Why we should love HTHS specs:

HTHS >3.0 for the win.

Look at the graph below and compare it to the wear graph shown in the article. See the similarity on ring wear as a function of HTHS. The hot running ring pack area doesn't seem to like low HTHS oil.

Piston Ring Wear vs HTHS at 130C Oil Temp(2).JPG


Engine Wear vs Oil HTHS.png
 
HTHS >3.0 for the win.

Look at the graph below and compare it to the wear graph shown in the article. See the similarity on ring wear as a function of HTHS. The hot running ring pack area doesn't seem to like low HTHS oil.
... when you happen to be running a long-ago engine at a sump temperature of 130°C.
 
... when you happen to be running a long-ago engine at a sump temperature of 130°C.
And with oil at 100-110 C it would probably make the wear inflection around 2.8 cP like the second graph. As said, I go for HTHS >3.0 and sleep better, why run on the edge of possible increased wear all the time ?
 
Last edited:
Always as high as possible HTHS - for me.
(Mobil 1 15W-50 is still my friend after all these years with the 4.5 HTHS)
I've mixed SAE 50 with 15W40 50/50 to arrive at the same HTHS at half the price. Ok if 20w50 is ok for the ambient.
I noticed a small fuel economy hit vs 15w40 in a LML Duramax. It's all deleted now, runs cooler, the oil stays clean and fuel economy improved 25%.
 
Who is having their engines wear out running the close to proper spec oils and doing proper maintenance in their vehicles?
Plenty of people are having chain issues with the OEM spec'd oil and change interval. Plenty. Not to mention a rash of low tension piston rings that fail to seal, along with clogged piston oil drain holes.
 
I like thick oils but I think that top graph was from 1950. Can you find the source?
I know it wasn't that old. Think it was a paper out of Asia by some PhDs. Will have to do some searching to find it.

Update edit. Go down about 60% down on this website to the section "Which HTHS parameter is safer for the engine?" Looks like a Toyota R&D paper done in 1997. I think I have the paper on one of my computers ... would have to look. You might be able to find the report PFD on the 'net somewhere.

 
Last edited:
Thanks. Definitely looks Russian in origin; what year, who knows. Anyway thanks for the post.
It's shown in that link I gave that it's origin was a Toyota R&D study in 1997. The Russian website is just refering to the data and showing figures from the study.
 
Back
Top