[Cdn17Sport6MT]

Succinctly and well stated. I suspect you are right. I think the improvement that 0W-20 provides for first-up lubrication on start up (versus 5W-30) is offset (not sure to what degree) by probably a reduction of protection the former provides at the highest temps/ most arduous hot operating conditions. Which aspects over-rides the other is up for grabs, as is whether the differences are worth being concerned about. For me, living in the "great white north" I will go with Mazda-branded 0W-20 oil during the engine warranty period in any case. And I am not saying Mazda-branded oil is necessarilly as good as the name brand premium synthetic oils.

 

[Get Inline]

Dang, you people will argue over anything.

I’m gonna simplify for those who are confused...

1. Manufacturers often implement an engineering/design change based on the need to meet a regulatory expedient. 0w-20 motor oil appears to be in this category, due to corporate average fuel economy requirements in the US.

2. There is no evidence that the use of 0w-20 motor oil in vehicles - for which it is recommended - has any noticeable effect on the durability or longevity of these vehicles.

3. Mazda specifies 5w-30 oil in markets where 0w-20 may not be available.

4. You can use either one and sleep easy at night, knowing that your engine is perfectly safe.

There. Now go back to arguing.

It is not specified in some places because there is no use for it. Japan, where Mazda's are built uses 5w30, so I will be using 5w30. Unless there is evidence that CAFE requirements had no bearing on the choice of oil here, of course...

Succinctly and well stated. I suspect you are right. I think the improvement that 0W-20 provides for first-up lubrication on start up (versus 5W-30) is offset (not sure to what degree) by probably a reduction of protection the former provides at the highest temps/ most arduous hot operating conditions. Which aspects over-rides the other is up for grabs, as is whether the differences are worth being concerned about. For me, living in the "great white north" I will go with Mazda-branded 0W-20 oil during the engine warranty period in any case. And I am not saying Mazda-branded oil is necessarilly as good as the name brand premium synthetic oils.

According to the chart, even 10w50 is OK to use in -20C conditions. If you park in a garage overnight, I have serious doubts that anything less than 5w30 would be beneficial. I think it's best to choose something which would be best for a variety of conditions (5w30 for regular winters, 5w40 for summer use)

 

[Byakuya]

I really don't like to sound ignorant or like I am simply ignoring information, so I am presenting my own. A graph indicating which oil temperatures are appropriate for the Skyactiv engine. According to this graph, 0w20 gives you a slight edge in -40C weather... and that's it. With this graph in mind, I think serious considerations should be made to choose an oil weight appropriate for your driving styles and ambient conditions.

Thanks for finding this! It shows that even Mazda says 0w20 and 5w30 are recommended exactly the same except 0w20 is rated for slightly colder temps.

As for ignoring information: you still haven't countered anyone's statistics (like mine or tickers), you even took a 9 month hiatus when I posted mine, when it comes to oil analysis proving 0w20 absolutely not harmful in any way.

With that being said, I stand by my opinion on this matter.

I appreciate that you've acknowledged that everything you've stated in this thread is of your own opinion, and not based on the overwhelming evidence that 0w20 is perfectly harmless, and 5w30 warrants no proven statistical advantages.

Many of you might have a differing opinion because you choose to accept what CAFE mandates in one small part of the world like a bunch of sheep, and that's fine. This is part of the freedom of being able to have your own opinion.

......And this is where you dig yourself into a hole. No one here has belittled you in any way during this thread, so we appreciate when you don't do the same to us.

'...choose to accept what CAFE mandates...like a bunch of sheep' - Give me a break! I won't even go into why this is blatantly disrespectful to everyone partaking in this discussion.

But I have backed my ideas with information and plenty of logical counter-arguments so I don't see why my opinion is irrelevant if everyone is allowed to have their own.

No, you haven't.

The only argument that you have which hasn't been torn apart by data and statistics is CAFE, and even that we've discussed how the sulfur contents play a larger role in that decision than any of your conspiracy theories.

The only evidence you've presented, beyond the above graph (which further supports our argument), has been your personal opinions with no statistics.

I cannot take part in a one-sided discussion with someone who's opinions matter more than statistics.


For everyone else: I advise that you don't bother continuing a fruitless discussion. If you do, I ask that you please keep it as civil as possible, and be respectful at all times. Please mention me if anything else comes up, as I won't be following this thread directly any longer.

 

[Get Inline]

Thanks for finding this! It shows that even Mazda says 0w20 and 5w30 are recommended exactly the same except 0w20 is rated for slightly colder temps.

As for ignoring information: you still haven't countered anyone's statistics (like mine or tickers), you even took a 9 month hiatus when I posted mine, when it comes to oil analysis proving 0w20 absolutely not harmful in any way.



I appreciate that you've acknowledged that everything you've stated in this thread is of your own opinion, and not based on the overwhelming evidence that 0w20 is perfectly harmless, and 5w30 warrants no proven statistical advantages.



......And this is where you dig yourself into a hole. No one here has belittled you in any way during this thread, so we appreciate when you don't do the same to us.

'...choose to accept what CAFE mandates...like a bunch of sheep' - Give me a break! I won't even go into why this is blatantly disrespectful to everyone partaking in this discussion.



No, you haven't.

The only argument that you have which hasn't been torn apart by data and statistics is CAFE, and even that we've discussed how the sulfur contents play a larger role in that decision than any of your conspiracy theories.

The only evidence you've presented, beyond the above graph (which further supports our argument), has been your personal opinions with no statistics.

I cannot take part in a one-sided discussion with someone who's opinions matter more than statistics.


For everyone else: I advise that you don't bother continuing a fruitless discussion. If you do, I ask that you please keep it as civil as possible, and be respectful at all times. Please mention me if anything else comes up, as I won't be following this thread directly any longer.

- This chart does not necessarily make a case for 0w20 only. It shows that a variety of oils are suitable for the Skyactiv motor, in a variety of conditions, including 10w50.

- Japan comes factory filled with 5W30. I think this is a big factor as to what oil is most suitable for these cars.

- A user at Mazdas247 noted significantly less blow-by in his oil catch-can when using 5W30. He also claimed that his oil came out cleaner, even with longer intervals.

- You claim that I have not provided any sort of statistics proving that thicker oils will protect better than 0W20 oil in the long run, but one or two UOA samples is hardly any sort of statistic in itself. Not everyone's engine will be in such good condition as @tickerguy and not everyone's will have such low metal wear values making 0w20 fine to use. You can't possibly say that such a tiny oil analysis sample could, without a doubt conclude that 0W20 is indeed a good choice for a variety driving styles/conditions and can protect the engine for well over 150K miles for everyone's case.

So, seems like there isn't much proof for each oils case. However, 5W30, 5W40, even 10W oils have been around for decades without any sort of issues, so It is common-logic for me to be wary of 0W20 as it has been around for what, maybe 5 years at the most? Considering that you can use up to 10W50 with these engines, I think the fact thicker oils have a far longer running history speaks for itself.

 

[Byakuya]

Alright bud, I'll bite; because nothing gets me going more than logical fallacy.

Remember: YOU created a thread telling US why we shouldn't be using 0w20. We're simply telling you that you have no argument as to why other than your opinions. You, sir, have the burden of proof.

- This chart does not necessarily make a case for 0w20 only. It shows that a variety of oils are suitable for the Skyactiv motor, in a variety of conditions, including 10w50.

Not once, throughout this discussion, has anyone said 0w20 was the ONLY oil you can use in the Skyactive. We've simply been refuting your compulsive argument that 0w20 should never be used. See your first post:

0w20/30 (unless you start your car in-20C climate outside of your garage everyday, you should not be using this stuff because it's too thin)

You've provided evidence yourself directly from Mazda that says 0w20 is perfectly fine, even if you don't "start your car in -20c climate outside of your garage everyday"

And here's your supporting argument as to why:

Direct injection engines contaminate your supply of oil with fuel (fuel dilution) which breaks down your oil quicker then in other motors. this is why a good quality oil is important.

Of all the Skyactive engines out there and tests we can find (including two of our own from people living in vastly different climates), none of us are suffering from fuel dilution. You can't find us a single one that is, and even if you did, you can't prove it was because of the oil choice.

- Japan comes factory filled with 5W30. I think this is a big factor as to what oil is most suitable for these cars.

Ticker proposed, and you completely agreed, to a much more viable reason as to why the rest of the world Mazda recommends to stay away from 0w20 - sulfur.

See:

The Mexican climate is NOT that different than the US Climate, other than the lack of freezing weather. The upper end is not much different at all, IF different, especially in places like Florida, Arizona and Texas. It is therefore reasonable to assume that there is something else that's different, and what I *know* is different between the US and Mexico is the sulfur levels in the fuel. While Mexico has *recently* (last couple of years) put in "low sulfur" requirements they're still three times or greater US standards and prior to that, which incidentally encompassed when SkyActiv was first available, levels were as high as 500ppm (the old rules that we used to run under as well.)

Since a car sold in Mexico must be presumed to be able to be run in the entire nation without problems when it comes to oil recommendations it is entirely reasonable to assume that the oil recommendations were made to deal with high-sulfur gasoline, and even today Mexican standards are 3x those in the US. In addition they still use MTBE, which is basically not used in the US any more (there was a major environmental fight over it, including lawsuits and some state attempts to ban it, as it's a serious pollutant if it gets into the water.)

(FWIW marine and ag diesel in Mexico, even today, is STILL high-sulfur (500ppm), as is any area outside of major freight and border corridors plus certain metro areas. This is a MAJOR problem when it comes to modern diesels, many of which have exhaust treatment that will be destroyed by the use of high-sulfur fuels, and it also creates serious issues with TBN depletion in those engines as well.)

You agreed.

in Mexico, 5w30 is required for the NA 2.5L because of the ambient temperatures yes, but Ticker brought up an excellent point with the sulfur levels in Mexican fuel. 0w20 is very likely not able to cope with protecting the motor sufficiently from the added sulfur levels in mind.

The same can be said for the rest of the world's gas, especially Japan.

So, taking into account that ambient temperatures in Mexico (or anywhere else, for that matter) don't vary more than a few degrees from many places in the US, that means (logically) the more direct reason for oil difference is more than likely the above.

- A user at Mazdas247 noted significantly less blow-by in his oil catch-can when using 5W30. He also claimed that his oil came out cleaner, even with longer intervals.

Does he have any evidence to back this up? I'd love to see empirical data (like UOA) including where he does his driving and how much of it.

- You claim that I have not provided any sort of statistics proving that thicker oils will protect better than 0W20 oil in the long run, but one or two UOA samples is hardly any sort of statistic in itself.

But you haven't provided a single piece of evidence to support this - you just revert back to CAFE and conspiracy. You even admit it yourself that proving this would be very difficult:

The only way to find out is to take two identical Mazda's and drive them both to 300K, one using 0w20 the other using 5w40 and take UOA reports along the way.

You're absolutely correct!! Can't believe we agree. But guess what? Mazda (and Toyota, and Honda, etc) have spent MILLIONS on testing and driving their engines crazy amounts of miles to absolutely make sure that 0w20 works perfectly in them.

Not everyone's engine will be in such good condition as @tickerguy and not everyone's will have such low metal wear values making 0w20 fine to use.

Not a single person has come to this thread (or the others you've created all over) claiming anything but success. Mazda has sold tens of thousands of these vehicles and not once even considered telling everyone to change oil weights.

You can't possibly say that such a tiny oil analysis sample could, without a doubt conclude that 0W20 is indeed a good choice for a variety driving styles/conditions and can protect the engine for well over 150K miles for everyone's case.

It's not a tiny oil analysis when you have tens of thousands of owners driving millions of miles annually from a manufacturer that has spent millions doing countless testing. Ticker and I are FAR from the only ones who have put over 130k miles on Skyactive engines with 0w20 - we're just a couple of them who have shown you the results.

So, seems like there isn't much proof for each oils case. However, 5W30, 5W40, even 10W oils have been around for decades without any sort of issues

Again: We're not trying to convince you to stop using 5w30, we're trying to convince you that coming onto a public forum where thousands read and learn, to tell them that Mazda's recommendation is wrong (without any evidence to support this), is what's actually wrong.

You're doing people a disservice by trying to force your opinions of oil on them when you have NO evidence that they're right, or even better at all.

so It is common-logic for me to be wary of 0W20 as it has been around for what, maybe 5 years at the most? Considering that you can use up to 10W50 with these engines, I think the fact thicker oils have a far longer running history speaks for itself.

You say that as if engines have remained the same for decades and, because of that, no other oil type could possibly work in them....

TL;DR:
Don't come here and blatantly tell us that an oil is flat-out WRONG for our vehicles, belittle us as 'sheep' and 'ignorant' for believing otherwise, and not be prepared to prove it (which you still have not done).

 

[Get Inline]

This conversation could honestly just keep going and going, so I'd like to officially conclude my view on this topic:

- Right from the very start, I named this thread why many of you should not be using 0W20 oil. I tried to poorly convince everyone that you may want to use a thicker oil. After hearing what you people had to say and looking over the UOA reports, my opinion did not change. There is nothing wrong with using the approved, FAR more proven 5/10W oils for this engine. I know I'm clearly against 0W20 oil. This is because most of you are totally naive to my “logical fallacy”, which makes no sense to me. I don't care if my observations and arguments aren't empirical, because not everything in life is, especially when CAFE has convinced you all that 0W20 oil is approved. Two UOA reports of engines with excellent metal-wear properties and practically zero oil-consumption running *fine* At 150K miles means quite frankly – shit to me or anyone else who owns a Mazda. This engine is clearly built around very high performance as the max 10W50 oil weight approval may suggest. According to my mistake, the oil pan can hold at least a quart of oil past it's recommended fill level with zero issues for an extended period of time, meaning this engine has a very aggressive and high-performance oil-pan that ensures the engine is not starved of oil during full throttle high speed corners. All of this makes it clear that we are dealing with a high-performance engine designed around upwards of 10W50. To put things into perspective, BMW M engines use 10W60. Hey. I'm not trying to make an "illogical fallacy" or anything, I'm simply stating that whatever CAFÉ-approved nonsense most of you believe in has 5 year track record. Let me just make one point before I hear "modern tolerances" again. The Mazda NA 2.5L, code-named PY-VPS is a modified evolution of the previous generation L5-VE 2.5L engine. This Skyactiv motor is NOT a clean-sheet design. Both engines have identical Bore X Stroke dimensions and overall displacement. This means that the internal-tolerances are NOT modern. Do you seriously believe that 10W50 and 0W20 have the same amount of protection in hot-weather? Please refer to this picture here, an oil temperature chart from Mazda before the CAFE shit:

As you can see, even 5W20 is only good for very cold weather, let alone a 0W. Thick oil and thin oil Obviously does not protect the same in hot weather. Now go back to what CAFE intends to do. Interesting.

No, It's not because of sulfur. I am sure it plays a role, but CAFE has more to do with it. Europe extracts the sulfur from their fuels. They don't use 0W20 there. The user, Chris_Top_Her from Mazdas247 lives in Texas, drives the absolute shit out of his car, and has stated that his catch-can caught less blow-by when using 5w30 oil:

(https://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?123864255-Oil-Carbon-build-up-palooza!)

Thicker oil is the better choice for DI motors because it helps to limit the amount of carbon build-up on your intake valves, which is a rare-occurrence but has happened According to the above link. Yes you can use 0W20. But there is a whole plethora of reasons why you shouldn't.

 

[Get Inline]

@Byakuya, please refer to my edited final rebuttal in regards to this topic.

 

[Byakuya]

I took the time to lay out everything for you and that's what you came back with? I was having a good time discussing this whole thing.

"I don't care if my observations and arguments aren't empirical" - That's a problem when trying to convince people of something......same could be said for half of this country's opinions......but that's another topic for another day

You do you, and I'll do me. :thumbup:

You think I'm blindly following CAFE (I'm not) and I think you blindly believe ambient temp actually has any significant role when dealing with normal engine operating temperatures and modern full-synthetic oils (it doesn't).

If/When I see a single Skyactive engine (or Toyota, or Honda, etc) fail in the 200k+ mile range explicitly due to running 0w20, I'll remember you and this thread

 

[Get Inline]

I took the time to lay out everything for you and that's what you came back with? I was having a good time discussing this whole thing.

"I don't care if my observations and arguments aren't empirical" - That's a problem when trying to convince people of something......same could be said for half of this country's opinions......but that's another topic for another day

You do you, and I'll do me. :thumbup:

You think I'm blindly following CAFE (I'm not) and I think you blindly believe ambient temp actually has any significant role when dealing with normal engine operating temperatures and modern full-synthetic oils (it doesn't).

If/When I see a single Skyactive engine (or Toyota, or Honda, etc) fail in the 200k+ mile range explicitly due to running 0w20, I'll remember you and this thread

So you just omit my ideas completely because they are logical, but not backed up with empirical data? Well that's not very fair nor is it helpful, is it? Interesting point you made about politics. If your countries interests were even somewhat logically laid-out, they would be accepted. But let's not get into that.

Ambient temp plays a role in hot weather if you like to drive fast. Oil temperatures increase during aggressive driving, and there's more heat-soak in the engine bay during hot weather - oil thins and breaks down considerably from such conditions, Hence which is why you should use an appropriate oil weight for your driving style in whichever warm conditions you may reside in. Skyactiv engines run pretty cool so 5w30 should suffice, but considering the background of this engine, it doesn't hurt to go thicker.

Try draining 0W20 oil after 5000 miles and then the same with 5W30 and just compare. Maybe that should give you an idea of what you are putting into your car.

 

[Byakuya]

So you just omit my ideas completely because they are logical, but not backed up with empirical data?

No. You have started this discussion and made your claims, you have the burden of proof, which cannot be obtained through nuance and speculation. Don't make a claim if your only supporting element is "because I think so."

Well that's not very fair nor is it helpful, is it? Interesting point you made about politics. If your countries interests were even somewhat logically laid-out, they would be accepted. But let's not get into that.

You think I'm bad on this subject, don't even get me started

Ambient temp plays a role in hot weather if you like to drive fast.

No, it doesn't. I was going to write out all the stats and figures, again, proving that ambient temperature represents a tiny fraction of the overall temperature variance that an oil will be subject to during normal operation, but I'll let you do some light reading from other people who have discussed the same exact thing.

BobIsTheOilGuy
Toyota 4Runner Forum
Some Random Forum (Quora)
Prius Forum

^^^ I found those in 3 minutes on Google.

The list can go on, but EVERYONE's consensus is that ambient temperature plays no significant role when talking about oil temperature inside an operating vehicle (specifically when dealing with modern, full-synthetics). The math and data show the exact same thing.

Try draining 0W20 oil after 5000 miles and then the same with 5W30 and just compare. Maybe that should give you an idea of what you are putting into your car.

No, thanks. All the arguments, testimonies, and data (aside from your opinions) point to 0w20 working perfectly as it should.

 

[Get Inline]

No. You have started this discussion and made your claims, you have the burden of proof, which cannot be obtained through nuance and speculation. Don't make a claim if your only supporting element is "because I think so."



You think I'm bad on this subject, don't even get me started



No, it doesn't. I was going to write out all the stats and figures, again, proving that ambient temperature represents a tiny fraction of the overall temperature variance that an oil will be subject to during normal operation, but I'll let you do some light reading from other people who have discussed the same exact thing.

BobIsTheOilGuy
Toyota 4Runner Forum
Some Random Forum (Quora)
Prius Forum

^^^ I found those in 3 minutes on Google.

The list can go on, but EVERYONE's consensus is that ambient temperature plays no significant role when talking about oil temperature inside an operating vehicle (specifically when dealing with modern, full-synthetics). The math and data show the exact same thing.



No, thanks. All the arguments, testimonies, and data (aside from your opinions) point to 0w20 working perfectly as it should.

which arguments,testimonies and data? That two people who have driven barely 130-150K on an engine with excellent metal-wear properties didn't experience failure? You're not actually serious, are you? I could easily argue that the data I have provided such as the charts, backed by real-world experiences and logic all paired to the running history of 5W/10W oils is a far more convincing argument.

 

[toy4x]

You have provided GENERAL charts based upon CAFE recommendations. You have not posted actual data. Cafe recommendations say both oils work in this engine.

Byakuya and especially Tickerguy have shown actual mazda 6 engine data. Tickerguy has posted multiple oil analysis running 0w20. I believe in his results as they aren't just charts but actual usage. There's another member that used to post his results as well... cant remember the member.... old age showing.

You've brought up a moderator (forget name... not going to look for it) from another forum who's done a catch can.

1)He's not posted any oil analysis.

2) how many oil changes have been done running 0w20 vs 5w20 on his car to come out with his results? I would like to see 5oc's EACH MINIMUM before making any conclusions.

3) not enough evidence from multiple vehicles to support his conclusions.

In the end... Get Inline .. run your 5w20 I'm sure it will be fine and you'll see no problems. I'll continue running my 0w20 as most here have had zero problems running this weight.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Get Inline]

3) not enough evidence from multiple vehicles to support his conclusions.

In the end... Get Inline .. run your 5w20 I'm sure it will be fine and you'll see no problems. I'll continue running my 0w20 as most here have had zero problems running this weight.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Looking at two perfectly worn-in motors with minimal oil consumption is not any sort of evidence at all. It's not anywhere near enough information to judge how good 0W20 oil can protect over an extended period of time. remember, 0W20 has only been out for 5 years which is a very short period of time to be judging anything. Now we are not seeing any failures, but what about 10 years down the road? More than 150K+ miles? There will be most certainly more rod-bearing failures.

Is this seriously the only argument anyone can think of? You mentioned the moderator, Chris_Top_Her from the other forum. How is his findings less convincing VS: "there hasn't been any failures from this in 4 years," or "It seems to be doing it's job?"

It's not. Just carry on countering my logical ideas with ancedotal nonsense.

 

[toy4x]

Looking at two perfectly worn-in motors with minimal oil consumption is not any sort of evidence at all. It's not anywhere near enough information to judge how good 0W20 oil can protect over an extended period of time. remember, 0W20 has only been out for 5 years which is a very short period of time to be judging anything. Now we are not seeing any failures, but what about 10 years down the road? More than 150K+ miles? There will be most certainly more rod-bearing failures.

Is this seriously the only argument anyone can think of? You mentioned the moderator, Chris_Top_Her from the other forum. How is his findings less convincing VS: "there hasn't been any failures from this in 4 years," or "It seems to be doing it's job?"

It's not. Just carry on countering my logical ideas with ancedotal nonsense.

- Yep I mentioned the other moderator who has done ZERO OIL ANALYSIS. And you basing everything on what one person has said, who has done ZERO OIL ANALYSIS.

- I have said there will be no issue with you running 5w20. I wasnt arguing, I agreed with you.

- Yes there hasn't been ANY failures in 4 years from cars running running 0w20.... hmmmm... maybe there's something to that.

- Then mentioned 2 cars with over 150k+ miles.... again... hmmm... sounds good to me basing their outcomes WITH oil analysis vs 1 guy with No oil analysis... member just has some theories that in no way has he tried to verifiy.

- I go by what I've seen. Tickerguy, Byakuya, and other members showing their oil analysis. And my car is running beautifully at 63,000 miles with 0w20. Will I switch... nope... see no compelling data or reasoning to switch. I couldn't car less what oil you run. Run 5w100,000... I dont care.. it's not my car, it's yours. But dont come here telling everyone they're dumb based on ZERO evidence. There's Zero issue running 5w20 or 0w20.

Your non sensical rhetoric sounds more and more like Seiya every day. Are you his cousin? Or Seiya username #12 ? Telling everyone what they need to like, what to do with their cars, bumping every thread you made to try and engage members to argue = Seiya. I guess welcome back you've been gone for a while.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Byakuya]

I like the part when he makes fun of us for countering his argument with 'anecdotal nonsense' when we're the only ones who have actually provided any evidence at all, and he's openly admit to this all being based on his opinion and nothing more......

 

[Dougspeed]

blah blah blah BLADEEEH blah? There will be most certainly more rod-bearing failures.

blah blah blah..

blah blah logical blah nonsense.

You just lost ALL credibility when you made this outlandish claim. No engineer, and no one with any sort of logic will listen to your arguments when you insert your opinions as fact. Especially when there's absolutely no evidence that such a catastrophic event such as a rod bearing failure has occurred due to the use of 0 weight oils. A few good friends of mine are mechanics and work on cars full time, five to six days a week and not one of them have complained that using 0 weight oils, even on motors clocking over 100k miles has had any adverse effect as long as the oil change intervals were followed. Even on BMWs that are known to run a bit hotter than motors of any Japanese car, 0wxx oils have performed fine.
Honestly, I would've liked to see this post deleted because it's pointless really, you're just trying to pass your opinion off as a fact when it's anything but.

 

[Get Inline]

I like the part when he makes fun of us for countering his argument with 'anecdotal nonsense' when we're the only ones who have actually provided any evidence at all, and he's openly admit to this all being based on his opinion and nothing more......

Whatever you guys have provided isn't evidence. It isn't shit. Just some poorly slapped together arguments which make no sense that I was able to easily debunk, such as the sulfur in fuel claim.

two oil analysis reports of engines with relatively low mileage isn't nearly enough of a test sample for anyone to be convinced of anything. Not nearly enough time has passed for 0W20 to be even remotely proven. It's funny, you act like you've made a convincing argument, but you haven't at all. Not even a little bit.

 

[Get Inline]

You just lost ALL credibility when you made this outlandish claim. No engineer, and no one with any sort of logic will listen to your arguments when you insert your opinions as fact. Especially when there's absolutely no evidence that such a catastrophic failure such as a rod bearing failure has occurred due to the use of 0 weight oils. A few good friends of mine are mechanics and work on cars full time, five to six days a week and not one of them have complained that using 0 weight oils, even on motors clocking over 100k miles has had any adverse effect as long as the oil change intervals were followed. Even on BMWs that are known to run a bit hotter than motors of any Japanese car, 0wxx oils have performed fine.
Honestly, I would've liked to see this post deleted because it's pointless really, you're just trying to pass your opinion off as a fact when it's anything but.

You're not actually serious? I think it's hilarious how you try to counter my "outlandish claim" with - "Some cars my friend looked at here and there haven't exploded at 100K using 0W oil - It's perfectly fine." What about double that mileage? Triple that mileage? Those BMW's commonly use 0W40, which is significantly thicker at operating temp VS 0W20.

Dude. Just do us all a favor and become a scientist if you're not one already. What a convincing argument that was!

 

[Dougspeed]

You're not actually serious? I think it's hilarious how you try to counter my "outlandish claim" with - "Some cars my friend looked at here and there haven't exploded at 100K using 0W oil - It's perfectly fine." What about double that mileage? Triple that mileage?

Dude. Just do us all a favor and become a scientist if you're not one already. What a convincing argument that was!

Because you're a scientist and know better than people who work professionally on hundreds of cars per month right?

BTW, those friends as you refer to them as, are professional paid mechanics that have done full tear downs and rebuilds of motors, they don't just "look" at them but nice try with your pithy little come back.

I'll take the advice of those with experience actually wrenching on cars over some armchair "expert" such as yourself who doesn't even know how shocks/struts and springs fit on their own Mazda 6.

 

[Byakuya]

Whatever you guys have provided isn't evidence. It isn't shit.

But we've 'slapped together' and presented more evidence than you have. You openly admit that the whole basis of this thread was your personal opinions. Opinions are not evidence.

Just some poorly slapped together arguments which make no sense that I was able to easily debunk, such as the sulfur in fuel claim.

But you agreed to the sulfur in fuel claim........see:

in Mexico, 5w30 is required for the NA 2.5L because of the ambient temperatures yes, but Ticker brought up an excellent point with the sulfur levels in Mexican fuel. 0w20 is very likely not able to cope with protecting the motor sufficiently from the added sulfur levels in mind.

No wonder this discussion can't go anywhere - it never will when accuser is the perpetrator.