What if "low tension ring" theory is all wrong?

[Jetronic]

Not when your API oils exceed the IIIH test by 20x.

If there's oils exceeding the test minimum by 20x, the minimum should be raised, a lot!

 

[Jetronic]

Dealer bulk oil is not Mobil 1 Extended Performance, Castrol EDGE Extended Performance, PUP or Valvoline Restore and Protect.

It was Total quartz 9000 5w-40,; Castrol magnatec OE 5W-40, Total quartz ineo mdc 5w-30 at the 2 dealerships I worked for.

 

[Jetronic]

Does the winter rating play a role here when talking about thicker? I.e. would a hypothetical 10w-50 do the same in this application?

It plays a role in the sense that on average a 10W-50 will have less HTHS viscosity, and more VI content than a 20W-50.

 

[Jetronic]

Thanks for the read! Very interesting info.

It reminded me to tell next time the guys that always run top tier fuel that their intake valves get dirty not because the low tier fuel burns dirtier than top tier, but because EGR gases pass trough (and there is certain amount of oil in them) them regardless of port or direct injection.
I'll mention that in the top tier fuel threads later this week.

German cars (mostly turbo) that run thick Euro oil get stuck piston rings and burn oil regardless of the better quality oil. What about that?

But quite a few engines don't have EGR valves. The oil vapours are more likely to come from the PCV anyway, or coming down the valve stem, or just flung into the combustion chamber from the piston wall, when the piston rises and the valves are still open.

 

[Hohn]

Does the winter rating play a role here when talking about thicker? I.e. would a hypothetical 10w-50 do the same in this application?

Not really, not unless that winter rating translates into gobs of vii and epic HTHS loss.

 

[Hohn]

100% agree. Well said.

I feel as the premise of this thread points to an overwhelming contradiction/incompatibility of things....., requirements, lube, fuel, design, driving style etc. The sum of which is not good for the consumer, and by and large, counter productive to the "efficiency" goals.

My primary gripe is that the thin oil efficiency advantage doesn’t exist in the real world. The 1-2% disappears in a world of drive through and sit in your car idling to goof off on your phone.

So we’re doing a net harm to the environment and making cars less durable.

 

[Bailes1992]

I'd be interested in the science behind sulphated ash vs long term engine wear. I.e. is the risk to emissions equipment really outweighed by the additional wear caused by low SAPS oils? if there is additional wear caused at all?

 

[burbguy82]

My primary gripe is that the thin oil efficiency advantage doesn’t exist in the real world. The 1-2% disappears in a world of drive through and sit in your car idling to goof off on your phone.

So we’re doing a net harm to the environment and making cars less durable.

Agreed. The 1-2% is not worth the headache. Juice not worth the squeeze. One factor that should have input is the cost of repair and replacement. Cost is an inefficiency. Folks have to use energy and produce work to make money to fix these dumb problems.....Ill bet that if that factor was input, the"fact" would be much harder to defend

 

[Mechanician]

My primary gripe is that the thin oil efficiency advantage doesn’t exist in the real world. The 1-2% disappears in a world of drive through and sit in your car idling to goof off on your phone.

So we’re doing a net harm to the environment and making cars less durable.

How does the oil break down / oxidation theory of thinner oils, line up with a general lack of cylinder wear observed?
The (many) engines that I installed new rings on, most had 80-90K miles - some over 100K, the cylinders still showed the factory cross hatch.
And many people here, have reported fixing their oil consumption by chemical means - no new parts were installed. No worn parts needed replacement.
How does oil break down occur with no real wear?

 

[buster]

How does the oil break down / oxidation theory of thinner oils, line up with a general lack of cylinder wear observed?
The (many) engines that I installed new rings on, most had 80-90K miles - some over 100K, the cylinders still showed the factory cross hatch.
And many people here, have reported fixing their oil consumption by chemical means - no new parts were installed. No worn parts needed replacement.
How does oil break down occur with no real wear?

You can have good wear control despite oxidation.

 

[buster]

If there's oils exceeding the test minimum by 20x, the minimum should be raised, a lot!

It's actually considered one of the most stringent oil tests - 305F oil temps for 90 hours.

 

[Hohn]

I'd be interested in the science behind sulphated ash vs long term engine wear. I.e. is the risk to emissions equipment really outweighed by the additional wear caused by low SAPS oils? if there is additional wear caused at all?

My opinion:
The wear attributable to low vs mid vs full SAPS is really dependent on duty cycle and OCI. SAPS pay off in boundary conditions where you don't have full EHD films established. So if you have a lot start/stop, lots of transients from low idle to high load, etc.

Once the engine is up and running and you have all the films in place, the 800ppm Phosphorus limit of API SP/SQ is going to perform about identically so any higher 1000-1100ppm levels (like in Mobil 1 15w-50).

Higher SAPS will also give higher detergency so reducing it means shorter OCIs needed to maintain cleanliness.

I think it's perfectly consistent with the ethos of modern auto regulation that nobody writing the rules really cares if preserving the downstream catalysts destroyed the engine. That's a price they're willing for you to pay.

 

[Hohn]

How does the oil break down / oxidation theory of thinner oils, line up with a general lack of cylinder wear observed?
The (many) engines that I installed new rings on, most had 80-90K miles - some over 100K, the cylinders still showed the factory cross hatch.
And many people here, have reported fixing their oil consumption by chemical means - no new parts were installed. No worn parts needed replacement.
How does oil break down occur with no real wear?

You can have good wear control despite oxidation.

Indeed, they aren't necessarily the same thing until the oxidation has progressed pretty far. Eventually, those glazed rings WILL cause wear. But sometimes you just get crud stuck in there without it being severe enough to generate a ton of wear.



My own odyssey van is likely an example of that. The Valvoline Restore and Protect is almost certainly cleaning rings as much as its cleaned the overhead. However, the van has no evidence of any oil consumption or major wear that I can detect.

 

[Mechanician]

Indeed, they aren't necessarily the same thing until the oxidation has progressed pretty far. Eventually, those glazed rings WILL cause wear. But sometimes you just get crud stuck in there without it being severe enough to generate a ton of wear.



My own odyssey van is likely an example of that. The Valvoline Restore and Protect is almost certainly cleaning rings as much as its cleaned the overhead. However, the van has no evidence of any oil consumption or major wear that I can detect.

More followup questions:
Do you believe the carbon/crud is a byproduct of the oxidized oil?

Is the glaze you're referring to the carbon? How does it cause wear?

 

[Sacredheals]

Thanks for sharing. Oxidation is a big deal and should be carefully monitored via a used oil analysis.

If you're using a lower viscosity oil it's important to choose wisely. You want strong oxidation resistance, stout detergent levels and solvency.

VII quantity and type may play a role too. With so many people using dealer bulk 0w20's it should be no surprise that rings will eventually stick at some point. Especially TGMO.

View attachment 305197

Why would TGMO specifically?

 

[OVERKILL]

Not when your API oils exceed the IIIH test by 20x.

But that doesn't change the minimum standard... that it's 20x better than, lol

 

[OVERKILL]

Thanks for the read! Very interesting info.

It reminded me to tell next time the guys that always run top tier fuel that their intake valves get dirty not because the low tier fuel burns dirtier than top tier, but because EGR gases pass trough (and there is certain amount of oil in them) them regardless of port or direct injection.

Intake valves generally stay clean on port injected applications, regardless of EGR or PCV, because the fuel is bathing the back of the valve, keeping it clean. This is what DI lacks, which is why, when DI was implemented, we saw the emergence of wallnut blasting the intake valves, something we didn't have to do with port injected applications.

I'll mention that in the top tier fuel threads later this week.

I can't wait.

German cars (mostly turbo) that run thick Euro oil get stuck piston rings and burn oil regardless of the better quality oil. What about that?

Some German cars (specific Audi engines for example) were victims of poor design decisions, just like certain Toyota engines, that resulted in ring sticking and oil consumption. While higher quality oils might delay the inevitable, these applications are predisposed to these issues, so unless you have a product that's able to clean faster than the deposits accumulate (and actually flow through the region, removing the existing contaminants, which, on some of these designs, they can't), you are going to succumb to them eventually.

You can't fix a mechanical defect with lubricant selection.

 

[OVERKILL]

Why would TGMO specifically?

I assume because it's VII city.

 

[travis8352]

It's actually considered one of the most stringent oil tests - 305F oil temps for 90 hours.

GF-7 is increasing the piston deposit standard to for the IIIH test from 4.2 with GF-6 to 4.6. It was 3.7 for GF-5. I thought I read that the viscosity increase limit was moving to 75% from 100% but I cannot find that anymore

 

[Tom NJ]

It's unfortunate that we guinea pig consumers are the ones who pay for these questionable improvements. Engineering isn't cheap.

One wonders if the end user recoups sufficient individual fuel savings to compensate - including ongoing maintenance and repair costs.

In my case, a 2% improvement in fuel economy translates to $1.65/month. A little extra viscosity is cheap insurance.