0w-16 Pour Point: Mobil 1 Vs. Amsoil Vs. HPL

[Sienna dude]

Yes, pour point depressant

So that's the thing; Mobil is using more of that stuff. Close this thread please, I got excited over nothing.

 

[wemay]

You really can't go wrong with any of those oils.

 

[Sienna dude]

It is all @buster's fault

 

[facility1]

the world of engine oils has changed since 2019 and so have the demands on oils ,,and Mobil has had reformulated many times in recent times, but still meet specs not so much as exceed like in past, along with other engine oil formulators, its a very competive market. Money talks......

 

[wemay]

Exactly, a lot has changed since 2019.

 

[Tom NJ]

Reproducibility for the pour point test by ASTM D97-17b is 6°C, meaning results from two different labs that disagree by up to 6°C are considered acceptable. In addition, different companies may choose different approaches in reporting their pour point, such as production average, production mean, initial development results, best result, most conservative result, etc.

Trying to determine the base oil composition by comparing data sheet reported pour points is more guess work than science.

 

[Astro14]

Please translate it to English, PAO or no PAO?

Let’s translate it to logic - can you judge the quality of an oil by the PAO percentage?

There are other base stocks, each with important qualities, like the solubility of additives, cleaning, etc. PAO matters, but so does everything else in the formulation.

Let’s focus on the overall performance of the final blend, not on the percentage of one ingredient.

In other words, instead of trying to figure out how much sugar is in the recipe, let’s ask: how does the cake taste?

 

[buster]

AN's can reduce pour point a bit if I recall correctly. As Tom said it's guesswork. Some of Amsoil SS PP's are not as low as some of the full blown PAO offerings by HPL. Likely due to some III in the mix maybe.

 

[Patman]

I remember when I first started paying attention to the technical data from the manufacturers I looked at pour point and considered it as a factor in choosing an oil, even though it is rare that the temperature here goes below 0F in the winter. But I was definitely impressed with the very low pour point that German Castrol 0w-30 had, it was so much lower than anything else out there and we all know that it was a very special oil unlike any others, with a very good blend of base oils.

 

[RDY4WAR]

So great pour point doesn't mean great base oil

Who says group III/III+ can't be a great base oil? They have better additive response than PAO with some higher end offerings rivaling PAO in heat tolerance and oxidative stability. (at substantially lower production cost) The only real benefit of PAO is extreme cold which doesn't apply to 98% of the population.

To debate pour points as an indicator of anything is to be penny-wise and pound foolish. If you want to compare oils by their cold weather performance, look at CCS/MRV. Focus less on what an oil is and more on what an oil does.

 

[OVERKILL]

So that's the thing; Mobil is using more of that stuff. Close this thread please, I got excited over nothing.

That's not how PPD's work, you can't make Group II/III/III+ behave like PAO by just adding more PPD's. PPD's push down the temperature that wax crystals form in waxy base oils, which includes all conventional and hydrocracked/hydroprocessed synthetic bases. PAO, being a manually "constructed" product, contains no wax, so there's nothing to crystalize, which is why PAO's viscosity curve is so different from other base oils, and why it has the cold temperature performance advantage it does.

However, GTL has considerably less wax than more traditional Group III's, which means it responds better to pour point depressants. So, when you are dealing with an extremely light GTL base oil, like the Pearl 4cSt GTL product, which already has a pour point below -30C to start:

You are able to push the pour point of the finished product down to say -51C:

This of course still isn't as low as a comparable 4cSt PAO, which has a pour point of -66C:

Which is how you get a product with a pour point of -63C:

And the fact that this is not PAO but GTL should in no way discourage the use of these products. In fact, it's impressive how much closer to PAO-level performance Shell is able to get with these base oils, compared to previous Group III bases like Yubase.

 

[Sienna dude]

Let’s translate it to logic - can you judge the quality of an oil by the PAO percentage?

There are other base stocks, each with important qualities, like the solubility of additives, cleaning, etc. PAO matters, but so does everything else in the formulation.

Let’s focus on the overall performance of the final blend, not on the percentage of one ingredient.

In other words, instead of trying to figure out how much sugar is in the recipe, let’s ask: how does the cake taste?

Yes but it feels good that your cake has Tualang honey in it and not corn syrup

 

[Sienna dude]

That's not how PPD's work, you can't make Group II/III/III+ behave like PAO by just adding more PPD's. PPD's push down the temperature that wax crystals form in waxy base oils, which includes all conventional and hydrocracked/hydroprocessed synthetic bases. PAO, being a manually "constructed" product, contains no wax, so there's nothing to crystalize, which is why PAO's viscosity curve is so different from other base oils, and why it has the cold temperature performance advantage it does.

However, GTL has considerably less wax than more traditional Group III's, which means it responds better to pour point depressants. So, when you are dealing with an extremely light GTL base oil, like the Pearl 4cSt GTL product, which already has a pour point below -30C to start:
View attachment 287785

You are able to push the pour point of the finished product down to say -51C:
View attachment 287786
View attachment 287787

This of course still isn't as low as a comparable 4cSt PAO, which has a pour point of -66C:
View attachment 287788

Which is how you get a product with a pour point of -63C:
View attachment 287790

And the fact that this is not PAO but GTL should in no way discourage the use of these products. In fact, it's impressive how much closer to PAO-level performance Shell is able to get with these base oils, compared to previous Group III bases like Yubase.

Feeling good about my Ultra Platinum stash lol. Does Mobil get GTL from Shell?

 

[ltslimjim]

Yes, but what is that ingredient?

Also, all three are D97 and D92, exact tests, nothing different.


View attachment 287747View attachment 287748View attachment 287749

Just comparing the two boutiques…

HPL PP has a lower cSt at 40c and 100, so perhaps the oil in general appears to be thinner; which may help the pour point at the colder temp. (Slightly different base oil combinations along with VII, hard to know the percentages let alone the recipe)

OTOH, the Amsoil has a superior CCS, which tends to matter more for engine starting in cold weather.

I doubt either oil would have much difference in most operating conditions.

 

[OVERKILL]

Feeling good about my Ultra Platinum stash lol. Does Mobil get GTL from Shell?

Yes.

 

[cheesepuffs2]

Does Mobil get GTL from Shell?

Yes.

 

[tired]

Just comparing the two boutiques…

HPL PP has a lower cSt at 40c and 100, so perhaps the oil in general appears to be thinner; which may help the pour point at the colder temp. (Slightly different base oil combinations along with VII, hard to know the percentages let alone the recipe)

OTOH, the Amsoil has a superior CCS, which tends to matter more for engine starting in cold weather.

I doubt either oil would have much difference in most operating conditions.

On that note of comparing, one thing I have found interesting just from reading reports on here, is that HPL has an amazing cleaning ability that seems unrivaled except by VRP (and even then not as aggressively). Amsoil seems to have a proven ability to keep engines clean and working well for 500k miles (and beyond) but I have not seen the same cleaning reports with Amsoil. There's no warning from them that switching to their oil may carbon load your filter in a few thousand miles and put it in bypass. Maybe they have to formulate their oil to prevent too rapid of cleaning because it's used much more commonly and by normies than HPL us used. HPL is probably restricted to us oil nerds here and their government and racing contracts.

I haven't seen an explanation for why that is. Is it the AN use by HPL?

 

[Hohn]

So great pour point doesn't mean great base oil

TGMO, anyone?

 

[thetricky]

On that note of comparing, one thing I have found interesting just from reading reports on here, is that HPL has an amazing cleaning ability that seems unrivaled except by VRP (and even then not as aggressively). Amsoil seems to have a proven ability to keep engines clean and working well for 500k miles (and beyond) but I have not seen the same cleaning reports with Amsoil. There's no warning from them that switching to their oil may carbon load your filter in a few thousand miles and put it in bypass. Maybe they have to formulate their oil to prevent too rapid of cleaning because it's used much more commonly and by normies than HPL us used. HPL is probably restricted to us oil nerds here and their government and racing contracts.

I haven't seen an explanation for why that is. Is it the AN use by HPL?

In my own experience I do believe Amsoil SS cleans, even though they don’t say it. I used it in my outback for awhile then switched to HPL and started cutting filters, which showed little to get excited about. My truck on the other hand, showed decent carbon bits after running HPL for a bit, which was filled with Wally world specials for 175k. This is in no way scientific, it is tell to me though.

 

[tired]

In my own experience I do believe Amsoil SS cleans, even though they don’t say it. I used it in my outback for awhile then switched to HPL and started cutting filters, which showed little to get excited about. My truck on the other hand, showed decent carbon bits after running HPL for a bit, which was filled with Wally world specials for 175k. This is in no way scientific, it is tell to me though.

I just haven't seen the same reports for Amsoil loading up filters like HPL does. If you search, there really aren't dramatic results for cleaning. Maybe I just haven't seen them. Based on what I've seen, it definitely seems to keep engines really clean and working well. My local Amsoil dealer just sent out a newsletter with a story on a 750k or 1 million mile (can't remember now) Suburban on Amsoil. Countless reports of clean engines on it.