The Oil Thread

[Design]

It is an anti-wear additive. Which I don't understand for new engine break in? When I assemble engines, I put moly lube on the camshaft to assure adequate lube during the first seconds after first start. Which is critical.
But this seems to me to be the opposite of what you want for piston ring / cylinder wall break-in. You WANT those to wear while the cylinder wall is still rough enough after honing to seat those rings. Piston ring sealing is the most important part of break-in in my mind. If you get a really good ring seat. It helps everything! If the rings seal, then you not only get better power and mileage because the compression is better, but the engine lasts much longer because combustion products are not leaking past them, which burns the oil film off the cylinder walls. Then lets acidic / corrosive compounds created by combustion into the oil. Which then attacks everything inside the engine.

The assembly line seems to be much different than a typical rebuild. The former leaves almost no wear particles (in theory) whereby molybdenum paste is used during different phases of Honda's assembly process (so I'm told). That in turn mixes with the factory fill. Good discussion here:
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=91344

There are two ways an engine breaks-in. One is where the asperities collide and instantaneously weld and tear away. That, obviously, leaves more (but smaller) asperities and it generates a wear particle that can cause more wear.

The other way is by plastic deformation where the asperities are mushed down rather than torn away. Plastic deformation leaves no jagged edges and generates no wear particle. Moly is a highly polar AW/AF additive that greatly aids break in by plastic deformation.

Sponsored

 

[Design]

Taken from another thread courtesy of member @BoringOhio :

In the interest of adding some actual scientific data to the discussion, I'll link to 540Rat's Oil Wear Protection Ranking List and his long write up about his methodology. The whole thing is pretty interesting and he gives a lot of useful information before he even gets to his test results.

Of particular interest for this thread is this section:

VISCOSITY COMPARISON:

20 wt oils rank between number 4 and 184.
.
30 wt oils rank between number 1 and 195.
.
40 wt oils rank between number 3 and 183.
.
50 wt oils rank between number 31 and 192.
.
60 wt oil, the only one tested, ranked number 81.
.
70 wt oil, the only one tested, ranked number 141.
.

So, as you can see, oil viscosity plays no particular role in an oil’s wear protection capability. As mentioned above, an oil’s wear protection capability is determined by its base oil and its additive package “as a whole”, with the primary emphasis on the additive package, which contains the extreme pressure anti-wear components, which has nothing to do with viscosity.

So using a thicker oil than the manufacturer recommends isn't giving you any extra wear protection. It would definitely make the oil flow differently compared to what was intended by the people who build, test, and cover warranty claims for the engine. That doesn't seem worth it for zero gain.

Another section of that article that's relevant to this thread:

A typical Gear Head’s mindset is, “What I’ve been doing works, so I don’t want to change anything”. An Engineer’s mindset is, “No matter what you’ve been doing, let’s see if we can move forward and improve things, making them “better” than they were before”.

The Engineering mindset that resulted in the Wear Protection Ranking List, is the whole point of this Blog. So now, we no longer have to guess which oil is best. We have the data available at our finger tips to show us how various motor oils compare head to head, regarding wear protection capability.

So I'm sure you have lots of anecdotal evidence about using thicker oil, but can you really argue with actual testing and data? If you think you can then please email him and make sure to post his response in this thread for our amusement.

 

[daltman584]

Can someone tell me what type of oil the new 2017 Hatchback come with initially? is it regular oil with a 3000 mile range or Synthetic blend with 5000?

 

[kirkhilles]

Can someone tell me what type of oil the new 2017 Hatchback come with initially? is it regular oil with a 3000 mile range or Synthetic blend with 5000?

Did you say it's a 2017 or 1987? LOL. The type that lasts 8,000+ miles. Follow your MM.

 

[daltman584]

Did you say it's a 2017 or 1987? LOL. The type that lasts 8,000+ miles. Follow your MM.

My previous car -Ford Mustang , the manual said 7500 but everyone I spoke to said 5000...

 

[kirkhilles]

My previous car -Ford Mustang , the manual said 7500 but everyone I spoke to said 5000...

Well, people will do what their comfortable with: many will use cheaper oil and change at 0% while others change every few thousand miles. That being said, it's 0w-20, so while there is speculation of whether it's a special Molly blend or not, it's at least partially synthetic. For the first oil change its never recommended you change before the MM tells you too. After that it's your preference.

 

[grevic16]

Did you say it's a 2017 or 1987? LOL. The type that lasts 8,000+ miles. Follow your MM.

I know right. I can't believe people still change the oil at 3000 miles. It's usually not even half used up at that mileage. Of course, I'm sure some genius will have some "facts" that proves that unless you change it every 3000, and use heavier weight full synthetic, your engine's just gonna leap right through the hood.

 

[David Harper]

The Moly in the original factory oil fill has done it's job and no longer serves any effective purpose after the first few hundred miles. It was only there in the first place to insure that no surface damage took place on initial engine start up. The rings and cylinder walls have undergone all the shear seating that they are going to do within a couple of hundred miles. And every new engine is "run in" at the factory before it's even installed in the car. All of this BS about "keeping it in until the MM says to change it" is nonsense.There is no such thing as "special break in oil".

 

[grevic16]

I knew it wouldn't take long.

 

[David Harper]

I change my oil myself every 6000. It costs me about 30 dollars, including the filter. But I'm not criticising those who want to go ten thousand between oil changes. Maybe you're right. Maybe it won't hurt your engine. I don't know. But even if it doesn't, Id still rather change mine. In fact, here's an idea; why not change it every twenty thousand? Or every forty? I mean, if your engine is really that unimportant to you, what difference does it make?

 

[josby]

The Moly in the original factory oil fill has done it's job and no longer serves any effective purpose after the first few hundred miles. It was only there in the first place to insure that no surface damage took place on initial engine start up. The rings and cylinder walls have undergone all the shear seating that they are going to do within a couple of hundred miles. And every new engine is "run in" at the factory before it's even installed in the car. All of this BS about "keeping it in until the MM says to change it" is nonsense.There is no such thing as "special break in oil".

Maybe you should alert Honda. I'm sure they'd love to hear that they're spouting "nonsense".

 

[kirkhilles]

I change my oil myself every 6000. It costs me about 30 dollars, including the filter. But I'm not criticising those who want to go ten thousand between oil changes. Maybe you're right. Maybe it won't hurt your engine. I don't know. But even if it doesn't, Id still rather change mine. In fact, here's an idea; why not change it every twenty thousand? Or every forty? I mean, if your engine is really that unimportant to you, what difference does it make?

Haha, why do I follow the interval set by the people who designed, developed and tested the vehicle with many, many years of building engines and claims to be the world's largest engine builder? Huh, I don't know .

Along those lines, if you don't trust Honda to set your intervals, I presume you change ALL fluids and maintenance items every 5,000 miles? I mean, transmission fluid is "cheap insurance" too, right?

Until I see evidence to the contrary, I'm trusting the company known for their reliability.

 

[Design]

Maybe you should alert Honda. I'm sure they'd love to hear that they're spouting "nonsense".

It's an older bulletin but I've been told it's still technically valid. I mentioned in the previous page that the techs are being instructed to re-add the factory fill when doing warranty work for the snap ring issue.

My take: talk to a master tech (or two) and follow their recommendations.

 

[grevic16]

I change my oil myself every 6000. It costs me about 30 dollars, including the filter. But I'm not criticising those who want to go ten thousand between oil changes. Maybe you're right. Maybe it won't hurt your engine. I don't know. But even if it doesn't, Id still rather change mine. In fact, here's an idea; why not change it every twenty thousand? Or every forty? I mean, if your engine is really that unimportant to you, what difference does it make?

Big difference between changing it at 6000, and changing it at 3000. Nothing wrong with 6k. Changing at 3k is just a total waste.

 

[David Harper]

Maybe you should alert Honda. I'm sure they'd love to hear that they're spouting "nonsense".

You don't know what you're talking about. That service article doesn't mean anything.

Sponsored