on oil.
Top three I would say.
1. The GM 3800
2. Any of the Cummins/Dodge pick up engines
3. the new Toyota V8's
1. The GM 3800
2. Any of the Cummins/Dodge pick up engines
3. the new Toyota V8's
Sure about the first one? Doesn't it have a timing chain? GM has also never recommended 5W-30 oil for it over 50 deg F.
Patman
Staff member
Any of the BMW, Mercedes or Jaguar engines out there with huge oil capacities (8 quarts or more) are also easy on the oil, which is why they can specify such long drain intervals.
It's the first two letters before the 3800 that would scare me off
y-p-w - Sure about the first one? Doesn't it have a timing chain? GM has also never recommended 5W-30 oil for it over 50 deg F.
Gee, I had a `90 Buick Park Avenue with a 3800 V6, I would have sworn they recommended 5w30 the year around at all temps.
Gee, I had a `90 Buick Park Avenue with a 3800 V6, I would have sworn they recommended 5w30 the year around at all temps.
You can not get a vechile new with this engine but one of the all time greatest engines is the Dodge Slant Six!!! SO long as they had oil in them you could easily get 300,000-500,000 miles out of them!!
Another great I6 is the 3.0 I6 used buy Toyota especialy in non-turbo trim!! They too will last almost forever in a lot of cases. The smaller I6's they had were great as well!
The Ford I6 used for years in the F150 was a great engine. If they still had that engine available I would consider one in a heart beat! The Ford Falcon in Austrailia still uses an I6! I wish Ford would bring the Falcon to the USA!
The Toyota 22RE was a beast they were about like a Timex "Takes a liken and keeps on ticking!!".
The Buick 350's were great engines and so were the Olds Rocket engine!
The Mopar 340TA was a beast and would take anyting you threw at it.
The 5.9 Cummins is a beast and is easily good in 600,000 miles in light duty use if you take care of them!!!
The automotive landscape is littered with great engine designs. The problem as I see it is that most companys tend to toss away designs with great durability for designs that are marginal at best! The worst part is that they have the nerve to call it progress! It is not just the domestics either! Toyota has done away with every I6 they have ever used in the USA. The IS300 was the last vechile to get the I6 and it will soon be replaced by a higher output V6.
The Toyota 2.7I4 that replaced the 22RE was a good design but it was not an evolution of the 22RE at all. Now after a relatively short run this engine is being replaced by a different 2.7 I4 of yet another completely different design. You can tell that it was yanked out of another platform because the engine is configured for transvers mounting and they just turned it 90° to work in the pickup.Never mind the 2.7I4 from 1995 was basicly a great engine.
To me it seems like good designs should be evolved and built upon not tossed aside and replaced with a completely new design. A prime example is the BUick 3.8V6. It has so much going for it that it seems stupid to start from scratch with another engine design. Instead of designing the high content line of engines from scratch it seems like they should of just evolved the the Buick 3.8! The bottom end on these motors is solid and almost bullet proof. They could have easily given it a set of OHC or DOHC heads and a tricked out intake. If they really wanted to spend money wisely they would have designed a replacement for the POS 2.8,3.1,3.4,3.5 V6. That would have benifitted them much more IMHO!
Ford should have left the 300 I6 alone as the base engine. They should have spent some money on their V6 engines so that the Ranger,Explorer and Mustang could have a refined powerful V6 instead of the tired old Colgne V6! They might also have a decent V6 for the 500 instead of that lack luster V6 that sits in it right now. They would ahve been wise to spend some money on the interior of the Taurus seeing how it is one of the best vechiles they ever made. The Ranger should also have gotten a make over!
Then you have Volvo the old Red BLock engines were the stuff of legends and what do they do? They get rid of them!!
Another great I6 is the 3.0 I6 used buy Toyota especialy in non-turbo trim!! They too will last almost forever in a lot of cases. The smaller I6's they had were great as well!
The Ford I6 used for years in the F150 was a great engine. If they still had that engine available I would consider one in a heart beat! The Ford Falcon in Austrailia still uses an I6! I wish Ford would bring the Falcon to the USA!
The Toyota 22RE was a beast they were about like a Timex "Takes a liken and keeps on ticking!!".
The Buick 350's were great engines and so were the Olds Rocket engine!
The Mopar 340TA was a beast and would take anyting you threw at it.
The 5.9 Cummins is a beast and is easily good in 600,000 miles in light duty use if you take care of them!!!
The automotive landscape is littered with great engine designs. The problem as I see it is that most companys tend to toss away designs with great durability for designs that are marginal at best! The worst part is that they have the nerve to call it progress! It is not just the domestics either! Toyota has done away with every I6 they have ever used in the USA. The IS300 was the last vechile to get the I6 and it will soon be replaced by a higher output V6.
The Toyota 2.7I4 that replaced the 22RE was a good design but it was not an evolution of the 22RE at all. Now after a relatively short run this engine is being replaced by a different 2.7 I4 of yet another completely different design. You can tell that it was yanked out of another platform because the engine is configured for transvers mounting and they just turned it 90° to work in the pickup.Never mind the 2.7I4 from 1995 was basicly a great engine.
To me it seems like good designs should be evolved and built upon not tossed aside and replaced with a completely new design. A prime example is the BUick 3.8V6. It has so much going for it that it seems stupid to start from scratch with another engine design. Instead of designing the high content line of engines from scratch it seems like they should of just evolved the the Buick 3.8! The bottom end on these motors is solid and almost bullet proof. They could have easily given it a set of OHC or DOHC heads and a tricked out intake. If they really wanted to spend money wisely they would have designed a replacement for the POS 2.8,3.1,3.4,3.5 V6. That would have benifitted them much more IMHO!
Ford should have left the 300 I6 alone as the base engine. They should have spent some money on their V6 engines so that the Ranger,Explorer and Mustang could have a refined powerful V6 instead of the tired old Colgne V6! They might also have a decent V6 for the 500 instead of that lack luster V6 that sits in it right now. They would ahve been wise to spend some money on the interior of the Taurus seeing how it is one of the best vechiles they ever made. The Ranger should also have gotten a make over!
Then you have Volvo the old Red BLock engines were the stuff of legends and what do they do? They get rid of them!!
Have not done a UOA on the Festiva yet, but it's engine is known for going to 300k and beyond. Incredible for such an s-box... Japanese Mazda built B3.
Since, the Buick 3800 is used in the Sequence testing, it must be one of the easiest on oil. I have a 3800 Series II.
It is a good engine, but I don't think being easy on oil is a good predictor of engine quality or longevity. This just isn't proven.
Pushrod engines that get good fuel economy are generally easy on oil, but beyong that it proves nothing.
People get very long life out of some turbocharged engines that aren't easy on oil.
The Ford modular V-8's haven't seemed to be too hard on oil either. No V-8 can run too much of an extended drain, just for the fact more fuel is consumed and will affect the oil life. Fuel consumption is part of the model in some oil life monitors.
You never know when a manufacturer may tweak the emission system more agressively either and that can be a factor also. Maybe Chevy has done this to the Avalanche, which ordinarily wasn't too hard on the oil for a V-8.
[ May 08, 2005, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: haley10 ]
It is a good engine, but I don't think being easy on oil is a good predictor of engine quality or longevity. This just isn't proven.
Pushrod engines that get good fuel economy are generally easy on oil, but beyong that it proves nothing.
People get very long life out of some turbocharged engines that aren't easy on oil.
The Ford modular V-8's haven't seemed to be too hard on oil either. No V-8 can run too much of an extended drain, just for the fact more fuel is consumed and will affect the oil life. Fuel consumption is part of the model in some oil life monitors.
You never know when a manufacturer may tweak the emission system more agressively either and that can be a factor also. Maybe Chevy has done this to the Avalanche, which ordinarily wasn't too hard on the oil for a V-8.
[ May 08, 2005, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: haley10 ]
Generally speaking and as Patman said, I too look for big oil capacity for any engine. That way the burden is spead out or diluted.
Harder to find is whether the anticipated duty cycle for the engine includes heavy duty service, in which case I would expect it to be relatively easy on the oil.
Some engines can be upgraded to be "easier on oil". Check out this month's Motor Trend. They interviewed Bob Lutz on the SBC. At one time he ran Opel. He tried using base SBCs in a new executive car for the European market. The engines kept failing in usage (high speed) testing. They finally upgraded the oiling system, among other things, to include large capacity, a cooler, and a finned oil pan. They ended up with the then racing version of the engine.
The other interesting note from that article was that the US guys told Lutz his customers were crazy to drive over 70 mph anyway, as "it is dangerous" so obviously the original SBC wasn't designed to sustain high power output. That thinking kinda factors into the xw-20 debate if you know what I mean.
The 3800 is a low pressure engine like the Rover V-8 (my current engine), both of which have similar roots. For the turbo Grand National engine for example, the min oil pressure at 4000 rpm is just 24 psi, and 6 psi at 1000 rpm. The low pressure might have something to do with it being easy on oil.
Hence the 10w-30 oil spec. The engine needs to pump higher viscosity oil at low pressure, but does it at large volumes (no shearing please as thinner oil flows off the bearings faster). My Land Rover dealer puts 20w-50 in Rover engines, which continues with a similar oil pump and block design.
Harder to find is whether the anticipated duty cycle for the engine includes heavy duty service, in which case I would expect it to be relatively easy on the oil.
Some engines can be upgraded to be "easier on oil". Check out this month's Motor Trend. They interviewed Bob Lutz on the SBC. At one time he ran Opel. He tried using base SBCs in a new executive car for the European market. The engines kept failing in usage (high speed) testing. They finally upgraded the oiling system, among other things, to include large capacity, a cooler, and a finned oil pan. They ended up with the then racing version of the engine.
The other interesting note from that article was that the US guys told Lutz his customers were crazy to drive over 70 mph anyway, as "it is dangerous" so obviously the original SBC wasn't designed to sustain high power output. That thinking kinda factors into the xw-20 debate if you know what I mean.
The 3800 is a low pressure engine like the Rover V-8 (my current engine), both of which have similar roots. For the turbo Grand National engine for example, the min oil pressure at 4000 rpm is just 24 psi, and 6 psi at 1000 rpm. The low pressure might have something to do with it being easy on oil.
Hence the 10w-30 oil spec. The engine needs to pump higher viscosity oil at low pressure, but does it at large volumes (no shearing please as thinner oil flows off the bearings faster). My Land Rover dealer puts 20w-50 in Rover engines, which continues with a similar oil pump and block design.
Perhaps I should through this one into the mix as well; V8 Chevrolet Z06 engine (pushrod). It has 68,000 miles and I have been doing 15,000 mile OCI's with Mobil One 5w30. From the way it feels and acts and looks now, 250,000 miles appears to be a slam dunk.
- Status
Similar threads
