GT Pony
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2015
- Threads
- 77
- Messages
- 9,233
- Reaction score
- 4,256
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Vehicle(s)
- 2015 GT Premium, Black w/Saddle, 19s, NAV
The clincher is what is the max oil temperature and the oil's viscosity at that temperature. The thinner oil you use, the more temperature control you'll need in order to keep the oil from becoming too thin, which causes the MOFT becoming too thin and possibly go to zero (point of metal-to-metal contact).Yep. I am comparing the too. Same Principle most definitely apply. Intake / compression / power /exhaust strokes, oiling, fuel delivery, all the same. Point being is that the more precision in tolerances your engine has, the lower viscosity engine oil you can use. Hence the 0w5 weight oil they use. Fuel diluted as well. 40/50 viscosity oils are for like .030+ bearing clearances, supercharger application where extreme pressure in put on the first 2 main bearings, pressure put on the compression and oil rings, yada yada. 5 weight isn't the cause of wear in f1 engines, extremely tight, accurate clearances are. So I wouldn't worry about the 5w20 in our engines where tolerances replaces precision.
Any idea what max oil temperatures these Indy engines see and what's the Kinematic Viscosity of that 0W-5 oil at those temperatures?
What bearing clearances are these Indy (and NASCAR too) engines running on rod and crankshaft bearings? Are they tighter than 0.0011?
The rod to crankshaft bearing clearance is specified to be 0.0011 to 0.0027 inch on the Coyote. Pretty sure the same basic clearance spec is called out for the Roadrunner (Boss 302) and Voodoo (GT350) engines. Yet Ford specifies 5W-50 for those engines. Also, when Roush (or anyone else) puts a supercharger on a Coyote they specify 5W-50 but they don't go in and modify the crankshaft or rods in order to be larger journal bearing clearances.
Also keep in mind that the MOFT is also a function of engine RPM, and since those race engines are operating at max RPM most of their life they can get away with thinner oil because running at high RPM helps increase the MOFT in the bearings. On a side note, this is why you don't want to "lug" an engine ... because low RPM kills the MOFT and increases the possibility of metal-to-metal contact in the bearings. It's better for your bearings to rev instead of "lug".
Fact is, the tighter the bearing clearance the less potential the hydrodynamic oil film will have to provide an adequate oil film thickness to keep the parts completely separated. See the attached graph which shows that no matter what the bearing clearance is, a thicker oil will result in more MOFT. The thinner oil (0W20) in the graph shows the MOFT falls off at clearances above about 0.003 inch. Any oil viscosity between those two curves will fall in between them on the graph
The MOFT is the only thing that keeps parts separated. Once the MOFT goes to zero then metal-to-metal contact and wear occurs, and then it's the anti-wear additives that have to take over to minimize the contact wear. Could be those race engines also use some pretty crazy anti-wear additives to help reduce enough wear to get them through the race. I'm betting those engines show some pretty good wear after a race or two, because othewide they wouldn't be rebuilding them.
Sponsored
Last edited: