Anyone have an answer on this?
Why does Ford Require 5W30 in the 4.0L SOHC?
- Thread starter Maritime Storm
- Start date
- Status
This engine IIRC uses 3 or 4 chains in the engine. They are probably concerned with sheering like on the GM 3.6
Given that
* Porsche have backspecced to 5W-40, (and allow 18% reduction in viscosity before condemning the oil);
* Honda are charging towards 0W-16;
* Ford have tested 5W-20 through the deserts of Tatooine, but designed a 5W-30 with Castrol for their euro engines;
* Toyota built a whole car around a block of TGMO 0W-20 (and amazingly, you can't tell the difference between the cars built around at least three different TGMOs);
* Subaru built a car around TGMO as well; and
* M1 5W-30 is suitable for a Corvette with over 600hp.
Maybe the Ford engineers know something about the engine, how it behaves, and what keeps it alive...
just guessing
* Porsche have backspecced to 5W-40, (and allow 18% reduction in viscosity before condemning the oil);
* Honda are charging towards 0W-16;
* Ford have tested 5W-20 through the deserts of Tatooine, but designed a 5W-30 with Castrol for their euro engines;
* Toyota built a whole car around a block of TGMO 0W-20 (and amazingly, you can't tell the difference between the cars built around at least three different TGMOs);
* Subaru built a car around TGMO as well; and
* M1 5W-30 is suitable for a Corvette with over 600hp.
Maybe the Ford engineers know something about the engine, how it behaves, and what keeps it alive...
just guessing
I find it odd, all other Ford gasoline engines are spec'd for 5W20, except this one.
It's not really odd. Maybe the engine has hot spots, maybe the oil pump sucks (no pun), maybe the cooling system allows slightly elevated oil temps under hard use....Ford figured it out... or maybe they didn't bother to test this model.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Given that
* Porsche have backspecced to 5W-40, (and allow 18% reduction in viscosity before condemning the oil);
* Honda are charging towards 0W-16;
* Ford have tested 5W-20 through the deserts of Tatooine, but designed a 5W-30 with Castrol for their euro engines;
* Toyota built a whole car around a block of TGMO 0W-20 (and amazingly, you can't tell the difference between the cars built around at least three different TGMOs);
* Subaru built a car around TGMO as well; and
* M1 5W-30 is suitable for a Corvette with over 600hp.
Maybe the Ford engineers know something about the engine, how it behaves, and what keeps it alive...
just guessing
Given that
* Porsche have backspecced to 5W-40, (and allow 18% reduction in viscosity before condemning the oil);
* Honda are charging towards 0W-16;
* Ford have tested 5W-20 through the deserts of Tatooine, but designed a 5W-30 with Castrol for their euro engines;
* Toyota built a whole car around a block of TGMO 0W-20 (and amazingly, you can't tell the difference between the cars built around at least three different TGMOs);
* Subaru built a car around TGMO as well; and
* M1 5W-30 is suitable for a Corvette with over 600hp.
Maybe the Ford engineers know something about the engine, how it behaves, and what keeps it alive...
just guessing
Just my educated guess, but I believe that it's because of the issues they had with the timing chains and guides in the first itteration of the SOCH 4.0. We had a 1999 Mountaineer that we ended up trading in because at 139k miles is developed a bad timing chain rattle. A well known issue with the first few years of the SOHC which was addressed in the 2004 model year I believe. We traded the 1999 for a 2005 4.0 Mountaineer and when we dumped it at 110k it had no chain issues. 5W-30 was used for the lives of both vehicles. The 1999 probably should have been running a 40 weight had the propensity for tensioner issues been known ahead of them pooping the bed.
I've also heard that the oil pump design just didn't work well with 5W-20, but I have no way of proving that out.
I've also heard that the oil pump design just didn't work well with 5W-20, but I have no way of proving that out.
Originally Posted By: Maritime Storm
I find it odd, all other Ford gasoline engines are spec'd for 5W20, except this one.
This isn't accurate, the Ford Focus ST and maybe the Fiesta ST require\spec 5w30 and are gas powered.
I find it odd, all other Ford gasoline engines are spec'd for 5W20, except this one.
This isn't accurate, the Ford Focus ST and maybe the Fiesta ST require\spec 5w30 and are gas powered.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Cam drives are the worst part of designing OHC engines:
Gears are expensive.
Belts break.
Chains wear.
It's almost enough to make you want to go pushrod.
Almost.
You forgot "gears break", at least if they are GM "Iron Duke" phenolic resin composite gears. It was very important to the old GM to have a quiet cam drive, so they invented a epoxy/cardboard gear driven by a steel gear just for the job. Who cared if it only lasted <100K miles? It wasn't an interference engine. And a tow job isn't that expensive! And people will buy it as long as GM makes it, right?
Cam drives are the worst part of designing OHC engines:
Gears are expensive.
Belts break.
Chains wear.
It's almost enough to make you want to go pushrod.
Almost.
You forgot "gears break", at least if they are GM "Iron Duke" phenolic resin composite gears. It was very important to the old GM to have a quiet cam drive, so they invented a epoxy/cardboard gear driven by a steel gear just for the job. Who cared if it only lasted <100K miles? It wasn't an interference engine. And a tow job isn't that expensive! And people will buy it as long as GM makes it, right?
Originally Posted By: Vspec
Originally Posted By: Maritime Storm
I find it odd, all other Ford gasoline engines are spec'd for 5W20, except this one.
This isn't accurate, the Ford Focus ST and maybe the Fiesta ST require\spec 5w30 and are gas powered.
As does the Ecoboost in the F-150. Mustang with the track pack calls for 5W-50.
Originally Posted By: Maritime Storm
I find it odd, all other Ford gasoline engines are spec'd for 5W20, except this one.
This isn't accurate, the Ford Focus ST and maybe the Fiesta ST require\spec 5w30 and are gas powered.
As does the Ecoboost in the F-150. Mustang with the track pack calls for 5W-50.
Originally Posted By: HangFire
[GM "Iron Duke" phenolic resin composite gears. It was very important to the old GM to have a quiet cam drive, so they invented a epoxy/cardboard gear driven by a steel gear just for the job. Who cared if it only lasted
It was nylon coated steel and they only had it for a few years in the 60's.
What about, imports that have you change the rubber timing belt every 60k? I've heard of costs as high as $2400 for a dealer to do a rubber timing belt.
I can buy a reman chevy short block for that.
This is a timely discussion for me as I've been thinking of draining the GC early to go to a thinner oil.
[GM "Iron Duke" phenolic resin composite gears. It was very important to the old GM to have a quiet cam drive, so they invented a epoxy/cardboard gear driven by a steel gear just for the job. Who cared if it only lasted
It was nylon coated steel and they only had it for a few years in the 60's.
What about, imports that have you change the rubber timing belt every 60k? I've heard of costs as high as $2400 for a dealer to do a rubber timing belt.
I can buy a reman chevy short block for that.
This is a timely discussion for me as I've been thinking of draining the GC early to go to a thinner oil.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
This is a timely discussion for me as I've been thinking of draining the GC early to go to a thinner oil.
Your undoubtedly correct, it's just unfortunate the car isn't equipped with an oil pressure gauge so that you can tell just how much the oil's too thick.
This is a timely discussion for me as I've been thinking of draining the GC early to go to a thinner oil.
Your undoubtedly correct, it's just unfortunate the car isn't equipped with an oil pressure gauge so that you can tell just how much the oil's too thick.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Me too.
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Me too.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
I don't think that's what he is saying.
And if the thick oil recommendation by Ford is to prevent chain noise, I'm really not interested in selecting an oil based on sound.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
I don't think that's what he is saying.
And if the thick oil recommendation by Ford is to prevent chain noise, I'm really not interested in selecting an oil based on sound.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
I don't think that's what he is saying.
And if the thick oil recommendation by Ford is to prevent chain noise, I'm really not interested in selecting an oil based on sound.
Or possibly chain wear. Oil pressure is one part of the equation.
Can't say I've ever lost an engine from oil from old fashioned "thick" oil but I've lost a few bottom ends from to thin.
I don't base my oils on sound either... But when cams are solid roller at over 700 lift you can't hear much
.
I respect your opinion on thin is best for everything, but experience has proven that isn't always true. Imo Ford has a reason for not back specing 20 in this engine since they did about everything else. That would be good enough reason to trust them.
You make some great points and in your posts and I personally follow many of those... I run 5w20 in a built 440 Mopar and a few modular 5.4/6.8s in our fleet well over 200k. There are some engines however that even with great oil pressure 0w20 and 5w20 can't protect even at sub 100c oil temps.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I'm interested in how oil pressure and temperature can be used to determine how the cam chains are faring with this overly thick oil...given that seems to be the reason for Ford's engineers getting it wrong in not specifying a 20.
Good point. The way I see it is can't give you any clue as to how the chains are faring unfortunately. Those two gauges tell part of a story, not the whole story. It's like going to the doctor for an exam and he checks your blood pressure, and temperature, and nothing else. He sees it's OK and sends you home with a clean bill of health.
If oil pressure and temperature can determine how the chains are holding up I stand corrected and would really like to learn how.
I don't think that's what he is saying.
And if the thick oil recommendation by Ford is to prevent chain noise, I'm really not interested in selecting an oil based on sound.
Or possibly chain wear. Oil pressure is one part of the equation.
Can't say I've ever lost an engine from oil from old fashioned "thick" oil but I've lost a few bottom ends from to thin.
I don't base my oils on sound either... But when cams are solid roller at over 700 lift you can't hear much
I respect your opinion on thin is best for everything, but experience has proven that isn't always true. Imo Ford has a reason for not back specing 20 in this engine since they did about everything else. That would be good enough reason to trust them.
You make some great points and in your posts and I personally follow many of those... I run 5w20 in a built 440 Mopar and a few modular 5.4/6.8s in our fleet well over 200k. There are some engines however that even with great oil pressure 0w20 and 5w20 can't protect even at sub 100c oil temps.
Last edited:
Well said.
I also like to use 20 grades as much as possible. But I will trust Ford on this call.
I also like to use 20 grades as much as possible. But I will trust Ford on this call.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
