One thing that has really struck me about the Conoco/Motorcraft 5w20 is the excellent UOAs this oil continues to post in a wide variety of engines and driving conditions. And yet when we look at what UOAs and VOAs tell us about this oil, it seems to be quite unremarkable in terms of the additives—at least the ones that are revealed by the typical oil analysis. Most other 5w20s show high levels of moly and boron, and overbase or near overbase levels of calcium. From what we know of these additives it's reasonable to expect good wear numbers from such oils. But the Conoco/Motorcraft 5w20 shows none of these additives, relatively normal levels of calcium, and near GF-4 levels of ZDDP. How, then, is this oil able to delivers such outstanding wear numbers? What could be in it that isn't showing up in the UOAs and VOAs? Antimony, as in Schaeffers? What do you think? Let's speculate with some educated guesses.
What makes Motorcraft 5w20 so darn good? Molakule?
- Thread starter G-MAN
- Start date
- Status
I don't know about the GT-40, but the lightning and the Mustang cobra use the Motorcraft 5w20. If ford thinks a 4.6 supercharged v-8 with almost 400 HP at the crank (they are underrated) that will no doubt be beat on can can hold up with this oil they must be pretty confident! I know my mothers escape that went almost 6 months with many short trips had an excellent uoa with Motorcraft 5w20. I am running Schaeffer's 5w30 in my 03 5.4 F-250, after a couple of UOA's I may switch to the Motorcraft for comparison.
MolaKule
Staff member
The UOA's do show some boron, but with the the special boron/tin ester adds, you don't need a lot of boron, or tin for that matter.
As I stated earlier, the majority base oils are GII, II+. The GIII is used for increased thermal and viscosity stabilization at low levels, about 15% max.
Kinda like Schaeffer's using PAO to stabilize their GI,II's.
As I stated earlier, the majority base oils are GII, II+. The GIII is used for increased thermal and viscosity stabilization at low levels, about 15% max.
Kinda like Schaeffer's using PAO to stabilize their GI,II's.
Is the boron/tin ester additives what makes the TBN reserve better ? I see these Motorcraft oils with 5k miles and high TBN still ?
Also , haven't they always used the ZDTP type zinc instead of ZDDP ?
Also , haven't they always used the ZDTP type zinc instead of ZDDP ?
Only 15% Group III in the 5w20?
Would you consider Conoco's approach to building a 5w20 superior to other companies, like Pennzoil, for example, where the Group III content approaches 50% and the boron levels are higher and moly is used?
MolaKule
Staff member
As stated earlier, the right base oil /add combination makes one oil show better results than another.
As far as the zinc/phosphate AW/antioxidant adds, there are approx. three versions of ZDDP that can be used, and some oils use two or more of these versions, often denoted by ZDDP A and ZDDP B.
As far as the zinc/phosphate AW/antioxidant adds, there are approx. three versions of ZDDP that can be used, and some oils use two or more of these versions, often denoted by ZDDP A and ZDDP B.
This is a good topic. I've been extremely impressed with MC oils, especially the 5w-20's we've seen. My father in-law just bought a new F-150 Lariat that comes with 2yrs worth of free oil changes. I'd actually consider using the MC oil deal through Ford, especially after seeing how well it does up to 5k miles.
I will give that!!! Out of all of the 20Wt oils the Motorcraft is the most consistent! They have also turned in some good UOA.
I think the answer may lie in an out of the box thought - it might very well be explained by the nature of the vehicle it is used in. Didn't Ford first go to this oil vis for trucks, and aren't the majority of Ford vehicles sold in the time Moto 5w20 has been around light-trucks and SUVs? My thought line is that these are vehicles are generally not run at high RPM, often have trailering packages with better radiators, external oil coolers, even auto tranny coolers? So the thermal stress load is less. They are often used for all-day driving, so the miles racked up are often where the least wear occurs - highway miles.
Point is, UOA's not indexed to a specific vehicle may be misleading. If the UOA's referred to in this posts refer to numerous before and after analyses on the same vehicle - if they are just the aggregate random UOA's, then the usage aspect is a variable that has to be considered (at least to me).
By contrast, what if you had a "Tale of Two engines". One is an Expedition using a 5.4L Triton, where the owner drives 35 miles to work, getting on a 4-lane within a mile of his house, and with no stops between his home and his parking space. He uses a quality minoil - let's say Pennzoil with Pure Base.
Now, along comes me. I am driving a Honda S2000 with a high strung I-4 with a 9000 RPM redline. It is also a 35 mile commute, but the first 5 miles are all stop and go, and then I run 30 miles on a 2-lane with lots of twisties, and boy do I love cracking off 9k shifts! The car is spinning 4k RPM at 70 mph cruise. I use Red Line 10w30.
So we perform UOA's of both after 5000 miles,and lo and behold, the Pennzoil shows low iron content, stable vis, etc. "My" oil shows higher wear rates.
We come along and see a table of results and declare that Pennzoil PB is "better" than RL?
Point is, UOA's not indexed to a specific vehicle may be misleading. If the UOA's referred to in this posts refer to numerous before and after analyses on the same vehicle - if they are just the aggregate random UOA's, then the usage aspect is a variable that has to be considered (at least to me).
By contrast, what if you had a "Tale of Two engines". One is an Expedition using a 5.4L Triton, where the owner drives 35 miles to work, getting on a 4-lane within a mile of his house, and with no stops between his home and his parking space. He uses a quality minoil - let's say Pennzoil with Pure Base.
Now, along comes me. I am driving a Honda S2000 with a high strung I-4 with a 9000 RPM redline. It is also a 35 mile commute, but the first 5 miles are all stop and go, and then I run 30 miles on a 2-lane with lots of twisties, and boy do I love cracking off 9k shifts! The car is spinning 4k RPM at 70 mph cruise. I use Red Line 10w30.
So we perform UOA's of both after 5000 miles,and lo and behold, the Pennzoil shows low iron content, stable vis, etc. "My" oil shows higher wear rates.
We come along and see a table of results and declare that Pennzoil PB is "better" than RL?
Road Rage,
I hear where you're coming from, and that's why up until now I've taken a "wait and see" attitude with 5w20. But when it comes to Motorcraft 5w20, we've got UOAs in everthing from 4cyl Focuses to V-10 F-350s. And all of these UOAs are remarkably good.
And Ford didn't first introduce this oil in trucks. With the exception of certain engines, it was introduced across the board in 2001.
[ March 05, 2004, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: G-Man II ]
I hear where you're coming from, and that's why up until now I've taken a "wait and see" attitude with 5w20. But when it comes to Motorcraft 5w20, we've got UOAs in everthing from 4cyl Focuses to V-10 F-350s. And all of these UOAs are remarkably good.
And Ford didn't first introduce this oil in trucks. With the exception of certain engines, it was introduced across the board in 2001.
[ March 05, 2004, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: G-Man II ]
Thank you for your wonderful "educated" contribution to the discussion.
Why don't you answer your own questions and enlighten us. Is Ford shipping the GT-40 with 5w20? If not, what oil is coming in it? (As for your second question, everyone knows the answer is no, and it would be no even if Ford shipped it with 10w30.)
Yep, Motorcraft seems to do pretty good, doesn't it.
Our local Pennzoil quick lube had to start stocking it by popular demand.
This must be coming from some general pretty good experience from users.
Looks to have poor chemistry just like Valvoline.
Seriously, we must be missing something here.
This must be coming from some general pretty good experience from users.
Looks to have poor chemistry just like Valvoline.
Seriously, we must be missing something here.
MolaKule
Staff member
These "non-synth" or non-semisynth" oils do show pretty good wear numbers for a low viscosity, non-descript oil.
Possibly another sleeper?
The Conoco refinery just happens to be about 1 hour south of me and have been there many times to pick up blending stock. In fact, some were still hot on the dock!
Anyway, Conoco uses a good group II and group II+ oils with the special boron/tin ester adds and sulfurized polybutylene copolymers. Their VI is a multifunctional dispersant/VII/friction modifier.
Possibly another sleeper?
The Conoco refinery just happens to be about 1 hour south of me and have been there many times to pick up blending stock. In fact, some were still hot on the dock!
Anyway, Conoco uses a good group II and group II+ oils with the special boron/tin ester adds and sulfurized polybutylene copolymers. Their VI is a multifunctional dispersant/VII/friction modifier.
Does not a 5w20 have less of a viscosity spread than a comparible 5w30? Could this have something to do with the great uoa results?
Along the lines of what Road Rage mentioned, if a 5w20 is more shear stability than a 5w30, and the engines they are primarily spec'd in (low redline engines compared to a honda for example), then a 5w20 would, throughout it's cycle, offer more consistent vicsosity and therefore less wear and more protection than a less shear stable 5w30. But even if a 5w30 were to shear down, it'd still be more viscous than a non sheared 5w20, would it not? Perhaps I am thinking about this the wrong way.
Along the lines of what Road Rage mentioned, if a 5w20 is more shear stability than a 5w30, and the engines they are primarily spec'd in (low redline engines compared to a honda for example), then a 5w20 would, throughout it's cycle, offer more consistent vicsosity and therefore less wear and more protection than a less shear stable 5w30. But even if a 5w30 were to shear down, it'd still be more viscous than a non sheared 5w20, would it not? Perhaps I am thinking about this the wrong way.
MolaKule
Staff member
The specs on some of the newer GII and GII+ fluids are very impressive wrt thermal and oxidative stability. Todays GII, II+ oils are not what went into your grandfather's Oldsmobiles.
Also, we have some new non-metallic organic polymer esters on the market that are themselves antiwear boosters and stabilizers, and it is highly likely that Conoco is using them as well. These esters will not show up in a standard oil analysis.
For a 10W40 mineral oil, and at ZDDP levels of 800 to 500 ppm, 10 % of these 34 cSt esters reduced wear in the VW Cam and tappet test by almost 30%.
Ford now specifies 5W-50 for the Mustang GT and GT500 in the US. I believe Ford allows the use of a synthetic 5W-30 for the EcoBoost engines (F-150, SHO, Escape) not unlike GM with the GM4718M specification. However, I've been saying all along that Ford's modular engines were designed to be used with 5W-50, as Ford Australia's engines generally use synthetic 5W-50 and they're of the same oiling design as the US modular engines back in the day (2002-present).
- Status
Similar threads
