0w-20 and VII use

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: car51
Daily driver: ya' lost me with the M1 0w40 thing. Can u elaborate please?

Thanks


I was thinking about mixing the M1 0W-40, with the M1 EP 0W-20, instead of the 'usual' (for the 'CATERHAM blend' users around here) mix with the TGMO, for my coming winter OCI, as that would yield a MUCH higher starting TBN.


And you'd be mixing two PAO-based oils rather than a PAO-based oil with one that is entirely Group III (TGMO).
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: car51
Daily driver: ya' lost me with the M1 0w40 thing. Can u elaborate please?

Thanks


I was thinking about mixing the M1 0W-40, with the M1 EP 0W-20, instead of the 'usual' (for the 'CATERHAM blend' users around here) mix with the TGMO, for my coming winter OCI, as that would yield a MUCH higher starting TBN.


EP and 0w40 use an entirely different detergent system. I wouldn't do it.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: car51
Daily driver: ya' lost me with the M1 0w40 thing. Can u elaborate please?

Thanks


I was thinking about mixing the M1 0W-40, with the M1 EP 0W-20, instead of the 'usual' (for the 'CATERHAM blend' users around here) mix with the TGMO, for my coming winter OCI, as that would yield a MUCH higher starting TBN.


And you'd be mixing two PAO-based oils rather than a PAO-based oil with one that is entirely Group III (TGMO).


Except the SN version of M1 0W-40 is 100% GP III based.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
The Mobil made, U.S. TGMO's starting TBN cannot touch the M1 EP 0W-20's starting TBN though, correct?

(Thinking about winter OCI, short trip fuel dilution/moisture & acid buildup resisting, high TBN as taking precedent over ultimate V.I., when mixed with M1 0W-40.
wink.gif
)

Maybe.
There's only one way to know the actual TBN depletion rate of an oil and that's try it. And for Sustina users remember that oil uses a sulfur free ZP AW molecule that reduces acid formation and therefore the rate by which TBN is depleted.
 
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Except the SN version of M1 0W-40 is 100% GP III based.


I'm not seeing that M1 0W-40 is 100% GP III from the last discussion on this topic:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3856508/1

The version made in Europe may still be PAO based but the US made SN version is GP III based. The last SM version that up until recently we could still get in Canada was PAO based with a 21,000cP MRV. The 35,000cP MRV of the current SN oil is indicative of a GP III based oil.

There was a big BITOG discussion years ago when the SN oil first hit the market about the move away from a PAO based oil and a Mobil paper was part of that discussion with the performance differences of the two formulations. Sorry I can't find it but from memory the only disadvantages of the GP III SN oil was a drop in the extreme cold performance and a slight increase in high temp' oxidation.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
And for Sustina users remember that oil uses a sulfur free ZP AW molecule that reduces acid formation and therefore the rate by which TBN is depleted.


Yes, and of course then I also get the high starting TBN (at least the TBN claimed by Eneos
21.gif
), to go with the sky high VI, and bring up the somewhat mediocre VI of the M1 0W-40 in the mix, without lowering the overall TBN.

I was just trying to avoid the hassle of ordering the Sustina yet again online (IF any place actually has it in stock at the time I need it, most, including amazon do NOT), AND the cost of the product and shipping (best I've seen is `$85.00 for a 6 quart pack shipped).

I WISH that Altrom/NAPAs would start having this stuff available already.
frown.gif
 
M1 0w40 is a global formulation and should be the same everywhere. I do no think it's group III based, based on the NOACK volatility. If it is, it must be using some high end Group V base oils in order to meet such a high level of performance. As I've said before, it's interesting to note that their wording for this oil includes "Ultra" high end base oils.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
The version made in Europe may still be PAO based but the US made SN version is GP III based. The last SM version that up until recently we could still get in Canada was PAO based with a 21,000cP MRV. The 35,000cP MRV of the current SN oil is indicative of a GP III based oil.

There was a big BITOG discussion years ago when the SN oil first hit the market about the move away from a PAO based oil and a Mobil paper was part of that discussion with the performance differences of the two formulations. Sorry I can't find it but from memory the only disadvantages of the GP III SN oil was a drop in the extreme cold performance and a slight increase in high temp' oxidation.


You mean this presentation?

www.motor-talk.de/forum/aktion/Attachment.html?attachmentId=695007

And your "facts" are not correct. It never was "all Visom", always a blend. And that presentation is likely out of date in regards to the current formulation - which by a reading of the MSDS tea leaves points to being a majority PAO.
 
If I had to guess, based on MSDS and Mobil's terminology, the 0w40 is a blend of Group III+/PAO and a good slug of group V.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: car51
Daily driver: ya' lost me with the M1 0w40 thing. Can u elaborate please?

Thanks


I was thinking about mixing the M1 0W-40, with the M1 EP 0W-20, instead of the 'usual' (for the 'CATERHAM blend' users around here) mix with the TGMO, for my coming winter OCI, as that would yield a MUCH higher starting TBN.


EP and 0w40 use an entirely different detergent system. I wouldn't do it.


+1
 
JHZR2, to gain a "feel" for how the oils are built, you could try the Harmann Shear Stability Index.

Use a VI calculator to calculate the KV150, then use density to turn that into the guestimated Low Shear Cp at 150C.

density calculator http://planetcalc.com/2834/

Newtonian oils (like Ravenol's 0W16) have much less (virtually nil) impact from VII, and more effect from the base oils, displaying much closer to Newtonian than some of the lubes out there.

(Personally, I'd take Ravenol 0W16 over some of the OEM 0W20s in a heartbeat)
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
The version made in Europe may still be PAO based but the US made SN version is GP III based. The last SM version that up until recently we could still get in Canada was PAO based with a 21,000cP MRV. The 35,000cP MRV of the current SN oil is indicative of a GP III based oil.

There was a big BITOG discussion years ago when the SN oil first hit the market about the move away from a PAO based oil and a Mobil paper was part of that discussion with the performance differences of the two formulations. Sorry I can't find it but from memory the only disadvantages of the GP III SN oil was a drop in the extreme cold performance and a slight increase in high temp' oxidation.


You mean this presentation?

www.motor-talk.de/forum/aktion/Attachment.html?attachmentId=695007

And your "facts" are not correct. It never was "all Visom", always a blend. And that presentation is likely out of date in regards to the current formulation - which by a reading of the MSDS tea leaves points to being a majority PAO.

Yes that's the piece which I though was very honest on the part of Mobil.
And I never said the current formulation was "all Visom" but GP III based (GP III+ to be precise). Any use of PAO would be as a correction fluid to meet their 0W and other targets that Visom alone isn't capable of.

It's also interesting that Mobil made reference back in 2010 to the GTL oils soon to becoming on stream and Visom was just an intermediate step until that happened. Fast forward to late 2015 and Shell for the most part is keeping their superior GTL GP III+ oils for themselves. There are one or two other minor GTL refineries but AFAIK Mobil isn't using them yet.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Except the SN version of M1 0W-40 is 100% GP III based.


I'm not seeing that M1 0W-40 is 100% GP III from the last discussion on this topic:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3856508/1

The version made in Europe may still be PAO based but the US made SN version is GP III based. The last SM version that up until recently we could still get in Canada was PAO based with a 21,000cP MRV. The 35,000cP MRV of the current SN oil is indicative of a GP III based oil.

There was a big BITOG discussion years ago when the SN oil first hit the market about the move away from a PAO based oil and a Mobil paper was part of that discussion with the performance differences of the two formulations. Sorry I can't find it but from memory the only disadvantages of the GP III SN oil was a drop in the extreme cold performance and a slight increase in high temp' oxidation.


The MSDS for the US M1 0w-40 a few months ago showed 50-60% PAO. Then there was another one even more recently that showed 30-40% God knows what, because the CAS # doesn't directly correspond to anything. Speculation is that the 30-40 is Group III/VISOM. It could also be GTL (Mobil had another plant in the works as of 2011, it was supposed to start producing this year but no update on that actually happening).

The German MSDS (along with a number of others) which is less than a year old shows 50-60% PAO.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Thanks, but I'm trying to get away from generalities. I've tried to find the 0w-20 AFE MSDS without success


It is the one simply labelled "Mobil 1 0w-20" under the MSDS search. The EP product contains the additional EP language.

The AFE 0w-20 currently shows:

Originally Posted By: Mobil

1-DECENE, HOMOPOLYMER HYDROGENATED - CAS#: 68037-01-4 @ 30 - < 40% H304
SEVERELY HYDROTREATED HEAVY PARAFFINIC DISTILLATE - CAS#: 64742-54-7 @ 30 - < 40% H304
SOLVENT DEWAXED HEAVY PARAFFINIC DISTILLATE - CAS#: 64742-65-0 @ 1 - < 5% H304


So 30-40% PAO.

Whilst EP 0w-20 currently shows:

Originally Posted By: Mobil

1-DECENE, HOMOPOLYMER HYDROGENATED - CAS#: 68037-01-4 @ 60 - < 70% H304


OK thanks... Im in no way an expert in reviewing motor oil MSDSs, but was hoping that VII constituents might be listed on there as a way to get a percentage....

Thanks!



Originally Posted By: Solarent
It greatly depends on what cuts and types of PAO is being used, as well as which VII. For Example Exxonmobil Chemical has a product called mPAO Link which is sometimes used to balance out a formulation. Also the type of VII is important. For example I've seen some PAO based 0W20 formulas with as little as 2.5% VII, others with 6-8%. Depending on your desired viscosity curve you can also choose VII that have optimized treat rates (in the 5-7% range) but still hit really high (200+) viscosity index.


The exact amount (Percentage) of Viscosity Modifier used is part of the proprietary formulation and is never divulged.

VII's aren't a bad thing as explained earlier by Solarent.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Has their ever been a GroupIII-only oil that is capable of meeting LL-01, 229.5, A40, a3/b4, and 502 simultaneously?


A40 requires oils to have a 0w40 viscosity I believe, so they're off theradar for me. I'd rather have a 0w30 with a HTHS above 3.5 cP

Gulf Formula GMX 5w-30 is getting there...
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Solarent
It greatly depends on what cuts and types of PAO is being used, as well as which VII. For Example Exxonmobil Chemical has a product called mPAO Link which is sometimes used to balance out a formulation. Also the type of VII is important. For example I've seen some PAO based 0W20 formulas with as little as 2.5% VII, others with 6-8%. Depending on your desired viscosity curve you can also choose VII that have optimized treat rates (in the 5-7% range) but still hit really high (200+) viscosity index.


The exact amount (Percentage) of Viscosity Modifier used is part of the proprietary formulation and is never divulged.

VII's aren't a bad thing as explained earlier by Solarent.


THANK YOU MolaKule (AND Solarent)!
thumbsup2.gif


Most on here seem to think that even small doses of the absolute BEST VIIs out there are the 'devil's work'. LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Learn Ya
Mobil 1 0W-20 AFE Oil Consumption
Replies
18
Views
1K
SubieRubyRoo
Ed_Flecko
HPL 0W-20 vs 5W-20 vs 10W-20
Replies
15
Views
2K
kschachn
D
M1 ESP 0W-30 vs M1 Euro/FS 0W-40
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
buster
R
Can I use 0W-20 in BOTH my cars?
Replies
18
Views
809
rbelloff
Sandstorm
Mobil 1 Advanced Full Synthetic 0W-20
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
cammyfive79
Back
Top Bottom