Just read the discussion, people get stuck on grade numbers being absolute when they are not and do not allow for degradation as the oil is used in the engine with better oils staying at their figures for longer plus offering more and further protection, one 10w-40 might perform differently to another 10w-40 even within the same oil blender's range of 10w-40 oils.

 

As I've put before oil seems to be a lot about beliefs.

 

A big oil producer/blender will possibly have more consistency with their base oils and additives, on the other hand smaller blenders may use those base stocks with their own additive package which might be better, or perhaps not quite as good.  You as a consumer have so much choice.  If you had a a factory stock car your baseline would be an oil that meets VWSkoda's 23-years old specifications, you could chose to take advantage or ignore any beneficial advances in the oil products since API SH (pre-2001).

 

You may also want to comply with the VW 50* ** commands relevant to your model. - https://addinol.de/en/products/lubricants-for-the-automotive-sector/engine-oil/specifications/#OEM

 

As an example only for you as I know you can't get Millers this is the type of oil I would look at, having had a 50 year old engine, that was designed over 70 years that is still going strong now and was uprated for performance, used through English summers and winters ( -10c to 30+c) for 16 years. - https://www.millersoils.co.uk/products/ee-performance-engine-oil-10w40/

 

I will end my contributions to the thread with my usual oil viscosity chart attached, cheers. -

 

13 hours ago, nta16 said:

You may also want to comply with the VW 50* ** commands relevant to your model.

 

For Felicia Petrol: API SG, VW 501 01 or VW 500, 00

2 hours ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

For Felicia Petrol: API SG, VW 501 01 or VW 500, 00

 

All was merely as example, you have the choice of many different engine oils.  Personally particularly for a car engine of your vintage I would ignore the added unnecessary VW numbers compliance (with my wife's 2015 Skoda you only get the VW number and not the multigrade weights specified).

 

But anyway. -

 

https://www.millersoils.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/7708-EE-Performance-10w40.pdf

 

 

API oil categories. - https://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/eolcs-categories-and-classifications/oil-categories#tab-gasoline

Edited 12 October, 20232 yr by nta16

1998 Felicia 1.3 MPI, 104 thousand miles and 25 years old purchased from new and never ever warmed up the engine from cold start just started and drive off used 10/40 good quality oil and no problems.

 

Just passed its 25th MOT and passed the only problem is it could out live me.

 

Fantastic car, in quality and running would not swop it for any new modern car of the same capacity.

14 hours ago, mikefelicia said:

Just passed its 25th MOT

Just for those not in the UK, 25th was a typing error, it would be 22nd MoT pass, and congratulations to Mike on those, as in the UK the first MoT is due when the car is 3 years old.

 

And I totally agree about not swapping it for a new modern car, of any capacity.

 

21 hours ago, mikefelicia said:

1998 Felicia 1.3 MPI, 104 thousand miles and 25 years old purchased from new and never ever warmed up the engine from cold start just started and drive off used 10/40 good quality oil and no problems.

 

No warm-up in UK weather? Fuel consumption in City Traffic?

Here for the new car in first seven years no MOT, after this every 2 years.

I think this belong here.

 

 

So, no matter if it's Stock or with ECU chip, if has stock exhaust or custom, if has factory air filter or cotton gauze or POD, if it's outside the cool air or down in a 5th floor basement etc the warm-up time (from crank and 1100 prm to 800 rpm idle) for Skoda (with VW electronics) Felicia has a 3:40-3:50 minutes as ''standard''.

Why? I don't know any more.

Can this time reduced or if it's proper to be reduced? I don't know either and as i have seen in forums probably no one knows.

It's very simple, the engine efficiency puts out a certain amount of thermal energy and with constant volume with the thermostat closed takes the same amount to heat up 

4 hours ago, Thefeliciahacker said:

with the thermostat closed

 

You have removed your thermostat, am i right?

1 hour ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

You have removed your thermostat, am i right?

No, thermostat is in place

7 hours ago, Thefeliciahacker said:

the engine efficiency puts out a certain amount of thermal energy

 

The rate of Antifreeze presence in Coolant does not play a crucial role?

A 50 water-50% Antifreeze Coolant mixture won't get warm-up later than a 20-80% one?

56 minutes ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

A 50 water-50% Antifreeze Coolant mixture won't get warm-up later than a 20-80% one

I doubt it, 

Imagine that the engine holds 1 litre of water and produces 1kw for idling purposes. 

At such low rpm it is 10% efficient 

So 9 kw of thermal energy being dumped into that small volume, nothing will play a role more than the actual heat capacity of water... 

G12 has Density 1,119 g/cm3 an G11 has Density 1.80 g/cm3

that plays any role for the warm-up time?

If we heat them for example 3:40 minutes in the end of the test the temperature diferrence would be significant? Who will get warm faster?

@nta16 In the deleted topic (we know who's responsible) you had an attachment about calatyst warm-up time in your wife's Fabia.

Do you still have it?

Do bear in mind this relates to later cars with many more sensors, modules and complex computer programs that interfere more with the running and driving of the car (not as much as later and latest cars though).

 

I know I will shatter the illusions for some that the VW engineers, computer engineers and mechanics always get everything right and have their customers best interests at heart  at all times but in my experience with my wife's car the figures given are not fully accurate, now it may be that my wife's car is an exception and there may be other factors influencing the figures to her car.  The 6 hours is wrong in my experience with my wife's car, I have never paid attention to coolant temperature when this happens as I have no idea how accurate it is, its a 90 biased gauge anyway.

 

 

Here is my Cold start (Morning)

 

 

and my Cold start (Night)

 

 

 

They are not the same, many times tested and the difference is present, why? I don't know, except the temperature the density of air is different.

Always the same results, a bit of ''rough'' in the morning (of course not so rough with strong vibrations as @Thefeliciahacker has) and ''softer'' with one click more revs at night.

 

50 minutes ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

many times tested and the difference is present, why?

Isn't this looping back to the start of the thread and all the possible answers included in the thread.

 

53 minutes ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

I don't know, except the temperature the density of air is different.

Always the same results, a bit of ''rough'' in the morning (of course not so rough with strong vibrations as @Thefeliciahacker has) and ''softer'' with one click more revs at night.

Is it the morning or night where the air was colder?

 

Is the car parked at the same location morning and night?

 

Are you starting the car with your feet away from the pedals?

 

I can imagine why you have the lights on at night but why have you got the lights on with the morning start when there appears to be enough light to see and record the dash gauges anyway?

 

Are the videos taken on the same day, as you appear to have a fuller tank at night or is it that the fuel tank gauge needle has finished rising?

 

I'm mainly curious and expect the questions and answers have been given in the thread before but I've forgot.

 

Either start seems good enough to me and I would be driving off to get things moving as they should.

 

1 hour ago, nta16 said:

Isn't this looping back to the start of the thread and all the possible answers included in the thread.

 

Is it the morning or night where the air was colder?

 

Is the car parked at the same location morning and night?

 

Are you starting the car with your feet away from the pedals?

 

I can imagine why you have the lights on at night but why have you got the lights on with the morning start when there appears to be enough light to see and record the dash gauges anyway?

 

Are the videos taken on the same day, as you appear to have a fuller tank at night or is it that the fuel tank gauge needle has finished rising?

 

Either start seems good enough to me and I would be driving off to get things moving as they should.

 

 

No, every day the day Cold start is different than night one.

 

In the morning the air is colder.

 

Out in the street (day) and in the same parking lot (underground) at night.

 

No, clutch pressed 2-3 seconds while the engine cranks, then released (Neutral speed).

 

Parking light On, for video only otherwise nobody could see the gauges.

 

Different days, nonetheless every day Cold start is not the same as night's.

 

With previous oils every Cold start was the same, for example with 15W-50 every one was rough, with Motul 10W-40 every one was like the Night (1100 rpm).

Although weird phenomenon to have 2 kinds of Cold start the only positive thing is that the City fuel consumption is improved a bit but only when i wait 1 minute before i go, if i make the ''crank and go'' system then rise a bit as the old days.

So you have only notice this difference in outside morning and inside night cold starts since you have used Eneos 10w-40 (which might just be coincidence)?

 

You find the morning, outside, cold start is the one you don't like?

 

Do you find the 1 minute wait before you go improves your City fuel consumption from the outside morning cold start, or the inside night cold start, or both?

 

9 hours ago, nta16 said:

So you have only notice this difference in outside morning and inside night cold starts since you have used Eneos 10w-40 (which might just be coincidence)?

 

You find the morning, outside, cold start is the one you don't like?

 

Do you find the 1 minute wait before you go improves your City fuel consumption from the outside morning cold start, or the inside night cold start, or both?

 

 

Yes, only with ENEOS. With other oils was the same no matter if was day or night.

 

Yes, the sound of day Cold start is a bit "rough" for me.

 

Generally speaking is better than previous oil, in the night is one click better than the morning, i will post photos soon.

Thinking of the differences between the two starts have you checked and perhaps cleaned MAP, intake air temperature sensors, checked and cleaned their  connectors, wires, so on since this difference started?.

 

Side question, what resolved the 3:42(?) wait?

 

Do you have a scan tool that can check readings before and after start?

 

10 minutes ago, nta16 said:

Thinking of the differences between the two starts have you checked and perhaps cleaned MAP, intake air temperature sensors, checked and cleaned their  connectors, wires, so on since this difference started?.

 

Side question, what resolved the 3:42(?) wait?

 

Do you have a scan tool that can check readings before and after start?

 

 

That day-night differences shown up when i installed the new Synthetic ENEOS.

 

I will measure the time in future days, the bad thing in City is when you enter the car many times other car is coming beside you saying ''are you leaving?" to take the parking space so you don't have enough time for a proper warm-up.

Especially at night out in the street when they see your brake lights while you are parked it's very common for a car to stand beside you and make you a gesture ''are you leaving?".

Lot of cars, not enough space and you grab every opportunity.

At night in the underground parking lot i haven't that problem, in the morning when i have not enough time for a proper warm-up time the fuel consumption is about 12,9 ltr/100 Km or 23.73 Uk Mpg but at night when i have time the fuel consumption at the end of the routs is 11,4 ltr/ 100Km or 24.77 Uk Mprg which is a very good result comparing with older prices.

My car never liked the ''crank and go'' habit.

 

I have OBD 11, you can scan with the key in position I but when you crank the device strops working.

26 minutes ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

the bad thing in City is when you enter the car many times other car is coming beside you saying ''are you leaving?"

I think I would leave the lights off when I start the car and if they asked about anything just tell "it's an old car, I've got to wait a five minutes for something to work before I can go".  Perhaps ask them to stick around after they've found a space in case your car needs a push, they should get rid of them (unless they own an old car to). 😄

 

For difference in fuel could that be the difference in temperature of the engine and ambient between morning outside as it is and the car having been parked overnight and night starting inside, parked inside so initially warmer engine and surroundings.

 

38 minutes ago, D.FYLAKTOS said:

I have OBD 11, you can scan with the key in position I but when you crank the device strops working.

Yes but you can scan and perhaps do a report either side of the cranking and perhaps see any anomalies.   Just think how bigger spreadsheet you could have from those reports. 😉  IIRC there were over 600 data points for the Fabia engine, yours might be a few less.

 

18 minutes ago, nta16 said:

For difference in fuel could that be the difference in temperature of the engine and ambient between morning outside as it is and the car having been parked overnight and night starting inside, parked inside so initially warmer engine and surroundings.

 

My previous record with 5W-40,

 

 

i thought was ''the best i can do'' since the nightmare with that useless dump catastrophic 15W-50 but now with the new 10W-40 the indications day by day start lowering, 12-11,8-11,7-11,6 and now my record is this:

 

 

11,4 ltr/ 100 Km so things getting better.

A "thinner" and/or better quality oil used for short journeys in the cold will give less resistance for the engine.  I'd imagine a better quality 15w-50 would have given better fuel figures in these circumstances than the 15w-50 you used, but possibly not as good as the 10w-40.

 

The likes of VW try to shave the fuel consumption figures as very much as they can with various ways but it doesn't mean there are not some detrimental consequences from this pursuit of having the very ancient ICE and using too much modern technology on it perhaps including thin oils - but I am NOT saying the 10w-40 oil is too thin for your engine.

 

But here you only want to compare the fuel consumption between the recent cold morning and cold night starts (with the same oil in the engine at both times).

 

What ambient temperature range is the TC-6 guaranteed to be accurate at?

 

What is the state of charge and state of health of your car battery at the moment?