5W-40?

[River2016]

Ah ok I see your thought process now. Thanks for the extrapolation.

I like many others buy into the ratt blog and was planning to switch to QS 5w-30 as it was rated #1.When I read that doc I just wanted to see if anyone herehad anything that might dissuade me. Of All the oil posts I have read here to date I was still set on the QS.

Sponsored

 

[Maximus Gladius]

You’re asking opinions because you’re seeking advise and knowledge but at the end of the day you will decide to either leave things as they are, OR increase the viscosity slowly and watch your oil analysis reports OR dive right in with 5/40.

You do have the upper hand in being flush with cash so there’s also that factor that allows you to play. If I had no financial concerns, my vote would be to take it slow and increase viscosity slowly and watch the reports.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

I too read that blog and went with QS as well but my own personal research mixed both 0/20 and 5/30 (3 and 2) which kept the viscosity from dropping. This mix of 3 and 2 kept the viscosity the same as what comes fresh from the 0/20 bottle. There was no drop.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

But also with that blog, there’s near nothing posted how 0/20 stands up with other 0/20’s. It is mostly 5/30 and thicker.

I watched my MANY reports using the QS 0/20 mix with 5/30 and I saw all the wear numbers drop except for IRON which ran higher than ever before. I know the engine was still “breaking in” so I expected some elevation in the iron but not that high. (85 ppm in 7000k kms) All the other metals, much lower than I’ve seen.

I have switched to Mobil 1 Extended Performance 0/20 to see what numbers I get from their additive package.

 

[River2016]

But also with that blog, there’s near nothing posted how 0/20 stands up with other 0/20’s. It is mostly 5/30 and thicker.

I watched my MANY reports using the QS 0/20 mix with 5/30 and I saw all the wear numbers drop except for IRON which ran higher than ever before. I know the engine was still “breaking in” so I expected some elevation in the iron but not that high. (85 ppm in 7000k kms) All the other metals, much lower than I’ve seen.


very interesting. Thank you for that. I am also curious what my reports will indicate

 

[River2016]

That high iron content is definitely a little scary.

 

[River2016]

You’re asking opinions because you’re seeking advise and knowledge but at the end of the day you will decide to either leave things as they are, OR increase the viscosity slowly and watch your oil analysis reports OR dive right in with 5/40.

You do have the upper hand in being flush with cash so there’s also that factor that allows you to play. If I had no financial concerns, my vote would be to take it slow and increase viscosity slowly and watch the reports.

would not say flush lol but I can handle it if it goes south but it would not be a fun thing. It would definitely delay my plan to LS swap my sc400 and switch to manual.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

That high iron content is definitely a little scary.

I did however have a magnetic oil drain plug made since seeing 85ppm IRON which has made a dent in the IRON numbers and I have seen it drop.

 

[Mr._Bill]

I did however have a magnetic oil drain plug made since seeing 85ppm IRON which has made a dent in the IRON numbers and I have seen it drop.

But now your oil analysis is no longer accurate. You're manipulating the results by removing the iron from the oil with the magnet. I would be concerned with where the iron is coming from and what is causing it.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

But now your oil analysis is no longer accurate. You're manipulating the results by removing the iron from the oil with the magnet. I would be concerned with where the iron is coming from and what is causing it.

I guess I’m also manipulating it using a filter too but a magnet can only help with slowing down the wear. I didn’t like seeing the iron as high as it was and I believe I saw in a FINNING lab report?? that 100ppm would be concerning. 85ppm is still too high for my liking and want to see it south of 30’s.

Crossing my fingers this number comes down and this time I’ll change the oil around 7000-8000k to compare. Watching to see if there are different results between the additive packages of QS to Mobil 1 Extended Performance. There’s certainly some different variables to consider (and also that there was 12L of oil in there at the first plug pull?) Perhaps the high IRON count is a result of this ?? We are watching close.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

But now your oil analysis is no longer accurate. You're manipulating the results by removing the iron from the oil with the magnet. I would be concerned with where the iron is coming from and what is causing it.

Instead of being concerned about my analysis report not being accurate, you should thank me that I would throw the accuracy by informing us all we don’t have a magnetic drain plug and having one made and installing one. The point of having my reports done is to see if there is anything I can do to improve the health of the component. When it comes to maintenance, for me, the last thing that will leave my lips is the phrase “it is what it is”. Until that point, if I see the numbers drop because I took care to make a positive difference then I’ll take that manipulation all the way to the bank and hopefully help others do the same thing.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I like many others buy into the ratt blog and was planning to switch to QS 5w-30 as it was rated #1.

I've been using oils he recommends before I even realized he was a thing - come to find out I was, in my own ways, seeing the same things - through hands-on experience over years and years of working on hundreds of engines of all types over the years.
I've never ever run additives, never lost a cam (and have done a heck of a lot of cam installs, including some performance cams).
I did have one interesting thing happen to me after, just for kicks and giggles, switching my built 360 to biosyn oil from that blog. I had to knock the idle speed down on that car after running a bit with that oil. As I recall I had to drop the RPM more than 150 and rebalance the carbs on it. It idled faster. I saw no real logical reason -the engine is loose, except maybe the lifters liked it better.

There's always more out there believing they are better engineers, know more than engineers and can do a better job.
With millions of engines out there, most of them going some danged high miles, how wrong can engine makers be?

 

[TheRealStreetcommander]

Maximus is trying to do legitimate science. I appreciate his approach and the fact the he’s unselfish and posts his results.

Fair warning though, some of the most senoir contributors will be verbally abusive and viscously attack you for daring to ignore the oil gospel in their Mopar bible. The idea that Mopar engineers would make oil selection compromises in pursuit of an MPG or two, is simply out of the realm of possibilities for them. 0w20 cures cancer and diabetes too. Mopar need say no more than 0w20 is approved for use in the DANA 44s retroactively, and they’d believe 0w20 to now be THE best gear oil in every situation.

At 2k, I made a personal decision and switched to M1 0w40 euro. It shears to a 30w very rapidly but seems to perform very well in UOAs. It’s reduced my cold start clatter from .75-1.25 seconds down to imperceptible -.5 seconds. I suspect this is due to the phasers and tensioners not draining down as much over night.

Ow40 won’t cure cancer or diabetes either, but it gives me comfort and so far hasn’t caused any adverse affects. Others have reported great longevity results from 40w’s. My personal results with using diesel HDEO 40w’s in my gas engines has been outstanding.

Each owner needs to use what they’re comfortable with. Even with 0w20, these Pentastar are superbly durable.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Fair warning though, some of the most senoir contributors will be verbally abusive and viscously attack you for daring to ignore the oil gospel in their Mopar bible. The idea that Mopar engineers would make oil selection compromises in pursuit of an MPG or two, is simply out of the realm of possibilities for them. 0w20 cures cancer and diabetes too. Mopar need say no more than 0w20 is approved for use in the DANA 44s retroactively, and they’d believe 0w20 to now be THE best gear oil in every situation.

Ah, a preemptive strike.
With his own attacks, as seen in the past as well. Nice.

I'm one who ignored the books and specs on the T5 years ago when ATF was recommended. I run synchromesh. Ironically the spec was later changed to - yeah, synchromesh.

and was planning to switch to QS 5w-30

There's good evidence for such a weight oil
0w30 or 5w30 would be better in towing and hot climates than 0w20.
If I get time later (HAHA) I may give 0w30 a shot to see if I note any differences in oil temperatures and so on. It gets cold here so not sure about 5w for myself.
My engines have not had any cold start clatter - nothing can be heard once it fires. It's got typical cold weather valve train sounds, but none of ours have ever had a clatter. They are actually pretty quiet - cold and warm. So I have no reason to believe I'd be any better off than what the "book" calls for.

I run 10w30 in my built 4.0 but it doesn't get run in the winter temperatures. I'm more concerned about hot weather. I've got performance valve springs and a bit more lift on it than stock.


cSt @ cold 40*C (104*F) / cSt @ hot 100*C (212*F)

0W20 = 44.9 / 8.5, or 5.3 times thicker when cold

0W30 = 53.8 / 9.6, or 5.6 times thicker when cold
.
0W40 = 79.9 / 14.3, or 5.6 times thicker when cold
—–
5W20 = 51.6 / 9.0, or 5.7 times thicker when cold
.
5W30 = 62.4 / 10.8, or 5.8 times thicker when cold
.
5W40 = 87.2 / 14.7, or 5.9 times thicker when cold
—–
10W30 = 71.8 / 11.5, or 6.2 times thicker when cold

SAE 30 = 98.0 / 11.4, or 8.6 times thicker when cold, this straight weight oil was added to the list for comparison purposes
.
10W40 = 96.5 / 14.7, or 6.6 times thicker when cold

SAE 40 = 165.0 / 14.0, or 11.8 times thicker when cold, this straight weight oil was added to the list for comparison purposes
.
10W60 = 168.5 / 24.1, or 7.0 times thicker when cold
—–
15W40 = 105.0 / 14.8, or 7.1 times thicker when cold
.
15W50 = 133.8 / 20.2, or 6.6 times thicker when cold
—–
20W50 = 170.0 / 20.2, or 8.4 times thicker when cold
.
Notice how the thickness of the hot viscosity rating (the number AFTER the W) of any given oil above, also affects the thickness of the cold viscosity rating (the number BEFORE the W). For example, 5W20 and 5W40 both have a cold viscosity rating of 5, but the cold thickness of 5W20 is 51.6 cSt, while the cold thickness of 5W40 is 87.2 cSt, or 1.7 times thicker when cold, even though they both have the same cold viscosity rating of 5.

And as you can see above, even at these modest cold and hot temperatures that motor oil thickness values are typically available for, the oil is WAY, WAY THICKER when cold, than it is when hot. And the difference is even GREATER at more normal colder start-up and hotter operational temperatures. So, that means that at cold start-up, oil flow rate/lubrication will be GREATLY REDUCED

Diesel oils have a lower onset of thermal breakdown. Diesel oils are made for low RPM engines, and lower pressures (because the parts are larger the stresses are spread out) and they carry a lower film strength. Gas engines are made for higher RPM and have smaller bearing surfaces, increasing the stress or forces per square inch.
It's not that it can't be done or won't work or things will fry before 100,000 miles - it's that you could do a lot better and a lot longer. Oils are formulated for specific purposes.
How often does a diesel engine wind up to 4,000 + RPM

 

[TheRealStreetcommander]

Interesting food for thought from another manufacturer:

Ford says if you have the dealer install the factory performance package on a 2.3 Ecoboost or 5L 3rd-gen Coyote, which on both is ONLY a computer flash with zero internal engine mods, you must also run 5w50. The engine oil clearance tolerances don’t magically change after the PP tune. Ford just knows the car is more likely to be driven hard, and therefore should have an oil which provides better film strength to promote optimal longevity over MPG. MPG becomes a secondary objective.

Why should we think Ford would recommend a 50w oil, if cold start or any form of accelerated wear would result? Particularly on an engine they now suspect may have a more strenuous duty demand? The factory warranty conveys unchanged with the PP install.

Sponsored