Oil type for 1987 2.3 non turbo diesel is 5w30 motorcraft ok

[Rebecca Scoffield]

I'm getting confused here on what engine you have




1 - Gasoline
2 - Diesel - Non Turbo
3 - Diesel - With Turbo

1 gas. Every time I go to the parts store I have to say non turbo/diesel so it just has become a habit.

 

[Rebecca Scoffield]

If the engine is a gas engine, as you seem to indicate, 5W-30 is perfectly fine if the oil fill cap and the owner's manual says it is.

All three of my Rangers speced 5W-30. So, it would seem to follow the trend that yours would as well.

As far as the oil not being listed as compatible, auto parts stores and their websites aren't always the most reliable source of information. I've run into problems a few times with their systems saying a part I removed from the vehicle not being listed and they showed something else instead.

Also, one thing I've run into in the past with Honda is that they changed the oil specified sometime later after the vehicles were built, going from 5W-30 to 5W-20 or something similar. It has something to do with fleet fuel economy numbers or something along those lines.

As far as the oil usage, you could have developed a leak or started burning oil because of the change in the additive package when changing oils. But this is just speculation. If you don't have smoke coming out of the tail pipe, I would start looking for leaks.

Understand that completely. The wrong slave cylinder comes up for my ranger. Finally got the right one by using 89 instead of 87 for the year. I just got off work and will be putting the motorcraft 5w30 in with some Lucas stabilizer. Praying it works for the oil pressure. Haven't located a leak yet but I'll keep looking. Thanks for your help. I love my little ranger. It's still metal

 

[Rebecca Scoffield]

^^^ I agree. You need to tell us which of the 3 choices; 1,2, or 3...

I've stated I don't have a diesel

 

[pentode]

Semantics resolved... I'm guessing if you had a huge leak you'd have mentioned that. If you're burning oil, there might be a few ways to mitigate that temporarily. I'm sure some on here will have different opinions but I'd suggest not bothering to dump super thin oil into it. Maybe bump it up to 10W40 or 15W40 if you get to the point you find it's a really tired engine.

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

I would have no problem running 5w30 all the way to 15w40 in that old of an engine. Lighter weights are good for winter and emissions. Heavy weights won't hurt it.

I worked at an oil field company for a short time. The mechanics there specified 15w40 in all new vehicles they bought, mostly Dodge gas engines that called for 5w20. I don't have any idea if it was a good policy. Maybe those engines may have consumed more fuel but probably lasted longer...

 

[19Walt93]

5W30 isn't "super thin oil", it never gets thinner when hot than a straight 30 weight oil would, it just flows better when cold. 10w40 is an obsolete formula, though it's probably OK in a Lima 2.3. 15w40 would flow poorly at low temps. Other than zinc additive when breaking in a new flat tappet cam, I never dump anything into my oil.
Are you trusting the factory bimetal gauge? If so, put a real oil pressure gauge on it to see what you really have before getting too involved.
There is such a thing as oil that's too thick. Our old body shop manager ran 10w40 in his 5.4 3 valve. After he had to replace the cam phasers for the second time he took my advice and switched to 5w30.

 

[pentode]

5W30 isn't "super thin oil", it never gets thinner when hot than a straight 30 weight oil would, it just flows better when cold. 10w40 is an obsolete formula, though it's probably OK in a Lima 2.3. 15w40 would flow poorly at low temps. Other than zinc additive when breaking in a new flat tappet cam, I never dump anything into my oil.
Are you trusting the factory bimetal gauge? If so, put a real oil pressure gauge on it to see what you really have before getting too involved.
There is such a thing as oil that's too thick. Our old body shop manager ran 10w40 in his 5.4 3 valve. After he had to replace the cam phasers for the second time he took my advice and switched to 5w30.

For my part, if I wasn't clear, I would only deviate from the manufacturer's spec as a last resort for a tired old engine. It just happens that other than my Ranger, all my cars are over 35 years old and actually spec 15W40.
As to the "super thin" comment -poor word choice- I just meant that if the seals or rings are gone, you're probably going to burn more 5w30 off than 15w40. Again, talking about an engine on its last legs, if in fact that's the case here.

 

[19Walt93]

The last motor oil spec sheet we got from Ford before I retired in 2017 showed 5w30 as recommended for every gas engine 93 or earlier.

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

5W30 isn't "super thin oil", it never gets thinner when hot than a straight 30 weight oil would, it just flows better when cold. 10w40 is an obsolete formula, though it's probably OK in a Lima 2.3. 15w40 would flow poorly at low temps. Other than zinc additive when breaking in a new flat tappet cam, I never dump anything into my oil.
Are you trusting the factory bimetal gauge? If so, put a real oil pressure gauge on it to see what you really have before getting too involved.
There is such a thing as oil that's too thick. Our old body shop manager ran 10w40 in his 5.4 3 valve. After he had to replace the cam phasers for the second time he took my advice and switched to 5w30.

Funny enough, I was able to keep my 2004 5.4L going for an extra year by using thicker oil. I never tore it down but the person that bought it replaced the phazers. My research led me to a failing seal, something to do with the phazers, and using thicker oil hid the problem... for about a year. Then it got too bad to drive. I bought the truck knowing it had phazer problems for $1,000 and sold it for the same price. I had put in an analog oil pressure gauge and when it dropped below (iirc) 20 psi is when problems showed.

 

[kishy]

On the whole "5W30 not thinner than 10W30" at normal temperatures:

Varying by brand and exact product line, 5W30 in general is more readily burnt in a worn engine with oil consumption issues than 10W30 is. The 30 is the same, so why would this be?

This is a phenomenon I've noticed with my own vehicles, and thought had to be impossible, and then is something I've heard other people say as well, which caused me to do some searching on the topic. As I understand it (which is limited), there is a volatility factor called NOACK which relates to how easily an oil can vapourize. This volatility gets worse the wider the spread is between the two viscosities (e.g. the difference between 5 and 30, vs the difference between 10 and 30).

So, for example, I have one 302 V8 that is known to drink oil in general. It's pretty happy with 10W30, but it absolutely drinks 5W30 of the same brand and product line of oil.
For reasons that are irrelevant in this discussion, it's currently running a 5W40 diesel oil, and it is absolutely annihilating the 5W40. Drinks like a fish, and much of it is through the PCV, where vapourized oil would be most prevalent.

When we're talking about an engine that is maybe burning oil (1987 is 37 years ago) and maybe has some sloppy tolerances (suspected reduced oil pressure), I'd probably be running the 10W30 and if it's noisy at cold startup, seasonally change to 5W30 at the start of winter, which is the "old school" approach and is probably pretty similar to what the original owner's manual says to do. Most Ford engines before the mid 90s were specced to take 10W30 unless the outdoor temperature is regularly below a certain number, at which point they were supposed to take 5W30, and I'm almost positive my 1985 Ranger manual says that.

edit: I'm aware this is the Mazda-specific subforum and Mazda may have specced differently than Ford at that time - but some of these general principles are pretty universal. It is unclear to me what engine the OP's truck has though, because I don't think there was a 2.3 in the B-series trucks before the round body trucks where the Ranger and B-series were rebadged cousins of each other.

 

[Rebecca Scoffield]

Semantics resolved... I'm guessing if you had a huge leak you'd have mentioned that. If you're burning oil, there might be a few ways to mitigate that temporarily. I'm sure some on here will have different opinions but I'd suggest not bothering to dump super thin oil into it. Maybe bump it up to 10W40 or 15W40 if you get to the point you find it's a really tired engine.

It's never burned oil until I did this oil change what I have now after putting the stabilizer in it is oil pressure when I push the gas but none when I let it off so I guess I'm tearing the oil pan off this weekend and seeing off the blue devil clogged up the screen. If not then I'm gonna be trying to find a pump. Probably will anyways since I'll have it open.

 

[19Walt93]

Oil pumps rarely fail, if the engine has sludge in it the releif valve can stick open and drop pressure. If it looks clean I'd pull a couple of bearing caps and take a look.

 

[Rebecca Scoffield]

On the whole "5W30 not thinner than 10W30" at normal temperatures:

Varying by brand and exact product line, 5W30 in general is more readily burnt in a worn engine with oil consumption issues than 10W30 is. The 30 is the same, so why would this be?

This is a phenomenon I've noticed with my own vehicles, and thought had to be impossible, and then is something I've heard other people say as well, which caused me to do some searching on the topic. As I understand it (which is limited), there is a volatility factor called NOACK which relates to how easily an oil can vapourize. This volatility gets worse the wider the spread is between the two viscosities (e.g. the difference between 5 and 30, vs the difference between 10 and 30).

So, for example, I have one 302 V8 that is known to drink oil in general. It's pretty happy with 10W30, but it absolutely drinks 5W30 of the same brand and product line of oil.
For reasons that are irrelevant in this discussion, it's currently running a 5W40 diesel oil, and it is absolutely annihilating the 5W40. Drinks like a fish, and much of it is through the PCV, where vapourized oil would be most prevalent.

When we're talking about an engine that is maybe burning oil (1987 is 37 years ago) and maybe has some sloppy tolerances (suspected reduced oil pressure), I'd probably be running the 10W30 and if it's noisy at cold startup, seasonally change to 5W30 at the start of winter, which is the "old school" approach and is probably pretty similar to what the original owner's manual says to do. Most Ford engines before the mid 90s were specced to take 10W30 unless the outdoor temperature is regularly below a certain number, at which point they were supposed to take 5W30, and I'm almost positive my 1985 Ranger manual says that.

edit: I'm aware this is the Mazda-specific subforum and Mazda may have specced differently than Ford at that time - but some of these general principles are pretty universal. It is unclear to me what engine the OP's truck has though, because I don't think there was a 2.3 in the B-series trucks before the round body trucks where the Ranger and B-series were rebadged cousins of each other.

I was told it Is a Mazda one. Don't have the manual and I'm also sure other stuff has been swapped out on it. For example the slave cylinder that comes up for an 87 isn't the right one for my truck. But ya. I'm still fighting the oil pressure so after that I'll do the other oil. The engine honestly has sounded great. It's just this