You say you don't believe the car companies would not use synthetic because it would extend their cars' life (reducing their sales), then you mention that "they've already got enough planned long term annoyance in most cars to get many people to move." TB, it sounds like you are talking about planned obsolescence to me!
This is what I mean about the disposability of cars today in our society. There is nothing wrong with running 20wt except I want to have the option to keep the car a long time.
I guess if someone runs 20wt and then trades the car in, the real loser is the poor sap who buys the car second hand. It is always that way, the little guy gets the raw deal...
I said they wouldn't use synthetic oil because of increased production costs.
However, most people tire of their cars because of all of the other planned annoyances.
At least that is what I meant to say, what time did I write that anyway? It would have been midnight my time after being up at around 4AM, 140miles to a customer site, left there at 9PM, came home (another 140 miles), wifey and kids were asleep so I posted some incoherant nonsense on Edmunds. Sorry.
absolute basis? Maybe $20? And I would think the car companies would get a good deal from the oil makers because it's good advertising for them...but I am not sure about this. I know Mobil 1 brags about the cars they are factory fill in.
Two previous posters on this discussion, "according2me", and "fleetwodsimca" had some interesting points regarding the "synthetic" blend 5W-20 motor oils. For anyone interested in a bit of history regarding recent definitions of what constitutes "synthetic", read on:
"November 2000
PATRICK BEDARD: Synthetic motor oil gets all new semantics. BY PATRICK BEDARD
Now that the meaning of "is" has gotten so slippery you need to grab it with both hands, we'd better keep an eye on longer words, too.
One's already gone squirmy on us -- "synthetic," as in synthetic motor oil. Most guys know two things about synthetic oils. First, the price is three to four times that of conventional oils. Second, they're not real oil, not made from crude.
News flash: Scratch that second part. Now motor oils derived from crude may be labeled "synthetic." But they still cost over four bucks a quart.
Bait and switch? That's the obvious conclusion. Except in this case the advertising ethics people have given their approval.
Here's what happened, according to a detailed account published in the trade magazine Lubricants World. Late in 1997, Castrol changed the formula of its Syntec "full synthetic motor oil," eliminating the polyalphaolefin (PAO) base stock (that's the "synthetic" part, which makes up about 70 percent by volume of what's in the bottle) and replacing it with a "hydroisomerized" petroleum base stock.
Mobil Oil Corporation, maker of Mobil 1, "World's Leading Synthetic Motor Oil," said no fair and took its complaint to the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. NAD often arbitrates between feuding advertisers on their conflicting claims. The notion behind synthetic motor oils as we've known them is an elegant one. Instead of relying on the cocktail of hydrocarbons contained in crude oil, why not go into the laboratory and build the perfect base stock from scratch, molecule by molecule? The synthesizing of PAO starts with ethylene gas, a simple two-carbon molecule, and builds till it gets 10-carbon molecules, then combines three of those to form PAO. The result is a fluid more stable than the usual base oils derived from crude. It keeps flowing at low temperatures. It's more resistant to boiling off, and more resistant to oxidation, which causes thickening with prolonged exposure to high temperatures.
Still, there's more than one road to the point B of improved stability. Petroleum refiners in recent years have learned how to break apart certain undesirable molecules -- wax, for example, which causes thickening at low temperatures -- and transform them by chemical reaction into helpful molecules. These new hydroisomerized base oils, in the view of some industry participants, "provided properties similar to PAOs but cost only half as much," Lubricants World reported. The argument before NAD tiptoed around the obvious -- does the consumer get four bucks' worth of value from each quart of synthetic oil? -- and plunged straight into deep semantics. Mobil's experts said "synthetic" traditionally meant big molecules built up from small ones. Castrol's side held out for a looser description, defining "synthetic" as "the product of an intended chemical reaction."
What do unbiased sources say? It turns out that the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) both have technical standards covering motor oils, and both of these organizations in the '90s backed away from their old definitions of "synthetic," leaving lots of room for new interpretations.
In the end, NAD decided that the evidence "constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil," said Lubricants World. The obvious question now: Has the term "synthetic motor oil" been opened up to the point that it no longer means anything? Maybe. But here's a better question: Did synthetic ever mean what we thought it meant?
"Great oil" is what most guys think it means. "At that price, it's gotta be great stuff!"
Okay, but how great? Your car's manual tells what motor oil you should use, and with few exceptions, that description will consist of only two specifications. One is for viscosity, such as 10W-30; and another is for the API service grade, SJ being the current one for gasoline passenger cars. [remember, this editorial was in November, 2000 issue of Car & Driver]
The buck-a-quart multigrades meet these standards, as do the synthetics.
The synthetics, on the back label, claim compliance with more standards, but even if you know what they mean, they seem beside the point for U.S. passenger cars. For example, should you care about diesels if you drive a gasoline burner? API service CF is the oldest of the current specs for light-duty diesels; some synthetics list that one. Synthetics may also list ACEA A1 and B1, which are European specs roughly equivalent to API gasoline and diesel specs. The Europeans grade their oils by levels of performance, so that A2 and A3 are tougher specs than A1. Same for diesels. Usually, the date of the spec is omitted, but A1-98 is newer than A1-96. Completely absent is the one performance claim that would have real meaning for all of us -- some indication of longer oil life. But automakers hold synthetics to the same change intervals as conventional oils. And the oil companies, if anything, promise even less. "To give added protection and life to your engine, change your oil every 3000 miles." This same language appears on the back of both Pennzoil Synthetic and Pennzoil conventional oils. Valvoline synthetic makes a similar recommendation.
Synthetics do get one unambiguous endorsement: Corvettes, Porsches, Vipers, and all AMG models from Mercedes-Benz come with Mobil 1 as the factory fill.
Most synthetics mention GM 4718M in their list of claims; that's the unique spec created by General Motors for Corvette oil. It's a high-temperature requirement that tolerates less oxidation (thickening) and volatility (boil-off) on a standard engine test called Sequence IIIE, according to engineer Bob Olree of GM Powertrain.
But don't expect to learn such details on any label. Mobil 1 at least uses straightforward declarative sentences. Most of the others read as though they were written by a lawyer looking for an escape clause. Why else would the following claim be so rubbery? "Pennzoil Synthetic motor oil is recommended for use in all engines requiring ILSAC GF-1, GF-2, API SJ, SH, or SG, and in engines requiring oils meeting GM 4718M." Okay, but does it actually pass those standards?
"Yes," says James Newsom, Pennzoil's motor-oil product manager.
Castrol Syntec, on its label, "exceeds" every standard it mentions. Hmm. Now that the meaning of "is" is in play, I have to wonder, does Syntec meet those standards as well?
"It does," says Castrol's Juli Anne Oberg. While I have her on the phone, I ask if there wi
I should have figured the above post would be automatically truncated... Here's the rest:
"...While I have her on the phone, I ask if there will be a Syntec price reduction now that a lower-cost base stock has been substituted for the old synthetic. She says no."
Me again:
Some of you car guys may have already read the article from over two years ago. Of those, and depending on the libation you were partaking at the time, you may actually remember it, and you have my sincerest apologies for the bandwidth hit.
is that Mobil-1 is the good sheriff, and we don't know whether or how many banks the other guys have robbed yet.
I will, however, remember the magical phrase PAO and put it into my codeword book. any of them rustlers what uses PAO correctly in a sentence can brand my cows any day.
I'm curious, the ACURA RSX calls for 5w-20, but the hiher performance RSX-Type S calls for 5w-30!! I'd think if 5w-20 was better ACURA which is Honda would want to put it in their highest performance engines??? Same thing goes for the TL and TL-type S.. Just a thought
I believe it falls under an emission loophole that when a limited run of vehicles is produced, the manufacturer does not need to re-certify (EPA) a modified version of an existing drive train.
5W-30 is heavier duty than 5W-20, all else being the same. What may not be so simple is that Honda and Ford have tied us in a knot with a vague "requirement." My intention is to use 5W-30 in my 2002 Mountaineer V8, and not accept the recommendation to do otherwise. Recommendations, demands, and threats are not all the same thing!
Buy the 5W20 at Wally World and just hang on to it until you are out of warranty. (Actually use the 5W30 you buy on a seperate receipt.) If something happens, you have your maintenance log and receipts (for the 5W20 silly, don't show them the wrong receipts), otherwise, after the warranty expires exchange the 5W20 for the 5W30 stuff and go on your merry way.
You probably don't need to even bring the receipt back to exchange at Wally World, so you could probably do this on the same trip.
say, "the analysis of the 5W-20 looked good, it didn't breakdown much..." My question is, breakdown to what? Something can only be so thin. It was thin as water to begin with and after 3000 miles it's still thin as water. Great, folks, that is very reassuring. I'll stay with the 30 wt.
American: You may want to be a little carefull with all your broad generalizations and put downs about 5W20 oil. I own a Nissan in addition to my Ford vehicles so I follow the long running oil analysis reports on the Maxima.org site. If you study the various oils analyized there over several years you'll see that some oils (ones much better than oils you brand 5Wthin) don't always hold up all that well in real life. Some dino oils have been shown to run 10K miles while some synthetics like Castrol and Mobil 1 need changing in 4-5K miles. Even Amsoil, which has a solid track record, doesn't fair well in a few applications. There are no certainties when it comes to oil because there are so many variables to consider.
Will 5w20 oil hurt engine life? Will the use of something other than 5W20 harm a 5W20 engine? I'd submit, we really don't know the answer to either question yet.
A year ago, these same Edmunds oil boards were full of people railing about how bad the new Mobil 1 SuperSyn was compared to the old Tri-Syn. Now, most of those same folks are saying the new Mobil oil ain't all that bad. Who knows, in 10 years when the auto industry brings out the new API certified -15W0 weight oils, people will be crying for that good old 5W20. At least that was an oil with some body to it compared to "-15Wthin"
I don't know. You may ultimately be right. But in the here and now, the only thing I really know for sure is that my own closed mind is a greater threat to my car's welfare than any oil company marketing hype or broad generalization.
So for the time being I'm keeping my eye on real results, not opinions.
that the folks who are on the wrong side of the argument lose their engines at X thousand miles, well short of 150,000. takes a lot of time to get that data.
American: My oil analysis has come back with the oil looking great. What more proof can I provide? The lab claims the oil was fine just like when I used to send my 5w30 off. Everyone has already proven and pointed out that the 5w20 is actually pretty close to some 5w30 oils, so shouldn't that mean your 5w30 oils are just as bad?
Do I have to take the engine apart and show that everything looks fine?
FYI: Fast Fords and Mustangs ran an article recently listing all the changes and variations in the 4.6L V8 thru the years. Ford has changed the block and heads numerous times since the 4.6 came out. In fact, Ford changed the block and heads on the 4.6 V8 in 2001. Hmmm...wasn't that also when they switched to 5w20. Ford also changed the 2.5L V6 in 2001 the same year they switched to the 5w20. Now changes to the 4.6 and 2.5 might not have been related to changing to the 5w20, but then again they very well might be related to the change.
I'll stick with my 5w20 until someone can show actual proof and not just articles from Amisoil.
Well here's a question: Did Ford make the changes to the 4.6L to provide better performance/fuel economy/etc or did they do it to accomodate the new 5W-20? I'd like to see that proof first.
I'm not sure what 2.5L V6 you are referring to. Only one I'm aware of was in the Contour/Mystique/Probe and I believe these were made by Mazda not Ford. Is there any Ford product using the 2.5L V6 today now that all three of those cars are discontinued?
While you are researching this I'd like to know what engine mods were made to accomodate 5W-20 to the rest of the Ford gas engine family. Post a link or a Ford engineering document that states exactly what changes Ford made to every gasoline-powered engine they sell in the US with regards to 5W-20.
Once all this documentation has been unearthed and analysed we can move the conversation forward.
the 2.5 in the contour/mystique is the duratech and totally unrelated to the Mazda 2.5 in the probe. A bored version (3.0) of the 2.5 duratech is still used in the Taurus, Escape/Tribute, and Mazda MPV. Derivatives of the Duratech are also used in the Linc LS, baby Jag, and the Mazda6. That 2.5 very much lives on...
5W-30. In an email they told me 5W-30 was mechanically fine for my 2003 4.6L. Mobil 1 is a pretty expert opinion IMO. They don't benefit from the CAFE rules so I consider them to be less biased. And remember, they are making a 0W-20, they told me not to run that or 0W-30 either.
AMERICAN: Actually, I trust Mobil too. But a year ago they carried a FAQ on their web site about Ford and Honda's decision to use 5W20 and cautioned people to follow the manufacturer's recommendations. It was only up for a few months and then gone.
But, that was then, this is now. When the 0W20 SuperSyn comes out, I fully intend to check it out and probably use it. And despite all my pushback on you, I will probably stay with that oil or the 5W30 SuperSyn when the warranty is over. I think Mobil's synthetic is simply a superior lubricant to any other 5W20 on the market today. And considering the issues around the oil and what I've read about the Escape engine to begin with, well worth the extra cost.
While the factual evidance so far does not indicate a problem with 5W20, there is also no evidence (as you correctly pointed out a few posts back) that the use of something other than 5W20 will do any harm either! Except maybe for 85W140. That was a good one, Zues
I also trust Ford. Hell, I own 2 of their products! It's just that in this case, I have some of your same doubts. I'm sure there are some valid engineering reasons for this oil. But what makes me question it is that they also recommend 5W20 retroactively back to model years before 5W20 was available. And my biggest "hmmmm" is that the Mazda Tribute issued a TSB in '02 permitting 5W30 in their V6. I still don't understand that one. Totally goofy.
Right or wrong, I'm focusing on protecting the warranty right now cause I can't afford a fight with the manufacturer. Once that's over, I'll focus on protecting the engine. It sucks, I know. In fact the more I think about it, the more I want a beer right now.....
One thing that I don't ever recall seeing on this post about 5W20 oil is that these really are tough little oils. The Ford and Honda specs require these oils to pass the API double length (160 hours) Sequence IIIF tests for oil thickening, piston deposits, and valve train wear. Not all oils can do that. 5W30's usually just meet the single length (80 hours) test. Amsoil 5W30 may be an except to that. So there is more to consider than just oil viscosity. It also explains why most of these oils are syn-blends, or "severely" processed oils. They contain a fair amount of group 3, or better, base oils inorder to even meet the test. I suspect that may also help explain why there have been so many "good" oil analysis reports so far with 5W20, not to mention why these oils cost more than the average bear.
Mobil says their 0W20 will meet the Ford and Honda specs. That, plus the fact that it's a PAO synthetic (vs. Group 2 or 3 oil), ought to make it one of the better 20W oils available today.
synthetic 0W-20 either, but to go with 5W-30. That is no little matter.
Thin is thin. I have no doubt the 5W-20 offers some protection, I just think that for now, the safer bet is 5W-30. And I'll bet when all is said and done, it turns out the 30 wt offers more protection at the cost of a little fuel economy.
Do you think, if it was not for CAFE, that either Ford or Honda would be going to 20 wt? I doubt it. BTW, I love Fords, I just want mine to last.
Also, regarding warranty consideratons. I am running 5W-30 because I think if there are serious engine problems it will be a fight anyway. Why not use the oil that offers more protection?
"Fuel Economy formula". They call their 5W-30, "New Vehicle Formula". I think you can read between the lines and see what they are saying. There is one advantage to the thin 0W-30, added fuel economy (unless you happen to live in the Artic Circle and need the added cold start protection in sub-zero temps).
oil "Reduced Engine Life Formula". It will be interesting to see this! May not be the best for marketing but at least you have to hand it to them for being honest.
it's so counterproductive to put out a label that runs from "useless crap" to "set the world standard", and have a thermometer-type bar to indicate which level this bottle will perform at. I'm sure exxon/mobil has better advisors
but it would be so refreshing to have somebody say the automakers' recommended product will kill the engine that I would gladly pay admission to see it.
I am also emailing this to Mobil 1, I use their product and think highly of the company. These titles are no reflection on Mobil 1 but rather on the 20 weight oil. H is for Honesty folks:
10) Increased Friction Formula 9) Leased Car Without Intent to Buy Formula 8) Early Trade In Formula 7) Increased Wear and Tear Formula 6) I Am Afraid of the Big Bad Warranty Formula 5) I Don't Believe It's That Bad Formula 4) At Least It's Better Than 5W-20 Dino Formula 3) The Government and CAFE Love Me Formula 2) I Trust the Government and Corporate America Formula
And of course my favorite and from what I hear most likely:
spring for a high quality filter like the Mobil 1 oil filter. Afterall, who cares, filter it all you want, it ain't gonna make the 20 weight oil any thicker or better.
Maybe to save money a person could just use a Brie water filter...
the manual calls for 5W30 and I should probably use synthetic.
I was wondering if I should use 5W20 instead since I'll need an excuse for swapping the block for a Mopar Performance 2.4 Neon race block and a larger Garrett turbocharger.....
ISSUE Ford Motor Company now recommends SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade for servicing any Ford gasoline-powered vehicle regardless of model year.
ACTION When servicing any Ford gasoline-powered vehicle, use SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oil. Refer to the following text for further details.
Both SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oils have been recommended in the past depending on vehicle model and year.
Tests have proven SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oil provides the optimum protection and benefits for Ford gasoline engines. At both high and low ambient temperature conditions, SAE 5W-30 provides the best overall protection. It allows faster starts under cold ambient temperatures.
**SAE 5W-30 also provides approximately 1/2% increase in fuel economy over SAE 10W-30.**
SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oils certified for gasoline engines by the American Petroleum Institute (API) should be used for all service procedures requiring replacement of the motor oil.
The asterisks re the fuel economy increase are mine. I wonder what next week's spec will be.
10W-30 to 5W-30. 5W-30 is still 30 weight but with a lower starting viscosity, what is the problem with that? And there are some gains in fuel economy to be had at the expense of engine protection within reason. But when it goes to 20wt, and your engine is being protected by something the thickness of water, then I have to question it. If 5 years from now it is proven to protect as well as 30 weight, then I'll be there. I doubt that will happen though. I think the arguement will still be greater fuel economy.
Has anyone looked into barrier protection provided by the Motorcraft semisynthetic 5W-20, relative to mineral based 5W-30? This comparison could be meaningful, concerning the ability of the FOMOCO oil to replace 5W-30 non semisynthetic mineral oil. This comparison could then be broadened to include other brands of 5W-20. Are there any 5W-20's out there that are not semisynthetic, or is that formulation part of the package for all refiners/synthesizers?
doesn't call for it (20wt), but the Cobra probably will (call for 20wt). If I get the Cobra next year, or late this year, I'll know by them how many Fords with blown motors have come through!
Comments
5w-20 keeps showing up on teller-cam pictures of bank robberies in Wichita
5w-20: the oil that made milwaukee famous
5w-20: the other white water
need I go on?
5w-20: the other YELLOW water
but we'll leave the beauty for the beholder.
-0-
5w-20 carries "MT" designation, also rated "C-through" for diesel (frequent) service.
-0-
Q: what would the antipollution crews do if a truck of 5w-20 flipped over on the highway and fell into a slough?
A: go out drinkin', no hazard there.
This is what I mean about the disposability of cars today in our society. There is nothing wrong with running 20wt except I want to have the option to keep the car a long time.
I guess if someone runs 20wt and then trades the car in, the real loser is the poor sap who buys the car second hand. It is always that way, the little guy gets the raw deal...
However, most people tire of their cars because of all of the other planned annoyances.
At least that is what I meant to say, what time did I write that anyway? It would have been midnight my time after being up at around 4AM, 140miles to a customer site, left there at 9PM, came home (another 140 miles), wifey and kids were asleep so I posted some incoherant nonsense on Edmunds. Sorry.
TB
TB
The college kid who just bought a Focus or Cavalier isn't going to like dropping $60 when he could use the other oil in a $20 oil change.
My point is consumers would have to step up to support the use of synthetic. Corvette owners don't seem to mind because it makes them special.
"November 2000
PATRICK BEDARD: Synthetic motor oil gets all new semantics. BY PATRICK BEDARD
Now that the meaning of "is" has gotten so slippery you need to grab it with both hands, we'd better keep an eye on longer words, too.
One's already gone squirmy on us -- "synthetic," as in synthetic motor oil.
Most guys know two things about synthetic oils. First, the price is three to four times that of conventional oils. Second, they're not real oil, not made from crude.
News flash: Scratch that second part. Now motor oils derived from crude may be labeled "synthetic." But they still cost over four bucks a quart.
Bait and switch? That's the obvious conclusion. Except in this case the advertising ethics people have given their approval.
Here's what happened, according to a detailed account published in the trade magazine Lubricants World. Late in 1997, Castrol changed the formula of its Syntec "full synthetic motor oil," eliminating the polyalphaolefin (PAO) base stock (that's the "synthetic" part, which makes up about 70 percent by volume of what's in the bottle) and replacing it with a "hydroisomerized" petroleum base stock.
Mobil Oil Corporation, maker of Mobil 1, "World's Leading Synthetic Motor Oil," said no fair and took its complaint to the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. NAD often arbitrates between feuding advertisers on their conflicting claims.
The notion behind synthetic motor oils as we've known them is an elegant one. Instead of relying on the cocktail of hydrocarbons contained in crude oil, why not go into the laboratory and build the perfect base stock from scratch, molecule by molecule? The synthesizing of PAO starts with ethylene gas, a simple two-carbon molecule, and builds till it gets 10-carbon molecules, then combines three of those to form PAO. The result is a fluid more stable than the usual base oils derived from crude. It keeps flowing at low temperatures. It's more resistant to boiling off, and more resistant to oxidation, which causes thickening with prolonged exposure to high temperatures.
Still, there's more than one road to the point B of improved stability. Petroleum refiners in recent years have learned how to break apart certain undesirable molecules -- wax, for example, which causes thickening at low temperatures -- and transform them by chemical reaction into helpful molecules. These new hydroisomerized base oils, in the view of some industry participants, "provided properties similar to PAOs but cost only half as much," Lubricants World reported.
The argument before NAD tiptoed around the obvious -- does the consumer get four bucks' worth of value from each quart of synthetic oil? -- and plunged straight into deep semantics. Mobil's experts said "synthetic" traditionally meant big molecules built up from small ones. Castrol's side held out for a looser description, defining "synthetic" as "the product of an intended chemical reaction."
What do unbiased sources say? It turns out that the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) both have technical standards covering motor oils, and both of these organizations in the '90s backed away from their old definitions of "synthetic," leaving lots of room for new interpretations.
In the end, NAD decided that the evidence "constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil," said Lubricants World.
The obvious question now: Has the term "synthetic motor oil" been opened up to the point that it no longer means anything? Maybe. But here's a better question: Did synthetic ever mean what we thought it meant?
"Great oil" is what most guys think it means. "At that price, it's gotta be great stuff!"
Okay, but how great? Your car's manual tells what motor oil you should use, and with few exceptions, that description will consist of only two specifications. One is for viscosity, such as 10W-30; and another is for the API service grade, SJ being the current one for gasoline passenger cars. [remember, this editorial was in November, 2000 issue of Car & Driver]
The buck-a-quart multigrades meet these standards, as do the synthetics.
The synthetics, on the back label, claim compliance with more standards, but even if you know what they mean, they seem beside the point for U.S. passenger cars. For example, should you care about diesels if you drive a gasoline burner? API service CF is the oldest of the current specs for light-duty diesels; some synthetics list that one. Synthetics may also list ACEA A1 and B1, which are European specs roughly equivalent to API gasoline and diesel specs. The Europeans grade their oils by levels of performance, so that A2 and A3 are tougher specs than A1. Same for diesels. Usually, the date of the spec is omitted, but A1-98 is newer than A1-96.
Completely absent is the one performance claim that would have real meaning for all of us -- some indication of longer oil life. But automakers hold synthetics to the same change intervals as conventional oils. And the oil companies, if anything, promise even less. "To give added protection and life to your engine, change your oil every 3000 miles." This same language appears on the back of both Pennzoil Synthetic and Pennzoil conventional oils. Valvoline synthetic makes a similar recommendation.
Synthetics do get one unambiguous endorsement: Corvettes, Porsches, Vipers, and all AMG models from Mercedes-Benz come with Mobil 1 as the factory fill.
Most synthetics mention GM 4718M in their list of claims; that's the unique spec created by General Motors for Corvette oil. It's a high-temperature requirement that tolerates less oxidation (thickening) and volatility (boil-off) on a standard engine test called Sequence IIIE, according to engineer Bob Olree of GM Powertrain.
But don't expect to learn such details on any label. Mobil 1 at least uses straightforward declarative sentences. Most of the others read as though they were written by a lawyer looking for an escape clause. Why else would the following claim be so rubbery? "Pennzoil Synthetic motor oil is recommended for use in all engines requiring ILSAC GF-1, GF-2, API SJ, SH, or SG, and in engines requiring oils meeting GM 4718M." Okay, but does it actually pass those standards?
"Yes," says James Newsom, Pennzoil's motor-oil product manager.
Castrol Syntec, on its label, "exceeds" every standard it mentions. Hmm. Now that the meaning of "is" is in play, I have to wonder, does Syntec meet those standards as well?
"It does," says Castrol's Juli Anne Oberg. While I have her on the phone, I ask if there wi
"...While I have her on the phone, I ask if there will be a Syntec price reduction now that a lower-cost base stock has been substituted for the old synthetic. She says no."
Me again:
Some of you car guys may have already read the article from over two years ago. Of those, and depending on the libation you were partaking at the time, you may actually remember it, and you have my sincerest apologies for the bandwidth hit.
I will, however, remember the magical phrase PAO and put it into my codeword book. any of them rustlers what uses PAO correctly in a sentence can brand my cows any day.
You probably don't need to even bring the receipt back to exchange at Wally World, so you could probably do this on the same trip.
Problem solved, we can close the topic now, LOL.
TB
Will 5w20 oil hurt engine life? Will the use of something other than 5W20 harm a 5W20 engine? I'd submit, we really don't know the answer to either question yet.
A year ago, these same Edmunds oil boards were full of people railing about how bad the new Mobil 1 SuperSyn was compared to the old Tri-Syn. Now, most of those same folks are saying the new Mobil oil ain't all that bad. Who knows, in 10 years when the auto industry brings out the new API certified -15W0 weight oils, people will be crying for that good old 5W20. At least that was an oil with some body to it compared
to "-15Wthin"
I don't know. You may ultimately be right. But in the here and now, the only thing I really know for sure is that my own closed mind is a greater threat to my car's welfare than any oil company marketing hype or broad generalization.
So for the time being I'm keeping my eye on real results, not opinions.
meanwhile, we all wrangle with no information.
the upside is, we get to keep the thread going
Do I have to take the engine apart and show that everything looks fine?
FYI: Fast Fords and Mustangs ran an article recently listing all the changes and variations in the 4.6L V8 thru the years. Ford has changed the block and heads numerous times since the 4.6 came out. In fact, Ford changed the block and heads on the 4.6 V8 in 2001. Hmmm...wasn't that also when they switched to 5w20. Ford also changed the 2.5L V6 in 2001 the same year they switched to the 5w20. Now changes to the 4.6 and 2.5 might not have been related to changing to the 5w20, but then again they very well might be related to the change.
I'll stick with my 5w20 until someone can show actual proof and not just articles from Amisoil.
Kidding - I don't have a new Ford 4.6. I may have a new WRX pretty soon, though!!
I'm not sure what 2.5L V6 you are referring to. Only one I'm aware of was in the Contour/Mystique/Probe and I believe these were made by Mazda not Ford. Is there any Ford product using the 2.5L V6 today now that all three of those cars are discontinued?
While you are researching this I'd like to know what engine mods were made to accomodate 5W-20 to the rest of the Ford gas engine family. Post a link or a Ford engineering document that states exactly what changes Ford made to every gasoline-powered engine they sell in the US with regards to 5W-20.
Once all this documentation has been unearthed and analysed we can move the conversation forward.
AMERICAN: Actually, I trust Mobil too. But a year ago they carried a FAQ on their web site about Ford and Honda's decision to use 5W20 and cautioned people to follow the manufacturer's recommendations. It was only up for a few months and then gone.
But, that was then, this is now. When the 0W20 SuperSyn comes out, I fully intend to check it out and probably use it. And despite all my pushback on you, I will probably stay with that oil or the 5W30 SuperSyn when the warranty is over. I think Mobil's synthetic is simply a superior lubricant to any other 5W20 on the market today. And considering the issues around the oil and what I've read about the Escape engine to begin with, well worth the extra cost.
While the factual evidance so far does not indicate a problem with 5W20, there is also no evidence (as you correctly pointed out a few posts back) that the use of something other than 5W20 will do any harm either! Except maybe for 85W140. That was a good one, Zues
I also trust Ford. Hell, I own 2 of their products! It's just that in this case, I have some of your same doubts. I'm sure there are some valid engineering reasons for this oil. But what makes me question it is that they also recommend 5W20 retroactively back to model years before 5W20 was available. And my biggest "hmmmm" is that the Mazda Tribute issued a TSB in '02 permitting 5W30 in their V6. I still don't understand that one. Totally goofy.
Right or wrong, I'm focusing on protecting the warranty right now cause I can't afford a fight with the manufacturer. Once that's over, I'll focus on protecting the engine. It sucks, I know. In fact the more I think about it, the more I want a beer right now.....
One thing that I don't ever recall seeing on this post about 5W20 oil is that these really are tough little oils. The Ford and Honda specs require these oils to pass the API double length (160 hours) Sequence IIIF tests for oil thickening, piston deposits, and valve train wear. Not all oils can do that. 5W30's usually just meet the single length (80 hours) test. Amsoil 5W30 may be an except to that. So there is more to consider than just oil viscosity. It also explains why most of these oils are syn-blends, or "severely" processed oils. They contain a fair amount of group 3, or better, base oils inorder to even meet the test. I suspect that may also help explain why there have been so many "good" oil analysis reports so far with 5W20, not to mention why these oils cost more than the average bear.
Mobil says their 0W20 will meet the Ford and Honda specs. That, plus the fact that it's a PAO synthetic (vs. Group 2 or 3 oil), ought to make it one of the better 20W oils available today.
Thin is thin. I have no doubt the 5W-20 offers some protection, I just think that for now, the safer bet is 5W-30. And I'll bet when all is said and done, it turns out the 30 wt offers more protection at the cost of a little fuel economy.
Do you think, if it was not for CAFE, that either Ford or Honda would be going to 20 wt? I doubt it. BTW, I love Fords, I just want mine to last.
Also, regarding warranty consideratons. I am running 5W-30 because I think if there are serious engine problems it will be a fight anyway. Why not use the oil that offers more protection?
but it would be so refreshing to have somebody say the automakers' recommended product will kill the engine that I would gladly pay admission to see it.
10) Increased Friction Formula
9) Leased Car Without Intent to Buy Formula
8) Early Trade In Formula
7) Increased Wear and Tear Formula
6) I Am Afraid of the Big Bad Warranty Formula
5) I Don't Believe It's That Bad Formula
4) At Least It's Better Than 5W-20 Dino Formula
3) The Government and CAFE Love Me Formula
2) I Trust the Government and Corporate America
Formula
And of course my favorite and from what I hear most likely:
1) Reduced Engine Life Formula
Maybe to save money a person could just use a Brie water filter...
I was wondering if I should use 5W20 instead since I'll need an excuse for swapping the block for a Mopar Performance 2.4 Neon race block and a larger Garrett turbocharger.....
Date: May 3, 1999
ISSUE
Ford Motor Company now recommends SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade for servicing any Ford gasoline-powered vehicle regardless of model year.
ACTION
When servicing any Ford gasoline-powered vehicle, use SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oil. Refer to the following text for further details.
Both SAE 10W-30 and SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oils have been recommended in the past depending on vehicle model and year.
Tests have proven SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oil provides the optimum protection and benefits for Ford gasoline engines. At both high and low ambient temperature conditions, SAE 5W-30 provides the best overall protection. It allows faster starts under cold ambient temperatures.
**SAE 5W-30 also provides approximately 1/2% increase in fuel economy over SAE 10W-30.**
SAE 5W-30 viscosity grade motor oils certified for gasoline engines by the American Petroleum Institute (API) should be used for all service procedures requiring replacement of the motor oil.
The asterisks re the fuel economy increase are mine. I wonder what next week's spec will be.
I'll use 5W30 synthetic and if this car gives me a problem, I have two other guys to write a report - I won't have to get involved in my own case.
I think I'll sit on the sidelines and see if any engine failure lemon law cases come in - you might say I have a ringside seat.
Fleetwood, interesting question.
Ringside seats, I tell you!