W80 vs W100

N

n12365

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
182
Location
Charleston, IL
Display Name
Display name:
Ryan
I am based in Charlottesville, VA (KCHO) and plan to change the oil in my C172 (O320-E2D) this weekend in preparation for a trip to the Cayman Islands where it is much warmer. I am currently using AeroShell W100 and am trying to figure out if I should change over to W80 for this trip or make the change when I get back. Temps in the Caymans should be mid 70s to mid 80s, which makes me want the W100. However, I need to stop in Tennessee on the way down and on the way back and will not have access to preheat. The lows will probably be in the upper 30s or low 40s and that makes me want to use W80. Unfortunately, I can't use a multi-weight oil. My only choices are to use W80 or W100. Anyone have any suggestions?

Ryan
 
Personally, 80 weight oil would be my choice but check out the temperature viscosity charts for your engine to be sure that you won't be operating outside the perameters there.


Just wondering why no multi weight?
 
n12365 said:
I am based in Charlottesville, VA (KCHO) and plan to change the oil in my C172 (O320-E2D) this weekend in preparation for a trip to the Cayman Islands where it is much warmer. I am currently using AeroShell W100 and am trying to figure out if I should change over to W80 for this trip or make the change when I get back. Temps in the Caymans should be mid 70s to mid 80s, which makes me want the W100. However, I need to stop in Tennessee on the way down and on the way back and will not have access to preheat. The lows will probably be in the upper 30s or low 40s and that makes me want to use W80. Unfortunately, I can't use a multi-weight oil. My only choices are to use W80 or W100. Anyone have any suggestions?

Ryan
Click to expand...
Why can't you use a multi-weight oil?
 
Skylane81E said:
Personally, 80 weight oil would be my choice but check out the temperature viscosity charts for your engine to be sure that you won't be operating outside the perameters there.


Just wondering why no multi weight?
Click to expand...

I had been looking at the AeroShell documentation and didn't even think to look for something from Lycoming. After reading your post, I found that Lycoming service instruction 1014M recommends SAE40 for temperatures between 30F and 90F. Sounds like W80 is the way to go.

Ryan
 
Sounds like an awesome trip. I am working on doing a DC to caribbean island trip in the spring. Have fun!
 
AirDC said:
Sounds like an awesome trip. I am working on doing a DC to caribbean island trip in the spring. Have fun!
Click to expand...

It is my first time overflying Cuba, so it should be interesting. I went to the British Virgin Islands in May and stopped in the Bahamas, Turks and Caicos, Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico. If you have any questions about your Caribbean trip, let me know.
 
Lycoming publishes the following recommendations:

All temperatures: SAE 15W-50 or 20W-50
Above 80F: SAE 60
Above 60F: SAE 40 or SAE 50
30-90F: SAE 40
0-70F: SAE 40, 30, or 20W-40
Below 10F: SAE 30 or 20W-30

Based on your post, it's probably time to change to SAE 40 oil (e.g., Aeroshell W80) at this time. Since you have an -E2D engine, you don't need the "Plus" version that includes the LW-16072 additive and you can save the extra bucks. Just remember you want the ashless dispersant additives included in the "W" version.
 
Ron Levy said:
Lycoming publishes the following recommendations:

All temperatures: SAE 15W-50 or 20W-50
Above 80F: SAE 60
Above 60F: SAE 40 or SAE 50
30-90F: SAE 40
0-70F: SAE 40, 30, or 20W-40
Below 10F: SAE 30 or 20W-30

Based on your post, it's probably time to change to SAE 40 oil (e.g., Aeroshell W80) at this time. Since you have an -E2D engine, you don't need the "Plus" version that includes the LW-16072 additive and you can save the extra bucks. Just remember you want the ashless dispersant additives included in the "W" version.
Click to expand...

What does his overhauler say ??? Why else would his pards want W80/W100 in a 0-320-E2D with a filter??
 
Skylane81E said:
And why have they come to the conclusion that this is the only way to go?
Click to expand...

1. We have always done it that way and have never had any problems.
2. We already have 6 cases of W80/W100 in the hangar
3. W80/W100 is cheaper
4. I am very happy with my partners and they could probably be convinced to change, but I haven't put the effort in to change there minds. This is mainly because it hasn't been a problem. With the information that W80 is good for 30F to 90F, it makes it even less likely we will change.

Ryan
 
Tom-D said:
Because they believe all the old wives tales about mineral oil for break in.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this comment. Neither W80 nor W100 are straight mineral oil, they are both ashless dispersant.
 
Tom-D said:
What does his overhauler say ??? Why else would his pards want W80/W100 in a 0-320-E2D with a filter??
Click to expand...

Our overhauler had us use a straight mineral oil for the first oil change, then an ashless dispersant. We did the overhaul in December of last year and have about 150 hours on the engine since then.

Ryan
 
Tom-D said:
What does his overhauler say ???
Click to expand...
I can't imagine any overhauler recommending against Aeroshell W80/W100 once the engine is broken in, and if he's up for an oil change, the engine should be broken in.

Why else would his pards want W80/W100 in a 0-320-E2D with a filter??
Click to expand...
Perhaps because it's a couple of bucks a quart cheaper than Aeroshell 15W50.
 
Ron Levy said:
I can't imagine any overhauler recommending against Aeroshell W80/W100 once the engine is broken in, and if he's up for an oil change, the engine should be broken in.

Perhaps because it's a couple of bucks a quart cheaper than Aeroshell 15W50.
Click to expand...

After seeing Ryan's comment above, that is probably the best reason I've heard.
 
n12365 said:
I don't understand this comment. Neither W80 nor W100 are straight mineral oil, they are both ashless dispersant.
Click to expand...

The question was " why not the multi weight -- W 50" There is no advantage to using a single weight oil when the temps vary widely in the fall.

other than the cost. as Ron has pointed out.

The old wives tales about mineral oil for break in runs comes from the day of long ago when we did not have filters on our engines, and we wanted the debris to drop of suspension in the oil tanks/sumps of the engine rather than being pumped thru the engine again, but now we have filters we want a "D" oil to hold the debris in suspension until it reaches the filter.

The "D does not mean the oil will have better lubrication and slow the break in process.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
There is no advantage to using a single weight oil when the temps vary widely in the fall.
Click to expand...
Temps may not vary as much other parts of the country at this time of year as they do where you live;), thus negating the advantage of multigrade. It's really a situational issue depending on where you live, how far from home you fly (especially north/south), and how much the plane flies during the recommended 4-month oil change interval regardless of hours flown.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Temps may not vary as much other parts of the country at this time of year as they do where you live;), thus negating the advantage of multigrade. It's really a situational issue depending on where you live, how far from home you fly (especially north/south), and how much the plane flies during the recommended 4-month oil change interval regardless of hours flown.
Click to expand...

True, but he lives in VA. and is flying south, and back. Plus this time of year you can get some pretty wide temp swings on the east coast.

OBTW the temp varies more in Texas than here, Last time we were in Tucson it was 19 degrees in the morning and 70 in the afternoon here its 40 in the AM and 45 in the afternoon.

There really is no advantage to single weight oil other than costs. Remember its all about starting when cold, the lubricating properties are the same.
 
Tom-D said:
True, but he lives in VA. and is flying south, and back. Plus this time of year you can get some pretty wide temp swings on the east coast.

OBTW the temp varies more in Texas than here, Last time we were in Tucson it was 19 degrees in the morning and 70 in the afternoon here its 40 in the AM and 45 in the afternoon.

There really is no advantage to single weight oil other than costs. Remember its all about starting when cold, the lubricating properties are the same.
Click to expand...

Are there any issues with switching back and forth between a single weight (W80/W100) and a multiweight (15W50)? We have a Reiff electric preheat system and electricity in our hangar, so this is really only an issue when travelling.
 
n12365 said:
Are there any issues with switching back and forth between a single weight (W80/W100) and a multiweight (15W50)? We have a Reiff electric preheat system and electricity in our hangar, so this is really only an issue when travelling.
Click to expand...

No, I do not know of any issues to changing back and forth between the two types.

The most probable reason your partners want the single weight oil in their engine is simply because the multi weight aeroshell products have the snake oil additive included in the additive package of the all the multi weights.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
No, I do not know of any issues to changing back and forth between the two types.

The most probable reason your partners want the single weight oil in their engine is simply because the multi weight aeroshell products have the snake oil additive included in the additive package of the all the multi weights.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest issue with my partners is inertia. We have always done it that way, so we continue to do it that way until someone pushes for a change. Using the multi weight when planning a trip that has large temperature swings might be a good way to try it out. I couldn't ask for better partners, so if I push for the change and can back it up with good reasons, they will probably agree to it.

Ryan
 
n12365 said:
I think the biggest issue with my partners is inertia. We have always done it that way, so we continue to do it that way until someone pushes for a change. Using the multi weight when planning a trip that has large temperature swings might be a good way to try it out. I couldn't ask for better partners, so if I push for the change and can back it up with good reasons, they will probably agree to it.

Ryan
Click to expand...

IF you go to the multi weight oil, use one which does not comply with Lycoming's SB for the snake oil.. TCP in your engine is not a good thing.

read oil talk for dummies at ECI2FLY.com see what TCP really is.

TCP:
Tricresyl Phosphate. An oil additive which produces an EP lubricant. Lycoming oil additive LW‐16702 contains this chemical.

EP oils:“Extreme Pressure” lubricants have additives that provide boundary lubrication to mating metal parts when a film of oil is not present. The additives are compounds of chlorine, phosphorous and sulfur which react with metal parts in the engine to form protective films and polish mating parts.

Polishing is wear process.

as well as the safety of it
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
I like that! :yesnod:
Click to expand...

I've been using Phillips XC for years, It is a EP oil and it sells for about the same as Aeroslime W80/100, does not have the safety hazards that Aeroslime has with the TCP.

The major factor in break in oil is the fact that they are EP oils or not, you do not want a EP oil for break in. not knowing if the operator knows the difference, the overhauler will error to the safe side and say Mineral oil, when in fact all aviation oils are mineral oils. There are no Lipid oils (synthetic oil) that are authorized as aviation oils.

The regular Phillips 20W50 is not an EP oil, and ECI knows it works well for break in and normal service in engines not requiring the Lycoming snake oil.
 
Tom-D said:
I've been using Phillips XC for years, It is a EP oil and it sells for about the same as Aeroslime W80/100, does not have the safety hazards that Aeroslime has with the TCP.

The major factor in break in oil is the fact that they are EP oils or not, you do not want a EP oil for break in. not knowing if the operator knows the difference, the overhauler will error to the safe side and say Mineral oil, when in fact all aviation oils are mineral oils. There are no Lipid oils (synthetic oil) that are authorized as aviation oils.

The regular Phillips 20W50 is not an EP oil, and ECI knows it works well for break in and normal service in engines not requiring the Lycoming snake oil.
Click to expand...


I've been using it exclusively in the Chief. Longest time between oil changes has been 20 hours (no filter).

We just finished a tear down in order to replace all gaskets and exhaust manifold flanges, and everything looked good. Some valves were adjusted to spec, but otherwise the 71 year old engine is looking good.
 
Tom-D said:
There are no Lipid oils (synthetic oil) that are authorized as aviation oils.
Click to expand...

From http://aeroshelldirect.com/aviation_oil.asp we read:


Aeroshell Oil W15 - 50 is a premium semi-synthetic multigrade ashless dispersant oil specifically developed for aviation piston engines. AeroShell Oil W 15W-50 is a special blend of a high quality mineral oil and synthetic hydrocarbons with an advanced additive package that has been specifically formulated for multigrade applications. The combination of non-metallic anti-wear additives and selected high viscosity index mineral and synthetic base oils, give exceptional stability, dispersancy and anti-foaming performance. The advanced additive package in AeroShell W 15W-50 provides excellent protection to engines operating at extreme ambient temperatures. The ashless anti-wear additive package provides exceptional wear protection for camshafts and lifters and other wearing surfaces. AeroShell W 15W-50 has become very popular amongst engine manufacturers and operators alike. In order to cater for those Lycoming engines that need improved load carrying, the Lycoming LW 16702 antiwear additive has been incorporated into the formulation thus eliminating the need for supplemental additive addition.

While it's not a pure synthetic, it has synthetic components. Over the 19 years I spent in the flight school we used a number of different brands as well as single weights and multigrades. Many of them weren't up to snuff and caused cam problems even in the E2D engines. We've used Aeroshell 15W50 for many years now and had no further trouble, and the engines all reached TBO with no decrease in compression and the oil consumption remained quite acceptable.

I even use it in my old A-65, and the oil temperature is a good 40 degrees lower than I used to get using Exxon or Shell single-weight oils. I attribute that to the snake oil additive, and the reduced friction that results.

That's my experience, anyway, over many engines that all reached TBO.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
I even use it in my old A-65, and the oil temperature is a good 40 degrees lower than I used to get using Exxon or Shell single-weight oils. I attribute that to the snake oil additive, and the reduced friction that results.

That's my experience, anyway, over many engines that all reached TBO.

Dan
Click to expand...

Dan -- 40 degrees lower??

:confused:
 
Tom-D said:
The most probable reason your partners want the single weight oil in their engine is simply because the multi weight aeroshell products have the snake oil additive included in the additive package of the all the multi weights.
Click to expand...
I think most folks reserve the term "snake oil" for the various advertised after-market additives of uncertain and generally unproven value, and there are no "snake oil additives" in Aeroshell products. The only additive you get with their 15W-50 that you don't get with W80/W100 is Lycoming's LW-16072 anti-scuffing additive, which is required by AD for some Lycoming engines (but not the O-320-E2D the OP has). However, other than during break-in, it won't hurt anything if used when not required. It interferes with the break-in process by making things in the cylinder too slick to "rub in" the rings/walls properly.
 
Tom-D said:
IF you go to the multi weight oil, use one which does not comply with Lycoming's SB for the snake oil.. TCP in your engine is not a good thing.
Click to expand...
Really bad advice. If your engine requires LW-16072 (which your O-320-E2D does not), it's an AD, not an SB. In that case, compliance is not optional. And there is no evidence that LW-16072 has any deleterious effect on engines which do not require it.

Second, TCP in your fuel is really a good thing, as it improves lead scavenging.

If you have any doubts about any of this, ask Ted DuPuis here; he knows more about the engineering side of Lycoming engines than anyone else on this board.
 
Ron Levy said:
Really bad advice. If your engine requires LW-16072 (which your O-320-E2D does not), it's an AD, not an SB. In that case, compliance is not optional. And there is no evidence that LW-16072 has any deleterious effect on engines which do not require it.

I beg the difference in a big way, any polishing agent is a wear agent. They even tell you it is. plus if you are running a oil bath direct drive starter it will shorten the life of the starter by 1/2.

Second, TCP in your fuel is really a good thing, as it improves lead scavenging.

Do you believe every thing you read? sales hype? I have used in several engines and seen no difference.

If you have any doubts about any of this, ask Ted DuPuis here; he knows more about the engineering side of Lycoming engines than anyone else on this board.
Click to expand...

He may, then he is a company man, and support the company directives right or wrong.
 
Ron Levy said:
I think most folks reserve the term "snake oil" for the various advertised after-market additives of uncertain and generally unproven value, and there are no "snake oil additives" in Aeroshell products. The only additive you get with their 15W-50 that you don't get with W80/W100 is Lycoming's LW-16072 anti-scuffing additive, which is required by AD for some Lycoming engines (but not the O-320-E2D the OP has). However, other than during break-in, it won't hurt anything if used when not required. It interferes with the break-in process by making things in the cylinder too slick to "rub in" the rings/walls properly.
Click to expand...

you ask any A&P in any hangar in the world, about Lycoming's snake oil, they will know exactly what you are talking about.

read the AD and tell me why Lycoming wants the additive in their engines, then read the MSDS sheet on it and you'll know why I recommend not using it when you are not required to.

read the safety hazards
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricresyl_phosphate

Here's a quote from a product information page.
"The most extensive section assesses findings from toxicity studies, emphasizing the large number of studies documenting neurotoxic effects, often at very low doses. These effects are further characterized through a review of the numerous reported cases of large-scale human poisoning following the ingestion of accidentally or deliberately contaminated medicines and foodstuffs. Readers are given detailed information on the clinical symptoms of poisoning, the characteristics of delayed neuropathy, long-term prognosis, and advice on the first-aid treatment of victims. While the concluding section notes that use of tricresyl phosphate poses very little risk to either the environment or the general population, the report underscores the severity and long-duration of the neuropathology caused by accidental poisoning, noting that some victims never recover."

here is some info on this wonderful stuff, read this page and tell me how many times it mentions Phosphoric acid.

http://chemicalland21.com/industrialchem/plasticizer/TRICRESYL PHOSPHATE.htm

OBTW Phosphoric acid is a metal cleaner, used mostly to clean metal, bought at he local hardware store as loc-tite corrosion remover for aluminum. and soldering flux.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
There really is no advantage to single weight oil other than costs.
Click to expand...

I thought straight weight oils kept an engine's internal parts "filmed" better between flights than multi weights?
 
timwinters said:
I thought straight weight oils kept an engine's internal parts "filmed" better between flights than multi weights?
Click to expand...

show me where any oil producer says that?
 
Tom-D said:
He may, then he is a company man, and support the company directives right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Ahem. I support nobody's directives besides my own.
 
Ron Levy said:
Really bad advice. If your engine requires LW-16072 (which your O-320-E2D does not), it's an AD, not an SB. In that case, compliance is not optional. And there is no evidence that LW-16072 has any deleterious effect on engines which do not require it.

Second, TCP in your fuel is really a good thing, as it improves lead scavenging.

If you have any doubts about any of this, ask Ted DuPuis here; he knows more about the engineering side of Lycoming engines than anyone else on this board.
Click to expand...

Tom-D said:
you ask any A&P in any hangar in the world, about Lycoming's snake oil, they will know exactly what you are talking about.

...snip...

read the safety hazards
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricresyl_phosphate


here is some info on this wonderful stuff, read this page and tell me how many times it mentions Phosphoric acid.

http://chemicalland21.com/industrialchem/plasticizer/TRICRESYL PHOSPHATE.htm

OBTW Phosphoric acid is a metal cleaner, used mostly to clean metal, bought at he local hardware store as loc-tite corrosion remover for aluminum. and soldering flux.
Click to expand...

Then I'm really confused.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the primary ingredient of LW-16702 tri phenyl phosphate? It was my belief that this is an anti-scuffing/wear agent? Not particularly flammable or toxic.

TCP is tri-cresyl phosphate, a completely different beast. TCP is a very good lead scavenger, it is also very flammable and certain isomers are known neurotoxins.

I don't believe LW-16702 is TCP.

As far as phosphate... that is not the same as phosphoric acid as far as chemical properties.

Not sure that we are talking about the same compounds. Is the Lycoming snake oil which Tom mentions - LW-16702 or TCP??

Gary
 
Tom-D said:
He may, then he is a company man, and support the company directives right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Said by someone who has obviously never met or carried on a meaningful conversation with Ted.
 
Tom-D said:
show me where any oil producer says that?
Click to expand...

It was a question, not a statement, hence the use of the question mark.

And, admittedly, my google Fu sucks. I mean, for a few months now I've been attempting to find Continental's recommendations on the proper glue to use for adhering my oil filter to my engine and I haven't even been able to find that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top