Rotella 5w-40 synthetic

[SPYDERLK]

Actually, many newer gasoline engines call for xxW20 engine oils. In the coming years expect to see more and more manufacturers going to this grade.

20 is a W viscosity. What gives?
larry

 

[brandoro]

My 2008 Tundra calls for 5W20 or 0W20 oil. Since break in I have run Amsoil 0W20. Even with that the cold oil pressure goes pretty high, don't think I would want to chance running a heavier oil in it.

 

[thatguy]

I thought I heard on the news that a lot of OEM were using the 0w# or 5w# oils to try and squeak out a few more MPGs for the CAFE standards..

BTW - Based on what MPGs my wifes car (2009 Subaru Forester 4 cyl, ~25 to 27 mpg) I dont see how the car mfg will ever get to the new required standard of 36ish mpg within the next 5 to 7 yrs..

Brian

 

[DieselPower]

Shouldn't be that hard. I have a 2002 Impala that I get 36 MPG highway and 32 city with. Good maintenance, high quality lubricants, proper tire inflation, not carrying a ton of unneeded junk and removing the lead from my right foot years ago goes a long way to getting high MPG.

 

[Hematite]

20 is a W viscosity. What gives?
larry

Modern engines are built to very tight clearances. The thin oil is a necessity for proper lubrication and with the quality of modern oil the film strength is way more than adequate. I'm sure the fact that the thin oil adds about .1 mpg is a factor, too.

 

[Hematite]

I thought I heard on the news that a lot of OEM were using the 0w# or 5w# oils to try and squeak out a few more MPGs for the CAFE standards..

BTW - Based on what MPGs my wifes car (2009 Subaru Forester 4 cyl, ~25 to 27 mpg) I dont see how the car mfg will ever get to the new required standard of 36ish mpg within the next 5 to 7 yrs..

Brian

They're all going to have to make and sell a LOT of all electric cars to raise the Fleet Average that high!

 

[Sully2]

Modern engines are built to very tight clearances. The thin oil is a necessity for proper lubrication and with the quality of modern oil the film strength is way more than adequate. I'm sure the fact that the thin oil adds about .1 mpg is a factor, too.

"Clearances" have tighten up SOME in newer cars ( etc)..but not as much as some seem to think. What HAS happened is the TOLERANCES of the clearances have gotten down to "plus or minus jack squat".

 

[Sully2]

I thought I heard on the news that a lot of OEM were using the 0w# or 5w# oils to try and squeak out a few more MPGs for the CAFE standards..

BTW - Based on what MPGs my wifes car (2009 Subaru Forester 4 cyl, ~25 to 27 mpg) I dont see how the car mfg will ever get to the new required standard of 36ish mpg within the next 5 to 7 yrs..

Brian

MUCH smaller engines and "itty bitty" cars...of which 90% of Americans dont want...but are going to get shoved down their throats regardless!

I saw a new Honda ( model ??) in a crash test on TV....and I told the wife that it had room for " MY *** and a gallon of gas" and that was it!!!

 

[Dargo]

Shouldn't be that hard. I have a 2002 Impala that I get 36 MPG highway and 32 city with. Good maintenance, high quality lubricants, proper tire inflation, not carrying a ton of unneeded junk and removing the lead from my right foot years ago goes a long way to getting high MPG.

I have a 2003 Impala that also does well on fuel economy, particularly using regular fuel and considering the size of the car. The only thing that is disappointing is that Chevrolet cut absolutely every corner possible in building these cars. Never in my life have I seen such poor quality and workmanship. Exactly how bad does a company have to be to fail to even clear coat the paint in the door jambs, under the trunk lid, under the hood and to use particularly poor quality interior materials? Although it runs well and gets admirable fuel economy, with only 43000 miles on mine I'm not sure how long I want to keep it. If Chevrolet took so many clearly obvious shortcuts in building the Impala, how many unseen shortcuts did they take? With that in mind, I won't use anything but the best lubricants and filters on the vehicle. I seriously doubt that it is built well enough to take much abuse. Heck, my seat heaters constantly go out, the automatic climate control system has been out 3 times, the cat converter has plugged twice, the transmission developed a problem to where it lost reverse and I've had 2 "half shafts" replaced in the steering column in only 5 years and 43k of easy, mostly highway, driving. It's never sat outside a single day since I've owned it, so the exterior looks fine still. I'm just worried what other shortcut by Chevrolet is going to bite me next. Maybe it's just GM suffering from such poor quality in workmanship, I don't know. I've never seen any other brand go so far as not finishing the paint job to save money. I think quality lubricants and filters will be the only thing keeping this car going.

 

[arrow]

I have a 2003 Impala that also does well on fuel economy, particularly using regular fuel and considering the size of the car. The only thing that is disappointing is that Chevrolet cut absolutely every corner possible in building these cars. Never in my life have I seen such poor quality and workmanship. Exactly how bad does a company have to be to fail to even clear coat the paint in the door jambs, under the trunk lid, under the hood and to use particularly poor quality interior materials? Although it runs well and gets admirable fuel economy, with only 43000 miles on mine I'm not sure how long I want to keep it. If Chevrolet took so many clearly obvious shortcuts in building the Impala, how many unseen shortcuts did they take?

This is a large part of GM failure mode. This is an old time mindset to save money that was hemmoraging from past short cut builds along with unfunded pension liability. It is amazing to me that once this trap was set, it was not going to let go other than to lead to bankruptcy. They are starting clean. It will be interesting to see if they wise up and build a good car that they can sell for a reasonable price that doesn't reflect unfunded liabilities. If they think they can "get away with it" again, this is only a prolongation of eventual failure.