|
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Tegger wrote: > Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in > news:y6qTi.262552$ax1.155997@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > >> >>Tegger wrote: >> >> >>>highkm <ic3po@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >>>@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >>>>Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about >>>>why certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of >>>>say 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief >>>>that Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to >>>>engine tolerances. >>> >>> >>> >>><snip gibberish> >>> >>>You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >>> >>>Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that >>>has a lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >>> >>>1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >>>Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >>> >>>2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >>>Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >>> >>>All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are >>>similarly identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no >>>other. >>> >>>And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV >>>six. .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 >>>in 1952? >>> >>> >> >> >>Heh heh heh... It's amazing on how specs for machanical components >>have hardly changed over the years ain't it? >> >>The biggest issue with camshaft wear as far as I can tell is the >>reformulation of engine oils that remove direct contact "cushions." > > > > > There is some evidence that organo-moly offers the same "wear pad" > protection that ZDDP used to provide. The API has not yet conducted > tests to definitively confirm this, though. > > It's my understanding that engines with excessive cam-train wear rates > are performance engines with flat tappets, high spring rates and high- > lift cams. Your average road car has sufficiently developed metallurgy > that cam-train wear is not an issue even in the absence of ZDDP. > I share the same assessment and hope that your, er, I'm right. And then there was that issue of valve seats being a problem when lead was removed from gas. That has generally not proven to be the case with Studebakers. So far so good.. > > > >>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). > > > > > The API has stated on the record that older engines exhibit no excessive > wear with low-ZDDP GF-4 oils. > > ZDDP is not the be-all-and-end-all of wear protection. > > > > > > |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Tegger wrote: > Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in > news:y6qTi.262552$ax1.155997@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > >> >>Tegger wrote: >> >> >>>highkm <ic3po@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >>>@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >>>>Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about >>>>why certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of >>>>say 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief >>>>that Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to >>>>engine tolerances. >>> >>> >>> >>><snip gibberish> >>> >>>You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >>> >>>Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that >>>has a lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >>> >>>1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >>>Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >>> >>>2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >>>Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >>> >>>All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are >>>similarly identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no >>>other. >>> >>>And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV >>>six. .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 >>>in 1952? >>> >>> >> >> >>Heh heh heh... It's amazing on how specs for machanical components >>have hardly changed over the years ain't it? >> >>The biggest issue with camshaft wear as far as I can tell is the >>reformulation of engine oils that remove direct contact "cushions." > > > > > There is some evidence that organo-moly offers the same "wear pad" > protection that ZDDP used to provide. The API has not yet conducted > tests to definitively confirm this, though. > > It's my understanding that engines with excessive cam-train wear rates > are performance engines with flat tappets, high spring rates and high- > lift cams. Your average road car has sufficiently developed metallurgy > that cam-train wear is not an issue even in the absence of ZDDP. > I share the same assessment and hope that your, er, I'm right. And then there was that issue of valve seats being a problem when lead was removed from gas. That has generally not proven to be the case with Studebakers. So far so good.. > > > >>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). > > > > > The API has stated on the record that older engines exhibit no excessive > wear with low-ZDDP GF-4 oils. > > ZDDP is not the be-all-and-end-all of wear protection. > > > > > > |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in
news:zxtTi.16385$kj1.5876@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > > Tegger wrote: >> >> It's my understanding that engines with excessive cam-train wear >> rates are performance engines with flat tappets, high spring rates >> and high- lift cams. Your average road car has sufficiently developed >> metallurgy that cam-train wear is not an issue even in the absence of >> ZDDP. >> > > I share the same assessment and hope that your, er, I'm right. > > And then there was that issue of valve seats being a problem when lead > was removed from gas. That has generally not proven to be the case > with Studebakers. So far so good.. Again, from extensive reading, it's my impression that valve seat recession in the absence of TEL occurs primarily in situations that contain some or all of the following: high revs; high spring rates; high cam lift. I'm seeing many reports that most standard pre-unleaded road-going engines are getting by just fine without lead protection. Mind you, most of the vehicles containing such engines are now considered "classics" and are generally driven in a very sympathetic manner. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in
news:zxtTi.16385$kj1.5876@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > > Tegger wrote: >> >> It's my understanding that engines with excessive cam-train wear >> rates are performance engines with flat tappets, high spring rates >> and high- lift cams. Your average road car has sufficiently developed >> metallurgy that cam-train wear is not an issue even in the absence of >> ZDDP. >> > > I share the same assessment and hope that your, er, I'm right. > > And then there was that issue of valve seats being a problem when lead > was removed from gas. That has generally not proven to be the case > with Studebakers. So far so good.. Again, from extensive reading, it's my impression that valve seat recession in the absence of TEL occurs primarily in situations that contain some or all of the following: high revs; high spring rates; high cam lift. I'm seeing many reports that most standard pre-unleaded road-going engines are getting by just fine without lead protection. Mind you, most of the vehicles containing such engines are now considered "classics" and are generally driven in a very sympathetic manner. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
On 10/23/2007 1:27 PM highkm spake these words of knowledge:
> On Oct 23, 11:31 am, Tegger <teg...@tegger.c0m> wrote: >> highkm <ic...@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >> @v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >> >> > Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >> > Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about why >> > certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of say >> > 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief that >> > Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to engine >> > tolerances. >> >> <snip gibberish> >> >> You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >> >> Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that has a >> lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >> >> 1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >> >> 2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >> >> All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are similarly >> identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no other. >> >> And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV six. >> .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 in 1952? >> >> -- >> Tegger >> >> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQwww.tegger.com/hondafaq/ > > You might have a point here. I also called Amsoil to discuss the > difference between 2 oils in the engine and the situation. They have > also firmly suggested not to switch to 5w20 whether it be Amsoil's or > Honda's oil as it will accelerate the wear of other components which > are currently functioning properly. It appears that a lot of people > don't like the 5w20 oil. It would be interesting to find out if there > are other higher milage vehicles out there that have used 5w20 > exclusively. > > Thanks. > 2003 Accord LX v4, 134,000 miles, Mobil-1 5-20, changed every 10,000 miles. Haven't noted any engine problems with power, mileage, problem codes or noises. RFT!!! Dave Kelsen -- Life is short; break the rules, forgive quickly, kiss slowly, love truly, laugh uncontrollably, and never regret anything that made you Smile. Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we should dance... |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
On 10/23/2007 1:27 PM highkm spake these words of knowledge:
> On Oct 23, 11:31 am, Tegger <teg...@tegger.c0m> wrote: >> highkm <ic...@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >> @v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >> >> > Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >> > Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about why >> > certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of say >> > 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief that >> > Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to engine >> > tolerances. >> >> <snip gibberish> >> >> You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >> >> Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that has a >> lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >> >> 1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >> >> 2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >> >> All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are similarly >> identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no other. >> >> And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV six. >> .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 in 1952? >> >> -- >> Tegger >> >> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQwww.tegger.com/hondafaq/ > > You might have a point here. I also called Amsoil to discuss the > difference between 2 oils in the engine and the situation. They have > also firmly suggested not to switch to 5w20 whether it be Amsoil's or > Honda's oil as it will accelerate the wear of other components which > are currently functioning properly. It appears that a lot of people > don't like the 5w20 oil. It would be interesting to find out if there > are other higher milage vehicles out there that have used 5w20 > exclusively. > > Thanks. > 2003 Accord LX v4, 134,000 miles, Mobil-1 5-20, changed every 10,000 miles. Haven't noted any engine problems with power, mileage, problem codes or noises. RFT!!! Dave Kelsen -- Life is short; break the rules, forgive quickly, kiss slowly, love truly, laugh uncontrollably, and never regret anything that made you Smile. Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we should dance... |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
> > > Tegger wrote: > >> highkm <ic3po@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >> @v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >> >> >>> Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >>> Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about why >>> certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of say >>> 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief that >>> Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to engine >>> tolerances. >> >> >> >> <snip gibberish> >> >> You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >> >> Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that >> has a lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >> >> 1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >> >> 2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >> >> All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are >> similarly identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no other. >> >> And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV six. >> .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 in 1952? >> >> > > > Heh heh heh... It's amazing on how specs for machanical components have > hardly changed over the years ain't it? > > The biggest issue with camshaft wear as far as I can tell is the > reformulation of engine oils that remove direct contact "cushions." > > This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet another > guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. > To the best of my knowledge, only oils that meet Caterpillar's diesel > standard still have these ingredients. (Caterpillar uses Shell Rotella > from what I understand). > > But, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this nonsense. I have a few > extra camshafts (and lifter sets) to keep me runnin' for a few years... > > <G> > > JT > |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
> > > Tegger wrote: > >> highkm <ic3po@mac.com> wrote in news:1193149570.334306.98020 >> @v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com: >> >> >>> Here's the latest word on 5w20 vs 0w30 viscosity in a 2003 Honda >>> Accord EX. i am sure that many of you have wondered and read about why >>> certain companies like Honda and Ford are using 5w20 insead of say >>> 5w30 or 5w40 as in European cars. Contrary to the popular belief that >>> Honda used 5w20 to meet CAFE requirements it is mostly due to engine >>> tolerances. >> >> >> >> <snip gibberish> >> >> You're talking through your hat, Mr. Metric Slave. >> >> Below is one of the most critical clearances in any engine, one that >> has a lot to do with oil pressure and consumption. >> >> 1991 Integra, 5W-30 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0017", max .0020" >> >> 2003 RSX, 5W-20 oil specified. >> Crank bearing clearance: .0007"-.0016", max .0020". >> >> All the other relevant clearances I can find in my manuals are >> similarly identical. 5W-20 is specified for CAFE reasons and no other. >> >> And just for fun I looked up the same clearance on a 1952 Ford OHV six. >> .0005"-.0021". Whaddya know. You suppose they were using 5W-20 in 1952? >> >> > > > Heh heh heh... It's amazing on how specs for machanical components have > hardly changed over the years ain't it? > > The biggest issue with camshaft wear as far as I can tell is the > reformulation of engine oils that remove direct contact "cushions." > > This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet another > guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. > To the best of my knowledge, only oils that meet Caterpillar's diesel > standard still have these ingredients. (Caterpillar uses Shell Rotella > from what I understand). > > But, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this nonsense. I have a few > extra camshafts (and lifter sets) to keep me runnin' for a few years... > > <G> > > JT > |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: > Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >> >> This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >> another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). > > Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. It happened around 1995, with the introduction of government-imposed OBD-II. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: > Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >> >> This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >> another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). > > Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. It happened around 1995, with the introduction of government-imposed OBD-II. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Tegger wrote: > Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in > news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: > > >>Grumpy AuContraire wrote: > > >>>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). >> >>Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. > > > > > ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet > government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. > It happened around 1995, with the introduction of > government-imposed OBD-II. > > Thanks Tegger... Don'tcha just luv every twerp that comes along and demands, "cite, cite, cite." JT (Back to the jug o' Pinch) |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Tegger wrote: > Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in > news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: > > >>Grumpy AuContraire wrote: > > >>>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). >> >>Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. > > > > > ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet > government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. > It happened around 1995, with the introduction of > government-imposed OBD-II. > > Thanks Tegger... Don'tcha just luv every twerp that comes along and demands, "cite, cite, cite." JT (Back to the jug o' Pinch) |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in news:JP3Ui.21899
$kj1.9496@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > > Tegger wrote: > >> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in >> news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: >> >> >>>Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >> >> >>>>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>>>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). >>> >>>Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. >> >> >> >> >> ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet >> government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. >> It happened around 1995, with the introduction of >> government-imposed OBD-II. >> >> > > Thanks Tegger... Don'tcha just luv every twerp that comes along and > demands, "cite, cite, cite." He'd rather pick a fight than look it up himself. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in news:JP3Ui.21899
$kj1.9496@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > > Tegger wrote: > >> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in >> news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: >> >> >>>Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >> >> >>>>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>>>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). >>> >>>Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. >> >> >> >> >> ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet >> government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. >> It happened around 1995, with the introduction of >> government-imposed OBD-II. >> >> > > Thanks Tegger... Don'tcha just luv every twerp that comes along and > demands, "cite, cite, cite." He'd rather pick a fight than look it up himself. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: 340,000 KM 2003 Accord Ex Oil Viscosity Issue
Tegger wrote: > Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in news:JP3Ui.21899 > $kj1.9496@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: > > >> >>Tegger wrote: >> >> >>>Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in >>>news:hETTi.8077$0l4.4947@trnddc08: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>This is an issue facing a lot of owners of older cars and is yet >>>>>another guv'ment mandate. (I can't speak for youse Canadians though). >>>> >>>>Prove that this is a guv'ment mandate. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>ZDDP was drastically lowered in gasoline motor oils in order to meet >>>government-imposed warranty requirements on catalytic converter life. >>>It happened around 1995, with the introduction of >>>government-imposed OBD-II. >>> >>> >> >>Thanks Tegger... Don'tcha just luv every twerp that comes along and >>demands, "cite, cite, cite." > > > > > He'd rather pick a fight than look it up himself. > > Yup and I'm 6'1'' and have massive 24" arms, 30" waste, weight a fightin' 200 lbs and hide regularly behind my widescreen monitor... <G> JT |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:31 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands