Why use thicker oil?
- Thread starter ARMY_Guy
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Originally Posted By: tdi-rick
Originally Posted By: 1sttruck
"Viscosity does offer more protection ...from states that 99.99% of those rolling on the road will never see 99.99% of the time"
Then why don't people racing use thinner oils than what they're typically using as it will provide better performance ?
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example
I gathered that he meant "even thinner". That is, "if thinner is better, then pour in water if it's such a good idea ..DUH!"
What's impossible to pry from him is a concession that lighter oils are perfectly acceptable in all but extreme or bona fide HD service. Not even a concession to the obvious that we've got MILLIONS OF UNITS running on lighter oils RIGHT NOW ..and have for almost a decade. Where are the junked hulks due to worn out engines
Originally Posted By: 1sttruck
"Viscosity does offer more protection ...from states that 99.99% of those rolling on the road will never see 99.99% of the time"
Then why don't people racing use thinner oils than what they're typically using as it will provide better performance ?
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example
I gathered that he meant "even thinner". That is, "if thinner is better, then pour in water if it's such a good idea ..DUH!"
What's impossible to pry from him is a concession that lighter oils are perfectly acceptable in all but extreme or bona fide HD service. Not even a concession to the obvious that we've got MILLIONS OF UNITS running on lighter oils RIGHT NOW ..and have for almost a decade. Where are the junked hulks due to worn out engines
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
I can putt around with Bruce's 0w-10 oil (maybe) 1ppm of Pb and nowhere near any condemnation level for 5k. Can I do it on one fill for 12k? Not yet. Can I do it at sustained high speeds (100mph) for hours on end and routinely do so without fatigue issues ..and maybe even WEAR issues? I dunno. If I can get my 4 banger Jeep to 100mph, I'll attempt to ponder it while I'm weighing the pucker factor of taking a jeep to 100mph. Can I tow 16k up 6% grades ...pushing oil temps to 275f+. Nope ..I surrender. I can't even tow 2000lbs due to other factors besides lacking power.
I obviously need heavier oil ..for no other reason than I need heavier oil
I obviously need heavier oil ..for no other reason than I need heavier oil
Wasnt there just a thicker oil thread recently !!??
ok sorry guys, its the same one hehe, just moved on so quickly !
" "Then why don't people racing use thinner oils than what they're typically using as it will provide better performance ?
"
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example "
Not even a good understanding of the question, and consequently not a good answer either. If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance. They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended. For F1 this was what, two races, for awhile at least.
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
"
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example "
Not even a good understanding of the question, and consequently not a good answer either. If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance. They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended. For F1 this was what, two races, for awhile at least.
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
I think we need to keep the race car oil weights and our passenger vehicle oil weights separate.
They choose what they choose for only one reason... what gets them around the track the fastest with the engine in one piece.
A little thicker oil does offer better protection.. but a 30 weight oil might be thicker than you think if your oil never makes it to 210 degrees. Some cars oil runs around 180 degrees, so it's all relative.
They choose what they choose for only one reason... what gets them around the track the fastest with the engine in one piece.
A little thicker oil does offer better protection.. but a 30 weight oil might be thicker than you think if your oil never makes it to 210 degrees. Some cars oil runs around 180 degrees, so it's all relative.
So far I haven't seen any 0/5/10W-20 oils on the shelfs here, in the Netherlands.
Thinnest available is xxW-30 weights.
Btw.. those 30 weights are about the only quality oils available.
The ACEA A1/B1, A5/B5, "low HTHS" oils are becomming common though and they are all 30 weights.
Long drain intervals are popular too.
The topic about HTHS in the "Question of the day" forum is a good read.
I would rather have a "firm" HTHS 30 weight than a lousy HTHS 40 weight.
Thinnest available is xxW-30 weights.
Btw.. those 30 weights are about the only quality oils available.
The ACEA A1/B1, A5/B5, "low HTHS" oils are becomming common though and they are all 30 weights.
Long drain intervals are popular too.
The topic about HTHS in the "Question of the day" forum is a good read.
I would rather have a "firm" HTHS 30 weight than a lousy HTHS 40 weight.
Originally Posted By: SpitfireS
I would rather have a "firm" HTHS 30 weight than a lousy HTHS 40 weight.
Me too, SpitfireS. This mainly applies to conventional, but this is why I go with a 10W-30 instead of a 5W-30. That exact quote.
I would rather have a "firm" HTHS 30 weight than a lousy HTHS 40 weight.
Me too, SpitfireS. This mainly applies to conventional, but this is why I go with a 10W-30 instead of a 5W-30. That exact quote.
For shear stable, Honda recommends dino 10W30 instead of 5W30 or 5W20 in S2000.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Quote:
If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance.
If thicker is better, then why aren't OEM heavy duty manufacturers spec'ing 20w-70 if it offers "more protection"?
Quote:
They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended.
They don't because they understand the limits of sensible need and can see no benefit in doing so. They're very smart and don't just have a "yer wid us or agin us" polarized disposition and set sensible margins of plausibility in their engineering practices.
Quote:
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
The whole world is a vast place and is diverse. Yet the laws of physics are immutable. While this may make some leanings "true" ..one has to have the ability to see one's frame of reference ..and reason outside of box.
Of course, one could cite that meteors do exist ..and that they do fall ..and one could say that the installation of titanium roof components would offer "more protection".
Again, I think you would really gain some notoriety if you could educate the mass fleet that they're due for failure.
They seem to have altered the constants of the universe on the localized NA continent ..and not just here on BITOG.
If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance.
If thicker is better, then why aren't OEM heavy duty manufacturers spec'ing 20w-70 if it offers "more protection"?
Quote:
They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended.
They don't because they understand the limits of sensible need and can see no benefit in doing so. They're very smart and don't just have a "yer wid us or agin us" polarized disposition and set sensible margins of plausibility in their engineering practices.
Quote:
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
The whole world is a vast place and is diverse. Yet the laws of physics are immutable. While this may make some leanings "true" ..one has to have the ability to see one's frame of reference ..and reason outside of box.
Of course, one could cite that meteors do exist ..and that they do fall ..and one could say that the installation of titanium roof components would offer "more protection".
Again, I think you would really gain some notoriety if you could educate the mass fleet that they're due for failure.
They seem to have altered the constants of the universe on the localized NA continent ..and not just here on BITOG.
"If thicker is better, then why aren't OEM heavy duty manufacturers spec'ing 20w-70 if it offers "more protection"?"
Diesels, whether light, medium or heavy duty, seem to do fine in most cases with a 15w40 HDEO, a 5w40 if a synthetic is desired. If they break things, typically they're melting pistons instead, it's rarely considered an oil failure because they start with an oil designed for wear protection as the primary attribute. This is because diesel engines are typically expected to have a long service life often under high loads, and they can be expensive.
Unlike some bikes and sports cars one typically doesn't see 50w or 60w oils being used in diesels. Some bikes and cars seem to have a wide operating range of load, where 50w to 60w oils are used for acceptable wear protection at the peak loads in order to provide an acceptably long service life.
As previously mentioned thinner oils are often used in racing engines for better performance, as the engines may not need to last very long and maximum performance is needed. In some cases a thicker oil is used for practice in order to manage the wear budget.
Piston aircraft need maximum wear protection under high loads, and typically use heavier oils.
Cars in Europe can be subjected to sustained speeds not seen in the US, and still have long oil change intervals typically not seen in the US, so higher quality and sometimes thicker oils often end up being used in spite of decades of much higher fuel costs. One doesn't too much 5w20 being used in spite of the advertising potential as 'green' isn't a dirty word like it often is in the US.
In the US 5w20 oils were introduced in order to increase a maker's fleet mileage, originally in order to be able to be able to continue selling high margin pickups and SUVs. Ford has used a synthetic blend, and many 5w20 advocates seem to use a full synthetic. The oil seems to do fine, driving conditions and oil change intervals are typically modest, but oil sales of 5w20 are perhaps 15% of oils sold so until dino 5w20 is used by a majority of people we won't know how 5w20 really does over the long term compared to say 5w30. In any case the oil was designed as a compromise between better fuel mileage and wear protection, as outside of the US even the vehicle makers seem to have used and are often still using thicker oils.
It's easy to see why the different types and weights of oils are used as users are balancing wear protection and service life with higher output or better mileage under different load conditions. Everyone is using the relationship between wear and viscosity / hths, in spite of the differences in the use and types of oils.
Diesels, whether light, medium or heavy duty, seem to do fine in most cases with a 15w40 HDEO, a 5w40 if a synthetic is desired. If they break things, typically they're melting pistons instead, it's rarely considered an oil failure because they start with an oil designed for wear protection as the primary attribute. This is because diesel engines are typically expected to have a long service life often under high loads, and they can be expensive.
Unlike some bikes and sports cars one typically doesn't see 50w or 60w oils being used in diesels. Some bikes and cars seem to have a wide operating range of load, where 50w to 60w oils are used for acceptable wear protection at the peak loads in order to provide an acceptably long service life.
As previously mentioned thinner oils are often used in racing engines for better performance, as the engines may not need to last very long and maximum performance is needed. In some cases a thicker oil is used for practice in order to manage the wear budget.
Piston aircraft need maximum wear protection under high loads, and typically use heavier oils.
Cars in Europe can be subjected to sustained speeds not seen in the US, and still have long oil change intervals typically not seen in the US, so higher quality and sometimes thicker oils often end up being used in spite of decades of much higher fuel costs. One doesn't too much 5w20 being used in spite of the advertising potential as 'green' isn't a dirty word like it often is in the US.
In the US 5w20 oils were introduced in order to increase a maker's fleet mileage, originally in order to be able to be able to continue selling high margin pickups and SUVs. Ford has used a synthetic blend, and many 5w20 advocates seem to use a full synthetic. The oil seems to do fine, driving conditions and oil change intervals are typically modest, but oil sales of 5w20 are perhaps 15% of oils sold so until dino 5w20 is used by a majority of people we won't know how 5w20 really does over the long term compared to say 5w30. In any case the oil was designed as a compromise between better fuel mileage and wear protection, as outside of the US even the vehicle makers seem to have used and are often still using thicker oils.
It's easy to see why the different types and weights of oils are used as users are balancing wear protection and service life with higher output or better mileage under different load conditions. Everyone is using the relationship between wear and viscosity / hths, in spite of the differences in the use and types of oils.
Hi,
almost universally US heavy high speed diesel engine manufacturers demand that a lubricant with a HTHS vis of 3.7cP be used. When using lower viscosity lubricants (lower than 15W-40) in controlled and very cold conditions, strict use factors are stated concerning the prevailing ambient temperature
Some Euro heavy high speed diesel engine manufacturers are specifying viscosities below 15W-40 but these are formally Approved lubricants only
In my Series 60 engines the average climbing oil temperature was 108C (ECMs "power down" temperature set @ 115C) and this in ambient temperatures of over 40C. Normal operating oil temperatures were around 100C
You must remember that the cooling system is strictly controlled and under normal conditions its total capacity is significantly under utilised - the Kaiser or Horton air actuated fan coming on at around 94-96C - this moves massive volumes of air through the radiator and around the engine and tunnel very quickly. These can lower the coolant temperature by about 10C in about 1 minute or so - oil coolers are of course mostly oil to coolant
almost universally US heavy high speed diesel engine manufacturers demand that a lubricant with a HTHS vis of 3.7cP be used. When using lower viscosity lubricants (lower than 15W-40) in controlled and very cold conditions, strict use factors are stated concerning the prevailing ambient temperature
Some Euro heavy high speed diesel engine manufacturers are specifying viscosities below 15W-40 but these are formally Approved lubricants only
In my Series 60 engines the average climbing oil temperature was 108C (ECMs "power down" temperature set @ 115C) and this in ambient temperatures of over 40C. Normal operating oil temperatures were around 100C
You must remember that the cooling system is strictly controlled and under normal conditions its total capacity is significantly under utilised - the Kaiser or Horton air actuated fan coming on at around 94-96C - this moves massive volumes of air through the radiator and around the engine and tunnel very quickly. These can lower the coolant temperature by about 10C in about 1 minute or so - oil coolers are of course mostly oil to coolant
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 1sttruck
" "Then why don't people racing use thinner oils than what they're typically using as it will provide better performance ?
"
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example "
Not even a good understanding of the question, and consequently not a good answer either. If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance. They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended. For F1 this was what, two races, for awhile at least.
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
Sheesh, this is getting serious, I was just trying to inject some levity into the thread......
....and I may have a little understanding of what's involved in building engines to last a race or two while extracting as much as possible (within reason and budget) from the lube system.
Yes my ego's gotten the better of me....
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...237#Post1330237
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...332#Post1330332
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...383#Post1330383
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...680#Post1330680
" "Then why don't people racing use thinner oils than what they're typically using as it will provide better performance ?
"
Umm, they do.......
Probably not a good example "
Not even a good understanding of the question, and consequently not a good answer either. If thinner is better then why don't the people putitng the oil in the F1 engine use a thinner one than the one they're putting, as it would provide better performance. They don't because they understand and use the relationship between wear and viscosity, and use the oil that enable the engine to last as long as intended. For F1 this was what, two races, for awhile at least.
The whole world understands this relationship, car makers, racers, engine designers, etc., apparently except for the geographical oddity known as bitog.
Sheesh, this is getting serious, I was just trying to inject some levity into the thread......
....and I may have a little understanding of what's involved in building engines to last a race or two while extracting as much as possible (within reason and budget) from the lube system.
Yes my ego's gotten the better of me....
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...237#Post1330237
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...332#Post1330332
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...383#Post1330383
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...680#Post1330680
"You must remember that the cooling system is strictly controlled and under normal conditions its total capacity is significantly under utilised.."
Even the light duty Cummins 5.9L in my pickup has what appears to be an excellent cooling system, with enough capacity that a 'front' is offered to block the radiator as needed in cold weather.
Even the light duty Cummins 5.9L in my pickup has what appears to be an excellent cooling system, with enough capacity that a 'front' is offered to block the radiator as needed in cold weather.
"....and I may have a little understanding of what's involved in building engines to last a race or two while extracting as much as possible (within reason and budget) from the lube system."
The threads that you posted show that you, like your peers, were using a wear / viscosity for each type of oil to try to manage the desired wear vs performance relationship. Even after each improvement that you made in the engine you were still using this relationship.
The threads that you posted show that you, like your peers, were using a wear / viscosity for each type of oil to try to manage the desired wear vs performance relationship. Even after each improvement that you made in the engine you were still using this relationship.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
For shear stable, Honda recommends dino 10W30 instead of 5W30 or 5W20 in S2000.
Remember that the S2000 owners manual was written in 1999.
Current 0/5W-30 oils, especially the true syn ones, are better than the 1999 SH/SJ oils, IMO.
Also, almost all F20/F22 (engine type used in S2000) UOA's I've seen show the dino oil shearing down into the 20 weight range.
Without, again: without! the "extra" wear associated with 20 weights.
And this in a 120hp/liter engine revving to 9000/8000 rpm.
Many of those have reached 100k miles without any problems using 10W-30(20 actually
) oils.
For shear stable, Honda recommends dino 10W30 instead of 5W30 or 5W20 in S2000.
Remember that the S2000 owners manual was written in 1999.
Current 0/5W-30 oils, especially the true syn ones, are better than the 1999 SH/SJ oils, IMO.
Also, almost all F20/F22 (engine type used in S2000) UOA's I've seen show the dino oil shearing down into the 20 weight range.
Without, again: without! the "extra" wear associated with 20 weights.
And this in a 120hp/liter engine revving to 9000/8000 rpm.
Many of those have reached 100k miles without any problems using 10W-30(20 actually
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Originally Posted By: 1sttruck
"....and I may have a little understanding of what's involved in building engines to last a race or two while extracting as much as possible (within reason and budget) from the lube system."
The threads that you posted show that you, like your peers, were using a wear / viscosity for each type of oil to try to manage the desired wear vs performance relationship. Even after each improvement that you made in the engine you were still using this relationship.
..and this means what to Joe Civic commuting @ 75mph ..or 85mph for that matter ..in the full range of ambient temps encountered from Manitoba to the Texas panhandle? Make that just about everything else ..EXCEPT diesels and hyper Euro alloy.
Give me an example of anything BUT diesels and high performance engine operated at ultra high output.
Where is their "managed damage" that you seem to insist exist??
Mundanes make up the galactic vast majority of the rolling fleet. Why are they shuffled into your HD/HP classification??
"....and I may have a little understanding of what's involved in building engines to last a race or two while extracting as much as possible (within reason and budget) from the lube system."
The threads that you posted show that you, like your peers, were using a wear / viscosity for each type of oil to try to manage the desired wear vs performance relationship. Even after each improvement that you made in the engine you were still using this relationship.
..and this means what to Joe Civic commuting @ 75mph ..or 85mph for that matter ..in the full range of ambient temps encountered from Manitoba to the Texas panhandle? Make that just about everything else ..EXCEPT diesels and hyper Euro alloy.
Give me an example of anything BUT diesels and high performance engine operated at ultra high output.
Where is their "managed damage" that you seem to insist exist??
Mundanes make up the galactic vast majority of the rolling fleet. Why are they shuffled into your HD/HP classification??
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
...
However it is very common to see much much higher lubricant return temperatures than the above - and this is normal
This was an issue with many VW installations in the 1990s where poor airflow caused excessively high oil temps and engine failures (especially with mineral lubricants). Some Porsche engines had the same problems. Individual components were really overheated but the bulk oil temepratures were not "excessive" by today's standards
Hello Doug,
I was wondering if this was also the 'problem' that Toyota had with their "slugger engines" or the 2.4L between roughly 1997 and 2002?
...
However it is very common to see much much higher lubricant return temperatures than the above - and this is normal
This was an issue with many VW installations in the 1990s where poor airflow caused excessively high oil temps and engine failures (especially with mineral lubricants). Some Porsche engines had the same problems. Individual components were really overheated but the bulk oil temepratures were not "excessive" by today's standards
Hello Doug,
I was wondering if this was also the 'problem' that Toyota had with their "slugger engines" or the 2.4L between roughly 1997 and 2002?
- Status
Similar threads
