Which oil would you use?

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
I call Bull Bologna!


Who cares what you call it? Regardless of you not ever hearing of it being done, that in no way means it didn't happen. With major engine work costing well into 4 digits today, dealers look for ways not to pay if they don't have to. If they find what looks to be damage from improper lubricant, why wouldn't they have an analysis done on the oil? It's simply good common sense. What's cheaper, to have the oil analyzed, or pay for an engine overhaul that was brought about by the owners negligence?

 

[robertcope]

The real question is, where do I get some API SG oil per the owner's manual?

robert

 

[Ducked]

Simple/Simplistic Question.

I've never been to a track day, but aren't the cars warmed up before a race?

Assuming they are, why the zero before the 40? Why not a bigger number, or no number at all?

IOW, what is the point of a wide range multigrade under race conditions?

 

[robertcope]

Good question. My answer has two parts: a) It's still a street car that I drive a few times a week when the weather is good, b) Not many straight weight street oils. Heck, even race oils are usually multigrade now days.

robert

 

[Ducked]

Originally Posted By: robertcope
Good question. My answer has two parts: a) It's still a street car that I drive a few times a week when the weather is good, b) Not many straight weight street oils. Heck, even race oils are usually multigrade now days.

robert


a) Is fair enough from your point of view (though in my local climate I can easily get away with a straight 40 on the street, and have done).

b) likewise, but it doesn't really answer the question. WHY are even race oils usually multigrade mowadays?

 

[Mitch Alsup]

Originally Posted By: Ducked
b) WHY are even race oils usually multigrade nowadays?


Real race oils are typically synthetic.

PAOs and Esters base stocks have a viscosity over temperature profile that fits the general pattern of xxW-yy with xx = yy -15.
So if one wanted a 10w-30 oil one could start with a 10W-25 base stock and add just enough VIIs to end up with a 10W-30.
If one wanted a 15W-30 oil, one could just use a 15W-30 base stock.
In effect, synthetic base stocks are already multi-grade.

 

[69GTX]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
I call Bull Bologna!


Who cares what you call it? Regardless of you not ever hearing of it being done, that in no way means it didn't happen. With major engine work costing well into 4 digits today, dealers look for ways not to pay if they don't have to. If they find what looks to be damage from improper lubricant, why wouldn't they have an analysis done on the oil? It's simply good common sense. What's cheaper, to have the oil analyzed, or pay for an engine overhaul that was brought about by the owners negligence?


Any good lawyer could probably poke holes through that mess by requiring chain of custody/witness documents. Who even says they didn't draw a sample off one of the employee's beater cars and claim it was yours? If I wasn't there when they drew the sample and mailed it...it's bogus. And since a previous poster already told you it is industry practice (>99% of the time) NOT to take samples, why would you question that?

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: 69GTX
And since a previous poster already told you it is industry practice (>99% of the time) NOT to take samples, why would you question that?


Oh yeah, that's it. If it's anonymously posted on the Internet, it MUST be true.

"The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act addresses such issues, stating that if a customer installs an aftermarket product (it could be a fluid, filter, hard part, software...virtually anything that was not installed on or in the vehicle from the factory when it was new), and if the vehicle fails as a result of the installation or use of the aftermarket product/service, the carmaker cannot arbitrarily deny a warranty claim and/or void the new car warranty because of the installation or use of the aftermarket product. In fact, the automaker must prove beyond a doubt that the failure was indeed caused by the installation or use of the aftermarket product.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
In fact, the automaker must prove beyond a doubt that the failure was indeed caused by the installation or use of the aftermarket product.[/b]


In the case that you cited, the manufacturer simply could't prove that a couple of cst caused beyond a doubt, nor likely caused a failure...logic 101...

I mean not everyone who calls a national radio show and is subsequently quoted on the internet is real, are they ???

You can't believe EVERYTHING that you see on the internet quoted off an unknown person on a radio station...

Most likely any glimmer of truth in there is that IF they did, it was possibly the S.A. which california and PQIA keep warning about.

The OP, isn't going to have Honda pull a sample now is he ???

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
You can't believe EVERYTHING that you see on the internet quoted off an unknown person on a radio station.


I don't. Read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. They require it.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Shannow
You can't believe EVERYTHING that you see on the internet quoted off an unknown person on a radio station.


I don't. Read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. They require it.


they require proof that it was the exclusive cause of failure...yes, you underlined that bit...and I agree

Originally Posted By: billt460

Not true at all.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/28/5-things-will-void-car-warranty/

"So why do people continue to use what they believe are the best fluids for their new vehicles? For example, a woman called my national radio show,


is the example of proof that you posted wasn't it ?

anonymous person on the radio, posted as fact on the internet, then posted as fact by yourself ?

 

[billt460]

The Magnuson Moss Warranty Act requires the dealer provide PROOF that it was something the owner did that caused the failure. In this case use an inferior lubricant that did not provide adequate protection to the engine. In that case why wouldn't the dealer have the oil analyzed? It is the only way they can refuse warranty service under the law. It's no big deal. You've got guys on this forum all over the place that do it for fun. You get off track too easy.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
You get off track too easy.


You are replying in a thread where a guy is running a 1992 Honda, on the track, and asking for advice on oils.

YOU then bring in a radio/internet example of warranty being denied, and start spouting the Magnuson Moss Act.

And accuse ME of being off track ?

LOL, you might be able to direct the OP to the Extended Warranty section of his manual...eh ???

 

[billt460]

It's the direction the thread took. This is your 3rd post on the subject.

 

[robertcope]

I doubt that a simple oil analysis wouldn't provide enough evidence for them to deny a claim.

Anyhow, I'm leaning towards sticking to M1 0W-40 at this point, although I have to admit that Red Line 5W-40 is tempting. I'll run it again with the oil pressure and temperature logging and see how it goes, but this time I'll run until the oil hits 290F or so. Hopefully I will find that it levels off before then.

robert

 

[Ducked]

Originally Posted By: Mitch Alsup
Originally Posted By: Ducked
b) WHY are even race oils usually multigrade nowadays?


Real race oils are typically synthetic.

PAOs and Esters base stocks have a viscosity over temperature profile that fits the general pattern of xxW-yy with xx = yy -15.
So if one wanted a 10w-30 oil one could start with a 10W-25 base stock and add just enough VIIs to end up with a 10W-30.
If one wanted a 15W-30 oil, one could just use a 15W-30 base stock.
In effect, synthetic base stocks are already multi-grade.


I had a bit of a Google. Since I know nothing about racing, I dunno what's actually in use, but there seem to be synthetic, semi-synthetic and mineral oils in a wide range of viscosities labelled "race oil".

For example, Amsoil does a wide range, presumably all synthetic, but some of them are described as straight weights, though perhaps they could also be described as multigrades and they choose not to for niche marketing reasons.

http://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-product/motor-oil/racing/

DOMINATOR® 5W-20 Racing Oil

DOMINATOR® 10W-30 Racing Oil

DOMINATOR® 15W-50 Racing Oil

DOMINATOR® SAE 60 Racing Oil

Lucas does straight 50 and 60 weights that seem to be mineral

http://lucasoil.com/products/racing-only/racing-engine-oil/plus-racing-oil

Mobil do some wide range multigrades that start skinny. For example, Mobil 1 Racing™ 0W-30 and 0W-50 "developed specifically for racing engines and not recommended for street use." This doesn't make obvious sense if only the second number is the relevent one at race temperatures, but perhaps they want the temporary high shear viscosity loss, rather than the low viscosity at startup.

A

 

[Shannow]

Yes, it's been posited that the 0W is an artifact of the construction of the oil rather than an intent to start race engines at -40C.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: robertcope
I doubt that a simple oil analysis wouldn't provide enough evidence for them to deny a claim. robert


Why not? If the analysis shows the oil is not up to specifications required, or else does not contain the proper additives as suggested by the manufacturer, they can and WILL deny the claim. I personally saw this happen to a co-worker who had the wrong fluid installed in the transmission of his Nissan Versa, at one of those non dealer transmission centers. The result? The dealer did an analysis on the trans fluid, and it was NOT the proper type. It ended up costing him $3,500.00 to have it replaced.

My 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee has a the German ZF 8-Speed automatic. The dealer told me, and showed me in the owners manual, if I put anything but the dealer recommended fluid in it, both the factory and extended warranty I purchased with the vehicle would be void. I was also told to use ONLY 5W-20 Pennzoil Full Synthetic Motor Oil in the engine. (5.7 HEMI V-8). Because it meets or exceeds Chrysler specification MS-6395.

The fact is most all of these new vehicles are very fluid and oil specific. The days of local "experts" sitting around the bar on a Saturday afternoon, arguing which motor oil is "best", are over. The manufacturers of todays new vehicles tell you what you have to use. If you think you know better, and have a fluid or oil related failure in the process, it can become very expensive, very fast. Yes, this only pertains to factory warrantied street cars. But it pertains none the less.

 

[Ducked]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Yes, it's been posited that the 0W is an artifact of the construction of the oil rather than an intent to start race engines at -40C.


Is "artefact" the right word? I was thinking of it as a "byproduct".

If I understand the above post correctly, it suggests a 15 point spread is inherent to synthetics, so they could achieve, say a 40 grade at operating temperature which would be a 25W/40 without VI's. This'd work fine, and they don't need a 0W, so there must be some other advantage to using VI's which give them a 0W as a by-product.

Only other advantage I can think of is temporary viscosity loss under sheer leading to lower power losses, with wear controlled by additives which are unconstrained by cat poisoning in a race oil.

Presumably a (similar but perhaps less) temporary viscosity loss is also the main reason for the push for skinnier street oils. Lower viscosity in the warmup phase seems unlikely to save much fuel, but if the operating temp viscosity is effectively less under shear, the saving will be more extensive.

Never thought of it in quite that way before, but it seems like another reason to dislike skinny oils.

 

[4WD]

Mercury marine does viscous spread with base oil albeit they blend synthetic and conventional - their intent is to avoid VII in marine lubes ... but wind up with pretty high W (conventional oil ?)
Reckon they are playing the odds of not much boating in extreme cold ...