itguy08

Just a point of clarification, the F150 NEVER spec'ed 5W30, it was the early car versions that use 5W20. Ford also, as of Sunday still says 5w20 in them (I had a subscription to the FSM's for the Taurus and it still said 5w20 and no TSB updating it to 5w30.

IMHO there is way too much emphasis put on viscosity. There were plenty that said 5w20 would nuke engines, especially in the heat. We're going on, what 12 years of 5w20 in Fords and they are just fine. Alaska, Arizona, Death Valley, Detroit, Miami. They run just fine.

Makes me think the additives and actually having a good quality oil is more important than viscosity. As does keeping it clean.

I think it was actually downsized after the release of the engine. The early filters were huge and are very hard to find. Although a good filter like a Fram Ultra would be perfect in this application.

Ford also has a standard for oil and there are 2 specs, 1 for 5w20 and 1 for 5w30. From what I've read its as stringent as Dexos 1.

Ford (as other OEMS) spends lots on lubrication studies. They know what they are doing.

All OEM's test/design to 150k service life. Anything over that is gravy and anything under that is junk. Not that it will fail at 151k but that's when you should expect to replace parts.

I fully expect 150k - 200k out of the Ecoboosts. The Taurus is over 1/2 way there on dealer swill changed at 7.5k The F150 is Pennzoil Platinum changed at either 6 months or the OLM. Time will tell on it.

I still say stop worrying and enjoy! Life's too short!

Ron AKA

Thanks for the clarification on the timing of their change, and the filter size change. Seems very strange that they would reduce the filter size. Perhaps it was done for standardization? I found an older post here where the poster tried both sizes and each one fit well. If there are any options to use a larger physical size filter, I always go for the larger one.

I'm sure Ford does lots of research on their engine oils. However, I have not seen any MotorCraft 5W30 Synthetic blend used oil analysis that they should be proud of. Perhaps the full synthetic is better, but I have seen any UOA reports on it in an EcoBoost. The EcoBoost is obviously tough service for an oil.

snobdds

Do you consider oil to have other properties besides viscosity?

papa tiger

If you consider another labs reports.

Ron AKA

Yes, actually there are quite a few things to look for. Viscosity at 100 deg C is right up there in importance. But likely even more important is HT/HS viscosity (high temperature/high shear). It is the shear resistance at even higher temperatures and pressures. If you look at the viscosity by auto grade chart at the link below, you will see the minimum for 20 weight is 2.6 and for 30 weight it is 2.9. That is the real number that one would like to see. If it goes below 2.6 with fuel dilution that is bad. Unfortunately I think it is a very expensive test. Oil manufacturers can afford to do it, but I don't think any of the consumer test labs do it (for a reasonable cost). However, if 100 deg C viscosity goes down, you can be sure HT/HS goes down too.


TBN number is important for prevent corrosion. You don't want it to go below 2. All the metal counts are really after the fact. They are not measuring the quality of the oil, but how much is wearing in the engine.


A low Noack Volatility indicates the oil does not easily vaporize and go back through the intake system to cause inlet valve carbon deposits. Important on a direct injection engine where the fuel air mix does not wash the intake valves.

Ron AKA

The fact that engines can run and reasonably last on fuel diluted oil can't be disputed. If you consider a two cycle engine, it can run on a lubricant that is 1% oil and 99% gasoline. However, it does not have a valve train, chains, or gears. It does have pistons and rings, and they reasonably survive. However, I don't think anyone would claim two cycle engines have a long life.

LastResort

I think that's my current problem: we're getting the metrics confused with what we actually care about: engine life. Do I really give a **** if my oil is diluted to 5 weight, TBN is 0.5, soot is 5%, and I've got a sold gram of copper in my oil at every change if my motor lasts to 500,000 miles? Obviously, the answer is no. However, I really give a **** if my motor can reliably perform to 200k miles, and what values are appropriate for that life expectancy. Ford really doesn't appear to be interested in sharing what the optimum values are for engine life and lets us interpolate from the data we see (UAOs), third party vendors (Kendal), and other groups (PQI). Those people tell us the sky is falling: our vehicles are destined for failed motors and we need to (go figure) buy more oil and change more regularly. Maybe buy a few more parts. Perhaps sacrifice a chicken. And most certainly whip out a credit card.

Frankly, reality seems to support Ford's position. How many motors have we seen that have failed due to lubrication issues (what oil test seem to indicate is inevitable)? It appears, very few. Hell, even the snake oil salesman who claims your sperm count will improve through the generous application of catch cans doesn't actually have data to show that installation of such toys as a catch cant increases motor life, motor output, and the flocking of women to me. However, we've got several data points that indicates a potential timing chain wear problem caused by sooting, and not a single oil analysis that I've seen has actually indicate a probability of failure caused by this measurement. This tells me that our metrics are increasingly irrelevant and only loosely correlated to what we actually care about: how ****ing long will my truck last?

So i figure I'm stuck. I can trust Ford (OLM) who wants me to buy a new vehicle or I can trust others (PQI, Kendal) who want me to buy more oil. Based on that, I'm going to go with Ford, as it's the group with the most amount to lose if wrong, and the most amount to gain from a future purchase. And It's totally possible I'll get ****ed and have to pay for a timing chain, valves, and maybe a new block at 70k., And, if that's the case: this is my only Ford ever. But I'm pretty sure I'm making a safe bet, based on sales history, the actual reporting of real problems, and a moderate understanding of human nature and statistics.

packplantpath

That's my general mode of thought too. But to be safe I run 5000 mile oci and motocraft full synthetic. I've contemplated an oil analysis. But too lazy.

Ron AKA

I hear what you are saying, and there is some logic to it. However, I would suggest the auto industry does not have a good record in dealing with problems. They are into selling more and more new vehicles, and not addressing skeletons in the closet. The GM ignition switch is an example. Even Toyota which probably has the best name for quality in the business has had significant issues with engine oil sludge from 1997-2002. They have finally settled a class action lawsuit, but like 10 years later. My thoughts are that if there are issues with the EcoBoost, Ford will do everything they can to keep the wraps on it, and 10 years from now the truth will come out -- if there is an issue. Here is a good link to look at. If soot is your concern, see the Sooty Little Problem in the VW section. Soot may not be an issue limited to diesel engines, now that direct injection and turbos are used on gasoline engines.

http://www.autosafety.org/campaigns/20

I guess the good news is that there is no Ford section on the oil sludge issue -- yet! However they are not free and clear. See this section:

http://www.autosafety.org/ford-38l-head-gasket-trouble

My thoughts are that once you buy the car/truck the vehicle problems are your problems. Sometimes small things can make a big difference. I certainly don't believe in doing oil analysis tests. Looking at the results posted for similar vehicles on line is not beneath me though. They are useful. I have no time for the silly games of testing the oil to see how long you can go without changing it. From what I can see based at looking at available tests, fuel dilution is a serious problem. Sooting and sludge not so much. Perhaps that is because the engine is being washed with gasoline all the time!!

itguy08

Fuel dilution is only a serious problem if it compromises engine longevity.

After 5 years and many hundreds of thousands of engines and miles there are no widespread report of it causing issues in the Ecoboost 3.5. It may be higher than some like but not within the parameters set by Ford engineers.

Follow the OLM or your gut and it will last a good long time. If you think you need it, buy an extended warranty.