[twodogs]

It's the oil specifications that change, not the engines. I suspect 17 and 20 refer to 2017 and 2020

 

[madhatter]

To All

FYI, have just bought a 2022 1.5 DCI 4x4 and did not have any info re correct oil within the owners manual. Contacted Dacia customer service and they sent me a PDF Warranty and service sheet specific to my vehicle. See extract below re Engine Oil. Aligns fully with Madhatter's good advice.

View attachment 40521

This is screenshot from my service bulletin that I acquired through a kind reddit user for my VIN. Pretty much the same.

But I wondered about the coolant. Your’s says Glaceol Type D. Mine says Type E.

Edit: it seems Renault seems to have changed the type from D to E. I seem to have the old yellow D in the car from the factory (april 2023).

Here is a bit of a duscussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Renault/s/7TU6OUgtfO

 

[madhatter]

It's the oil specifications that change, not the engines. I suspect 17 and 20 refer to 2017 and 2020

The engine actually changed. Enough that it opened a new possibility for oil (the 0W-20 viscosity) or warranted an actual new requirement in the case of the first generation of DPF equipped engines (with the RN0720 approval that is still relevant from the bunch of old approvals).

I’m not concerned with semantics here though: if the dpf system was added I count it as change of the engine.

There is an outdated article on wikipedia that doesn’t go up to the latest (2018) version engine, but is an illustration of the evolution of k9k:
“Improvements over this period have included coating the tappets to reduce friction by 40%; redesigning the injector spray angle, resulting in a 15% reduction of NOx during combustion and a small improvement in torque; and fitting new piston rings, reducing the tension on the belt-driving engine accessories and optimizing the dimensions of the base engine. The injection pattern has been altered to have two pilot injections over a wide operating range, reducing combustion noise by up to 3 decibels. Still newer technology also includes using a variable-pressure oil pump, and adding stop/start battery technology and low-pressure exhaust-gas recirculation.”

More knowledgeable people can chip in at what point, which version (or even if) this happened, but from other sources I read it gained steel pistons and cylinders with DLC coating for better wear resistance (or lesser friction?). I imagine that different piston rings, dlc cylinder (or piston?) coating, aftertreatment systems are changes to the engine that require new oil formulation.

 

[dralexandertom]

I have the BLUE coolant. Here Nissan & Renault have used 'blue' right from the beginning.

 

[Roger]

I have the BLUE coolant. Here Nissan & Renault have used 'blue' right from the beginning.

Mine has Type D, yellow/green, in my 2013 dCi.

 

[MarkP80]

So it seems that even the Renault spec allows the use of two different oil grades and specs - RN17 5w30 or RN17FE 0w20 being the new specifications for post-2018 diesels (not for earlier). Yet it doesn't seem to give any advice as to which might be "better", which is a little confusing.
It would appear that Renault are happy to use an SAE 20 viscosity oil at operating temperatures. And 0w will give better protection at cold starts. The RN17 FE also claims to have lower friction for better fuel consumption.
I would conclude that the RN17 FE will probably provide better protection.

 

[madhatter]

So it seems that even the Renault spec allows the use of two different oil grades and specs - RN17 5w30 or RN17FE 0w20 being the new specifications for post-2018 diesels (not for earlier). Yet it doesn't seem to give any advice as to which might be "better", which is a little confusing.
It would appear that Renault are happy to use an SAE 20 viscosity oil at operating temperatures. And 0w will give better protection at cold starts. The RN17 FE also claims to have lower friction for better fuel consumption.
I would conclude that the RN17 FE will probably provide better protection.

It looks like they are preferring the 0W20 for newer engines. But the question is for what reason - if it’s fuel consumption and emissions or engine protection. Are the thinner new oils that oil selectors and renault/dacia themselves cite as first choice as protective regarding wear as the 5w-30 or not? Does the additive pack compensate for lower viscosity or are engine constructions such that the thinner film is actually preferred. As dralexandertom says if the engine construction of the diesel is unchanged from the time 5W-40 was the preferred viscosity the new thinner oil may rely solely on anti wear additives which tend to deteriorate with use.

 

[MarkP80]

That is indeed the question!
I would say generally though that a 0w is better than a 5w for protecting the engine on cold starts. I did look at some info for both oil types and for the RN17FE, the following bullet points were over an above the identical statements for the "plain" RN17 -

• Provides a very resistant oil film, facilitates cold starts, reduces friction in the engine, maintains oil pressure and globally lowers engine operating temperatures
• Reduces the hydrodynamic friction of the oil, resulting in fuel savings especially when the lubricant is cold
• Excellent lubricating properties for resistance to high temperatures, limiting the formation of deposits and reducing wear

It would be iinteresting to know what changes have been made to the engine recently. I suspect it may well be things like piston rings.

 

[madhatter]

That is indeed the question!
I would say generally though that a 0w is better than a 5w for protecting the engine on cold starts. I did look at some info for both oil types and for the RN17FE, the following bullet points were over an above the identical statements for the "plain" RN17 -

• Provides a very resistant oil film, facilitates cold starts, reduces friction in the engine, maintains oil pressure and globally lowers engine operating temperatures
• Reduces the hydrodynamic friction of the oil, resulting in fuel savings especially when the lubricant is cold
• Excellent lubricating properties for resistance to high temperatures, limiting the formation of deposits and reducing wear

It would be iinteresting to know what changes have been made to the engine recently. I suspect it may well be things like piston rings.

Those bullet points in text are more or less poetic

 

[Gasman14]

The sceptic in me would say that the 0w oil was designed to lower emissions on cold starts rather than protecting the engine as the 5w would.
After all, by the time the damage is done the car is well out of warranty and the manufacturer won't care.
I have no scientific evidence to back up this statement, just many years of distrust 🤔

 

[madhatter]

The sceptic in me would say that the 0w oil was designed to lower emissions on cold starts rather than protecting the engine as the 5w would.
After all, by the time the damage is done the car is well out of warranty and the manufacturer won't care.
I have no scientific evidence to back up this statement, just many years of distrust 🤔

The 0w actually is better wear protection property because it is winter viscosity rating. 0W flows faster on cold starts when a lot of the damage usually occurs.

The possibly lower protection is the working temperature viscosity - the 20 part of 0W-20 - because lower viscosity means thinner oil film, can mean less resistance to pressures etc.

I don’t lnow if I can subscribe to a cynical view that car makers don’t care for the engine longevity. I hope they do. Also I’m not sure how much less emmissions the oil contributes to, i’d say negligible.

 

[MarkP80]

Having done a little more research into this, I've come to the conclusion that the RN17FE 0w20 grade has been brought in specifically to improve fuel efficiency (that is what the FE stands for, after all), not to give long term protection to the engine.
I agree that 0w is lower viscosity than 5w in cold weather, but from the temperatures quoted I see no benefit for UK conditions. So I don't personally think there will be any reduction in cold start wear from using the 0w. (as from the spec sheet above, Dacia don't recommend going to 0w until the temperature falls to -30C)
The interesting property is the High Temperature High Shear (HTFS) specification. From my research, the higher this viscosity, the better for long term bearing life. The modifiers in 0w oils mean that HTHS is generally always lower for 0w oils, particularly if they are "fuel efficiency" oils. (I couldn't find the Castrol HTHS, but for Motul oil it was 2.7 for the RN17FE and 3.6 for the RN17, which is quite some difference).
Fewer viscosity modifiers also means less deposits (again from my limited research), again pointing to 5w oils being "better".
For the Castrol GTX oil recommended by Dacia, the RN17 has a slightly lower ash content than the RN17FE as well.

So, I'll stick with RN17 5w30 for my car, which I intend to keep for a long time. I'll also be changing every 12 months, not as per the scheduled 2 years...
Interestingly, when I looked at Opie oils, the Castrol GTX recommended by Dacia is a lump cheaper than the other RN17 oils for some reason.

Oh, I contacted Dacia to see which they recommend and they said they recommend 0w20 RN17FE and 5w30 RN17. So I asked them why they recommend two different grades, which seems very odd. I'll see if they give an answer but I don't expect one in reality.

 

[madhatter]

Having done a little more research into this, I've come to the conclusion that the RN17FE 0w20 grade has been brought in specifically to improve fuel efficiency (that is what the FE stands for, after all), not to give long term protection to the engine.
I agree that 0w is lower viscosity than 5w in cold weather, but from the temperatures quoted I see no benefit for UK conditions. So I don't personally think there will be any reduction in cold start wear from using the 0w.
The interesting property is the High Temperature High Shear (HTFS) specification. From my research, the higher this viscosity, the better for long term bearing life. The modifiers in 0w oils mean that HTHS is generally always lower for 0w oils, particularly if they are "fuel efficiency" oils.
Fewer viscosity modifiers also means less deposits (again from my limited research), again pointing to 5w oils being "better".
For the Castrol GTX oil recommended by Dacia, the RN17 has a slightly lower ash content than the RN17FE as well.

So, I'll stick with RN17 5w30 for my car.
Interestingly, when I looked at Opie oils, the Castrol GTX recommended by Dacia is a lump cheaper than the other RN17 oils for some reason.

Oh, I contacted Dacia to see which they recommend and they said they recommend 0w20 RN17FE and 5w30 RN17. So I asked them why they recommend two different grades, which seems very odd. I'll see if they give an answer but I don't expect one in reality.

You’ve got a lot of this backwards.
The lower value with letter W us performance in low temps. Has nothing to do with HTHS. If anything the second value, the one after the W- has something to do with HTHS. That is the nominal viscosity rate at working temperatures. And it makes sense that lower viscosity grades have lower HTHS. The HTHS is otherwise prescribed for ACEA oil ratings and C3 (RN17)has a minimum of 3.5 mPa.s and C5 (RN17FE) has a HTHS viscosity minimum of 2.6 mPa.s. And that’s that. I couldn’t find the HTHS data for Castrol Rn17FE on Castrol site, but if this isn’t a mistake, here are the values:

Motorna olja – Originalna olja | Brezplačna dostava nad 39 € |

Velika izbira motornih olj: Castrol, Motul, Shell, VW, BMW in več. Brezplačna dostava nad 39 € s Pošto Slovenije.

motornaolja.com

I wouldn’t be as sure as you are about the wear protection though. Yes, lower HTHS means lower wear protection but you don’t know if/how they compensate anti-wear properties of the lower oil viscosity. Oils as it is today haven’t relied solely on viscosity for wear protection for some time now. How and if the oil producer’s engineers plus engine producer’s engineers that set the approvals have this in mind when formulating an oil we can get an idea from the above linked approval comparison tools when engune producers are in question. What oil makers do with their oils is their secret but if the oil is aporoved we at least know what they dud as a minumum.

The viscosity grade and “UK climate” have little value for judging today’s oil requirements. Manufacturers now consistently claim that the nominal viscosity they recommend is for all temperatures with a limitation in the bottom negative temps. The graphs you may have found online may not be best translated into new engines and their dufferent cimponent tolerances.

So while you may be entirely right I wouldn’t be so cocky regarding the conclusions you made
Engibe manufacturers could be just aiming on warranty period and want the engines to signifucantly loose the performance after 10 years for the little potential gain in reducing emissions (more likely theoretical, on paper than not). But why be specific which engines can use the thinner oils then? Why not just say - yeah, from now on it’s the thin oil for everybody? OK maybe they thought older engibes would very soon exhibit problems, while the post 2018 ones would take time and the relationship with oil couldn’t be positively proven to be the culprit for premature engine wear signs. But we may be entering conspirancy theory territory here

 

[MarkP80]

You’ve got a lot of this backwards.
The lower value with letter W us performance in low temps. Has nothing to do with HTHS.

I don't think I got anything backwards. I didn't say "w" had anything to do with HTHS. On the contrary, I said it was related to cold weather performance (the w meaning winter). I spoke separately about HTHS.
What I said was -

I agree that 0w is lower viscosity than 5w in cold weather, but from the temperatures quoted I see no benefit for UK conditions

So there's nothing wrong or "backwards" with what I said regarding 0w and 5w. But this characteristic certainly relates to cold weather suitability.

As to HTHS, sure, we don't know the manufacturer's secrets, but this characteristic indicates how an oil retains its viscosity under high shear conditions.

Maybe I'm a little sensitive, but I take a bit of offence when I'm accused of being "cocky", despite the smiley face after it.
I posted my personal views on which oil I will be putting in my car when the manufacturer gives two completely different options and gives no guidance on why they give two completely different options.
Like I said -

I'll stick with RN17 5w30 for my car, which I intend to keep for a long time.

- but others may choose the RN17FE 0w20 if that's what they would like to use, in lieu of any help from the manufacturer

 

[madhatter]

I don't think I got anything backwards. I didn't say "w" had anything to do with HTHS. On the contrary, I said it was related to cold weather performance (the w meaning winter). I spoke separately about HTHS.
What I said was -

So there's nothing wrong or "backwards" with what I said regarding 0w and 5w. But this characteristic certainly relates to cold weather suitability.

As to HTHS, sure, we don't know the manufacturer's secrets, but this characteristic indicates how an oil retains its viscosity under high shear conditions.

Maybe I'm a little sensitive, but I take a bit of offence when I'm accused of being "cocky", despite the smiley face after it.
I posted my personal views on which oil I will be putting in my car when the manufacturer gives two completely different options and gives no guidance on why they give two completely different options.
Like I said -

- but others may choose the RN17FE 0w20 if that's what they would like to use, in lieu of any help from the manufacturer

Don’t take offence, it wasn’t meant like that. Maybe language coloring was off with that word choice, english isn’t a language I use every day.

But you did say this with which I polemicised: “…The modifiers in 0w oils mean that HTHS is generally always lower for 0w oils…” which led me to believe you think the winter number is responsible for HTHS. It isn’t.
You also said there is more viscosity modifiers in 0w20 than in 5w30, which if anything would be the other way round. Viscosity modifiers are there to make the viscosity more stable. The 0w20 has as much or less werk to do as it is already thin. 5w30 has a higher viscosity span to overcome. And I don’t think that the VM are responsible for engine and aftertreatment devices deposits. SAPS were there as anti-wear agents and were sustituted for probably some polymer additives.

Regarding oil choice I would speculate both are well suited, one may be more advanced and enables lower fuel consumption, although I don’t see that in my use. I also chose the RN17 for last oil change at 20k; this was my second change.

 

[MarkP80]

Don’t take offence, it wasn’t meant like that. Maybe language coloring was off with that word choice, english isn’t a language I use every day.

Thanks for clarifying, that's much appreciated - it's easy to misunderstand meaning when things are typed. Especially if it's not your first language, which I hadn't realised.
Thanks again.

 

[MarkP80]

Incidentally, does anyone know the correct torque setting for the sump plug?

 

[dralexandertom]

Incidentally, does anyone know the correct torque setting for the sump plug?

20 Nm. The sump is aluminium.

 

[MarkP80]

20 Nm. The sump is aluminium.

Excellent, thank you

 

[MarkP80]

I finally got round to changing my oil at the weekend. I couldn't get the specific 64mm/14 flute filter tool in time so bought the Halfords universal one. The problem then was that the "legs" on the tool are too long, so they go beyond the flutes onto the circular part of the housing and so won't grip. I sorted that by taking a hacksaw to it, and then it worked. It's still not a great tool, it was a bit fiddly to get it to grip and stay in place, but it did the job.

I didn't find the clearance an issue as the socket ratchet (and torque wrench) go straight into the 3/8" hole in the tool. @Gasman14 , could this have helped you with clearance, rather than trying to get a socket on?

You can see in the photo how I've shortened the legs. It also shows the clearance to that anti-roll bar when you can get the driver directly into the tool.

The biggest issue I had was getting a decent reading from the dipstick! I found that every time I put the dipstick in, it was picking up oil from the guide tube, making it very difficult to see the actual oil level.