5w30 oil

customboss · September 26

11 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Limiting HTHS loss is not always indicative of the oil not meeting the min film needed in your engine.

Mobil 1 uses formulations that BY DESIGN thin slightly so over drain period they stay

in grade because their polymers reattach over time. That’s the formulation plan.

TheRiver · September 26

On 9/24/2024 at 10:50 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

@customboss, no need for confusion. You of all people are aware that this is a dynamic situation that everyone tries to see as a static moment. Lots of moving parts that must be connected. Separating out a single point, a marketing trick, does not paint a complete picture. And you also surely understand the difficulty of explaining that dynamic.

What I see clearly in mind, words sometimes can't capture.

Try to explain to someone the nature of a rod bearings travels over time. How rotation reverses and what effect that has on the hydrodynamic wedge at the point of reversal. How the load at any given point along its arc effects the Hersey number. Make them understand a load plot and how GM defined and plotted that data stream during the development of the Gen 1 SBC. Even changing the forced lubrication point of entry based on that data.

Get them to understand the value of time in a wear study and how accelerated testing does not even come close to the reality of Joe Average's motors life cycle. And yet, is still useful. How personal observation over decades does not lead one to the truth in the absolute only to a better/worse conclusion that we will not live long enough to fully explore. They can't do it in a lab but some a certain that a lifetime of experience is absolute.

Ring tension hysteresis on film thickness at the reversal points and how those two points differ. Or how the oil temperature in the pan is not the point temperature anywhere in the motor other than the pan and its value is not the average nor even the median, just it's dynamic thermal equilibrium.

What we can say is what is directionally correct but without the certainty of the acceleration of gravity.

So, we chose points of discussion. Stare so closely at the eye, that we can't tell if it is the eye of a human or a horse. We don't even share points of reference in these discussions.

One in concerned with wear mitigation and cleanliness and another's concern is warranty and fuel economy.

A dog chasing its tail.

You a "part-time" philosopher???

Grumpy Bear · September 26

3 hours ago, customboss said:

Limiting HTHS loss is not always indicative of the oil not meeting the min film needed in your engine.

Mobil 1 uses formulations that BY DESIGN thin slightly so over drain period they stay

in grade because their polymers reattach over time. That’s the formulation plan.

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard. :crackup:

How on earth can they stay in grade by going out of grade. Exactly what we witnessed in the HPL video? Under what period of non-shear would they 'reattach' and by what mechanism?

I will agree to the line in green IF you have an excess to begin with and upon shear it does not exceed the MOFT.

Cheap is just cheap. It isn't a plan for success. Just one of margin. Did you bump you head today?

Grumpy Bear · September 26

3 hours ago, TheRiver said:

You a "part-time" philosopher???

customboss · September 27

6 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard.

How on earth can they stay in grade by going out of grade. Exactly what we witnessed in the HPL video? Under what period of non-shear would they 'reattach' and by what mechanism?

I will agree to the line in green IF you have an excess to begin with and upon shear it does not exceed the MOFT.

Cheap is just cheap. It isn't a plan for success. Just one of margin. Did you bump you head today?

Checkout the API specs allowance for shear and permanent shear.

customboss · September 27

10 hours ago, TheRiver said:

You a "part-time" philosopher???

Full time dementia

customboss · September 27

6 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard.

How on earth can they stay in grade by going out of grade. Exactly what we witnessed in the HPL video? Under what period of non-shear would they 'reattach' and by what mechanism?

I will agree to the line in green IF you have an excess to begin with and upon shear it does not exceed the MOFT.

Cheap is just cheap. It isn't a plan for success. Just one of margin. Did you bump you head today?

MOFT is much lower than recommended viscosity for manufacturer.

Grumpy Bear · September 27

11 minutes ago, customboss said:

Checkout the API specs allowance for shear and permanent shear.

Ah, and there we have it.

That machine is mindless and uneducated. It responds to what is and cares not what we think it ought to care about. Viscosity keeps parts from touching other parts it shouldn't be touching. A first date thing. :crackup: It doesn't know who the API is or who the SAE is, and it certainly hasn't a clue who the ASTM is. When a chemical company starts telling me a flaw in the product is a 'feature' then :idiot: That story is pure SPIN.

I've been around the block long enough and had enough tuna cans opened up to know that what I SEE and MEASURE in light of what I KNOW its history is/was, is more relevant that the theory or calculations.

Quantum Entanglement and 'fuzzy logic' did not invalidate time space relativity.

I had a PhD tell me once that we could make a water born oil-based alkyd instead of alcohol/mineral solvents and keep in solution and it would still cure by the method of crosslinking. They told the team this because the NEEDED it to be true to solve the VOC issues of the coatings were selling. They BELEIVED a competitor had already done so based on a JOURNAL.

I'm the janitor on this team. Lab research rat and I KNEW oil and water do not and will not mix and remain in anything but an unstable emulsion for more than a short while. Throw as much dispersant as you please and all you get is a wet mess than never dries and will not spray. Well Eastman spent millions and years and all we got was fired for not doing the physically impossible. Hurrah, they still don't have a product other that a LATEX that is water born. Sometimes smart people amaze me with thier stupidity.

AJMBLAZER · September 27

I’ll be short on acronyms and testing data but I put 5w30 synthetic in my 5.3L yesterday and it seems quieter and smoother so far. No warning lights or new issues. The starts after auto-stop are much smoother and quieter.

@Gangly

Edited September 27 by AJMBLAZER

Grumpy Bear · September 27

26 minutes ago, AJMBLAZER said:

I’ll be short on acronyms and testing data but I put 5w30 synthetic in my 5.3L yesterday and it seems quieter and smoother so far. No warning lights or new issues. The starts after auto-stop are much smoother and quieter.

@Gangly

Bought a new Mitsubishi Mirage that calls for 0W20. When I picked it up, I had the shop change oil to 5W30. These motors are OHC but shimless bucket solid lifter. They clatter a bit at idle. Even they were amazed at how it quieted it down. They told me it would ruin the fuel economy. Listed highway is 41 mpg. I get 57-63 so far and it is still breaking in. only 1700 miles so far. On tickets not on the DIC. Motors are happy when internals are not being drug across concrete. They told me it would void the warranty. I asked them about the full spectrum recommendations in the UK market then and how they would PROVE the viscosity did any damage. They gave in. In the UK market everything is on the table in the manual from 0W20 to 20W50. Looky there, no OIL acronyms. Okay the W :crackup:

Edited September 27 by Grumpy Bear

diyer2 · September 27

Where have I been Grumps? You bought a new car?

customboss · September 27

12 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Ah, and there we have it.

That machine is mindless and uneducated. It responds to what is and cares not what we think it ought to care about. Viscosity keeps parts from touching other parts it shouldn't be touching. A first date thing. It doesn't know who the API is or who the SAE is, and it certainly hasn't a clue who the ASTM is. When a chemical company starts telling me a flaw in the product is a 'feature' then That story is pure SPIN.

I've been around the block long enough and had enough tuna cans opened up to know that what I SEE and MEASURE in light of what I KNOW its history is/was, is more relevant that the theory or calculations.

Quantum Entanglement and 'fuzzy logic' did not invalidate time space relativity.

I had a PhD tell me once that we could make a water born oil-based alkyd instead of alcohol/mineral solvents and keep in solution and it would still cure by the method of crosslinking. They told the team this because the NEEDED it to be true to solve the VOC issues of the coatings were selling. They BELEIVED a competitor had already done so based on a JOURNAL.

I'm the janitor on this team. Lab research rat and I KNEW oil and water do not and will not mix and remain in anything but an unstable emulsion for more than a short while. Throw as much dispersant as you please and all you get is a wet mess than never dries and will not spray. Well Eastman spent millions and years and all we got was fired for not doing the physically impossible. Hurrah, they still don't have a product other that a LATEX that is water born. Sometimes smart people amaze me with thier stupidity.

Engine oil bench testing like HTHS that you reference above ON USED oil will look different than a polymer shredding test in a video with a clean formulation. HTHS, Kinematic and dynamic vis readings will change. THE ENGINE test procedures allow vis loss both temporary and permanent in your commentary above shows you don't know what you are talking about as you mix bench testing with engine testing and back and forth. My commentary about HTHS, Kinematic readings in used oil allows losses of certain %'s. Mobil knows that and formulates to stay inside those boxes.

customboss · September 27

Just now, customboss said:

Engine oil bench testing like HTHS that you reference above ON USED oil will look different than a polymer shredding test in a video with a clean formulation. HTHS, Kinematic and dynamic vis readings will change. THE ENGINE test procedures allow vis loss both temporary and permanent in your commentary above shows you don't know what you are talking about as you mix bench testing with engine testing and back and forth. My commentary about HTHS, Kinematic readings in used oil allows losses of certain %'s. Mobil knows that and formulates to stay inside those boxes.

Having stated that the only lubricants that stay literally in design viscosity like new are GRP V versions. Look at RLI in my L3B here. For $3.5 qt that's some good value on a fully BIO synthetic! I may eat it over 6000 miles at about a qt but it burns clean out my tailpipe!

KARNUT · September 27

I’ll acknowledge I think a little differently than some on here. Personally I believe actually recently I must admit. Two hundred thousand miles is about all I want to drive a vehicle that I drive on trips. One hundred and fifty thousand miles was the limit. The exception are 2002 to 2006 GM trucks and SUVs that I have experience with. They are basically bulletproof. The 5 vehicles I’m tracking currently an 05 Elantra, an 11 Genesis, a 15 CRV, a 16 Camry and a 17 Odyssey. My 02 Avalanche I didn’t acquire until 4 years ago. The rest I’ve tracked since new. The avalanche had completed detailed records. The Camry, CRV and Odyssey had 10K oil changes most of their service life. The Camry and CRV are still on that schedule. The CRV while I used it had a couple of 5K oil changes. The Odyssey up until 127K miles had 10K oil changes. I gave my daughter the CRV and took the Odyssey and dropped it down to 5K oil changes. Only for it having cylinder deactivation. The CRV is close to 100K miles. The avalanche leads with 184k. The Elantra, Odyssey and Genesis are 150K and over. The Camry on their heals. My point finally is they run factory recommended oil. Even 0-20 one semi synthetic. Prior to my retirement 15-25k oil changes was the rule on Amsoil. Engines are more complicated and less mileage driven. Increased my oil change intervals. Until I experience a reason I’m pretty satisfied with my current Valvoline quick service. Or the dealer. That’s my experience. Not real complicated, no stress. By 100K miles I certainly got my money’s worth. By 200K I’ve had enough I’m quite certain.

customboss · September 27

20 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard.

How on earth can they stay in grade by going out of grade. Exactly what we witnessed in the HPL video? Under what period of non-shear would they 'reattach' and by what mechanism?

I will agree to the line in green IF you have an excess to begin with and upon shear it does not exceed the MOFT.

Cheap is just cheap. It isn't a plan for success. Just one of margin. Did you bump you head today?