Gaspi101

My friend, I think you make excellent points all around and I'm sure you're absolutely right. I just hope you don't work for the Arizona chamber of commerce!! The place sounds like one of those teen thriller movies--having a grand old time, until their car (or boat, or ski lift, etc.) breaks down and everyone dies. Lol

WhiteBird00

I think they're just yankin' your chain a little. Either that or they've never been stuck waiting for help because of lack of preparation. I moved here from Canada and I learned early that tools, water, and especially a spare tire are essentials. I still carry all the same things (okay maybe not the "space" blanket and bag of sand) in my trunk. Other than the spare, none of them are particularly heavy. Even in the city, I would rather change my own tire than sit on the side of the road for a couple of hours waiting for the auto club.

Gaspi101

Amen to that. I too keep a spare, an emergency kit with a pretty well-stocked set of tools, and even a good emergency kit that includes flares, gauze, alcohol, etc. I go fishing and snorkeling often, and minor injuries occur with frequency.

Being prepared means I've used my AAA service only on my older cars for dead alternators and such. But now with the 2011 GT, I'm not sure I'll have much need of it.

RandyW

Could it be because the average temperature in Australia is substantially warmer than much of the U.S.? You could have two identical cars and have different oil specs if one is for the Canadian market and the other is for Mexico.

bob

Yep good ol' megalopolis all the way from Florida to jeez... I guess New Hampshire along the east coast? I suppose Vermont and Maine are one of the few places on the east were you could die due to exposure and a lack of civilization, well excluding that hinterlands collectively called Canada.

I've been to Nevada, that dry heat is so frigg'n awesome! I'll trade ya a nice 50%+ humidity 115 degree day in Va for a 5-10% or less humidity 120 degree day in Az. Oddly my first time out I had a problem with dehydration, but after that I seemed to aclimate pretty good.

Sometimes I think about retireing out west with the dry air, it was one of the few times in my life I haven't had the "grunge" (anybody who has lived in SEVa and suffered an almost permanent sinus infection knows exactly what I'm refering to). The only down side I think would be missing all the trees from where I'm at.

Bert

hmmmm . . . if 5W-20 is good for 0.25 more MPG, than maybe 0W-20 is good for another 0.25 . . .

Everett

Well why wouldn't they change it for the warm states then. I am done with defending my position. Use what you want. I am trying to help my fellow mustangers get their engines to last longer. I don't care how long it lasts then. I have done my homework and am trying to convey the knowledge I have absorbed to people who maybe haven't read up on this as I have.

Ethanjbeau

slidejob

Mobil does claim MPG savings over time with the 0W-20. I would think with the 3 Ford's I own & their high mileage that the savings have been significant.

WhiteBird00

And you're convinced that you know better and the Ford engineers are deliberately trading engine longevity for .25 MPG because you've read it on the internet? I work for a major oil company regional jobber and I will not be using higher viscosity oil than recommended. Synthetics and synthetic blends provide much better shear resistance so a lighter viscosity is justified by the need for better flow characteristics for tighter tolerance parts.

Everett

I merely stated that they recommend 2 different viscosities for the same car...hey your government told you you landed on the moon too...do you believe em...believe what you want,I really don't care. Maybe google the CAFE laws and you might change your mind...and how would you know where I learned this info. I am a journeyman carpenter also taking university courses at night studying such things as bio-chemical engineering so perhaps you should read something on the Internet ....other than **** of course. Fords engineers are controlled by a bottom line...trying to explain this to you would Be a complete waste of my time and energy because you would have a hard time reading the big words. And it has nothing to do with longevity it's all about carbon emissions and ford not wanting to pay the government millions in penalties. And just think if the motor wears out you gotta buy a new car. Do what you want. And you bring up shear resistance and stability and synthetic oils...where exactly is ford suggesting you use a synthetic. Synthetic blend maybe but even motorcraft is only a 20% blend. You sir are what keeps the world spinning....go do what your told then and god forbid you think for yourself. Try the bob is the oil guy forum...might learn something but I doubt it

06GT

reduce TPS angle

Everett

How that work...

WhiteBird00

Oh my goodness, there really are people out there that wear aluminum foil on their heads to prevent government mind reading! I thought they were just urban legend. Let's see... 9/11 and Kennedy's assassination were government planned and HIV/AIDS was created to get rid of gays. Am I missing anything? Oh, yeah... UFOs!

Itravelalot

+1

Oh, and by the way my grandfather was an engineer on the Apollo program. I can't stand the stupid people who dismiss his important and groundbreaking work. My grandfather was a very smart, patient and honest man.

06GT

TPS angle is directly correlated to angle of right foot

karman

+1 on your +1
I'm a little older, so it was my dad who was on the program too.

HoosierDaddy

Ford definitely has traded engine reliability for very small improvements in MPG in the past. I don't know if they are still doing it, but all the motivations are still there.

In the original US Focus, Ford wanted to specify 5W30 in the owners manual but deliver the cars (and do the Govt mileage testing) with 5W20. The Feds said no dice; the cars have to be tested with the recommended oil. So Ford changed the recommended oil in the manual to 5W20.

I don't have a link anymore but I saw what appeared to be leaked internal Ford memos elaborating on how many engines Ford would likely have to replace under warranty due to the change. It was not a huge number so they decided to eat them to get the lower mileage rating. The memos also noted that there would be much more failures AFTER the warranty had expired but still low enough to accept the customer loyalty hits. The overwhelming majority of owners would have no impact, but people who drove them hard or in extreme conditions were at increased risk. That's why I used the term reliability rather than longevity as you did.

Its a tough industry; I'm sure many remember the Pinto gas tanks. After reports of fires in rear end collisions, Ford did an analysis and decided it was cheaper to pay the estimated number of wrongful death suits rather than recall/replace the bad tanks. That is until the press got copies of the memos.

Like I said, I have no idea if Ford is still recommending an oil that increases the risk of engine failures. For now I intend to use 5W20 because the car isn't likely to see extreme conditions. But if there is ever evidence that 5W30 has no downside except mileage, I will switch.

cdynaco

Well that's all I needed to read right there...

cdynaco

Well I reiterate, if CAFE was such a motivation for Ford to change oil in lieu of reliability, then GM and Chrysler would have been under the same pressure.

Yet my '10 Chrysler uses 5w30 - the same as the 2k engine when it first came out - and 1.3+ million cars later (actually many more as the 2.4L was used in other vehicles). If there was that much benefit under CAFE - or to avoid penalties, don't you think they would have changed to 5w-20 for those 1.3+ million engines??

Ford chose an oil - 5w-20 synth blend - that worked within tolerance on this engine.