Manual states 5w20 or 10w30?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: MarkC
Someone who knows about such things begs to differ, and believes that a good 5W20 provides much better wear protection than a 5W30....


Not to insult you in any way but how do you know that?


Got it from a well-respected person who knows what he's talking about, based on things other than opinions or guesses.
Not to sound like a [censored], but that's all I can say.


I would love to hear how a quality 20wt provides more protection than a quality 30wt. I think the best you could hope for is the same protection. Unless we're talking about that microsecond difference in time to pressure with the already lubed bearings and cylinders.


Well, if you talk with the right people, maybe they'll tell you.

Maybe 20's are better built. Maybe they actually stay in grade, unlike many 5W30's.
Maybe someone who looks at many, many UOA's is in a better position to say than someone who just guesses.


Or maybe not.


You won't catch me running a 5w-30 but there's nothing wrong with a quality one. I don't look to UOAs to measure wear. They mean nothing as is evidenced by teardowns with a terribly worn out engine producing ok UOAs. I can state this over and over and guys will still ignore it. Use them for trending an engine over it's lifetime but I have absolutely 0 faith in a single UOA whether is shows 0 wear or 999ppm.

Who exactly are the "right" people?


My idea of the "right" person is Doug. A guy with probably 10+ million Km's under his belt of trending and tracking UOA's and oil brands in concert with tear-down testing.

He stated that single-pass UOA's are essentially useless for measuring wear. His explanation makes perfect sense. Nobody wants to hear it is the real issue..........


I put a lot of faith into what Doug has to say. I doubt anyone on this board or any 5 people for that matter could match his real world experience and research.



As do I sir, as do I. I cherish my copy of his book as well. The man is a wealth of wisdom and knowledge, and his massive resume of real world experience, not only with fleet testing, but in doing testing and work FOR Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Castrol...etc.... Simply speaks volumes.
 
I agree on the Acura I think energy conserving is energy conserving (I know you stepped out of the box with the Redline)0w20 to 10w30 there is really only nominal difference in the operating temperatures. It does cost more to produce 20wts tat meet the standards that logically could lead to a conclusion that the 20 wt base oils are better or the add package is fortified or both. The fact is they all meet the same standards the only difference in the fuel economy test.
I don't have issue with anyone who has a vehicle that recommends and ILSAC energy conserving grade experimenting within the energy conserving grades. I do that I have run 5w20 in a 5w30 vehicle and I have 5w30 and 10w30 in the stash slated for a 5w20 engine.. Not ideal in my opinion but the stuff is there I got it cheap and it will do the job. I will UOA the series. I doubt much variation will be apparent. (jeep 3.8).

Your GN is beyond the norm and the lower end is obviously not bullet proof. I cannot argue with your oil choices in it. If is helping to hold it together then that is what you have to run.


I don 't think we are so far apart in philosophy, it is our applications that are different. Groups of people tend to polarize to ideas they are comfortable with based on their experience.. I attribute much of this thick-vs- thin debate on that trait. I refuse to believe the logic is irreconcilable, we have to much in common with our goals.
 
Originally Posted By: Jdblya
I'm still pretty sure that 0w flows better on cold starting than does 5w


Not in every case. Not 0w-30 vs 5w-20 synth.
 
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
I agree on the Acura I think energy conserving is energy conserving (I know you stepped out of the box with the Redline)0w20 to 10w30 there is really only nominal difference in the operating temperatures. It does cost more to produce 20wts tat meet the standards that logically could lead to a conclusion that the 20 wt base oils are better or the add package is fortified or both. The fact is they all meet the same standards the only difference in the fuel economy test.
I don't have issue with anyone who has a vehicle that recommends and ILSAC energy conserving grade experimenting within the energy conserving grades. I do that I have run 5w20 in a 5w30 vehicle and I have 5w30 and 10w30 in the stash slated for a 5w20 engine.. Not ideal in my opinion but the stuff is there I got it cheap and it will do the job. I will UOA the series. I doubt much variation will be apparent. (jeep 3.8).

Your GN is beyond the norm and the lower end is obviously not bullet proof. I cannot argue with your oil choices in it. If is helping to hold it together then that is what you have to run.


I don 't think we are so far apart in philosophy, it is our applications that are different. Groups of people tend to polarize to ideas they are comfortable with based on their experience.. I attribute much of this thick-vs- thin debate on that trait. I refuse to believe the logic is irreconcilable, we have to much in common with our goals.





I agree, we nearly agree on most things, there's just that little difference. One thing I always forget to post is I'm sure your average 20wt is of a higher quality than an average heavier weight oil. It has to be. I get so wound up on the "best" that I sometimes forget there are "normal" heavy oils.
 
We who give a darn about this topic enough to carry on endless no conclusive discussions on the topic are most likely to invest in quality and value that delivers performance. We are wired similarly in that regard.
 
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
We who give a darn about this topic enough to carry on endless no conclusive discussions on the topic are most likely to invest in quality and value that delivers performance. We are wired similarly in that regard.


You sir, speak with great eloquence.
 
I am on my second glass of wine..
wink.gif
I see several gramatical errors in my posts but do not care so much.
 
Originally Posted By: BuickGN
I drained the scorching straight 30wt out of it today and it looked like water.


Sparkly and shiny just like water
wink.gif
 
Quote:
I am on my second glass of wine.. ;\) I see several gramatical errors in my posts but do not care so much.


Have a couple more glasses and you won't even notice the errors.
11.gif
 
Wroking tommorow..1/2 glass more..thin done..\


I admit I am able to connect more when I am not between task at work. I may carry over some of my worktime hardnose agressive attitude into my daytime posts, shame on me for not refraining to post until I am unstressed.
 
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
Wroking tommorow..1/2 glass more..thin done..\


I admit I am able to connect more when I am not between task at work. I may carry over some of my worktime hardnose agressive attitude into my daytime posts, shame on me for not refraining to post until I am unstressed.


I'm 100% guilty of that myself.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

As do I sir, as do I. I cherish my copy of his book as well. The man is a wealth of wisdom and knowledge, and his massive resume of real world experience, not only with fleet testing, but in doing testing and work FOR Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Castrol...etc.... Simply speaks volumes.


I was not aware he had a book? Can you point me towards it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: Tim H.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Good to know there's so many posters, some new and psychic, who know more than the car manfacturers.
smirk2.gif



If they knew so much, then perhaps there wouldn't be recall notices would there?
21.gif

I've seen no recalls for engines related to the use of recommended 5w20 oil.
21.gif
That is what's specifically being discussed here.

I've also not seen any failures related to the use of 5w20 since Honda and Ford went that recommendation. Where are they?
wink.gif


Yep, lot's of recall notices for them.
smirk2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

As do I sir, as do I. I cherish my copy of his book as well. The man is a wealth of wisdom and knowledge, and his massive resume of real world experience, not only with fleet testing, but in doing testing and work FOR Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Castrol...etc.... Simply speaks volumes.


For us newcomers who don't get all the inside jokes....who is this Doug person?

Respectfully,
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Originally Posted By: Jdblya
I'm still pretty sure that 0w flows better on cold starting than does 5w


Not in every case. Not 0w-30 vs 5w-20 synth.
I've been wondering about that specifically. Which would flow better in the winter, at say 0 degrees F. 0w30 M1 AFE or something like 5w20 PP???
 
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
I will do the work for you this time.

References
http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_0W-30.asp

http://www.pennzoil.com/documents/Platinum Full Synthetic Motor Oil.pdf
Using the Widman viscosity chart http://www.widman.biz/Seleccion/Viscosidad/Conversiones/Graph/graph.html


At 0°f PP 5w20 will be thinner
PP5w20- = 1549
M1 0w30= 2087




Thank you very much! I had looked at those pages before, I was just having a hard time deciphering the information. Not sure what meant what!
 
Quote:
My idea of the "right" person is Doug. A guy with probably 10+ million Km's under his belt of trending and tracking UOA's and oil brands in concert with tear-down testing.



Here's where you have Doug all wrong. What you fail to realize is that Doug tends to gravitate to the 40 weight range. 5w-40, 0w-(cough-cough)40, and 15w-40.

In Oz language, he's a virtual heretic for not insisting on 25-70 or 40-70
LOL.gif


He's is very much a thin head.
grin2.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top