Update: 5W-30 & Heavier Recommended RoTW (3 Viewers)

[degmla]

No, bearing clearances are not the only criterion. And to say it's a "huge part" seems silly....which part of your lubrication system is not a "huge part"? Heat removal is a huge part. Material selection is a huge part. Flow distance is a huge part. Surface finish is a huge part. Coking tendency is a huge part. I believe there are plenty of huge parts that affect the eventual oil specification.

I respect your OP. All I was addressing is that someone else seemingly suggested that because their 4.7L engine specified any of the following: 5W-30, 10W-30, 15W-40, or 20W-50, it must be okay to consider for the 5.7L engine? And when I confronted that ill-advised comparison, you wanted to downplay it?

If you want to use a grade of oil contrary to OEM, go for it. And I appreciate that you provided your justification. And I think there MIGHT be POTENTIAL benefits in CERTAIN applications (yes, loaded with wiggle words). But, if you want to purport it as a better selection with "increased protection", I think you go too far.

You asked for our thoughts.

 

[04UZJ100]

No, bearing clearances are not the only criterion. And to say it's a "huge part" seems silly....which part of your lubrication system is not a "huge part"? Heat removal is a huge part. Material selection is a huge part. Flow distance is a huge part. Surface finish is a huge part. Coking tendency is a huge part. I believe there are plenty of huge parts that affect the eventual oil specification.

I respect your OP. All I was addressing is that someone else seemingly suggested that because their 4.7L engine specified any of the following: 5W-30, 10W-30, 15W-40, or 20W-50, it must be okay to consider for the 5.7L engine? And when I confronted that ill-advised comparison, you wanted to downplay it?

If you want to use a grade of oil contrary to OEM, go for it. And I appreciate that you provided your justification. And I think there MIGHT be POTENTIAL benefits in CERTAIN applications (yes, loaded with wiggle words). But, if you want to purport it as a better selection with "increased protection", I think you go too far.

You asked for our thoughts.

Agree in principle but nothing has fundamentally changed inside a Toyota 5.7L aluminum block low rev, low compression, port injected V8. There is Nothing special about a 3UR.

 

[degmla]

Agree in principle but nothing has fundamentally changed inside a Toyota 5.7L aluminum block low rev, low compression, port injected V8. There is Nothing special about a 3UR.

I'm not sure what is considered a "fundamental change", so I'll say this:

For an LX570:

**Engine Piston, Part No. 131010S011, fits 2008-2014​

**Engine Piston, Part No. 131010S030, fits 2013-2021​

​

**Crankshaft, Part No. 134010S010, fits 2009-2011 (there was no 2012 model year, IIRC)​

**Crankshaft, Part No. 1340138010, fits 2008-2021, labelled as "interchangeable" with S010, as opposed to "superseding". I interpret that as meaning the 8010 part can be used in place of the S010 part, but the S010 part can't be used in place of the 8010.​

You can do the same thing with all the Toyota 5.7L variants (Tundra, Sequoia, et al.). So, I'm guessing SOMETHING changed? Can you explain?

Maybe it’s nothing?

I guess there are two possible biases:

1. 0W20 is WORSE for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation specified is to appease various USA laws. The engineers begged management not to specify 0W20, but management decided after risk consideration that the use of 0W20 would result in more wear and tear, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.
2. 0W20 is BETTER for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation permitted other heavier weights in other parts of the world was to appease local availability and cost (or other variables). The engineers, although they preferred 0W20, decided after risk consideration that the use of heavier weights would result in more wear and tear, possibly some coking of the piston rings, possibly a little more oil consumption, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.

I’m guessing you are in the (1) camp?

STORY TIME
I’ll end with a story to contrast all the posters that read something like “I’ve used 0W40 the whole time and ne’er a problem!” My first Lexus was a 1999 GS400 – the car that converted me to forever Lexus. I bought the vehicle at about 100k miles. I had a catastrophic engine failure at high RPMs at about 125k miles. Piston rod popped three holes through the block (and my steering rack!). While looking for a salvage engine replacement, I ran into the same response: those engines NEVER fail! One guy even informed me that this engine was one of very few car engines approved for use in an airplane. So I went back and looked at all the pristine maintenance records from the previous owner. And there it was: he always specified 10W40 Castrol at oil changes (~100k miles worth). Stupid me followed the OEM specification: 5W30 (10W40 was not an option). I always noticed I was almost a quart low every oil change, but I didn’t know any differently. Figured it was typical for an older car. After the salvage engine was installed, I kept the car for another 100k miles (engine ~200k total). Used 5W30 the whole time – and it was NEVER low at subsequent oil changes. And I drove the car at high RPMs, Texas heat, all the time. And it was black on black without window tint – can’t get any hotter!

Although I certainly do not know for sure, I speculated that the use of the heavier oil for such a long time caused the engine to “loosen” up. When I started to use the lighter OEM-specified oil, the engine pieces were able to move around just a tad more and eventually caused a catastrophic fatigue crack. Maybe not – maybe totally random and unrelated? But I’m not a big fan of coincident.

REQUEST
Those of you that decide to use the heavier weight oils contrary to your owner's manual, please (1) stick with it, don’t change later in life, and (2) please make it clear to the possibly younger, possibly poorer, next owner that they need to continue using the heavier weight oils.

Good talk. Thanks for staying respectful.

 

[04UZJ100]

I'm not sure what is considered a "fundamental change", so I'll say this:

For an LX570:

**Engine Piston, Part No. 131010S011, fits 2008-2014​

**Engine Piston, Part No. 131010S030, fits 2013-2021​

​

**Crankshaft, Part No. 134010S010, fits 2009-2011 (there was no 2012 model year, IIRC)​

**Crankshaft, Part No. 1340138010, fits 2008-2021, labelled as "interchangeable" with S010, as opposed to "superseding". I interpret that as meaning the 8010 part can be used in place of the S010 part, but the S010 part can't be used in place of the 8010.​

You can do the same thing with all the Toyota 5.7L variants (Tundra, Sequoia, et al.). So, I'm guessing SOMETHING changed? Can you explain?

Maybe it’s nothing?

I guess there are two possible biases:

1. 0W20 is WORSE for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation specified is to appease various USA laws. The engineers begged management not to specify 0W20, but management decided after risk consideration that the use of 0W20 would result in more wear and tear, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.
2. 0W20 is BETTER for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation permitted other heavier weights in other parts of the world was to appease local availability and cost (or other variables). The engineers, although they preferred 0W20, decided after risk consideration that the use of heavier weights would result in more wear and tear, possibly some coking of the piston rings, possibly a little more oil consumption, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.

I’m guessing you are in the (1) camp?

STORY TIME
I’ll end with a story to contrast all the posters that read something like “I’ve used 0W40 the whole time and ne’er a problem!” My first Lexus was a 1999 GS400 – the car that converted me to forever Lexus. I bought the vehicle at about 100k miles. I had a catastrophic engine failure at high RPMs at about 125k miles. Piston rod popped three holes through the block (and my steering rack!). While looking for a salvage engine replacement, I ran into the same response: those engines NEVER fail! One guy even informed me that this engine was one of very few car engines approved for use in an airplane. So I went back and looked at all the pristine maintenance records from the previous owner. And there it was: he always specified 10W40 Castrol at oil changes (~100k miles worth). Stupid me followed the OEM specification: 5W30 (10W40 was not an option). I always noticed I was almost a quart low every oil change, but I didn’t know any differently. Figured it was typical for an older car. After the salvage engine was installed, I kept the car for another 100k miles (engine ~200k total). Used 5W30 the whole time – and it was NEVER low at subsequent oil changes. And I drove the car at high RPMs, Texas heat, all the time. And it was black on black without window tint – can’t get any hotter!

Although I certainly do not know for sure, I speculated that the use of the heavier oil for such a long time caused the engine to “loosen” up. When I started to use the lighter OEM-specified oil, the engine pieces were able to move around just a tad more and eventually caused a catastrophic fatigue crack. Maybe not – maybe totally random and unrelated? But I’m not a big fan of coincident.

REQUEST
Those of you that decide to use the heavier weight oils contrary to your owner's manual, please (1) stick with it, don’t change later in life, and (2) please make it clear to the possibly younger, possibly poorer, next owner that they need to continue using the heavier weight oils.

Good talk. Thanks for staying respectful.

Why would heavier weight oils be recommended in Aus and the Middle East?

 

[degmla]

Why would heavier weight oils be recommended in Aus and the Middle East?

Recommended, or permitted? I don't know. Do you? Perhaps their dealers are all changing to 0W20 because they can't figure out why USA market recommends 0W20?!?

 

[mdh384]

I'll add some conjecture and potential lies to the (never ending) oil debate:

In the past decade or so, OEMs have been trying to eek every last bit of emission control and fuel efficiency out of our (doomed) internal combustion engines. 0W-20 aids this in two regards: increased fuel economy due to "low friction" formulations, and increased flow response during cold starts, which is necessary due to the way in which cold starts are tuned and because of how owners are instructed to operate modern vehicles. The faster the cats heat up, the less emissions the engine is making. To aid in this, OEMs tune the engines to run in a way that dumps heat into the exhaust, which puts some abnormal loads on the rod bearings when the engine is cold - when it is most vunerable to wear. This is largely prevalent in variable valve timing engines, but the cold start fuel mixture and injection timing can be adjusted to send more heat through the exhaust on non-VVT engines as well. Journal bearing clearances are not what they are supposed to be when cold, so by running a thinner oil the engine is able to get those wear surfaces in oil faster. This is critical for an engine that is put under load immediately upon start-up, and doubly so when owners are instructed to start the engine and drive, rather than start the engine and let it warm up before driving.

I present zero evidence, but I do wonder if the tuning for more current USDM 3UR engines is different from ROW, and the 0W-20 requirement is there to not just meet fuel economy numbers, but also to help the engine survive cold start emissions treatment. My WAG would be that if you're going to let the engine warm up a bit before driving, running a 5W-30 is probably fine in all but the coldest parts of the country.

 

[04UZJ100]

I'll add some conjecture and potential lies to the (never ending) oil debate:

In the past decade or so, OEMs have been trying to eek every last bit of emission control and fuel efficiency out of our (doomed) internal combustion engines. 0W-20 aids this in two regards: increased fuel economy due to "low friction" formulations, and increased flow response during cold starts, which is necessary due to the way in which cold starts are tuned and because of how owners are instructed to operate modern vehicles. The faster the cats heat up, the less emissions the engine is making. To aid in this, OEMs tune the engines to run in a way that dumps heat into the exhaust, which puts some abnormal loads on the rod bearings when the engine is cold - when it is most vunerable to wear. This is largely prevalent in variable valve timing engines, but the cold start fuel mixture and injection timing can be adjusted to send more heat through the exhaust on non-VVT engines as well. Journal bearing clearances are not what they are supposed to be when cold, so by running a thinner oil the engine is able to get those wear surfaces in oil faster. This is critical for an engine that is put under load immediately upon start-up, and doubly so when owners are instructed to start the engine and drive, rather than start the engine and let it warm up before driving.

I present zero evidence, but I do wonder if the tuning for more current USDM 3UR engines is different from ROW, and the 0W-20 requirement is there to not just meet fuel economy numbers, but also to help the engine survive cold start emissions treatment. My WAG would be that if you're going to let the engine warm up a bit before driving, running a 5W-30 is probably fine in all but the coldest parts of the country.

Part numbers across all high clearance parts are the same around the world.

 

[mdh384]

I am not sure what is meant by 'high clearance parts'. Could you expand on that?

Do we know if engine ECM tuning is identical across all markets? Do we know if ROW customers are instructed to start and drive as USDM customers are?

 

[04UZJ100]

I am not sure what is meant by 'high clearance parts'. Could you expand on that?

Do we know if engine ECM tuning is identical across all markets? Do we know if ROW customers are instructed to start and drive as USDM customers are?

Should clarify. Tight clearance. Crank, rod bearings etc.

The performance variant of the 3UR in F Lexus vehicles calls for 5W30.

US cruiser manual says heavier weight oils may be used for high load and speed. WTF does that mean?

 

[mdh384]

Should clarify. Tight clearance. Crank, rod bearings etc.

The performance variant of the 3UR in F Lexus vehicles calls for 5W30.

US cruiser manual says heavier weight oils may be used for high load and speed. WTF does that mean?

Journal bearing clearances have not changed appreciably in decades.

I would think the 5W30 requirement in the F Lexus has to do with higher heat generation of a higher horsepower motor not allowing for use of a 0W20 in "normal use" due to viscosity dropping as oil temperatures increase. The heavier weight oil recommendation in the owners manual for high speed/high load has to do with higher heat loads going into the oil. There is another post in this thread which discusses the use of appropriate viscosity for a given engine oil temperature - that is very much appropriate reasoning for changing viscosity.

However, none of this has anything to do with why Toyota recommends 0W20 as the standard fill in the US. Multiple posters have offered potential explanations beyond the theory you've developed to justify your own decision. I have offered yet another potential explanation beyond "gubmint bad, OEM dumb, I are smarter". I am not trying to convince anyone what oil they should be using; although I would caution those who are still under warranty that any lubrication-related engine failures couple potentially not be honored if the specified oil was not being used.

FWIW, I'll be using the cheapest 5w30 or 5W40 API SP oil I can find, most likely on a 4-5k interval. Which oil viscosity I use will be determined by which oil makes the engine the quietest on cold start.


If you REALLY want something to get your panties in a twist about, I suggest looking into oil filter media, and how difficult it is to find any actual specification on OEM (or aftermarket!) filter efficiency/beta ratio numbers. In my opinion the oil debate is a fool's errand. The real meat and potatoes are in the filter...

 

[40Man]

Recommended, or permitted? I don't know. Do you? Perhaps their dealers are all changing to 0W20 because they can't figure out why USA market recommends 0W20?!?

Other markets require 5w30 or heavier. All car manufacturers have gone this way in the U.S. as well as 10k oil changes due to EPA restrictions. It is still recommed to change oil at 5k in other countries. If you think engineers win the battles on these things I have a bridge I will sell you.

The only guaranteed foolproof solution ia putting in two quarts of 0w20 amsoil, 2 quarts of 5w-30 mobil, 2 quarts of 10w-30 valvoline and 2 quarts of shell 15w40 just to make sure you have all your bases covered.

 

[04UZJ100]

Journal bearing clearances have not changed appreciably in decades.

I would think the 5W30 requirement in the F Lexus has to do with higher heat generation of a higher horsepower motor not allowing for use of a 0W20 in "normal use" due to viscosity dropping as oil temperatures increase. The heavier weight oil recommendation in the owners manual for high speed/high load has to do with higher heat loads going into the oil. There is another post in this thread which discusses the use of appropriate viscosity for a given engine oil temperature - that is very much appropriate reasoning for changing viscosity.

However, none of this has anything to do with why Toyota recommends 0W20 as the standard fill in the US. Multiple posters have offered potential explanations beyond the theory you've developed to justify your own decision. I have offered yet another potential explanation beyond "gubmint bad, OEM dumb, I are smarter". I am not trying to convince anyone what oil they should be using; although I would caution those who are still under warranty that any lubrication-related engine failures couple potentially not be honored if the specified oil was not being used.

FWIW, I'll be using the cheapest 5w30 or 5W40 API SP oil I can find, most likely on a 4-5k interval. Which oil viscosity I use will be determined by which oil makes the engine the quietest on cold start.


If you REALLY want something to get your panties in a twist about, I suggest looking into oil filter media, and how difficult it is to find any actual specification on OEM (or aftermarket!) filter efficiency/beta ratio numbers. In my opinion the oil debate is a fool's errand. The real meat and potatoes are in the filter...

So you’re bringing another point of view into the conversation only to say you’re running heavier oil?

 

[degmla]

Other markets require 5w30 or heavier. All car manufacturers have gone this way in the U.S. as well as 10k oil changes due to EPA restrictions. It is still recommed to change oil at 5k in other countries. If you think engineers win the battles on these things I have a bridge I will sell you.

The only guaranteed foolproof solution ia putting in two quarts of 0w20 amsoil, 2 quarts of 5w-30 mobil, 2 quarts of 10w-30 valvoline and 2 quarts of shell 15w40 just to make sure you have all your bases covered.

View attachment 2638879

@40Man, is EURO 3 still the applicable standard (circa 2000)? There appears to be newer standards (e.g., EURO 4 circa 2005), but I'm not at all familiar with any of that. I'm curious if newer Land Cruisers meet newer standards, and, if so, what their oil recommendations are.

 

[bloc]

The cold start cam timing/exhaust heat/rod knock concept is a plausible reason, and could explain the oil requirement/recommendation here despite the mechanicals being the same as in other markets.. because we could certainly have a different tune. This is the first I’ve heard about this cam timing concept, but it is valuable information.

Personally I appreciate the new perspective, even if I’ll be keeping the 5w-30.

 

[degmla]

@04UZJ100 , @40Man ,

Has someone somehow somewhere determined that heavier oil is better for these engines? I still feel as if your starting point is: heavier oil is better, but EPA makes USA market use lighter oil. Why isn't your starting point: lighter oil is better, but due to cost and potential relaxed emissions in ROW, Toyota opts for the cheaper, more prevalent heavier oils?

 

[degmla]

If you think engineers win the battles on these things I have a bridge I will sell you.

I think it is a given that engineers lost the battle in this situation. Why would an engineer specify different oils for the same engine in relatively the same climates? So there are obviously other variables in play.

I previously proposed two scenarios, in which engineers compromised in each one:

1. 0W20 is WORSE for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation specified is to appease various USA laws. The engineers begged management not to specify 0W20, but management decided after risk consideration that the use of 0W20 would result in more wear and tear, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.
2. 0W20 is BETTER for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation permitted other heavier weights in other parts of the world was to appease local availability and cost (or other variables). The engineers, although they preferred 0W20, decided after risk consideration that the use of heavier weights would result in more wear and tear, possibly some coking of the piston rings, possibly a little more oil consumption, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.

My current opinion: Toyota engineers designed the engines to the most strict design requirements (i.e., USA market?). However, since it seems 0w20 oil is generally more expensive than heavier weights (e.g., 10%?), they compromised the design by allowing cheaper oils in less restrictive markets.

Your current opinion: Toyota engineers designed the engines for a mid-point market. They were strong-armed by EPA (or whatever) to compromise durability by specifying in USA market an oil thinner than they designed for. For me, that is not the Toyota I believe in. And I have not yet seen why you guys think differently? Seems the only reason is based on the logic of: why would other markets do it? Therefore, it must be better!

I already pointed out that there was a part number change in the crankshafts and pistons around 2012 for the 5.7L engine. No one addressed it. Thus, deemed coincidence and unrelated? Or you appeal to a smaller engine's oil specification with different torque curves and different RPM redlines and consider that similitude?

Now, I'll point out that there was also a part number change around 2012 for the catalytic convertors. (38270/38010 vs 38070/38310) Another coincidence? Also unrelated?

If, IF, there was any compromise as you speculate, it would probably be in the earlier years of the 5.7L engine (pre-2013). MAYBE those engines were intended to have heavier oils, but had to make some durability compromises? But, IF IT WERE ME, I would NOT be heavying up the oil in 2014-2020 models (I'm looking at you @04UZJ100, ). Whatever compromises that MAY have been in play in the early years may have been mitigated in the 2013 changes? We're all speculating here. No one knows.

 

[04UZJ100]

I think it is a given that engineers lost the battle in this situation. Why would an engineer specify different oils for the same engine in relatively the same climates? So there are obviously other variables in play.

I previously proposed two scenarios, in which engineers compromised in each one:

1. 0W20 is WORSE for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation specified is to appease various USA laws. The engineers begged management not to specify 0W20, but management decided after risk consideration that the use of 0W20 would result in more wear and tear, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.
2. 0W20 is BETTER for my 5.7L engine, and the ONLY reason Toyota Corporation permitted other heavier weights in other parts of the world was to appease local availability and cost (or other variables). The engineers, although they preferred 0W20, decided after risk consideration that the use of heavier weights would result in more wear and tear, possibly some coking of the piston rings, possibly a little more oil consumption, but not enough to noticeably sacrifice reliability or reputation.

My current opinion: Toyota engineers designed the engines to the most strict design requirements (i.e., USA market?). However, since it seems 0w20 oil is generally more expensive than heavier weights (e.g., 10%?), they compromised the design by allowing cheaper oils in less restrictive markets.

Your current opinion: Toyota engineers designed the engines for a mid-point market. They were strong-armed by EPA (or whatever) to compromise durability by specifying in USA market an oil thinner than they designed for. For me, that is not the Toyota I believe in. And I have not yet seen why you guys think differently? Seems the only reason is based on the logic of: why would other markets do it? Therefore, it must be better!

I already pointed out that there was a part number change in the crankshafts and pistons around 2012 for the 5.7L engine. No one addressed it. Thus, deemed coincidence and unrelated? Or you appeal to a smaller engine's oil specification with different torque curves and different RPM redlines and consider that similitude?

Now, I'll point out that there was also a part number change around 2012 for the catalytic convertors. (38270/38010 vs 38070/38310) Another coincidence? Also unrelated?

If, IF, there was any compromise as you speculate, it would probably be in the earlier years of the 5.7L engine (pre-2013). MAYBE those engines were intended to have heavier oils, but had to make some durability compromises? But, IF IT WERE ME, I would NOT be heavying up the oil in 2014-2020 models (I'm looking at you @04UZJ100, ). Whatever compromises that MAY have been in play in the early years may have been mitigated in the 2013 changes? We're all speculating here. No one knows.

My engine is smoother and less noisy on startup on 5W30 in both my 14 and 20.

 

[chalice]

Doesn't Toyota recommend 0w20 - 20w50 depending on climate and region? I'm unsure if tolerances are of concern. Lots of high mileage, high idle time fleet Tundras running 0w20 - some burn 0 oil and some burn a little. Idling 0w20 might be the biggest culprit than anything when it comes to oil consumption.

I come from using Rotella T6 5w40 in a track car that needed a lot of zinc for turbo life at 40psi. Has anyone put thought into the additive package for the 3UR? Are there documented failure modes related specifically to oil used?

 

[bloc]

There are tons of great used oil analysis of both 0w-20 and 5w-30 posted to bob is the oil guy forums.

Realistically unless it is a hard worked engine with greater than 5k changes in a very hot climate, I don’t see 0w-20 causing problems. Even then, it appears to work well for many people for many miles, but that doesn’t mean something couldn’t work better.

But, and I believe @04UZJ100 has stated this a few times, the startup valve train noise running 5w-30 is significantly reduced. Then consider the fact that at least mechanically (bearing tolerances, etc) it is approved in other markets.. and the hot climate I live in. 5w-30 is what I will run.

 

[degmla]

My engine is smoother and less noisy on startup on 5W30 in both my 14 and 20.

I'd kinda expect that on start-up, wouldn't you? It's a thicker oil. It won't run off the parts as easily. And, at least the USA spec concedes to an occasional 5W use. Is 0W and 5W that much different? Is that presented as your proof of better protection? Was 5W20 any quieter?

Realistically unless it is a hard worked engine with greater than 5k changes in a very hot climate, I don’t see 0w-20 causing problems.

In other words, if you follow Toyota's USA specification (0W20, 10k miles, any climate), you feel it could cause problems? And you must also obviously feel 5W30 won't?

Then consider the fact that at least mechanically (bearing tolerances, etc) it is approved in other markets.

This is the "fact" that I'm still struggling with. The only evidence I have seen so far is based on a Europe emissions spec approved 21 years ago!! I'm having a hard time believing that is still current.