Castrol formula RS

[16V_Matt]

Ive atempted and sucseaded in doing an oil and filter change on my 16V, quite easy actually! slightly scratched up hands but thats all!

anyho the oil i used was this Castrol formula RS 0W-40 no w after taking if for a blast i must say the car feels great more responsive, smother and dare i say as if theres more power! now im well impressed!

Matt

 

[BRUN]

that oil is too thin for a 16v, expect to be usin a lot of oil, keep your eye on the level regularly, every 2 weeks at least if you use your car a lot

you should have used the 10W-60 variety, however this is hard to get hold of, as most places no longer sell that version

 

[Infinicar]

You should be checking your oil more than every 2 weeks, specially with it that thin.

I use Mobil 1 15W50. In the wiliams anyway.

Paul

 

[16V_Matt]

i usually check at least about 2 times a week! its the same as ive always had in there and had no problems with it useing a lot of oil!

Matt

 

[technicalman]

Dont use thin oil oil in older cars, you need to use that stuff from new.

If it anyway begins to sound rough/rattley change it right away for more viscous oil. You will notice alot more blue oil smoke on start up as it will leak past the valve seals, you need to be careful of this or you will end up burning out valves. Expensive. usualy takes the piston with it too. All right for race engines being as they only get used once and dont really run in.

 

[BRUN]

ive never known a race engine use a 0W, they always seem to use a 15W-50

Matt, i really would suggest changing your oil to something thicker, even the new 172s dont use a 0W, though it may be fine to start with when new

you want at least a 10W in a 16v/Willy, if not a 15W, there older engines which need a thicker oil

 

[Captain Slarty]

sheeeesh, here we go again..

this is what renault say, and I can see no probs in using the above in a valver - at all...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/captainslarty/oil1.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/captainslarty/oil2.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/captainslarty/oil3.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/captainslarty/oil4.jpg

 

[16V_Matt]

Thanks for that! all very informative dont get it all but cheers!

matt

 

[Captain Slarty]

Just a point re thiness as some quote..

it is not thinner or thicker - it is the same !!..

it is just that the viscosity will remain constant over differing ranges of temperature.

Joe.

 

[Eddd]

Joe,

50 is thicker than 40, and 40 thicker than 30, and so on down the line. Or am I missing something here?

Ed

 

[Captain Slarty]

not at all, thats the range on the oil.... it has the properties of, say, 40 AND say, 10.. where the 40 would not offer protection, the formulation allows a wider spread of ratings for the same oil, but its base consistency at normal temp is the same (to all intents and purposes..) - it doesnt adopt a mid range visocity in a mathematical way.. it adopts a visocity that is perfectly tolerated by the engine with manufacturers figures (relating to ambient temp)

People quote thiness and even viscocity as being vitally important to lubrication.. with pure base oil, then yes, but not with modern formulations and adatives. Normal, Synthetic and semis all have similar aditives and inhibiters, what you pay for in the synths is the polymers to maintian the desired viscocity over a wider operating range with less adatives..

Again, the viscocity range is really only a guide as to how the oil would compare with an upper and lower target single range oil.

the bottom line is that the oil adopts a viscocity that is appropriate to the engine as designed by the manfacturer. ANY oil that meets the required std is as good as any other. The brakedown and contamination of the oil is the governing factor on changes, nothing else. I change the oil several times in quick succession on a new car using non synth. This is to carry away any particles in the sump, not for lubrication properties.



Hope that makes sense...

Joe.

 

[BRUN]

Joe, what you have said about the thick/thin is untrue, let me show you an example of two oils with different ratings, and there given viscosities

0W-30

Kinematic Viscosity @ 100°C - 11.3

Kinematic Viscosity @ 40°C - 57.3

10W-30

Kinematic Viscosity @ 100°C - 11.9

Kinematic Viscosity @ 40°C - 69.8

notice that the oils both have a 30 hot rating, and given the data above we can see they are VERY similar in viscosity at a hot temperature, 100c, now look at the cold rating, the 5W is thinner at 40c than the 10W, so, the oils ARE thicker/thinner than each other

also, the information i have posted above is actual data from 2 oils of a different rating from the same manufacturer, it is not specification values

 

[Eddd]

That is more like the way I understand it. If you want to pour some 50 weight on a cold day it is damn near like molasses. 10 weight or 10/50 would seemingly pour easier cold.

And the oil pressure in my car is always higher with a thicker oil.

Ed

 

[Nick Read]

Im with you on this one Brun. These ACEA ratings or whatever they are mean nothing to me. Nor is that chart representative of a Clio 16v, because it is applied to Renaults current range. It says so at the top. A valver is a ten year old design. Maybe we should be looking at oils specced for Fords Zetec lumps and try them in an old Cortina just for fun?

15W50 is a tried and tested oil rating that works on all the valvers I know of. Not too thin at 15W (and yes, I do know thats not the correct terminology, but it is the easiest analogy) and will maintain its integrity at high temp with the 50 hot rating. Any 16v or Willy owner knows how hot they run, Ive never known a normally aspirated sub-2.0 lump (from any manufacturer) to run as hot as the F7P or F7R engines. The bonnet vent is there for a reason and thats why the lump benefits from a 50 rating.

It may be that there are no externally noticeable leaks because theyve gunged up. But I would suggest changing over to the 15w50 Mobil 1. Of course its your call though.

 

[Nick Read]

BTW one last thing - well done on the oil filter change Matt! You must have arms like pipecleaners.

 

[Captain Slarty]

Sorry Brun, but you in effect disagreed with your own findings....

what you are saying is.. at normal temp they are similar viscocity .. that is exactly what I said, and the engine spends most of the time at that temp..

the cold rating as you call it is irrelevent if the oil is within manufacturers limits.

Eddd, yes, exactly.. thats why they have a multi rating..., and a pour point, omitted from Bruns figures.

The oil is chosen for the conditions the vehicle will be used in - temp ranges mainly..

The out of normal temp figures are of no consequence provide the lubricating effect is maintained.. thats exactly what the ratings are >!

As Brun again points out... the viscocity at normal operating temps is roughly the same.. thats exactly what I have been saying all along....

and Nick.. sheeeeeesh

Im with you on this one Brun. These ACEA ratings or whatever they are mean nothing to me. Nor is that chart representative of a Clio 16v, because it is applied to Renaults current range. It says so at the top. A valver is a ten year old design. Maybe we should be looking at oils specced for Fords Zetec lumps and try them in an old Cortina just for fun?

Try reading it again - the renault chart.. note the reference to the f7 etc. ??.. this is for all the range .!

If you dont accept ACEA and The Manufacturers figures you are really off base on your mechanical knowledge... they know FAR more than your misguided beliefs m8... sorry to be so blunt, but sometimes your comments beggar belief...

15W50 is a tried and tested oil rating that works on all the valvers I know of. Not too thin at 15W (and yes, I do know thats not the correct terminology, but it is the easiest analogy) and will maintain its integrity at high temp with the 50 hot rating. Any 16v or Willy owner knows how hot they run, Ive never known a normally aspirated sub-2.0 lump (from any manufacturer) to run as hot as the F7P or F7R engines. The bonnet vent is there for a reason and thats why the lump benefits from a 50 rating.

And Again here..

15w50 is an old design of oil.. yes, they are designed.. its not the old engine that needs old oil only.. its the old engine probably benefitting from a better design of oil.... the bit about how hot they run ??? I am sure Renault know too unless you have some knowledge they havnt ??. The bonnet vent IS there for a reason.. but its got naff all to do with the engine benefiting from a 50 rating... its to keep temps down due to the design of the front end ducting.. it works.. thats it.. no mystery.

Seriously, sit back and think... you are talking in riddles m8...

Joe

 

[Paul16V]

I use 10W40 oil. And thats been fine in mine. Costs about £9 for 5 litres.

 

[Captain Slarty]

Bargain dood.. a wise choice,, and a good price.. and identical in performance to any other of the same specification (ratings)

Joe.

 

[BRUN]

Joe what i was saying was that oils are actually thicker (more viscous) than others of a lower rating

and if you consider the figures ive posted, then it still proves than one oil is thicker than another at operating temp, does engine oil actually reach 100C ?........i would think it would be below that, yet definitely higher than 40C, meaning they will still be different viscosities

of the 2 oils i quoted there is a 3C difference in pour rating

 

[BRUN]

also, then lets consider 2 other oils, of similar ratings to those being discussed

20W-50

Kinematic Viscosity @ 100°C - 18.3

Kinematic Viscosity @ 40°C - 128.1

0W-30

Kinematic Viscosity @ 100°C - 11.3

Kinematic Viscosity @ 40°C - 57.3

if i use some estimations, at say 70C, id say, based on the figures above, the following would be likely figures

70C

20W-50 - 73.2

0W-30 - 34.3

even though this is just my estimation, its clear to see that at 70C the two oils are different viscosities, one is clearly thicker than the other

 

[Nick Read]

Maybe you should read it yourself Joe. The only reference to the F7P and F7R engine is that they an *exception* to whatever specification that is there.

Theres not a question of not accepting ACEA or manufacturers figures Joe - the simple fact is that I dont understand what ACEA figures mean and I dont have the inclination to find out at the moment. As long as the shops are selling oil by the system that I know ie as 15W50, then why should I bother learning ACEA figures? Who says I am not accepting manufacturers figures? I couldnt care less what Renault are saying now about ACEA, especially seeing as my engine is specifically excluded from their information and it is only relevant it seems to their current range.

I will continue to use my original manufacturers handbook, Haynes manual and my real working knowledge of which oils work best in my valver under the harshest conditions, to tell me everything I need to know about oil grade to use in my F7P. Once you start running a valver on the track, on the quarter mile and cruising at !20 on the motorway, then come back and let me know how happy you are with your oil. If it comes out as sludge dont blame me. If it comes out clean as a whistle (as my 15w50 does) then great.

The only other thing I have to say is that as you well know, my engine is not standard in any way. Why you think I should sit back and leave it at that is beyond me. If you wanna run your new, standard car the standard way then be my guest and youre welcome to your ACEA oils. Im running a non-standard car under a lot more strain that it was originally intended for and Ill do things my way which so far has been very successful.

 

[16V_Matt]

Thanks i think ill stick with what i have it cost £40 but the car feels great! smother and more responsive!

Wouldent say i have pipe cleaner arms! (someone might) but i did end up with a lot of cuts and scraches all up me arms and over nuckles! lol

Matt

 

[Captain Slarty]

usually 60 - 90 (av 80) but can vary with design.

The differences you are talking are minimal react the same...

So, lets expand it further... all oils - within the design range for the engine - and within the same rating - perform in an identical manner in respect to engine lubrication properties and cooling (one of the main jobs of the oil !)

there may be slight changes in viscocity at a given temp..

Now, you have used the term thinner or thicker and throught this thread a few seem to regard thicker as better.

Why would that be so ?.. the answer to this is why the tem thick or thin in relation to a within spec oil is irelevent. Some sound like they are talking the difference between soda pop and mamite in consistency.. its not.. as said now many times, the differences are minute.

the only reason a manufacturer makes an oil flow a certain way (not better or worse - or thicker or thinner), which is what happens... that is the rating.. thats what its all about.. thats what all those numbers mean.. and thick or thin is NOT flow. - is to offer compatability with a given std to categorise the charactersitics.

The flow rate is established by the chemical properties which can be synamic as well as static. Same as if you add a surfactant to water, it will flow better (greater volume passed through a given area in an engine block or similar material) but it aint thicker in the sense the word is being used here.

To even use the term thick or thin is misleading in this context and is leading to mucho confusion m8.

Joe.

 

[Captain Slarty]

Nick, the chart applies to the range.. the only exception is the short service interval - the exception - and that allows a cheaper oil to be used - apart from the f7p.. that means quite clearly that you dont use the lower spec oil in an F7P when acea 1 2 n 3 are not available.. in other words you MUST use an acea 1, 2 or 3.

thats what you NEED to choose the correct oil.. the oils mentioned in this post are perfectly suited to the application. You seem to think not. You cannot seriously say things like "Not too thin at 15W " and "why the lump benefits from a 50 rating." when the designer of the engine says differently ?.

Also, the cleansing factor - or ashing and ability to hold particulates are covered by the acea standards.. nothing else.. nothing to do with sae ratings.

We can all have our favourite loob.. kewl.. but advising of a specific kind to people who ask, for the reasons you give, is plain wrong.

Joe

 

[BRUN]

Quote: Originally posted by Captain Slarty on 10 October 2002


Now, you have used the term thinner or thicker and throught this thread a few seem to regard thicker as better.

Why would that be so ?..

what i am sayin mate, is that thicker oils are better for older cars, they simply were not designed with the small tolerances of todays engines, and thin oil could possibly end up in places where it shouldnt, and not give a thick enough coating, such as in a Turbo, the GTT boys strictly advise no oil with a hot rating of less than 50, as it simply wont protect the turbo properly

i was making a point in regard to viscosity to begin with, in relation to a comment you made, i still feel the evidence ive shown proves the point i wished to make, it may only prove that, but my intentions were not regarding any of the other points made

 

[BRUN]

also, have you heard an engine with too thin an oil, my handbook for my car recommends a 15W-50, when i used a 10W-40 once, my car was very tappety, i changed it about 3k later as i didnt feel the oil was giving a thick enough coating to my engine internals, based simply upon the noise it was making

 

[Ben H]

I once misguidedly used a 5w/50 oil. I had to top it up every 300 miles or less!!

 

[Nick Read]

OK some interesting points Joe, but I still dont agree with you that the chart applies to the whole range. It says it applies to the majority of the range, and thats not good enough for me. If Renault send me out a booklet which says forget what your original manufacturers handbook says and replace it with these ACEA ratings for your Clio 16v then great, Ill do that. In the meantime the point Im trying to make here is that the graphs and figures and all the stuff there just dont mean much to me. Maybe Im stupid and dont get it? But if so then that means the 9 out of 10 other drivers who I reckon couldnt make head nor tail of it are stupid too.

As far as recommendations go, the thread is about oil, so why shouldnt I make a recommendation about oil that I actually use and is proven to work in F7P engines run under all conditions, road, track, fast cruising and quarter mile? I cant see where your pedantry is leading.

Anyway, Matt if youre happy with it then stick with it. All I know is that my engine internals are still in perfect nick after 45K miles of hard driving using Mobil1 15W50. Maybe something to think about when you do your next oil change, but in the meantime see how you get on with it, particularly keep an eye on it when it really starts to get cold in the mornings...

 

[16V_Matt]

will do Nick and thanks guys much apreciated!

Matt