0W-16 Strength & Durability

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,168
Location
PNW
Two other considerations in other countries. (Europe) They have very stringent air pollution regulations and the oil drain intervals are longer than here. Both favor a different formula oil package with the longer oil drain, the heavier oil needed. It is not the same market.
The OCIs on American cars are always increasing too, while the specified viscosity is going thinner. Just what is the OCI on the same engine in Europe vs the USA?

Another market is American cars sold in Australia. I know for a fact that the Coyote in the Mustang OM has thicker oil specified for it in Australia.

And FYI, Ford just happened to change the specified oil for the American Coyote from 5W-20 to 5W-30.

Also the German Autobahn has no speed limit. Realistically our speed limit, oil drains, are geared to API rated oils.
Agree with the speed limit part. As pointed out in this thread many times, Toyota has a blurb in the OM that thicker oil will give better engine protection for high speed driving ... huuum, so they do know what's going on, but CAFE has some duct tape over their mouth. 😄
 
Last edited:

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,969
Location
Ontario, Canada
Base oil is synthetic with 0w, cannot be group 1 or group 2. I think they can call some synthetic group 3 and GTL is group 3+
Why is that important? The 0w synthetic is the starting base oil viscosity and changing the viscosity index +VII gets you where you need to go at operating temperature. How small the VII can go or how wide the VII can go… well the HTHS is a minimum for your chart at high temperature. And that shows the high end of the VII quality. Since I do not go that high. Really 40 c is over 100 f and the viscosity index improvers are not designed for the most critical part of oil protection, the engine cold start. It really does not matter how low the oil can go and still crank.
The 0w-xx designation is not a base oil viscosity, it's just a temperature performance target, as shown in the chart.

Blending is not as simple as just choosing a base oil that meets the Winter rating (like a 2cSt Group III) and just pumping it full of VII, as there are numerous parameters that must be met in order to satisfy performance targets.

Mobil makes numerous PAO bases that can meet the 0w-xx performance target, in varying viscosities. When blending using them, and other bases, the ones you might use will depend on what the application is. An 8cSt PAO can be blended straight to make a 0w-20 (no VII) for example, but what we see from the VI on the finished products is that this approach isn't taken. AMSOIL famously sold a 10w-30 with no VII for a while, not sure if they still do.


An oil like a Euro 0w-40 has to meet strict Noack limits, which means heavier bases are going to be used vs say a GF-5 0w-30 that can have a Noack of 13% when economics are brought into the picture. You'll see the opposite of that in one of the tables I'll show below where a "no holds barred" approach is taken in blending a PAO + ester 0w-30 which of course has less VII than the similarly blended 0w-40.

We can see some of the Japanese fuel economy OEM lubes used wickedly light bases, which you can tell by the Noack volatility:
Screen Shot 2021-09-06 at 11.05.02 AM.jpg


Here are the Shell GTL bases, you can see that they have excellent CCS values:
Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 10.35.11 PM.jpg


One could blend the 5cSt base with the 8cSt base to get an acceptable 0w-20 for example that would need very little VII.

Here's a Mobil chart showing that you can use a blend of Group II+ and Group III to drive down the cost of your 0w-20:
Screen Shot 2021-08-26 at 6.32.40 PM.jpg


Another few examples from the Mobil blending guide:
Group III with PAO, you can see they use more, lighter PAO in the 0w-40 than the 0w-30 and more VII:
Screen Shot 2019-02-04 at 11.31.42 PM.jpg


PAO with Group II+ this time, similar approach, but more PAO:
Screen Shot 2019-02-04 at 11.32.07 PM.jpg


Straight PAO with 10% ester, clearly a heavier base oil blend than the other two shown above:
Screen Shot 2019-02-04 at 11.31.11 PM.jpg


And another chart that shows that the base oil selection changes depending on the grade (this is just PAO + ester). Now consider that the Noack on M1 0w-40 is actually 8.8% (lower than shown below) and the majority of 0w-20 and 0w-30 lubes on the market are not blended like shown in this table. Because a 0w-20 blended with PAO needs VERY little (or none if you are being adventurous) VII, you can use a base oil blend that gets you extremely close to your hot viscosity target. On the other hand, the 0w-30 and 0w-40 will need more VII for the same type of base oil blend and subsequently need to use a lighter blend as a starting point to retain their cold temperature performance with the VII added.
Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 6.07.34 PM.jpg


As I noted at the beginning, these are "ideal" blends, using expensive bases. In reality, none of the 0w-20 or 0w-30's you buy are going to be blended like the above except maybe M1 EP 0w-20, which is ~70% PAO. They'll be more like the Mobil EHC example with the lighter Group III (and potentially Group II+ added) bases, with PPD's, and a heavier VII treat, and this is typically reflected in the Noack.

That's something Shell has done well with, as their GTL bases have very low Noack numbers, even the light bases. The Japanese oils, like TGMO, with very high VI's, use very light bases and a lot of VII to achieve that high VI. The natural VI of even PAO isn't very high, so how you achieve a "stratospheric" viscosity index is by using very light bases and a high VII treat rate. The 0w-20 in the table above for example has a VI of only 162.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
10,024
Location
California
The 0w-xx designation is not a base oil viscosity, it's just a temperature performance target, as shown in the chart.

Blending is not as simple as just choosing a base oil that meets the Winter rating (like a 2cSt Group III) and just pumping it full of VII, as there are numerous parameters that must be met in order to satisfy performance targets.

Mobil makes numerous PAO bases that can meet the 0w-xx performance target, in varying viscosities. When blending using them, and other bases, the ones you might use will depend on what the application is. An 8cSt PAO can be blended straight to make a 0w-20 (no VII) for example, but what we see from the VI on the finished products is that this approach isn't taken. AMSOIL famously sold a 10w-30 with no VII for a while, not sure if they still do.


An oil like a Euro 0w-40 has to meet strict Noack limits, which means heavier bases are going to be used vs say a GF-5 0w-30 that can have a Noack of 13% when economics are brought into the picture. You'll see the opposite of that in one of the tables I'll show below where a "no holds barred" approach is taken in blending a PAO + ester 0w-30 which of course has less VII than the similarly blended 0w-40.

We can see some of the Japanese fuel economy OEM lubes used wickedly light bases, which you can tell by the Noack volatility:
View attachment 84146

Here are the Shell GTL bases, you can see that they have excellent CCS values:
View attachment 84147

One could blend the 5cSt base with the 8cSt base to get an acceptable 0w-20 for example that would need very little VII.

Here's a Mobil chart showing that you can use a blend of Group II+ and Group III to drive down the cost of your 0w-20:
View attachment 84148

Another few examples from the Mobil blending guide:
Group III with PAO, you can see they use more, lighter PAO in the 0w-40 than the 0w-30 and more VII:
View attachment 84149

PAO with Group II+ this time, similar approach, but more PAO:
View attachment 84150

Straight PAO with 10% ester, clearly a heavier base oil blend than the other two shown above:
View attachment 84151

And another chart that shows that the base oil selection changes depending on the grade (this is just PAO + ester). Now consider that the Noack on M1 0w-40 is actually 8.8% (lower than shown below) and the majority of 0w-20 and 0w-30 lubes on the market are not blended like shown in this table. Because a 0w-20 blended with PAO needs VERY little (or none if you are being adventurous) VII, you can use a base oil blend that gets you extremely close to your hot viscosity target. On the other hand, the 0w-30 and 0w-40 will need more VII for the same type of base oil blend and subsequently need to use a lighter blend as a starting point to retain their cold temperature performance with the VII added.
View attachment 84152

As I noted at the beginning, these are "ideal" blends, using expensive bases. In reality, none of the 0w-20 or 0w-30's you buy are going to be blended like the above except maybe M1 EP 0w-20, which is ~70% PAO. They'll be more like the Mobil EHC example with the lighter Group III (and potentially Group II+ added) bases, with PPD's, and a heavier VII treat, and this is typically reflected in the Noack.

That's something Shell has done well with, as their GTL bases have very low Noack numbers, even the light bases. The Japanese oils, like TGMO, with very high VI's, use very light bases and a lot of VII to achieve that high VI. The natural VI of even PAO isn't very high, so how you achieve a "stratospheric" viscosity index is by using very light bases and a high VII treat rate. The 0w-20 in the table above for example has a VI of only 162.
What I found interesting is that the Toyota Japan 0W-16 has the lowest NOACK, while the rest of the OEM branded oils have high NOACKs which will certainly fail ILSAC and GM dexos testing off the bat. The Japanese seem to love methylacrylate or “star” VIIs which gives their oils high VI numbers - while the American and European blenders seem to use more olefin VIIs(Chevron Oronite being one of the biggest suppliers of it). I’ve read MMA VIIs are also “dirty”, leading to more deposits. Also probably why Idemitsu and Eneos oils aren’t currently D1G2 approved - either they didn’t submit their oil for testing or it failed it.

I know Red Line claims for their “enthusiast” oils(not their repackaged P66/Kendall “professional” line) they use a high amount of POE, which has a naturally high VI value.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
16,131
Location
Kendall, FL
Fuel economy is a lot more important to the vehicle manufacture for hitting the CAFE targets. I highly doubt anyone is really that concerned about the 0.05 MPG difference their vehicle might get if using thin vs thick oil. One large throttle opening to spin the engine up high in RPM during stop and go driving on that tank of gas would smoke any gains seen in using a thinner oil over the length of that tank of gas. Maybe if someone drove on the freeway 95+% of the time (with no traffic) on cruise control where the speed never change, it might be something actually seen when they filled up.
Yes, the bitoger may understand that but an oil producer trying to increase mkt share can sell the idea to the average driver who has no interest in the inner workings of lubrication. And these are at least, actual gains. Not snake oils like some Lucas, STP and ZMAX products. I believe we're underestimating the value of fuel economy.
 

Shel_B

Site Donor 2023
Thread starter
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
3,286
Two other considerations in other countries. (Europe) They have very stringent air pollution regulations and the oil drain intervals are longer than here. Both favor a different formula oil package with the longer oil drain, the heavier oil needed. It is not the same market. Also the German Autobahn has no speed limit. Realistically our speed limit, oil drains, are geared to API rated oils.
There are speed limits on Autobahns (note the plural). Here's a good overview of the subject: http://www.german-autobahn.eu/index.asp?page=speeds

While it's true that there are many miles on these highways that have no limit, making a broad statement as you did that is not factual diminishes what you have to say.
 
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
1,190
Location
So Cal
The 0w-xx designation is not a base oil viscosity, it's just a temperature performance target, as shown in the chart.

Blending is not as simple as just choosing a base oil that meets the Winter rating (like a 2cSt Group III) and just pumping it full of VII, as there are numerous parameters that must be met in order to satisfy performance targets.

Mobil makes numerous PAO bases that can meet the 0w-xx performance target, in varying viscosities. When blending using them, and other bases, the ones you might use will depend on what the application is. An 8cSt PAO can be blended straight to make a 0w-20 (no VII) for example, but what we see from the VI on the finished products is that this approach isn't taken. AMSOIL famously sold a 10w-30 with no VII for a while, not sure if they still do.


An oil like a Euro 0w-40 has to meet strict Noack limits, which means heavier bases are going to be used vs say a GF-5 0w-30 that can have a Noack of 13% when economics are brought into the picture. You'll see the opposite of that in one of the tables I'll show below where a "no holds barred" approach is taken in blending a PAO + ester 0w-30 which of course has less VII than the similarly blended 0w-40.

We can see some of the Japanese fuel economy OEM lubes used wickedly light bases, which you can tell by the Noack volatility:
View attachment 84146

Here are the Shell GTL bases, you can see that they have excellent CCS values:
View attachment 84147

One could blend the 5cSt base with the 8cSt base to get an acceptable 0w-20 for example that would need very little VII.

Here's a Mobil chart showing that you can use a blend of Group II+ and Group III to drive down the cost of your 0w-20:
View attachment 84148

Another few examples from the Mobil blending guide:
Group III with PAO, you can see they use more, lighter PAO in the 0w-40 than the 0w-30 and more VII:
View attachment 84149

PAO with Group II+ this time, similar approach, but more PAO:
View attachment 84150

Straight PAO with 10% ester, clearly a heavier base oil blend than the other two shown above:
View attachment 84151

And another chart that shows that the base oil selection changes depending on the grade (this is just PAO + ester). Now consider that the Noack on M1 0w-40 is actually 8.8% (lower than shown below) and the majority of 0w-20 and 0w-30 lubes on the market are not blended like shown in this table. Because a 0w-20 blended with PAO needs VERY little (or none if you are being adventurous) VII, you can use a base oil blend that gets you extremely close to your hot viscosity target. On the other hand, the 0w-30 and 0w-40 will need more VII for the same type of base oil blend and subsequently need to use a lighter blend as a starting point to retain their cold temperature performance with the VII added.
View attachment 84152

As I noted at the beginning, these are "ideal" blends, using expensive bases. In reality, none of the 0w-20 or 0w-30's you buy are going to be blended like the above except maybe M1 EP 0w-20, which is ~70% PAO. They'll be more like the Mobil EHC example with the lighter Group III (and potentially Group II+ added) bases, with PPD's, and a heavier VII treat, and this is typically reflected in the Noack.

That's something Shell has done well with, as their GTL bases have very low Noack numbers, even the light bases. The Japanese oils, like TGMO, with very high VI's, use very light bases and a lot of VII to achieve that high VI. The natural VI of even PAO isn't very high, so how you achieve a "stratospheric" viscosity index is by using very light bases and a high VII treat rate. The 0w-20 in the table above for example has a VI of only 162.
So… to get the most of your post and thanks for you presentation may I ask a few questions?

Here is what I know about VI. Notice the 0w line. In my view while the scale is made for mineral oil viscosity at a given temperature the 0w can not be made from mineral oil but only reached by synthetic oil.


Another question… according to this video you can get upwards of over 200 VI with PAO group 4 base. How high can you get the GTL base VI?
 
Last edited:

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,969
Location
Ontario, Canada
What I found interesting is that the Toyota Japan 0W-16 has the lowest NOACK, while the rest of the OEM branded oils have high NOACKs which will certainly fail ILSAC and GM dexos testing off the bat. The Japanese seem to love methylacrylate or “star” VIIs which gives their oils high VI numbers - while the American and European blenders seem to use more olefin VIIs(Chevron Oronite being one of the biggest suppliers of it). I’ve read MMA VIIs are also “dirty”, leading to more deposits. Also probably why Idemitsu and Eneos oils aren’t currently D1G2 approved - either they didn’t submit their oil for testing or it failed it.

I know Red Line claims for their “enthusiast” oils(not their repackaged P66/Kendall “professional” line) they use a high amount of POE, which has a naturally high VI value.
Depends on how you qualify "high" and what esters you are talking about (we tend to refer to POE broadly, but I believe that label actually only applies to Polyol esters). Mobil's Adipate Esters have the highest VI's.

Adipate Esters:
Esterex A32 (2.8cSt) is 149
Esterex A34 (3.2cSt) is 137
Esterex A41 (3.6cSt) is 144
Esterex A51 (5.4cSt) is 136

Phthalate Esters:
Esterex P61 (5.4cSt) is 62
Esterex P81 (8.3cSt) is 52

Polyol Esters:
Esterex NP343 (4.3cSt) is 136
Esterex NP451 (5.0cSt) is 130

Trimellitate Esters:
Esterex TM111 (11.9cSt) is 81

Most of the above in the Adipate and Polyol categories are in the same ballpark as ExxonMobil Chemical's SpectraSyn PAO bases.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,969
Location
Ontario, Canada
So… to get the most of your post and thanks for you presentation may I ask a few questions?

Here is what I know about VI. Notice the 0w line. In my view while the scale is made for mineral oil viscosity at a given temperature the 0w can not be made from mineral oil but only reached by synthetic oil.


Another question… according to this video you can get upwards of over 200 VI with PAO group 4 base. How high can you get the GTL base VI?

VI is just a calculated value between two data points (viscosity measured at 40C and 100C) and the VI of the final product is only loosely based on the VI of the bases used.

As I noted, "0W" isn't a base oil, it's just a range defined for CCS and MRV with the limits as shown in J300. When you blend, and you have a target viscosity, you'll know what bases will allow you to meet those targets (as shown in the Mobil blending guide examples) and the selection of bases from that rather large pool will depend on what the performance requirements are of the product you are making.

As you can see, you can blend a 0w-20 using Group II+ and Group III, PAO is absolutely not required.

You can get a VI over 200 using Group III, in fact TGMO is rather well known on this board for being straight Group III (not GTL) and having one of the highest VI's we've seen. I believe it was 214?

Most of the PAO based oils have relatively low VI's, because you can use heavier PAO bases to blend them, which have naturally "high" VI's (in the context of base oils) so you use less VII, which results in a finished product with a lower VI than what one would achieve using lighter bases and blending them with significant VII.

A high VI just means that the difference between the 40C and 100C visc is less (the plot line is more flat). So, you could blend an extremely high VI oil using GTL if you wish (just like you can using Group III or PAO) by using bases on the very light end of the spectrum, but you compromise volatility and will use a lot of VII.

The 0w-40 I'm using in my SRT has a VI of 182. You can see why based on the PAO examples in the turquoise blending guide example I posted. They've used a blend of PAO bases and then added sufficient VII to hit the 100C visc target. The impact of the VII results in a higher VI because the base oil blend is reasonably light.

Ravenol's VSE 0w-20 on the other hand has a VI of only 161. This is because, like shown in the blending guide again, they are able to use heavier PAO bases because they are using very little VII. This results in a finished product with a much lower VI.

Does that make sense?
 
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
1,190
Location
So Cal
VI is just a calculated value between two data points (viscosity measured at 40C and 100C) and the VI of the final product is only loosely based on the VI of the bases used.

As I noted, "0W" isn't a base oil, it's just a range defined for CCS and MRV with the limits as shown in J300. When you blend, and you have a target viscosity, you'll know what bases will allow you to meet those targets (as shown in the Mobil blending guide examples) and the selection of bases from that rather large pool will depend on what the performance requirements are of the product you are making.

As you can see, you can blend a 0w-20 using Group II+ and Group III, PAO is absolutely not required.

You can get a VI over 200 using Group III, in fact TGMO is rather well known on this board for being straight Group III (not GTL) and having one of the highest VI's we've seen. I believe it was 214?

Most of the PAO based oils have relatively low VI's, because you can use heavier PAO bases to blend them, which have naturally "high" VI's (in the context of base oils) so you use less VII, which results in a finished product with a lower VI than what one would achieve using lighter bases and blending them with significant VII.

A high VI just means that the difference between the 40C and 100C visc is less (the plot line is more flat). So, you could blend an extremely high VI oil using GTL if you wish (just like you can using Group III or PAO) by using bases on the very light end of the spectrum, but you compromise volatility and will use a lot of VII.

The 0w-40 I'm using in my SRT has a VI of 182. You can see why based on the PAO examples in the turquoise blending guide example I posted. They've used a blend of PAO bases and then added sufficient VII to hit the 100C visc target. The impact of the VII results in a higher VI because the base oil blend is reasonably light.

Ravenol's VSE 0w-20 on the other hand has a VI of only 161. This is because, like shown in the blending guide again, they are able to use heavier PAO bases because they are using very little VII. This results in a finished product with a much lower VI.

Does that make sense?
TGMO 0w-20 is 227 VI a GTL made by Exxon/Mobil. I am changing my view of this oil that I have been using because of the high VI. (high VII) Not that Noack has anything to do with anything (IVD) but does point to the quality of the base oil. Noack on TGMO is 12.9.
Exxon/Mobil has it’s own lubricating branch. Mobil 1 is separate. You have a SRT, thought you might like to see this video. The oil they factory fill.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top