Oil!!!!

[HoosierTrooper]

Surprised since those vehicles do soooo much idling. But keep in mind the design of the interceptors have extra external engine coolers, etc...they're not built the same as consumer vehicles. I'm not in LE anymore but I do have a Ford explorer interceptor I use at work sometimes. That thing is built waaay differently than a normal 2016 explorer because it's made for higher temps, long idle times, etc...

From what I've been able to learn from our mechanics the police Chargers are equipped with the severe duty II engine cooling system, which I believe is the same as what's in the SRT. I have not really researched this much, just going by what I've been told but it makes sense. But I think a comparison can be made to the use of 5W-20 in the "gentler " use of a civilian model with lesser cooling to a police Charger driven at very high speeds and a lot of idling that the increased cooling system helps control. Does that make sense?

 

[Rollint]

Actually I did today since it was 112°F when I got outta work. Wish I took a picture. My engine temp was exactly 102°F when I started my truck. A cold day has nothing to do with what I posted in that comment. But good talk my friend. My comment was referencing how heat is cumulative btw. I know...the oil helps with the heat, I get that.

your engine temp is the coolant temp in your radiator, not the temp of the engine block and oil -- you could see the oil temp when you turn your truck on. My point was that heat isn't cumulative when you have an active cooling system that dissipates heat effectively. High outside temps basically have no impact on your oil, it's low outside temp that can affect the viscosity on start.

Edit: I say this with "regular" driving in mind. Yes, if you're tracking your vehicle or something then you will need to take some different oils into consideration because of the extra stress put on the engine, cooling system, etc.

 

[HoosierTrooper]

Same here...every 5K without fail. 5W20 Pennzoil Platinum with a WIX XP filter. No ticking and takes a licking

And I'd be willing to bet the rest of the truck will rust away long before the engine begins to wear out on that combo.

 

[HoosierTrooper]

your engine temp is the coolant temp in your radiator, not the temp of the engine block and oil -- you could see the oil temp when you turn your truck on. My point was that heat isn't cumulative when you have an active cooling system that dissipates heat effectively. High outside temps basically have no impact on your oil, it's low outside temp that can affect the viscosity on start.

I'd give you multiple likes if I could for being so right.

 

[HoosierTrooper]

For an older car .. supertech is great. But I would NEVER use supertech in a modern vehicle engine like my Ram...that's asking for trouble. It wasn't until recently that Supertech met the specs for those brands you mentioned. They had to change their formula for that.

How's it asking for trouble if they've submitted the product for testing and it passed and is certified by the API and ILSAC and meets the manufacturers requirements? ST has passed the GM Dexos 1 Generation 2 testing which is an incredibly tough standard to meet.

 

[PowerJrod]

your engine temp is the coolant temp in your radiator, not the temp of the engine block and oil -- you could see the oil temp when you turn your truck on. My point was that heat isn't cumulative when you have an active cooling system that dissipates heat effectively. High outside temps basically have no impact on your oil, it's low outside temp that can affect the viscosity on start.

Edit: I say this with "regular" driving in mind. Yes, if you're tracking your vehicle or something then you will need to take some different oils into consideration because of the extra stress put on the engine, cooling system, etc.

I agree, that's why I mention that the oil circulating does help disapate heat. Hell...my coolant temp was at 204F° yesterday when I was driving home, maybe that's what's soaking up the heat more so than the oil

 

[HoosierTrooper]

Here's an SAE chart posted at the PQIA website that the OP might find interesting. I've never noticed this before because I've had no interest in the 0W-16 oils since I have no vehicles that use it, but according to this there is a little overlap between the 16 and 20 grades. So, if a particular companies 0W-16 is blended to a cSt of 6.9 to 8.2 at 100C then it actually falls in the XW-20 range, above 8.2 it's well into 20 grade. It also shows how close in viscosity the two grades are to each other.

SAE Viscosity Chart (High Temp)
100° C (210° F)
SAE Viscosity	Kinematic (cSt)	Kinematic (cSt)
	100° C Min	100° C Max
8	4.0	<6.1
12	5.0	<7.1
16	6.1	<8.2
20	6.9	<9.3
30	9.3	<12.5
40	12.5	<16.3
50	16.3	<21.9
60	21.9	<26.1
Source: Engine Oil Viscosity Classification, J300 Jan2015, SAE. The full publication is available from SAE at www.sae.org.

 

[PowerJrod]

Here's an SAE chart posted at the PQIA website that the OP might find interesting. I've never noticed this before because I've had no interest in the 0W-16 oils since I have no vehicles that use it, but according to this there is a little overlap between the 16 and 20 grades. So, if a particular companies 0W-16 is blended to a cSt of 6.9 to 8.2 at 100C then it actually falls in the XW-20 range, above 8.2 it's well into 20 grade. It also shows how close in viscosity the two grades are to each other.

SAE Viscosity Chart (High Temp)
100° C (210° F)
SAE Viscosity	Kinematic (cSt)	Kinematic (cSt)
	100° C Min	100° C Max
8	4.0	<6.1
12	5.0	<7.1
16	6.1	<8.2
20	6.9	<9.3
30	9.3	<12.5
40	12.5	<16.3
50	16.3	<21.9
60	21.9	<26.1
Source: Engine Oil Viscosity Classification, J300 Jan2015, SAE. The full publication is available from SAE at www.sae.org.

Oooo this is interesting. Based on these numbers looks like xW16 would be the lowest anyone should ever think about going in terms of operating viscosity...at least anywhere south of Alaska lol.

 

[HoosierTrooper]

The folks in Japan have been working on 0W-12 and 0W-8 for the areas north of Alaska.

 

[PowerJrod]

The folks in Japan have been working on 0W-12 and 0W-8 for the areas north of Alaska.

The folks in Japan have been working on 0W-12 and 0W-8 for the areas north of Alaska.

I wonder at what point the viscosity gets too thin before it doesn't help with internal engine friction, regardless of outside climate...0W8 would probably be the absolute limit. In a cold enough climate...you're better off with sleds and Huskies lol.

 

[PowerJrod]

0W8 = canola oil or vegetable oil?

 

[TruckDriver]

For an older car .. supertech is great. But I would NEVER use supertech in a modern vehicle engine like my Ram...that's asking for trouble. It wasn't until recently that Supertech met the specs for those brands you mentioned. They had to change their formula for that.

saw this comment and thought of this video - careful, Project Farm is a rabbit hole to jump down and watch every video

 

[HoosierTrooper]

Project Farms "tests" are entertaining, and make him a lot of money, but they really should be taken with a 10 pound grain of salt. His Noack volatility test is laughable. ASTM has had problems with repeatability for years with Noack testing, if anyone is interested in reading about it I've attached an article that discusses how difficult it's been for them using state of the art equipment. The notion that his amateur Noack test is accurate is complete nonsense.

While it's exciting as all get out watching two oils racing each other downhill it doesn't represent how an oil that is being forced under pressure through an engine by a positive displacement oil pump behaves.

The only tests that are important are the ones conducted in ASTM labs done by trained professionals using calibrated and certified equipment following established testing protocols. Oils that are API and ILSAC certified have passed the tests and are a much better way to choose the right oil than Project Farm "tests".

Noack volatility test: A new set of upheavals - F&L Asia

Just as it appeared the dust had settled on the somewhat controversial Noack Volatility Test, we are now faced with a new set of upheavals. The implementation of the Lubricant Test Monitoring System (LTMS) severity adjustment has helped moderate discrepancies plaguing the bench test in recent...

www.fuelsandlubes.com

 

[PowerJrod]

saw this comment and thought of this video - careful, Project Farm is a rabbit hole to jump down and watch every video

Lol. Also reminds me of those amateur independent tests done on Amazon basics engine oil. When that stuff came out, there were quite a few people that had some serious engine problems. I think of Supertech in the same category as Amazon oil. Disappointing since I'm a loyal Amazon client.

 

[WXman]

Project Farms "tests" are entertaining, and make him a lot of money, but they really should be taken with a 10 pound grain of salt. His Noack volatility test is laughable. ASTM has had problems with repeatability for years with Noack testing, if anyone is interested in reading about it I've attached an article that discusses how difficult it's been for them using state of the art equipment. The notion that his amateur Noack test is accurate is complete nonsense.

While it's exciting as all get out watching two oils racing each other downhill it doesn't represent how an oil that is being forced under pressure through an engine by a positive displacement oil pump behaves.

The only tests that are important are the ones conducted in ASTM labs done by trained professionals using calibrated and certified equipment following established testing protocols. Oils that are API and ILSAC certified have passed the tests and are a much better way to choose the right oil than Project Farm "tests".

Noack volatility test: A new set of upheavals - F&L Asia

Just as it appeared the dust had settled on the somewhat controversial Noack Volatility Test, we are now faced with a new set of upheavals. The implementation of the Lubricant Test Monitoring System (LTMS) severity adjustment has helped moderate discrepancies plaguing the bench test in recent...

www.fuelsandlubes.com

I don't agree. It's not as if the basic characteristics of an oil are going to magically change in a lab environment or inside an engine. They may be exaggerated but not different at the core. An oil that races down a ramp while cold and flows better than the others isn't going to magically lose in a flow test to others inside an engine or when tested in another setting.

Project Farm may not do things scientifically but he does do things well enough to prove the point and give viewers the ideas they need to pick quality items.

 

[PowerJrod]

I don't agree. It's not as if the basic characteristics of an oil are going to magically change in a lab environment or inside an engine. They may be exaggerated but not different at the core. An oil that races down a ramp while cold and flows better than the others isn't going to magically lose in a flow test to others inside an engine or when tested in another setting.

Project Farm may not do things scientifically but he does do things well enough to prove the point and give viewers the ideas they need to pick quality items.

Idk, the cold ramp test does show the ability of oil flowing in cold temps but doesn't show any indication of how well it will protect in a hot engine. My iced coffee will flow down that ramp better than both oils when cold...doesn't mean it's going to protect my engine when it's really hot. (obviously that's an extreme example, but you get the point)

 

[AmericanRebelution]

How did this thread make it to the 5.7 HEMI V8 forum anyways?

 

[HoosierTrooper]

The ASTM has several tests to determine the approximate pour point of an oil, D97, D5949 and a couple others. Pour point is the approximate lowest temperature that an oil is able to pour or flow out of a container, the idea being that if it won’t pour from a container it can’t be pumped by the oil pump. The ASTM does no testing on how fast or slow an oil flows over a certain distance because It’s irrelevant, either it flows or it doesn't. If the oil is fluid enough for the oil pump to start it moving through the engine is all that matters, and that's all the pour point test measures.

The ASTM also uses a Cold Cranking Simulator (CCS) test,D5293, to determine an oils ability to be pumped at the appropriate low temperatures for each winter rating. The CCS machine simulates an engine being started and determines if the test oil meets the winter rating it was designed for. Again, the ASTM isn't measuring how fast an oil flows, just whether the oil will allow the engine to crank at very low temperatures so it can be pumped by the oil pump.

Again, the ASTM has no tests for how fast or slow an oil flows over a given distance because it is irrelevant. If you want to believe that a test set up by a youtuber in his garage is relevant that's fine. I just have more faith in tests that measure the important characteristics of oil that have been established by tribologists, chemists and other oil industry experts and are performed under controlled conditions in professional labs by trained professionals. To each his own I guess.

 

[PowerJrod]

How did this thread make it to the 5.7 HEMI V8 forum anyways?

Magic

 

[PowerJrod]

The ASTM has several tests to determine the approximate pour point of an oil, D97, D5949 and a couple others. Pour point is the approximate lowest temperature that an oil is able to pour or flow out of a container, the idea being that if it won’t pour from a container it can’t be pumped by the oil pump. The ASTM does no testing on how fast or slow an oil flows over a certain distance because It’s irrelevant, either it flows or it doesn't. If the oil is fluid enough for the oil pump to start it moving through the engine is all that matters, and that's all the pour point test measures.

The ASTM also uses a Cold Cranking Simulator (CCS) test,D5293, to determine an oils ability to be pumped at the appropriate low temperatures for each winter rating. The CCS machine simulates an engine being started and determines if the test oil meets the winter rating it was designed for. Again, the ASTM isn't measuring how fast an oil flows, just whether the oil will allow the engine to crank at very low temperatures so it can be pumped by the oil pump.

Again, the ASTM has no tests for how fast or slow an oil flows over a given distance because it is irrelevant. If you want to believe that a test set up by a youtuber in his garage is relevant that's fine. I just have more faith in tests that measure the important characteristics of oil that have been established by tribologists, chemists and other oil industry experts and are performed under controlled conditions in professional labs by trained professionals. To each his own I guess.

Oh but everything on YouTube is true
Well said though!