 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / March 20065w30 vs 10w30 wt. oil
if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the 10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? I can't make myself believe that the recommendation of the motor car co. - isn't self-serving. m h o v e > if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the > 10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100?? > I can't make myself believe that the recommendation of the motor car co. > - isn't self-serving. > m h o > ?v ?e > No. if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the 10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? I can't make myself believe that the recommendation of the motor car co. - isn't self-serving. m h o v fe I would not hesitate to use 10w30. While I may be technologically outdated, I prefer a bit higher viscosity range. The lower range, if I understand correctly, is one of the ways that manufacturers achieve the mandated fuel economy ratings. >I would not hesitate to use 10w30. While I may be technologically outdated, >I prefer a bit higher viscosity range. The lower range, if I understand >correctly, is one of the ways that manufacturers achieve the mandated fuel >economy ratings. That's true. But, there's a considerable amount of wear put on your engine starting it up cold. In cold climates, the better flow characteristics in cold weather of the 5w30 can help that a lot. In Florida, it won't make a damn bit of difference. --scott  Signature"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." >if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the >10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > v e > I wouldn't hesitate to use 10W30 if 5W30 was unavailable within those temperature parameters. However, it is my understanding that the engines specifying 5W30 have tighter bearing clearances and that using the 10W may have an adverse, if miniscule, effect on lubrication at lower temperatures. That being said, two of our cars specify 10W and two specify 5W so keeping some of both in the garage is no big deal. > I can't make myself believe that the recommendation of the motor car co. > - isn't self-serving. Trolling idiot. As long as your engine is in good condition, and the cooling systme is functioning properly, there is no reason to think that there is an advantage to using 10W30 instead of 5W30. At the normal operating temeprature for your engine, they both have virtually the same viscosity. When the engine is cold, both are thicker than when the engine is warm. When cold, the 5W30 will flow better. The only possible reason for using 10W30 instead of 5W30 is becasue you are concerned that the 5W30 is more prone to break down. However, the usual affect of the oil breaking down is that it becomes thicker, not thinner. So I can't see any reason to use 10W30 instead of 5W30 unless you manufacturer specifically recommends the 10W3. It won't protect your engine better once the engine is warmed up and it is probably not as good as the 5W30 when the engine is cold. Ed >As long as your engine is in good condition, and the cooling systme is >functioning properly, there is no reason to think that there is an [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >that the 5W30 is more prone to break down. However, the usual affect of >the oil breaking down is that it becomes thicker, not thinner. Other way around. Viscosity index improvers allow the use of lighter (thinner) stock. It's the VI improver that determines the viscosity at normal running temperature, whereas the base stock determines viscosity at the cold end. The rest of your argument stands. There's everything to gain and nothing to lose by using the oil with the lowest borderline pumping temperature (and hence the lowest viscosity when cold). The 5W30 is also likely to use better quality VI improvers that are less likely to break down. SignatureJohn H where did I read that the use of 5w30 oil as opposed to10w30 for the same car - reduced the life of the car's engine by 30%, and only increased the fuel efficiency factor by a mere 1%? I know now, in an article titled - all about motor oil. m h o v e > Other way around. Viscosity index improvers allow the use of lighter > (thinner) stock. It's the VI improver that determines the viscosity > at normal running temperature, whereas the base stock determines > viscosity at the cold end. That's right. The improver is long-chained molecules that stay in a little clump at low temperatures, and uncoil at higher temperatures. There is another name for these molecules. When they form a solid mass, they are better known as rubber. Yes, the viscosity improver is rubber, or something chemically related to it. You can think of it as tiny particles of rubber which essentially start to melt at high temperature and mix with the oil, turning it to thicker goo. When the temperature drops, they revert to being dense little particles. > The rest of your argument stands. There's everything to gain and > nothing to lose by using the oil with the lowest borderline pumping > temperature (and hence the lowest viscosity when cold). > > The 5W30 is also likely to use better quality VI improvers that are > less likely to break down. What makes you sure that it uses a /better/ quality viscosity additive, rather than just /more/ of the same one? Add more rubber, get more thickening. These additives may add viscosity, but one thing they are not is lubricants. Corn syrup has viscosity, but it's not a terribly good lubricant (even for a cold machine) Thickness isn't everything, right? Adding a rubber-like compound to oil is not going to make it slicker, only thicker. If the engine and oil could be heated up to operating temperature without the engine actually turning over, then the best oil would be a straight non-multi-weight 30 (or maybe more) without any viscosity modifier. Multi-weight is a compromise: trick to get a 5 or 10 to fake the thickness of a 30 when things heat up. A deeper spread is not better, it's just a bigger compromise to handle a greater temperature range. For a spread greater than 10-30, I'd stick to synthetics. Supposedly, synthetics provide that multi-weight property without the viscosity improver additive, or need less of it to achieve a given spread. Flame away ... > On 3/10/2006 10:50 PM ... Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> Other way around. Viscosity index improvers allow the use of lighter [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > Flame away ... Thus you often see 0W-20 and 0W-30 products in synthetics. > > On 3/10/2006 10:50 PM ... Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> Other way around. Viscosity index improvers allow the use of lighter [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > Thus you often see 0W-20 and 0W-30 products in synthetics. The very 'best' Mobil1 grade is the 0w/40. 'Best' in the sense that it is suitable for much longer drain intervals and severe use than other M1 viscosity grades due to its superior chemistry. Huw >> Other way around. Viscosity index improvers allow the use of lighter >> (thinner) stock. It's the VI improver that determines the viscosity [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >goo. When the temperature drops, they revert to being dense little >particles. Probably a little too simplistic. The VI improvers are long chain polymers which curl up (like a spring) as temperatures rise. >> The rest of your argument stands. There's everything to gain and >> nothing to lose by using the oil with the lowest borderline pumping [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >rather than just /more/ of the same one? Add more rubber, get more >thickening. Long experience, with many applications, tells me that all VI improvers are far from equal. The common explanation is that the poorer quality polymers get chopped up by components such as gears where the better ones possibly survive. Better, and more expensive, oils tend to have better quality additives... this is probably particularly true of the more reputable synthetics. Some manufacturers still don't trust any mutigrade oil because of the risk of VI breakdown in their machinery. AFAIK this still applies to Caterpillar (other than engines), and definitely to Briggs & Stratton engines. Cars and bikes that use the same oil for both engine and transmission are also at risk -- especially under arduous conditions such as racing. >These additives may add viscosity, but one thing they are not is >lubricants. Corn syrup has viscosity, but it's not a terribly good >lubricant (even for a cold machine) Thickness isn't everything, right? Sure isn't. Contrary to popular opinion even natural viscosity has little to with the lubricating properties of an oil -- that's determined at the molecular layer level. Correct viscosity is about running clearances and obtaining correct flow rates. Too thin increases flow, often to the extent that piston rings can't handle the extra load. Too thick reduces flow, often to the extent that oil doesn't reach vital components. >Adding a rubber-like compound to oil is not going to make it slicker, >only thicker. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >straight non-multi-weight 30 (or maybe more) without any viscosity >modifier. The best oil would be one that had the same viscosity at all running temperatures. A straight grade is normally only the best option when there's a risk of VI improver breakdown. >Multi-weight is a compromise: trick to get a 5 or 10 to fake the >thickness of a 30 when things heat up. A deeper spread is not better, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >synthetics provide that multi-weight property without the viscosity >improver additive, or need less of it to achieve a given spread. Might be partly true but the multigrade synthetics also use VI improvers, albeit more expensive, and probably better quality ones. I might be wrong but I suspect that the better additives are also the ones that provide the highest viscosity index, rather than simply using more of the same thing. (The ones with the greatest number spread have the highest viscosity index -- ie 0W30 has a higher VI than 5W30, which is also higher than 10W30). FWIW the second number relates to a viscosity range at 'normal' operating temperature. The first number relates to the borderline pumping temperature (below which it turns into a solid frozen chunk) and doesn't indicate an actual viscosity (contrary to popular opinion). In any case the SAE classification numbers aren't a viscosity scale as such. >Flame away ... SignatureJohn H >>The improver is long-chained molecules that stay in a little clump at >>low temperatures, and uncoil at higher temperatures. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Probably a little too simplistic. The VI improvers are long chain >polymers which curl up (like a spring) as temperatures rise. Oops. My mistake... they uncurl as temperatures rise... which is as you've stated. No argument about the effect, just don't much like the rubber analogy. :) SignatureJohn H The common explanation is that the > poorer quality polymers get chopped up by components such as gears > where the better ones possibly survive. Better, and more expensive, > oils tend to have better quality additives... this is probably > particularly true of the more reputable synthetics. All polymers shear degrade, John. > The common explanation is that the > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > All polymers shear degrade, John. The synthetics by their nature are more stable viscosity-wise WRT temperature than conventional oils, and so require the addition of fewer polymers - or even none, possibly. I don't know of any synthetics that for 100% sure don't use any VI improvers, but it's possible that there may be some, esp if the oil does not have a wide viscosity spread (i.e. 10W30 instead of 0W30 etc.) nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel <fiveiron@webtv.net> wrote I can't make myself believe that the recommendation of the motor car co. - isn't self-serving. Yeah, you're right-on there brother. Go by horse. Huw what kind of car are we talking about? > if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the > 10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > m h o > v e Why not take advantage of the thousands of cumulative years of experience the engineers and chemists at the oil and car companies have. I suspect they will have access to more information on the proper viscosity oil for a given motor in a given temperature range than anyopne on this news group. In other words just read the owners manual. Can I ask why you want to use 10-30 rather than 5-30. "John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message Why not take advantage of the thousands of cumulative years of experience the engineers and chemists at the oil and car companies have. I suspect they will have access to more information on the proper viscosity oil for a given motor in a given temperature range than anyopne on this news group. In other words just read the owners manual. Can I ask why you want to use 10-30 rather than 5-30. This is always as safe an approach as you can get. Many owners manuals give you several choices depending upon the temperature range, type of driving, etc. The 10w versus 5w doesn't mean a lot, most of the time. But if you are in a very cold climate, it might mean a little. > "John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > This is always as safe an approach as you can get. Safer than ...what...not following the owners manual???? Many owners manuals > give you several choices depending upon the temperature range, type of > driving, etc. > > The 10w versus 5w doesn't mean a lot, most of the time. But if you > are in a very cold climate, it might mean a little. > > This is always as safe an approach as you can get. > > Safer than ...what...not following the owners manual???? Exactly! Following the manual, and documenting what you have done, gives you a leg to stand on if your engine burns up and you have to fight to get it replaced under warranty, as in the Toyota and VW sludge failures. Toyota claimed that most of the failures were due to improper service (even though they seemed to change their oil change interval recommendations after this problem manifested itself.) They were pretty good to replace engines under these conditions. >> > This is always as safe an approach as you can get. >> >> Safer than ...what...not following the owners manual???? >Exactly! Following the manual, and documenting what you have done, >gives you a leg to stand on if your engine burns up and you have to >fight to get it replaced under warranty, as in the Toyota and VW sludge >failures. Of course, VW's idea of warranty coverage is to put a sticker on the gas filler titled "check engine oil." and let the engine leak a quart a week. > > > This is always as safe an approach as you can get. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fight to get it replaced under warranty, as in the Toyota and VW sludge > failures. I'm confused. If the owners manual says to use 5-30 oil then what would your reasons be to use 10-30 oil. If it will help the engine, please explain how. I can explain changing oil more frequently than the minimum recommendation. Doing so will reduce the maximum level of contaminants in the oil the engine uses. > Toyota claimed that most of the failures were due to improper service > (even though they seemed to change their oil change interval > recommendations > after this problem manifested itself.) They seemed to change the oil interval or they did change the oil interval for the same engine. Big difference. > They were pretty good to replace > engines > under these conditions. Yes, considering that Toyota required virtually no documentation of regular maintenance. I believe they required proof of one oil change per year! "John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message > I'm confused. If the owners manual says to use 5-30 oil then what > would your reasons be to use 10-30 oil. If it will help the engine, > please explain how. Often the owner's manual allows you a range of lubricating oil viscosities which are acceptable for that engine under different driving conditions. If it does not, and you feel your warranty is in danger, then maybe you want to stick strictly with the manual. (All our cars are now out of warranty. I can run green coolant and even Amsoil if I wanted to do so;>) I said I would feel no miscompunction. And I wouldn't, but anyone could argue I would be doing the wrong thing. I feel that the rather minimal difference in the low temperature viscosity specifications in the case cited are all but meaningless. The lower number, IIUC, says that the oil will flow, when cold (unspecified temperature), like a 5 or 10 viscosity single grade oil. I believe that the upper viscosity rating (30, in this case) is the more important specification in most cases. Some people here (Texas) even go up to higher viscosities (1) when the engine is old enough to have sustained a bit of wear and (2) during hot as hell summers where ambiental temperatures can approach 115F and where you typically may drive at the speed limit for hundreds of miles. I put much more faith in running with clean oil than in worrying about the differences between the two multigrade specifications that were the subject of this thread. > I believe that the upper viscosity rating (30, in this case) is the more > important > specification in most cases. I'm not sure I agree entirely. Yes, having the upper number "in the right range" is important, since that's the viscosity that matters when the engine is at normal operating temp (ie, most of the time that its running. But on the other hand, the *lower* number is the one that determines what base oil viscosity is used, and the upper number is set by friction modifiers. A higher low number means fewer (or maybe no, in the case of some synthetics) friction modifiers needed to achieve the upper number. > Some people here (Texas) even go up to higher > viscosities (1) when the engine is old enough to have sustained a bit of > wear and > (2) during hot as hell summers where ambiental temperatures can approach > 115F > and where you typically may drive at the speed limit for hundreds of miles. If I start to lose oil pressure at high temperature, I drop the pan and replace the oil pump, or even "roll in" new bearing shells. Thick oil is just a bandaid. > I put much more faith in running with clean oil than in worrying about the > differences between the two multigrade specifications that were the subject > of > this thread. Yep, I agree. 5w30 and 10w30 are interchangeable in my opinion, especially if we're talking synthetic oils. > if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the > 10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > v ƒe > Is the car under warranty? If it's a new car and under warranty and you want to keep it that way, follow the manual. If it's not under warranty, you can use anything you want. There are times when 0w30 is right and there are times when 20w50 is right. Ray >if your car calls for the 5w30 weight oil, would you hesitate to use the >10w30 in a climate with temps of 32 - 100°? If I couldn't find 5W30, I would not hesitate using the 10W30 as long as it had the same API rating. ------------- Alex |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.