Jump to content

Another oil thread

Bob2C
 Share

Recommended Posts

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

I go where logic leads me. Fuel economy drives everything these days. Engineering and longevity is in the back seat. When the recommendation for the same engine goes from 5w30, to 5w20, to 0w20 in the course of 15 years while CAFE standards increase AND the oil change interval increases…that tells me everything I need to know. People still can’t figure out why their engine eats a cam every 75k. Really?

 

 

OMG, you think for yourself? Your doomed I say, doomed.😱

 

Google isn't my information source, it's a search engine and a pretty good one that leads me to a RELIABLE source.  I can buy all the SAE and published Doctoral works of REAL experts without leaving the farm and do. It's called an EDUCATION.

 

As I did when I lived in the CHEVRON/Getty/Conoco/Eastman/Gulf and Several University libraries (CSM, Utah State, Iowa) printing them off for five cents a page. Learned directly from the guys who TEACH IT at Universities and more importantly to the employees of those companies. Top tier guys Chevron and others hire for this purpose. Years, not semesters of classroom work. Clueless...utterly clueless. 

 

How much fuel, oil bright stock and light gas has this guy made? None! So how did he learn it? Same way I did. Same way Lake Speed did. In a classroom. Condescending *******. 

 

You Reel have to stop quoting this guy. Its like feeding a stray cat. Just won't go away. :crackup:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 315
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

customboss
customboss

Well, I answered your question.   I made a living analyzing automotive materials. When someone asks a question I give an answer based on lab work, engine test cells data, teardown of those t

Grumpy Bear
Grumpy Bear

Since Dizzy uses so much oil a 3K mineral oil cleaning was still beyond her ability so I broke it into two 1,500-mile segments. Yea, cost twice as much. I'm good with that.    At the end of

KARNUT
KARNUT

Until tomorrow. You two are over my head. I can only go by experience. Sometimes without explanation. I’ll try to keep up.🥵

Posted Images

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

I just saw a teardown of a 300K plus motor where the inside was cleaner than average. The piston skirts were scuffed hard. Motor ran nice, just noisy. Piston slap. Some wear on the rod and main bearings. About right for the miles.  Ring lands, specifically the oil control rings were minty fresh clean. No pin wear. This was a motor that lived on 0W20 oil and 7.5K OCI's most of its life. Bores were scored in sync with scuffing. Parts touching parts. Not a race motor. A delivery motor. 

 

What do you think is the root cause?

garagerog Enthusiast

garagerog

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I just saw a teardown of a 300K plus motor where the inside was cleaner than average. The piston skirts were scuffed hard. Motor ran nice, just noisy. Piston slap. Some wear on the rod and main bearings. About right for the miles.  Ring lands, specifically the oil control rings were minty fresh clean. No pin wear. This was a motor that lived on 0W20 oil and 7.5K OCI's most of its life. Bores were scored in sync with scuffing. Parts touching parts. Not a race motor. A delivery motor. 

 

What do you think is the root cause?

Would be my guess it is the 7.5K OCI.  The oil that started out as 0W20 would have no where near that viscosity after that long of an OCI, especially if the engine was a GDI.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted

Garagerog is spot on. Add dirt ingress and constant fuel’s dilution and you get a scored up engine but relatively clean. 

  • Like 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, diyer2 said:

0W20?

 

Specifically, viscosity loss. It's not so much the SAE grade as the HTHS and 100C shear loss. I've run some Honda D5Y motors past 200K without scuffing the skirts on 5W20 Red Line which has a HTHS of 3.1 which starts as the spec between a SAE 30 and a SAE 40 and stays in the 30-weight range. This fella used Klondike 0W20 which starts at 2.6 and ends as a SAE 8 to SAE16. The 100 C viscosity will follow.  His motors are MPFI so little fuel dilution. But that is also a consideration. Bulk oil temp is a consideration. Shear it down, dilute it down or heat it down. Scuff a piston. So not the grade but the right chemistry for the conditions. 😉 

 

Sae Motor Oil Grade Chart

 

Note in 2015 the light SAE 40's, the HTHS values were raised from 2.9 to 3.5

 

Once upon a time 3.1 was the spec for SAE 30. Thus, my comments that today's SAE 30 is yester years SAE 20. 

 

When mineral oils were what we had:

 

image.png.112f17004e4ad11834593c233e0f524c.png

 

 

  • Like 2
diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

OK Better quality oil or shorter OCI's. As you know shorter OCI's is my standard. I would use Amsoil OE oil and go a max 5k miles. Again the long OCI's today are a joke. Hey they all sell parts and new vehicles.

  • 3 months later...
  • 6 months later...
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted (edited)

Viscosity REALLY Matters

 

Since my thread on this topic got hijacked.....

 

I'll keep this really simple. If increasing HTHS viscosity decreases total wear metals then its use is not a Band-Aid. It's a requirement. 

 

This is a well broken in motor which I experimented on. Right column is 0W20 in a motor whose call out is 5W30. Note the lead/tin. Bearing materials. Then note the left column which is 10W30 and the total absence of those materials. 

 

Little changed in Iron (bore/ring) or aluminum (piston).  If Iron is the only thing you are looking at, you're not looking at the entire picture. 

 

Enough viscosity to keep the rotating assembly in the hydrodynamic regime. 

 

image.jpeg.fe0afd842367e361ae3cf0aa16984c0e.jpeg

 

In this motor each increase in viscosity results in a lower total wear metals and a drastically lower aluminum count

 

image.jpeg.c208d94e9ef9cb5a998b0d2cfac480b7.jpeg

 

image.thumb.png.a034405eaa937a7eed2f2daa31073c34.png

Edited by Grumpy Bear
  • Sad 1
customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted (edited)

Please post data with a defective component, bearing set, blocked off oil journal, and demonstrate how HTHS or any viscosity controls failure modes? 

 

Once again or to coin a phrase, THERE YOU GO AGAIN, beating a dead horse to move!  

 

On a normal engine, in your data a well maintained GM 4.3L V6 there aren't any components jamming together or blocked journals or excess particles of swarf or metals slamming against rotating stock. 

 

You aren't making your point my friend because there is no point to be made. 

 

MOFT is just that, a design viscosity ( whatever it is) that seperates NORMAL PARTS in normal operation. 

 

In the case of the DYSONANALYSIS data you once again correct excess fuels dilution of your REDLINE 0w20 and 4 years later add a 10w30 ( actually designed 0w-35 also formulated by DYSON at CUMMINS ) that is majority high end esters and the engine is burning cleaner stressing the RESTORE less than the Redline. Has nothing to do with dynamic viscosity. 

 

Let's look at the total dataset and not unintentionally mislead. 

 

Screenshot2025-05-239_37_40AM.thumb.png.e191b9eb96fa8323f6529de1d5d1e5ef.png

 

NOTE :  MAJOR LEVERS IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT MAKE VISCOSITY ONLY A PART OF THE FULL DISCLOSURE. 

 

2.4% fuels in oil vs 0 in RESTORE

 

Nitration drops 2 orders of magnitude via tune up made in intervening 2 years. 

 

To name a few major levers so......make sure you get your data interpreted by a fully trained analyst and not heading down rabbit holes ( Grumpy Holes). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by customboss
diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

Take his keyboard away from him.

Or should we feel sorry for him because he's oil soaked. 😀

  • Haha 2
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, diyer2 said:

Take his keyboard away from him.

Or should we feel sorry for him because he's oil soaked. 😀

 

 

What do you call it when you don't want anyone to have Something?

😏

 

You three could just not read what I write but feel an obsessive compulsion to do so. 

You could use the ignore button to defeat your obsession, but you won't. 

You three feel some need to "Save the world" from little old me. 

You feel empowered by your numbers to stalk and attack....

You yell that you won't because "I have a right to do so....."

 

 

What am I describing?

 

 Straight Jacket

 

Well ya do have a right and I gave you a chance. 

Multiple chances.

 

You too are now talking to the wall. 

 

Edited by Grumpy Bear
  • Haha 1
customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted (edited)

It’s easy Grumps. Stop posting incorrect assumptions. I’ll leave you alone then. No one is against you. You are respected. 

Edited by customboss
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

I didn't want to blow up the L87 failure thread so I drug the video over here. Comments below.

 

 

This guy links Lake Speed Jr's video to his and both of these guys have more than half a clue. They also both suffer the dreaded double speak and endless, If, And, But, Maybe, syndrome. That is the area I made my money in working with intelligent well educated guys. Why? Because it is there blind spot and they refuse to believe they have a blind spot. 

 

This fella is a bit more self aware and yet knows he's lazy. To lazy to test. TEST. TEST! 

 

While the three Stooges were laughing to hard to pay attention they missed something pretty significant. Something this fella makes quite a note of in this video. YOU CAN FIND STUDIES TO SUPPORT EVERY POSSITION. 

 

What does that mean? Not what the conspiracy theory crowd imagines. Doesn't mean adulterated studies. 

 

IT means EXAMPLE SPECIFIC STUDIES. That thing I've been showing you where I bring the receipts!

 

 

Did you note his references to Iron and Aluminum? Pretty basic. IF more viscosity reduces either or both then more isn't a Band-Aid...it's a requirement. 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 2,783 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • B14Sierra
      Cam chain tensioner question

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      So I'm in the middle of a DOD AFM delete on my 6.2 L86 Sierra. I had a pick holding the tensioner but after I got the Cam phaser gear off I was cleaning off all the rtv and apparently I didn't have the pick seated far enough in. I bumped it and the tensioner sprang forward.  I think everything is good but I want a second opinion. The top of the tensioner is just a looped piece of plastic that rides in that channel right? There is no spring or anything is there? I got the gear and chain back on and it seems tight and everything looks right. I'm hoping nothing fell out.
    • dna9656
      No low range 4 x 4

      By dna9656 · Posted

      My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • asilverblazer
      Transmission Woes :-(

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • Chuck FB
      summer road trips in the 2026 2500HD

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...