I do not rest my faith in the Honda Gods or any other god that does not warranty the engine up to the point I plan on driving it. Their mind is how to get out of spending their money on fixing it if it breaks.
The Viscosity vs Temperature tables give me an operating temperature range that I will operate my engine in and if an oil hits the window that I operate it in, than I will use it.
Assuming that the lower end, the first number is an ambient temperature that I will not see a lower temperature of and the higher number is a viscosity that works at the highest temperature the window is open at.
A 20 W 50 motor oil works between freezing, 32 degrees F and the present 113 degrees F I see out side as I am typing.
It will satisfactorily lubricate the engine when starting it and when running down the freeway.
Is it heavier than 20W40 or 10W40? yes, but I don't care, it works and in my Saturn it works well, also my Chrysler and my 4 AMC cars.
Of course the Chrysler is now gone, but I used it from the first oil change when I bought the car in 2007 new and the last one before I wrecked it with 120,000 miles on it. And running Mobil 1 I changed the filter every 4000 miles for 3 oil changes and added a quart of oil due to the filter change. On the 4th oil change, a full oil change took place with a filter and the cycle repeated.
My 2015 Dodge Caravan with a 2.6LV6, over head cams with variable cam shaft technology will until I can figure out how the variable cam shaft technology relates to a heavier grade oil, will use 10W30 oil. (With a factory recommendation of 0W20) Which is also specified to be acceptable between 32 degrees F and 113 degrees F. And if I figure I can get away with it and not cause cam shaft positioning errors I will change to a 10W40 or a 20W40, but the jury is out so far on that decision. The one decision that is not out, is no engine in anything I own will ever see a 0Wanything viscosity oil unless it is 20 degrees below zero degrees F. And I frankly do not care (until I see a better explanation from the manufacturer) what is recommended.
The Mitsubishi twin cam engine car I owned and bought brand new in 2002 (with a factory recommendation of 5W20 oil) used 20W50 motor oil for all of the 270,000 miles I drove it. With the oil changed every 4000 miles.
And it never used any between changes.
In Ruby's situation he will see temperatures in the morning or during the day below freezing at certain times of the year and he did at one point in time live with in 30 miles of an old friend of mine. Winter was cold there and it snowed. A 10W40 or so oil was a better choice for Ruby at one point in time.
But a lot of Saturn engines went down the toilet due to excessive oil consumption. They and apparently a lot of other brands of vehicles and even more so, apparently a wider selection of them now.
I used to see a lot of Studebaker I-6 cars leading a blue cloud of smoke around. Back in the day. And others, but they were notorious.
Time has passed and I am seeing a wiff of blue smoke coming out of exhaust pipes at stop lights lately. Something is going on. This is something new. And so is oil recommendations of zero W something. Funny how those two things seem to go together!

 

I don't trust the manufacturers anymore... Subaru calls for 0W-20 in my wife's Impreza, and I do use it since the warranty is still in effect, but it uses very little for now... I don't trust any oil life monitors though... On one "oil life" I get three changes done on my Malibu, and my wife's car gets changed every 5k...

 

Yesterday was a bit of an off day in that I was out delivering blanket packages to various hospitals, Ronald McDonald houses and equivalent and other organizations such as police and fire departments. Google Project Linus and you will see how huge this volunteer outfit is but I digress, my stress started when I heard a tire blow. I thought it was a front but it turned out to be a rear and by the way it was my tire that blew. The newer low profile radials have a run flat design to them if you don't over do things and I needed to get off of the freeway frontage road and call triple A to come and change the tire. The Mopar Vans have the spare directly under the front seat and it was 118 degrees hot and the spare is not accessible so even though it is there it is out of air. I carry a cigarette lighter powered air pump but I was not up to trying to change the tire. That is why I have AAA.
I digress
The fellow showed up in a Dodge or Chrysler cargo van and took care of things quickly but I got a chance to talk to him.
He is a driver not a car fixer, they give him a car and work to do. So I asked him if he had heard of the vehicles using oil and his reply was yes they do and they have even lost engines but triple A has a lot of money and the van is back the next day with a new engine. The vehicles are not making money if they are off the road.
AS a side bar, the cargo van has been compartmental orchestrated with a compressor running off of an inverter and storage for miscellaneous tools and parts including a nifty light weight jack that was easy to use. It was efficient and well done and I was impressed. I finished my deliveries and drove home at freeway speeds on the spare. But I think I was surprised to hear that excessive oil usage on the new vehicles was pretty much common knowledge.
And the next day off to a tire dealer to get the tires straightened out on my Caravan. I use a chain tire dealer close to where live. They have served me well on doing alignments and supplying tires. They have a chain mentality but they put up with me and conversely I tolerate the mentality because they will do a good job on alignments because I ask them to.
So two tires later mounted where I wanted them to I was able to ask a couple of the service guys the same question and oh yuh, they are seeing the exact same thing. Of course they see things through the eyes of a service organization that follows the factory recommendations. Oil usage has gone through the roof. 'Specially if the service recommendations are not followed. They wonder why such a light weight oil is factory recommended, but that is there job to put it in and the are putting in a lot of it.
All I can say is in my opinion there is something drastically wrong with that picture.
I am at the present using Mobile 1 10W30 synthetic motor oil in my Dodge Caravan 3.6L V6 with variable cam shaft positioning technology and a recommended 0W20 motor oil.
I know for sure that no cam shaft related error codes so I will continue. I never got an answer from MOBIL 1 concerning this so I will try again. But I personally believe that the fad of recommending a light weight oil is to put a spin on the sell for fuel economy with out regard for engine reliability after the initial warranty runs out.

 

The lightweight oil is just for fuel efficiency... As a member on ecomodder.com, I've witnessed people switch to a 0W-xx oil, with quantifiable and consistent gains in fuel mileage, due to less drag on the oil pump... Nobody has reported any usage, but they are a different group of people than the masses of people that are just running what the manufacturer says... I tend to run 5W-30 in both of my ECOtec engines, and lose less than half a quart per interval in my Malibu... I lost slightly more in my redline, but that was undoubtedly due to blow-by and the PCV system on the LSJ not being up to 18psi of boost...

 

I run 5-20 in my variable cam timing Navigator, I also run premium fuel. I have 160,000 on the Navigator. At Ford school they said it needed the 5-20 because the passages in the cam advancers are so small. I do the same at work with any vct engines, everything else at work gets Delo 400 15w-40. I have been running 10w-30 in the 460 motorhome because Ford recommends it. No problems so far.

 

I fully understand the logic for using 15W40 AND 20W50 in appropriate environments.

Bu don't you run the risk of Viscosity Improving Additives breaking down, leaving you running a much thinner oil than you think you are (as a function of time)?

Excerpt from Motor Oil Viscosity Grades Explained in Layman's Terms


(Motor Oil Viscosity Grades)

--------------------
Drawbacks of Viscosity Improving additives

Multi-grade motor oils perform a great service not being too thick at cold startup to prevent engine wear by providing more instantaneous oil flow to critical engine parts. However, there is a draw back. These additives shear back in high heat or during high shear force operation and break down causing some sludging. What's worse is once the additive begins to be depleted the motor oil no long resists thinning so now you have a thinner motor oil at 210 degrees. Your 10W-30 motor oil can easily become a 10W-20 or even a SAE 10 (10W-10) motor oil. I don't have to tell you why that is bad. The more VI additives the worse the problem which is why auto manufacturers decided to steer car owners away from motor oils loaded with VI additives like the 10W-40 and 20W-50 viscosities.

The less change a motor oil has from high to low temperatures gives it a high Viscosity Index. Synthetic motor oils that are made from Group IV (4) PAO base stocks have Viscosity Indexes of more than 150 because they are manufactured to be a lubricant and don't have the paraffin that causes the thickening as they cool. But petroleum based motor oils (Group I (1) & II (2)) usually have Viscosity Indexes of less than 140 because they tend to thicken more at the colder temperature due to the paraffin despite the addition of Viscosity Improving additives. The higher the Viscosity Index number the less thinning and thickening the motor oil has. In other words, high number good, low number bad. Low numbers thicken more as they cool and thin more hot. You see these Viscosity Index ratings posted on data sheets of motor oils provided by the manufacturer.

As already mentioned, VI improving additives can shear back under pressure and high heat conditions leaving the motor oil unable to protect the engine properly under high heat conditions and cause sludging. Also there is a limit to how much viscosity improving additives can be added without affecting the rest of the motor oil's chemistry.

Auto manufacturers have moved away from some motor oils that require a lot of viscosity improving additives, like the 10W-40 and 20W-50 motor oils, to blends that require less viscosity additives like the 5W-20, 5W-30 and 10W-30 motor oils. Because stress loads on multi viscosity motor oils can also cause thinning many racers choose to use a straight weight petroleum racing motor oil or a PAO based Synthetic which do not have the VI additives. But only the Group IV (4) PAO based synthetics generally don't need VI additives.

Read on to learn why:

What about synthetic motor oils? Do they need Viscosity Additives?
Group IV (4) and Group V (5) base oil (synthetics) are chemically made from uniform molecules with no paraffin and generally don't need Viscosity Additives. However, in recent years Group III (3) based oils have been labeled "synthetic" through a legal loophole. These are petroleum based Group II (2) oils that have had the sulfur refined out making them more pure and longer lasting. Group III (3) "synthetic" motor oils must employ Viscosity Additives being petroleum based.
Group V (5) based synthetics are usually not compatible with petroleum or petroleum fuels and have poor seal swell. These are used for air compressors, hydraulics, etc.

It's the Group IV (4) PAO based synthetics that make the best motor oils. They are compatible with petroleum based oils and fuels plus they have better seal swell than petroleum. Typically PAO based motor oils use no Viscosity Index additives yet pass the multi-grade viscosity requirements as a straight weight! This makes them ideal under a greater temperature range.

One advantage of not having to employ Viscosity Improving additives is having a more pure undiluted lubricant that can be loaded with more longevity and performance additives to keep the oil cleaner longer with better mileage/horsepower.

How do I know what motor oil is a Group IV (4) based PAO synthetic motor oil?
As more and more large oil companies switched their "synthetic" motor oils to the less expensive/more profitable Group III (3) base stocks it has become much easier to identify which are PAO based true synthetic.

Of the large oil companies, only Mobil 1 Extended Performance, as of this writing (12-16-2012), is still a PAO based true synthetic.

The rest, including regular Mobil 1 and Castrol Edge have switched to the cheaper/more profitable Group III (3) petroleum based "synthetic" motor oil.

AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils are PAO based true synthetic motor oils with the exception of the short oil drain OE and XL synthetic motor oils sold at some Auto Parts Stores and Quick Oil Change Centers.

This leaves more than 20 PAO based true synthetic motor oils manufactured and marketed by AMSOIL with only a few Group III (3) based synthetic motor oils identified by the "OE" and "XL" product name.

So as you can see, the average performance of motor oils can be affected by how they change during their service life. Multi grade petroleum can lose viscosity and thin causing accelerated wear as the VI additives shear back. Straight weight petroleum (i.e. SAE 30, SAE 40) thicken a lot as they cool meaning longer time before lubricant reaches critical parts on cold starts, but have no VI additives so they resists thinning. However, they can degrade and thicken as heat and by products of combustion affect the unsaturated chemistry. Group III (3) synthetics resist this degradation much better, but being petroleum based employ some VI additives which is a negative and typically don't have as good performance in the volatility viscosity retention areas.

Only the Group IV (4) PAO base synthetics have the saturated chemistry to resist degrading when exposed to the by products of combustion and heat, plus typically employ no VI additives making them very thermally stable for longer periods. For this reason the Group IV (4) synthetics maintain peak mileage and power throughout their service life.

---------------------------------

thoughts?

 

Thoughts?
There is no doubt that motor oil technology has gotten complex. While that has taken place the automobile has been merchandised as an appliance and treated as if little to no maintenance is required.
Service, that which used to be supplied by the local gas station has been replaced in total by either none at all or that supplied by a dealer.
New cars are warranted "X" number of miles and then written off as if they never existed.
Rules of thumb which made service selection options some what easy to make are questionable at the present as to their validity.
Forums such as this that have been around for awhile by in large are peopled by 2nd and 3rd owners trying to deal with a vehicle on their own and problems seen by forums such as this are by in large problems of high(er) mileage cars.
If engine wear can be directly related to the use of oil types over the life of the car it is at the high mileage end of the life that symptoms are going to be seen.
Simply stated and using S car Saturns as an example. A steady diet of a 5W20 engine oil has lead to engine failure by 100,000 miles as can be observed by the type of questions being asked and/or reported. Yet those same cars using a 10W30 or greater motor oil at 100,000 miles are showing now oil consumption at all.
That paints a picture of what is going on.
How that works in relation to the complexity I am sure that oil has gone through I do not know how to relate.
Will a lighter viscosity oil improve fuel economy. Of course it will, the question becomes not of whether it will or not, but what if any are benefits to be derived from that.
I can improve the fuel economy of my Dodge Caravan simply by changing the way I drive it by a couple of miles per gallon, but what does that prove if anything.

I was just at the MOBIL oil web site trying to determine what oil is a good one to use and frankly it said little more than what the factory recommends. With out justifying how it came to that conclusion. That is a different approach to oil recommendation then information I have in my files on oil recommendations from oil manufactures. Todays recommendations seem to be more "politically correct" then yesterdays which seeming assumed the proper oil extended engine life approach to a recommendation.
One difference noted was asking the web site the proper oil to use by individual car owned rather than a generic this is an engine and it needs oil approach, the oil suggested to be used for a 1980 model vehicle had a recommended useful life of 15,000 miles. The oil suggested for use for a 2016 model had no recommended useful life.
This comparison did not answer the question of "Why" when a new car was taken in for service at a 4000 mile oil interval the entire oil was changed while an older car when taken for the same service at 4000 miles, the filter was changed and a quart of oil was added to compensate for the loss when a filter was changed. A full oil change would be done at 15,000 miles.

Where was the explanation for that?
Something is amiss some where.

"Specially now when reports are showing up saying todays modern high efficient vehicle is using oil at the rate of a quart per 1000 miles or less.

An analysis of the complexity of todays oil by itself is not an answer to a question of what is going on. Until some how it is applied to the real world. The real world that I have been able to ferret out has an extensive list of vehicles that the manufacturer is saying a 1000 miles or less on a quart of oil is expected and acceptable.
This is at least one of many on line articles on this subject:
Excessive Oil Consumption Isn't Normal - Consumer Reports
And it raises a flag.
We on this forum have seen the same thing on S series Saturns and maybe others, but as I do not own one I have not paid that much attention.
But on that model, a change in oil viscosity when a new car, seems to have allowed the engine to age with out excessive wear.
If viscosity alone is a factor that can allow an engine to age gracefully than it needs to be considered as a factor in usage.
And the oil Viscosity vs Ambient Temperature charts indicate that the option to do it exists.
As that is a tool I have used over time I can say it has worked successfully for me.

 

Let me rephrase that.

Thoughts concerning the claims asserted in the article i quoted?
And specifically that Group 3 synthetics, being petroleum based, are not really full synthetics.

 

Derf
For almost 50 years there have been about only one tool standardized to select an oil viscosity to use, that of the viscosity vs ambient temperature charts. And that has adequately identified oil to be used in a variety of environmental conditions and to some extent applied use such as extremes in towing or mountainous driving while carrying loads and using that tool to pick an oil has been successful.
Taking into account the debacle of the S Cars eating their own engines up unless the viscosity used was heavier than the factory recommended is one example, maybe not the best one but it certainly has been covered in this forum that if you did not use 5W20, engines lasted.
A viscosity vs temperature chart is used by selecting an oil that the first viscosity number is greater than the minimum temperature you will ever see and the last viscosity number can be equal to or greater than the maximum temperature you will see that oil has been pretty much proven that it is a satisfactory selection.
Frankly I think pretty much anything past that is over thinking unless some how you actually need to know that information.
I have been a high mileage driver all my life and have never had an oil related failure using oil viscosity identified by the chart.
A simple solution needs to be used so that all people can make a reasonably intelligent decision, so under the circumstances no I don't worry about the probability of something like that.
Historically a 20W50 motor oil is a recognized heavy duty oil for heavy duty applications and a 5W10 has been a winter grade oil to be used below zero degrees. There are warnings in owners manuals, MOTORS and Chilton manuals to the same. These warnings are not referencing the nuances of motor oil, they are making statements bases on viscosities.
More and more indicators are showing up that engines with a factory recommended 0W20 or 5W20 motor oil are using oil and in my own way, sitting at traffic lights in city traffic I am seeing more and more blue clouds of smoke coming from exhaust pipes.
If those nuances are so critical that the average Joe who at this point in time is barely able to understand the proper grade of fuel to use in their car and the reasons for it, have to ferret out what is meant in order to make a decision then the procedure is too complex to be useful.
So no I really do not thing it is critical to go that far into things, if so the problem is even bigger than it looks.
I live in an extreme high temperature environment and a 20W50 weight motor oil according to the viscosity vs temperature charts supplies the maximum protection for engines in my environment and I am satisfied with that.
As to the variable of cam shaft variation a function of oil pressure, so far the only factor I have been able to determine is if the viscosity is too high, cam shaft positioning errors will occur and as the 3.6L engine in the car recommends 0W20 I am not going to use it. I am not getting errors with 10W30 and while it too is suggested as being adequate for my environment, my preference would still be the 20W50 or 15W50 Mobil 1. Again by viscosity only. I have no tools to make an easy selection from and if the tools are too cumbersome to use easily than they are probably a poor tool
So no I think it is overthinking things.

 

OK

1) One of my MAIN purposes in posting the excerpts from the article was to educate those who do not know what makes an oil a true synthetic vs the petroleum based "Synthetics" that are on the shelves, INCLUDING standard Mobil 1.

2) My other purpose was to educate those who do not know HOW the very oils you praise (which I have no problem with) derive the properties they have, and the POTENTIAL pitfalls of having some of the Viscosity Improver (VI) additives breaking down, leaving you with the equivalent of a 10W-40 in the oil pan after 1 month of heavy driving in hot climates similar to where you live.

Just because it's 20W50 going in does NOT mean it stays 20W50 in the oil pan until you change it.

If you want guaranteed 20W50 lubrication until your next oil change, why would you NOT worry about the probability of VI breakdown at 115F?

Nowhere did the author nor I imply that this is an earthshattering dealbreaker that kills engines left and right. It was an INFORMATIVE article letting you know HOW certain oils are made. I found it quite interesting when I got to the higher viscosity oils and how they were made.

I thought you would also find it interesting since you use those oils. But you " I don't worry about the probability of that".

Where does probability come into this? It's physics; hot environment, hot engine, moving parts shearing liquid often in small gaps. Shear degradation WILL occur, and not by chance. If you choose to ignore the additional information, that's fine.

But please don't taint it as the anti-{fill in the blank} just because YOU personally find no use for the added information---others just might.

It was an informational article that focused on true synthetic vs petroleum based "synthetics" and how the the higher weight oils are made.

We both know the average Joe puts whatever oil the cap says into the car or has others do so as he doesn't understand the difference anyway.

The information on the breakdown of the higher viscosity oils is informative. If you are considering 20W50 for an automotive application, there's likely a darn good reason why:

Excellent.

So why are you trying to paint an informational article that provides additional information about how the very oil you use is produced as a choice complicating, unnecessary source of confusion?

It's an INFORMATIONAL ARTICLE.
Take it or leave it. You seem to have left it. You seem not to be interested in the details. And that's perfectly fine.

But please don't say the additional information it provides complicates ANYTHING just because YOU are not interested in the details. Others may be.

The informational article I posted is an informational article. It is not a tool and therefore I can't see how cumbersome comes into the discussion

Of course you're going to go by viscosity/temperature chart.

But again, you're claiming additional knowledge somehow complicates the decision process and is cumbersome.

No one is debating the viscosity vs temp application chart.

But other details about oils, production, and ramification exist. It is unclear to me why you seem so unwilling to even consider that said knowledge could be of benefit of anyone......?????