Go Back  S2KI Honda S2000 Forums > General Interest > S2000 Under The Hood
Reload this Page >

10W-60 Synthetic Oil - Good or Bad Idea?

S2000 Under The Hood S2000 Technical and Mechanical discussions.

10W-60 Synthetic Oil - Good or Bad Idea?

 
Old 01-22-2017, 10:16 AM
  #21  
 
Chuck S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Chesterfield VA
Posts: 7,364
Received 285 Likes on 265 Posts
Default

Order a free engine oil analysis kit from Blackstone Labs and pull a sample. The kit is free but you pay for the test. Results will be highly informative if you do it every oil change.

I can't easily find any CS data for engine temperatures over 100°C and at that temperature 60 grade oil has 2.4x thicker viscosity than 30 grade. Lubrication needs oil flow. I've seen 10W-60 recommended for air cooled motorcycles.

-- Chuck
Chuck S is offline  
Old 01-22-2017, 08:24 PM
  #22  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by shind3 View Post
xW-20 oil is only specified to gain those last few tenths of a percent to help comply with EPA fuel mileage regulations.

And since there is a huge percent of the population that thinks the 'W' stands for 'winter', I'm going to reiterate the following.
The 1st number succeeded by a W is nothing more why arethan a representation of the Kinematic Viscosity of the oil at 40 degrees Celsius usually in units of centiStokes (cSt)
The 2nd number is nothing more than a representation of the Kinematic Viscosity of the oil at 100 degrees Celsius usually in units of centiStokes (cSt)

There is a 3rd value that is most important for those that track their cars. That is the High Temperature High Shear (HTHS) test which is performed at 150 degrees Celsius.

10W-60 is perfectly fine to use in a track car that doesn't see too many cold engine starts. It is frequently used in Japanese S2000s. If I had a bigger R&D budget, I would run this oil on the street and do an UOA on it. My hypothesis is that it'll be just fine. Fuel mileage will suffer slightly but that's it.

For all you guys that drank the kool-aid on how the S2000 engine is so 'modern' and 'tight', here are the main and rod bearing clearance limits.
Mains : 0.0007 to 0.0016" (service limit : 0.0020")
Rods : 0.0012 to 0.0021" (service limit : 0.0024")

Let's compare it to an engine designed 10 years prior. Nissan's SR20.
Mains : 0.0008 to 0.0019"
Rods : 0.0007 to 0.0018"

So please stop propagating the notion that the S2000 engine is some sort of special unicorn. The only reason it made big news at launch was because Honda installed a big ass oil pump that provides enough flow to maintain adequate oil pressure at 9000RPM and the camshafts to complement.
Why are you so angry? Lol
EricLovato is offline  
Old 01-22-2017, 08:43 PM
  #23  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 588
Received 16 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

I guess posting facts that are opposite of the blatant misinformation spread throughout the internet is construed as being 'angry'. You clearly are not part of my target audience. My target audience is not afraid to reassess their stance based on facts regardless of what their past beliefs may want them to.

And for anyone reading that cares about what I think, I run 0W-40 oil in ALL my cars (both NA and FI variants). Though I tend to subject each one to extended periods of abuse from time to time. If I didn't, I would run 0W-30 in ALL of them.

I would also encourage the reader to gauge subject matter credibility of the poster before accepting their opinion in equal company.

Also, EricLavato, you fabricated a typo into my quoted message in the 3rd line. I suspect you began to type your message before realizing you were posting in the middle of my quote. At which point you moved the cursor but left your defecation in the middle of my quote. Thanks, buddy. You speak volumes about yourself.

Last edited by shind3; 01-22-2017 at 08:46 PM.
shind3 is offline  
Old 01-27-2017, 02:17 PM
  #24  
Community Organizer
 
s2000Junky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 28,472
Received 236 Likes on 224 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by shind3 View Post
LOL, this is exactly opposite of the truth.
Official S65 Bearing Specification/Clearance Wiki
I stand corrected on the bearing clearances. I forgot about the "recommendation" to change these bearings as a preventative service at 60-80k miles, which is a big reason why my buddy sold his at 60k. That's unfortunate. Might have been prudent to run a thinner oil in this engine then a 60w! Makes little sense to me why BMW clearly dropped the ball on spec.

Last edited by s2000Junky; 01-27-2017 at 02:23 PM.
s2000Junky is offline  
Old 01-27-2017, 05:28 PM
  #25  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by shind3 View Post
I guess posting facts that are opposite of the blatant misinformation spread throughout the internet is construed as being 'angry'. You clearly are not part of my target audience. My target audience is not afraid to reassess their stance based on facts regardless of what their past beliefs may want them to.

And for anyone reading that cares about what I think, I run 0W-40 oil in ALL my cars (both NA and FI variants). Though I tend to subject each one to extended periods of abuse from time to time. If I didn't, I would run 0W-30 in ALL of them.

I would also encourage the reader to gauge subject matter credibility of the poster before accepting their opinion in equal company.

Also, EricLavato, you fabricated a typo into my quoted message in the 3rd line. I suspect you began to type your message before realizing you were posting in the middle of my quote. At which point you moved the cursor but left your defecation in the middle of my quote. Thanks, buddy. You speak volumes about yourself.
you misspelled my name there, keyboard warrior! Your attention to detail speaks VOLUMES about yourself as well! Great job!!! Hahaha
EricLovato is offline  
Old 01-28-2017, 05:24 AM
  #26  
 
SpitfireS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 17 ft below sea level.
Posts: 4,943
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by shind3 View Post
xW-20 oil is only specified to gain those last few tenths of a percent to help comply with EPA fuel mileage regulations.
Nah. Thinner oils tend to get better and better in holding up the needed film strenght to keep parts apart.
The other benefit is less pump loss. Why pump thick stuff around when you don't need to?
The more important benefit is you pump more oil around at higher rpm as the pump bypass opens at higher rpm with a lower viscosity oil.

And since there is a huge percent of the population that thinks the 'W' stands for 'winter', I'm going to reiterate the following.
The 1st number succeeded by a W is nothing more than a representation of the Kinematic Viscosity of the oil at 40 degrees Celsius usually in units of centiStokes (cSt)
May I suggest you try to find the SAE J300 spec on the world wide interweb?
Read about it, please.
It's too late to say: "Read it BEFORE you post about oil", but yeah...

I had a bigger R&D budget, I would run this oil on the street and do an UOA on it. My hypothesis is that it'll be just fine. Fuel mileage will suffer slightly but that's it.
You'll find your precious 10W60 will quickly shear down into a 40 weight or so.

So please stop propagating the notion that the S2000 engine is some sort of special unicorn. The only reason it made big news at launch was because Honda installed a big ass oil pump that provides enough flow to maintain adequate oil pressure at 9000RPM and the camshafts to complement.
I thought it was because it produced 120hp/L @ 9000rpm while being N/A and was Engine of the year for 2 or 3 years in a row?
No?
SpitfireS is offline  
Old 01-28-2017, 07:43 AM
  #27  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
RolanTHUNDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Not where I WANT to BE...
Posts: 1,474
Received 39 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by s2000Junky View Post
I stand corrected on the bearing clearances. I forgot about the "recommendation" to change these bearings as a preventative service at 60-80k miles, which is a big reason why my buddy sold his at 60k. That's unfortunate. Might have been prudent to run a thinner oil in this engine then a 60w! Makes little sense to me why BMW clearly dropped the ball on spec.
lol not surprised. The number of complaints I heard about M engines having issues based on oil are many.
RolanTHUNDER is offline  
Old 01-28-2017, 07:49 AM
  #28  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
RolanTHUNDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Not where I WANT to BE...
Posts: 1,474
Received 39 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SpitfireS View Post
Nah. Thinner oils tend to get better and better in holding up the needed film strenght to keep parts apart.
The other benefit is less pump loss. Why pump thick stuff around when you don't need to?
The more important benefit is you pump more oil around at higher rpm as the pump bypass opens at higher rpm with a lower viscosity oil.


May I suggest you try to find the SAE J300 spec on the world wide interweb?
Read about it, please.
It's too late to say: "Read it BEFORE you post about oil", but yeah...


You'll find your precious 10W60 will quickly shear down into a 40 weight or so.


I thought it was because it produced 120hp/L @ 9000rpm while being N/A and was Engine of the year for 2 or 3 years in a row?
No?
thanks for praising our engine for its awesomeness by reminding the poster of its 120HP/l its still so far ahead of its time even now. I had an exchange over Facebook with a friend who supports BMW an Audi. The point was our S2K F20C started out in 1999 with 240HP from 2L NA then 12 years later BMW made the same power from a 2L WITH BOOST... LOL. He was upset with that lol. He mentioned the BM 2L not being a performance engine but if it wasn't then why did they slap a turbo on it and put in their "performance" sedans?? I don't think he replied to that haha
RolanTHUNDER is offline  
Old 01-28-2017, 07:52 AM
  #29  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
RolanTHUNDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Not where I WANT to BE...
Posts: 1,474
Received 39 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by zeroptzero View Post
5w40 is a good idea for a boosted street setup, I run Red Line 5w40 on my NA ap1 as a personal choice. 5w40 will work well at the track as well. If you start tracking the car you really need to monitor your oil temps, viscosity choice is best done based on oil temps as oil becomes thinner as temps increase. I don't see any situation that would need a 60 weight but everyone should run what they like, oil is a very personal choice and there are too many opinions out there that have very little facts behind them. Nothing sparks a good argument better than oil recommendations.
thanks a lot. Very good advice. I just don't want to be paranoid that my oil is thinning out too much while I'm boosting to 9000rpm in every gear
RolanTHUNDER is offline  
Old 01-28-2017, 07:54 AM
  #30  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
RolanTHUNDER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Not where I WANT to BE...
Posts: 1,474
Received 39 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Chuck S View Post
Order a free engine oil analysis kit from Blackstone Labs and pull a sample. The kit is free but you pay for the test. Results will be highly informative if you do it every oil change.

I can't easily find any CS data for engine temperatures over 100°C and at that temperature 60 grade oil has 2.4x thicker viscosity than 30 grade. Lubrication needs oil flow. I've seen 10W-60 recommended for air cooled motorcycles.

-- Chuck
thanks for the idea. 40 weight oil may be 1.7 times give or take thicker than 30 at over 100 degrees C?
RolanTHUNDER is offline  

Quick Reply: 10W-60 Synthetic Oil - Good or Bad Idea?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands