Another oil thread

[Grumpy Bear]

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. 

[Grumpy Bear]

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?

[diyer2]

0W20?

[garagerog]

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.

[customboss]

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

[Grumpy Bear]

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.  

 

 

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:

 

 

 

[diyer2]

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.

[customboss]

https://jobbersworld.com/2024/06/21/amsoil-inc-acquires-aerospace-lubricants-with-strategy-for-growth/

[Grumpy Bear]

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. 

 

 

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

 

 

Edited May 23, 2025 by Grumpy Bear

[customboss]

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. 

 

 

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 May 23, 2025 by customboss

[diyer2]

Take his keyboard away from him.

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

[Grumpy Bear]

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?

 

 

 

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

Multiple chances.

 

You too are now talking to the wall. 

 

Edited May 24, 2025 by Grumpy Bear

[customboss]

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

Edited May 24, 2025 by customboss

[Grumpy Bear]

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. 

 

[customboss]

@Grumpy Bear check out this at the science part of the GM-TRUCKS site.....I am gonna stroke ya brother.