WHAT OIL SHOULD I USE?

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: scoobie
How come you always throw a wet blanket over all of my newly discovered revelations: I really enjoy finding out all these new things about motor oil from the experts on the internets, and Dr. Haas says that you should try the oil out, and decide for yourself, after careful study of the published properties, and review of the literature.


Because your revelations seem to be only a partial understanding and then you go off on a posting rampage posting only half-factual information and doing so as though the information is completely correct.

Calling engine designers idiots based on ONE PERSON'S theories and observations is ludicrous, and flies in the face of decades of research, design and testing performed by the manufactures of the engines in question.

I am not coming down on Dr. Haas's information; far from it. He has done his studies and conducted his testing and has observed certain results based on this (limited) testing that shows that under MODERATE driving conditions, in SOME engines, that a thinner oil SEEMS to (in the short-term thus far) yield better results than the factory-recommended oil. I do not believe he has done any actual tear-down testing/validation.

Ford's switch in the modular family to the 5w20 weight very much supports part of his theory.

On the other hand, Ford NOT back-spec'ing certain engine families to the 20-weight should be noted, as it was obviously done for a reason, and the engineer(s) that made that decision/recommendation were doing so based on data that none of us have access to, but likely cover a large sample of engines tested in a manner that showed an anomaly with the thinner oil, thus preventing them from recommending it for that application.

As with everything you read and learn, the absorption of the information is only part of the equation. Understanding, and then determining application and HOW the application of the data is applied are equally as important as the information itself. Regurgitating data without fully understanding simply does a disservice to you and the people you present it to.

There are a couple of Tribiologists on this board; MolaKule and Terry Dyson. Do you think that, being experts in their field that they always agree with each other? How about always agreeing with Dr. Haas?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Originally Posted By: scoobie
No, I actually believe the engineers are exceptionally clever. But the recommendation for motor oil is mainly a marketing ploy.
We're told that all of the North American recommendations for 5w20 oil, when you go to England or Europe, of Japan, or anywhere other than North America, these exact same engines call for 5w30 or 10w30 or even 10w40. This is because in Europe, the marketing strategy is to fool the consumer in thinking that if the engine needs a "heavy oil", then this must be a "heavy duty engine", and if it only calls for a "light" oil, then the engine must be very "light" and will break down easy. North Americans are not fooled so easy, so they actually tell us the right oil to use, mostly, except where there has been a misprint, or some other anomaly.


Really?????? Well now what about in Australia??

 

[Junior]

Well, I just say we disagree and leave it at that.

 

[lazaro]

Originally Posted By: edweather
I just bought a 2006 Explorer xls with 32k miles on it. It has the usual 4.0L V-6 SOHC engine. I bought it from a Ford dealer so I'm assuming it came with the Ford recommended oil, 5-30 Motorcraft Syn. blend (I will ask them.) I have no idea who owned it before me although Car Fax claimed it was a one owner vehicle. My last 2 Explorers I bought new and ran Castrol Syntec until they had a lot of miles, and then switched to high mileage synthetics. I can't complain about the results....I had 165k+ on both vehicles, but had a front seal leak on the last one. A dealer told a friend of mine you can switch to synthetic from conventional, but don't switch back to conventional oil from synthetic. I'm not sure I believe that. Some knowledgable folks claim synthetics dry out seals. I'm probably complicating this, and most oils would probably be ok as long as it's changed reasonably often. Any feedback is much appreciated. Thanks!

after reading all the great replies, yes they all sound good.
If you want the best value and long term protection of all your vehicle lubrication needs synthetics are the bleeding obvious best choice to use, for many reasons you may already know.
Lubricants alone are important but to keep them clean for the long haul, filtration needs to be the best you can buy. You want to capture any dust in the air that may go into the engine past the air filter, and you need to capture any contaminates in the oil that may get into your tight engine clearences. buying these items from wal mart is buying mass produced products that are made for profit not quality, many will scream bloody murder by now. sceam till your hoarse! dealers dont care about you or your car, can you blame them? they are all broke and begging the government for money at the moment like in the billions of dollars, if you want the best for your vehicle that comes out much cheaper than what the dealer or owners manual tells you too do Amsoil makes the cheapest products on the market that keep your vehicles running decades longer.

listed below are two site sponsors that can testify to this.
air filters that last 4 years 100.000 miles and capture dust not just sticks and stones, oil filters that last 25,000 miles and beyond and lubricants that outlast any mineral oil by 8/10 times longer 25,000 miles and beyond. just my opinion from the last 11 years of using these remarkable products that save me thousands of dollars in disposal time, fuel savings, drivetrain wear

America is addicted to using oil and this is why oil/gas prices are high and we use it like we have an oil rig in our bakyard!

 

[Doug Hillary]

Originally Posted By: Junior

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the typical oil clearance in a journal bearing somewhere between 0.0015 and 0.0035 inch. And that hasn't changed for a long long time.


Hi,
junior - I can confirm that the Mercedes Benz 300SL (Gullwing/Roadster) of MY1957-63 had clearances within the range you mention (Ref. Daimler-Benz AG - Zentralkundendienst - Tabellenbuch Juli 1963)

Oil pressure readings were gained using a mandatory SAE10 lubricant. For road use SAE20W-20 and SAE30 HD lubricants were preferred depending on the prevailing ambient

I agree with your comments

 

[kingrob]

I can confirm that my SOHC 4.6 Ford has journal clearances close to what you mentioned above. It came factory filled with 5w30, with a recommendation to use 10w30 for warmer temps. After using 5w30 for a couple of years I switched to 10w30 year round as consumption was a major issue. It is now a non issue.

Ford now spec's 5w20 for this same engine with the same journal clearance (actually it is a tiny bit tighter: 0.0022 as opposed to 0.0025). I couldn't imagine running 5w20 in this motor, and I DO believe that sometimes when a manufacturer back specs a one size fits all grade of oil or ATF, sometimes it's more marketing than conclusive evidence that leads them to issue a change in specifications.

Another good example on this same car of updated lubricant criteria is the power steering fluid and Mercon 5. Factory fills were Ford Type F in the power steering pump and Mercon in the transmission. They later back spec'd Merc 5 for this transmission. After reports of erratic shifting and burned valves, they re-recommended original Mercon.

Ford now recommends either generic power steering fluid or Mercon in the power steering pump. I have tried standard power steering fluid and immediately I following I had a leaking power steering unit. I replaced it at the dealer, who re-filled it with Type F. I was told that older power steering pumps did not like Mercon or PS fluid, that the steering was impaired and much more wonky with the introduction of a different formula. As far as I know Ford still insists that you can use either in an older system that originally called for Type F. Once again, I'll stick with the old outdated junk.

 

[scoobie]

have u tried HM 5w30? I think the oil consumption is a result of using the too thick 5w30, and if it had used 5w20 from the start, you would still be the proud owner of an engine in perfect condition. Any more "experts" - those people from above who enjoy castigating me - want to call for "fleet testing"? Here is ur fleet test - didn't use the oil Dr. Haas recommends, now has major oil consumption issues, with band aid 10w30 being now needed, probably engine rebuild on the way . How many more "fleet tests" of ruined engines before you admit that Dr. Haas is on to something.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: scoobie
have u tried HM 5w30? I think the oil consumption is a result of using the too thick 5w30, and if it had used 5w20 from the start, you would still be the proud owner of an engine in perfect condition. Any more "experts" - those people from above who enjoy castigating me - want to call for "fleet testing"? Here is ur fleet test - didn't use the oil Dr. Haas recommends, now has major oil consumption issues, with band aid 10w30 being now needed, probably engine rebuild on the way . How many more "fleet tests" of ruined engines before you admit that Dr. Haas is on to something.


How about a fleet of Diesel engines that have gone, what did you do your testing on Doug, was it 750,000 miles with 5w40 Delvac 1?

Yes, I believe it was 750,000 miles on Delvac 1 5w40. How many miles does Dr. Haas have on his vehicles?

The only person spouting off like they are some kind of EXPERT here is YOU.

You obviously don't understand the concept of what a FLEET test is either. It's a FLEET of vehicles, all run to verify how a certain lubricant holds up. You cannot cite a single statistical entry as a "test"; it is nothing more than a single statistic and could very well be an anomaly. This is why testing is done using FLEETS of vehicles, as to account for these things.

But please, lead on Mr. Expert with your non-existent fleet testing information and Internet knowledge based on one person's opinion and experience, lead on. May all the engineers and engine builders in the world bow to your superior knowledge base that you acquired overnight, as it is obviously vastly superior to their years of education and experience.

 

[kingrob]

Originally Posted By: scoobie
have u tried HM 5w30? I think the oil consumption is a result of using the too thick 5w30, and if it had used 5w20 from the start, you would still be the proud owner of an engine in perfect condition. Any more "experts" - those people from above who enjoy castigating me - want to call for "fleet testing"? Here is ur fleet test - didn't use the oil Dr. Haas recommends, now has major oil consumption issues, with band aid 10w30 being now needed, probably engine rebuild on the way . How many more "fleet tests" of ruined engines before you admit that Dr. Haas is on to something.


Kind of hard to use a 5w20 oil from the start since it wasn't invented until ten years after I bought the vehicle.

I've never heard of using a thinner oil to combat consumption. Maybe we should all just run straight ten weight oil for any of us that have a beater.

 

[kingrob]

BTW I'm still a proud owner of an engine in perfect condition. Running the manufacturers recommended weight of oil did not make my motor blow up. I'm not going to switch to a thinner oil that was developed a decade after my engine was just to "fit in" to the thin-is-in crowd. If you have good results using 5w20 in everything you own, then good for you. I'll stick with what's proven to work in my application.

Haas has some good points, but I don't believe he's 100% correct or unbiased. Every statement a so-called "expert" in any field makes is biased in some way, if only in that he's trying to prove his hypothesis. If all automotive engineering hypotheses were ubiased and definitive we would all be running the exact same weight, blend, and brand of motor oil. There would also only be about three different vehicles on the market. As it stands, there are just too many self-appointed "experts" (through credential or otherwise) that wish to prove to everyone that they are a correct, therefore genius. Proceed with caution, and take everything for what it's worth and come to your own conclusion.

But you, Scoobie, are piloting a sinking ship. Jump deck accordingly before you sink deeper.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
OVERK1LL - My testing was a 1m kms (620k miles) teardown inspection (by Detroit Diesel-MTU) and measure-up in one specific engine of mine. This engine was then tracked out to 2m kms (1240k miles) - I spoke to the Driver last week it has now done nearly 2.5m kms (1550k miles). Many millions of kms were covered in Fleet operations, my own and my Client's, in respect of Delvac 1 5W-40. Hundreds of used oil analysis were taken in the process

As well, in a "recent" Castrol prototype lubricant situation, 6m kms were covered with two engine families and six vehicles. All tests included programmed and random used oil analysis and tear down inspection/measure-ups at a set point - up to 2m kms (1240k miles)

I have been involved in this type of testing since the 1960s with MB, VW, Volvo, Chevron-Caltex, Mobil, Castrol, Shell, Detroit Diesel-MTU, Cummins, Kubota, MAN, FUSO-Misubishi and a number of others too numerous to include here. In the case of Castrol "R" synthetic 10W-60 the field tests involved many engine familes and many years/hours/kms of diverse operations - from Tropic to Alpine! It included two API upgrades

I can also say with absolute certainty that the "in-house" engine/lubricant testing done by engine manufacturers (MB and DD-MTU that I have an indepth collabrative knowledge of) in collaboration with the respective Oil Company's Engineers is comphensive to almost beyond belief in some cases. And this is well before field testing even commences!

I suggest that BITOG Members give due consideration to the engine lubricant specifications recommended by the engine's maker. This is especially so in relation to viscosity v operating ambient range

I always tend to use the less viscous lubricant allowed within the engine makers recommendations

But then I am always learning..........................

 

[OVERKILL]

Well Rob, you see, you just aren't doing it right.

Those fleets of Crown Vics that were going 1/2 million miles on 5w30 weren't doing it right either. And now that some of them are running on 5w20 and lasting the same amount of time, well, that's inconsequential.

Diesel engines routinely lasting a million miles on 15w40? Pfffft, doesn't matter.

What matter is the Internet. And what you read on the Internet. And single-digit-sample small-scale testing that can be taken WAY out of it's intended context, and then misconstrued as factual information in threads on the Internet. That's what matters Rob.

How many miles do you have under your belt Rob? Me, I've got about a 1/2 a million Km's.

My old Explorer (my sister drives) now has 298,000Km on it. No consumption, runs like a top.

My '87 Mustang GT T-top, who's engine now resides in the Capri, has 330,000Km on it. 38lbs of oil pressure hot at idle. It's had everything from 0w20 to 5w50 run in it over the years.

My '89 Town Car. Spent most of it's life on random 10w30/5w30 dyno, Mobil 1 5w30/10w30, then I ran 0w40, and am now running Mobil 1 Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40. It has 337,000Km on it.

But I'm doing it wrong Rob. I've gotta be doing it wrong. Those engines are DOOMED, even though they don't consume oil, run like tops, I'm doing it WRONG because I didn't run 0w20 in them since new. And, like you, I'm guilty of not having it available in 1987, 1989 and 1997. I'm guilty Rob, we are ALL guilty and we all need to stand up and admit that. The 'ol Scoobster is the saviour Rob, he's shown us the error of our ways. God help our 'ol junk Rob, God help us all. Bow-down and accept our prophet, he is the chosen-one; a veritable lubricant messiah, come from above to show us the readings of his Lord. We must accept him into our hearts and follow his advice, for only HE knows the truth!!

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
OVERK1LL - My testing was a 1m kms (620k miles) teardown inspection (by Detroit Diesel-MTU) and measure-up in one specific engine of mine. This engine was then tracked out to 2m kms (1240k miles) - I spoke to the Driver last week it has now done nearly 2.5m kms (1550k miles). Many millions of kms were covered in Fleet operations, my own and my Client's, in respect of Delvac 1 5W-40. Hundreds of used oil analysis were taken in the process

As well, in a "recent" Castrol prototype lubricant situation, 6m kms were covered with two engine families and six vehicles. All tests included programmed and random used oil analysis and tear down inspection/measure-ups at a set point - up to 2m kms (1240k miles)

I have been involved in this type of testing since the 1960s with MB, VW, Volvo, Chevron-Caltex, Mobil, Castrol, Shell, Detroit Diesel-MTU, Cummins, Kubota, MAN, FUSO-Misubishi and a number of others too numerous to include here. In the case of Castrol "R" synthetic 10W-60 the field tests involved many engine familes and many years/hours/kms of diverse operations - from Tropic to Alpine! It included two API upgrades

I can also say with absolute certainty that the "in-house" engine/lubricant testing done by engine manufacturers (MB and DD-MTU that I have an indepth collabrative knowledge of) in collaboration with the respective Oil Company's Engineers is comphensive to almost beyond belief in some cases. And this is well before field testing even commences!

I suggest that BITOG Members give due consideration to the engine lubricant specifications recommended by the engine's maker. This is especially so in relation to viscosity v operating ambient range

I always tend to use the less viscous lubricant allowed within the engine makers recommendations

But then I am always learning..........................


Thank you very much for that information Doug, it is always appreciated. Your real-life testing and data is always a blessing to have around; serves as a sort of factual injection at times when things that are often based in theory are being discussed.

I wholly echo your sentiment that one should listen to the recommendations made by the respective manufacturer and use this as a guide in choosing one's oil.

Contrary to what some believe, I too think that the engineers that designed the engines may in fact know what they are talking about when choosing a particular grade, or range of grades for an engine.

 

[Steelhead]

hasn't blow up in 100k miles and runs better on 5w20. gas mileage is better also. less than 1 qt consumption in 5k miles.
the reason Ford never back spec'd the 4L to 5w20 was that the engine was already written off their engineering list of long range offered engines.
a dead horse

and waste of engineering time.
did they back spec the flathead 239ci V8, no, another dead horse

i've gone green, i'll be sticking with 5w20 and putting the green in my wallet

would be a different story if i were still towing or drove the rig often in over 100d F temps

Originally Posted By: exranger06
Do not use 5w-20 in that engine. The 4.0 SOHC was one of the few engines not back-speced for it. Stay with the 5w30.

 

[webfors]

Scoobie, don't worry, all new bitog'ers get their haass's humbled when they arrive. It's all part of the learning process.

What I've learned after a couple of years at bitog? Well, that thin is good, so is thick, and thin is bad, so is thick, and synthetic is bad, and conventional is good, and conventional is bad and syn is good. You see, it's not all that complicated

My opinion? Use what api and visc the manual says to use for your driving style and ambient operating temp and enjoy hundreds of thousands of km (or miles), trouble-free of oil-related issues

 

[rumple]

I have a 2002 V6 4.0L Ford Explorer. Here is a used oil analysis of my Explorer with regular Pennzoil 5w30 conventional for 1,500 miles. I have since switched out to AMSOIL Signature Series 0w30 for three reasons - better cold start gas milage and lower wear and for a longer drain interval.

I have noticed that the timing chain rattle that these engines are subjected to has all but disappeared since I switched to the Amsoil 0W30. Unexpected but not unwelcome.

Rumple

 

[scoobie]

I think it is very important to have a good debate, because that is the only way to find the endpoint which we all seek (which some call Truth, others dispense with these fine words and just call it "a good engine that runs"). I always prefer the unconventional, because the Truth often lies in places that one would not think to look, so that is why I prefer, as a matter of personality, to go. The reason that it comes across as "The Messiah has spoken", is again, an unconscious style, an inborn desire to craft the argument, the same way you engineers have a built in desire to craft the best engine. That, however, does not mean that I am any good at, only that this is the intent.
And the "Messiah" was crucified too, so being crucified is sometimes an honor, expecially on a fine forum like BITOG. And no, in case you think there is a double meaning, I am not accusing anyone here of being the Barabas.

 

[kingrob]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Well Rob, you see, you just aren't doing it right.

Those fleets of Crown Vics that were going 1/2 million miles on 5w30 weren't doing it right either. And now that some of them are running on 5w20 and lasting the same amount of time, well, that's inconsequential.

Diesel engines routinely lasting a million miles on 15w40? Pfffft, doesn't matter.

What matter is the Internet. And what you read on the Internet. And single-digit-sample small-scale testing that can be taken WAY out of it's intended context, and then misconstrued as factual information in threads on the Internet. That's what matters Rob.

How many miles do you have under your belt Rob? Me, I've got about a 1/2 a million Km's.

My old Explorer (my sister drives) now has 298,000Km on it. No consumption, runs like a top.

My '87 Mustang GT T-top, who's engine now resides in the Capri, has 330,000Km on it. 38lbs of oil pressure hot at idle. It's had everything from 0w20 to 5w50 run in it over the years.

My '89 Town Car. Spent most of it's life on random 10w30/5w30 dyno, Mobil 1 5w30/10w30, then I ran 0w40, and am now running Mobil 1 Turbo Diesel Truck 5w40. It has 337,000Km on it.

But I'm doing it wrong Rob. I've gotta be doing it wrong. Those engines are DOOMED, even though they don't consume oil, run like tops, I'm doing it WRONG because I didn't run 0w20 in them since new. And, like you, I'm guilty of not having it available in 1987, 1989 and 1997. I'm guilty Rob, we are ALL guilty and we all need to stand up and admit that. The 'ol Scoobster is the saviour Rob, he's shown us the error of our ways. God help our 'ol junk Rob, God help us all. Bow-down and accept our prophet, he is the chosen-one; a veritable lubricant messiah, come from above to show us the readings of his Lord. We must accept him into our hearts and follow his advice, for only HE knows the truth!!

All hail the new messiah of Oildom!!!

For the record, I've had six vehicles go past half a million miles. The highest number I racked up was either a 92 Saturn or a 95 Oldsmobile, The Olds had close to eight hundred thousand miles and the Saturn had over eight hundred k when the odometer died, at which point it went another year before it blew a headgasket. They both started out on 5w30, worked their way up to 10w30, then at around the 300k mark 15w40. After about 400k it was 20w50 all the way, baby.

 

[webfors]

huh!! 800k? It would take me 30+ years to put that much mileage on a car... in which case everything else would fall apart first.

 

[exranger06]

Originally Posted By: Steelhead
hasn't blow up in 100k miles and runs better on 5w20. gas mileage is better also. less than 1 qt consumption in 5k miles.
the reason Ford never back spec'd the 4L to 5w20 was that the engine was already written off their engineering list of long range offered engines.
a dead horse

and waste of engineering time.
did they back spec the flathead 239ci V8, no, another dead horse

i've gone green, i'll be sticking with 5w20 and putting the green in my wallet

would be a different story if i were still towing or drove the rig often in over 100d F temps

Really, so Ford took the time to back-spec the even more outdated (and ALREADY DISCONTINUED) 3.0 to 5w-20, but they didn't take the time to back-spec the "dead-horse" 4.0?? The pushrod 3.0 was introduced around 1990 and has been exactly the same until it was discontinued this year. The 4.0 SOHC is a much more modern engine that was introduced in 1997, and is still being produced today. If there was any engine not worth Ford's time, it was the 3.0. But they did take the time to back-spec it, and they would have back speced the 4.0 if it was OK to use 5w-20. But it's not OK.