10W-40 and Energy Conserving, GF-5 and SN rating

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Nederlander75
I had 20w50 shear down to >13cst in 2,500 miles I think.


My car sheared RP 20W50 in 3200 miles.
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: fpracha
So back to the 15W-40 again... do these oils leave VII deposits or much more of other types of deposits?
In your experience are these deposits mainly generated during much extended drain intervals or even during shorter drain intervals ?
And will these 15W-40 oils cause the sluggishness and poor fuel economy due to original viscosity being thicker, OR due to the deposits they leave in engines?
With synthetic oil, deposits could only be a worry in turbocharged engines.

Coming back to my experience, switching from 15W-40 HDEO to first 5W-20 dino and then 0W-20 synthetic, I am seeing the best performance with the 0W-20 synthetic. I think the thinner synthetic has really cleaned the engine and it's also giving better performance due to lower HTHS viscosity. The engine is certainly running smooth, but in most part it's thanks to good maintenance, especially of the carburetor and emissions. Note that I wouldn't be able to make the switch to a thinner oil if I hadn't replaced the valve-stem oil seals because the oil consumption would be too high. Before then I was adding about 1 quart every 1,000 miles and with 0W-20 I would have to add about a quart every 250 miles. Now, the oil consumption is almost zero.

OK thanks
smile.gif

But are the Synthetic 5W-20's not good enough in comparison to the synthetic 0W-20's ?
I was looking at the below, seems really close to a synthetic 0W-20 oil but put forward as a 5W-20 by the manufacturer:

Monolec® Tetra-Syn™ Engine Oil 8521
SAE Grade .......... 5W-20
Density(60ºF/60ºF).. 0.850
Visc 100°C, cSt .... 8.46 typical
Visc 40°C, cSt .... 44.72 typical
Viscosity Index ... 171
FP °C(°F) ......... 215.6 (420)
PP °C(°F) ......... -42 (-43.6)
Acidity mg KOH/g .... 2.55
TBN ................. 7.59

LINK: A full synthetic SAE 5W-20 gasoline engine oil passenger cars and light duty trucks

Does this look like a 0W-20 to you ? All comments welcome, thanks!
 
Originally Posted By: fpracha
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: fpracha
So back to the 15W-40 again... do these oils leave VII deposits or much more of other types of deposits?
In your experience are these deposits mainly generated during much extended drain intervals or even during shorter drain intervals ?
And will these 15W-40 oils cause the sluggishness and poor fuel economy due to original viscosity being thicker, OR due to the deposits they leave in engines?
With synthetic oil, deposits could only be a worry in turbocharged engines.

Coming back to my experience, switching from 15W-40 HDEO to first 5W-20 dino and then 0W-20 synthetic, I am seeing the best performance with the 0W-20 synthetic. I think the thinner synthetic has really cleaned the engine and it's also giving better performance due to lower HTHS viscosity. The engine is certainly running smooth, but in most part it's thanks to good maintenance, especially of the carburetor and emissions. Note that I wouldn't be able to make the switch to a thinner oil if I hadn't replaced the valve-stem oil seals because the oil consumption would be too high. Before then I was adding about 1 quart every 1,000 miles and with 0W-20 I would have to add about a quart every 250 miles. Now, the oil consumption is almost zero.

OK thanks
smile.gif

But are the Synthetic 5W-20's not good enough in comparison to the synthetic 0W-20's ?
I was looking at the below, seems really close to a synthetic 0W-20 oil but put forward as a 5W-20 by the manufacturer:

Monolec® Tetra-Syn™ Engine Oil 8521
SAE Grade .......... 5W-20
Density(60ºF/60ºF).. 0.850
Visc 100°C, cSt .... 8.46 typical
Visc 40°C, cSt .... 44.72 typical
Viscosity Index ... 171
FP °C(°F) ......... 215.6 (420)
PP °C(°F) ......... -42 (-43.6)
Acidity mg KOH/g .... 2.55
TBN ................. 7.59

LINK: A full synthetic SAE 5W-20 gasoline engine oil passenger cars and light duty trucks

Does this look like a 0W-20 to you ? All comments welcome, thanks!

Well, the x in xW-y only refers to the really cold temperatures (such as -20 C, -40 C, etc.) and the y refers to 100 C. The temperatures in between (such as 40 C, 20 C) are not part of the SAE xW-y viscosity specs. Therefore, you cannot really tell anything by looking at the 40 C number.

That said, 0W-20 oils should usually run thinner than 5W-20 at temperatures such as 20 C, 40 C, etc. because they usually have a higher viscosity index. In fact, the definition of the viscosity index is a look-up table involving the 40 C and 100 C viscosities (you can use online calculators to calculate the viscosity index from the 40 C and 100 C viscosities). Having a high viscosity index oil, such as Toyota 0W-20 SN, Eneos 0W-20, etc., will ensure that you have an oil that runs still as thin as possible when the engine is cold, which is always a good thing.

All said, this oil doesn't have a high viscosity index. It certainly looks like a 5W-y, not 0W-y, but again only the really cold specs can tell that. But then the pour point looks like a 5W-y as well. Toyota and Eneos 0W-20 are well over 200 in viscosity index.

This is not to say that 0W-20 is superior to 5W-20 in all ways. It's definitely superior in viscosity characteristics -- you want the highest viscosity index possible for best fuel economy and engine protection with a cold engine. But then 0W-20 is more volatile than 5W-20 because it uses thinner base oil, which could increase oil consumption and high-temperature deposit formation.
 
Do you also consider group-3 oils as "dino" 5W-20?

Then again are all your above comments regarding "synthetic" 5W-20 vs 0W-20, or is it all the same with Dino 5W-20 vs 0W-20 too?
 
Originally Posted By: fpracha
Do you also consider group-3 oils as "dino" 5W-20?

Then again are all your above comments regarding "synthetic" 5W-20 vs 0W-20, or is it all the same with Dino 5W-20 vs 0W-20 too?

When oil people say dino, they refer to Group II+ and below. Many Group III oils also have Group IV and V in the mix anyway. In US, Group III and above oils can be labeled fully synthetic and that's good enough for most people.

My comments are general comments regarding SAE viscosity specs and the definition and meaning of viscosity index -- they don't refer to dino or synthetic base oils in particular. But then, it's impossible to make a 0W-x oil out of dino basestocks because it would fail to satisfy the NOACK-volatility requirement (usually 15% minimum, less for certain applications, such as dexos1, MB, CJ-4, etc.). Dino base oil that thin at low temperatures (0W-x thin) has very high NOACK volatility.
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Therefore, as for as VII deposits are concerns, which could lead to sludge, I would most worry about 10W-40. In fact, I believe GM explicitly recommended against 10W-40 in the early days precisely for this reason.


I was under the same impression about 10W40's but then how do you explain that in this 400C temperature test , 10W40's were the best performers?
http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

from here:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2698936&page=1
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: yannis
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Therefore, as for as VII deposits are concerns, which could lead to sludge, I would most worry about 10W-40. In fact, I believe GM explicitly recommended against 10W-40 in the early days precisely for this reason.


I was under the same impression about 10W40's but then how do you explain that in this 400C temperature test , 10W40's were the best performers?
http://bmwservice.livejournal.com/27699.html

from here:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2698936&page=1

Great, exhaustive empirical study, thanks! I will bookmark it.

It confirms that the high-temperature deposits are determined by these four things:

(1) Quality of the base oil (Group IV and perhaps also V being best, and II being worst [I being awful]).

(2) NOACK volatility (the lower the NOACK volatility being best by reducing the drying up of the oil, which translates as thicker the oil being best, especially the x being thicker in xW-y).

(3) Quality of the viscosity-index-modifier polymers being used.

(4) Amount of the viscosity-index polymers (VIIs) being used (the higher the spread between x and y in xW-y, the more the viscosity-index-improver polymers and the more the resulting sludge being formed by these polymers sticking together in clusters).

As far as 10W-40s you mentioned are concerned, they are fully synthetic oils and therefore have very low NOACK and a very low concentration of VIIs, amounting to very little deposit formation. I was referring to dino (Group II+, II, and I) 10W-40.

Nicely, the dino 15W-40s did well in these tests because of their low NOACK volatility and modest VII usage.

It's also interesting that the 5W-40s in the study did not do too well. Apparently 5W-40s use cheaper base oil and VIIs than the more expensive 0W-40s. Food for thought...

Moral of the study: You will be OK with quality synthetics as far as deposit formation is concerned but if you have a demanding application such a turbocharger-equipped engine, stay away from the thinnest grades such as 0W-20. 0W-40 or a quality fully synthetic 5W-30 (perhaps also a 0W-30), especially the A3/Bx-type, may work best in such applications.
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan


As far as 10W-40s you mentioned are concerned, they are fully synthetic oils and therefore have very low NOACK and a very low concentration of VIIs, amounting to very little deposit formation. I was referring to dino (Group II+, II, and I) 10W-40.



Only the Russian TATNEFT SAE 10W40 is a PAO.
BP 3000 10W40 , TOTAL QUARTZ 7000 10w40 and Castrol Magnatec 10W40 are cheap semi-synthetics like the 90% of semi's sold in Europe.
In fact BP has another 10W40 which is mostly group 3 and it is called "BP 5000 10W40" .
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: yannis
Originally Posted By: Gokhan


As far as 10W-40s you mentioned are concerned, they are fully synthetic oils and therefore have very low NOACK and a very low concentration of VIIs, amounting to very little deposit formation. I was referring to dino (Group II+, II, and I) 10W-40.



Only the Russian TATNEFT SAE 10W40 is a PAO.
BP 3000 10W40 , TOTAL QUARTZ 7000 10w40 and Castrol Magnatec 10W40 are cheap semi-synthetics like the 90% of semi's sold in Europe.
In fact BP has another 10W40 which is mostly group 3 and it is called "BP 5000 10W40" .

Well, fully synthetic means Group III and above and dino means Group II+ and below. While it's true that Group IV is somewhat superior to Group III, Group III is far superior to Group II+ and shouldn't be considered as a nonsynthetic or dino oil. It's highly processed with very uniform molecular structure and quite different than Group II+ oils, what we call dino on BITOG. Therefore, Group III and especially Group III+ (more processed) oils perform very similar to Group IV. In US, Group III and above oils can be legally labeled as fully synthetic.

Total Quartz 7000 10W-40 is fully synthetic according to the manufacturer's Web site.

Moreover, GTL base oils are currently being introduced and they will be a whole new story.
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan

Total Quartz 7000 10W-40 is fully synthetic according to the manufacturer's Web site.


I copy-paste from the same page you posted above:
"The base oil used for the TOTAL QUARTZ 7000 product range is a mix of mineral-based oils and synthetic oils"

Let me show you the MSDS of total 7000 here:
http://www.quickfds.com/out/16407-78933-16127-011075.pdf
3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Product containing mineral oil with less than 3% DMSO extract as measured by IP 346

I may not post a lot but i am a member here since 2003 and i know the differances between base oils.
 
Originally Posted By: yannis
Originally Posted By: Gokhan

Total Quartz 7000 10W-40 is fully synthetic according to the manufacturer's Web site.


I copy-paste from the same page you posted above:
"The base oil used for the TOTAL QUARTZ 7000 product range is a mix of mineral-based oils and synthetic oils"

Let me show you the MSDS of total 7000 here:
http://www.quickfds.com/out/16407-78933-16127-011075.pdf
3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Product containing mineral oil with less than 3% DMSO extract as measured by IP 346

I may not post a lot but i am a member here since 2003 and i know the differances between base oils.

On the same Web page I linked, on the top right corner, it says:

"TOTAL QUARTZ 7000 10W-40 -- 100% synthetic lubricant, TOTAL technology, very high performances dedicated to the lubrication of Gasoline and Diesel passengers cars engines."

It's apparently Group III, which can be labeled as fully synthetic for all legal purposes. It also says synthetic in the datasheet provided.

You can't really tell anything from the MSDS. They are meant to be very general information only for safety purposes, not a detailed list of the ingredients. In one MSDS it says severely refined mineral oil, which probably means Group III, and in another one it just says mineral oil, which can be either Group II or III, but it really doesn't matter because it's only an MSDS.

The long story short, the evidence is clearly indicating that this oil is Group III or above. Group III can be legally labeled synthetic but Group II+ can't be. If you look at the picture, the label on the oil says "Synthetic Based" and if there was any Group II+ (what we call dino) included in the base oil, they would be in legal trouble.
 
Originally Posted By: yannis
Its pour point is very weak for a group 3 compared with
total classic 10W40

total 10W40

That's obviously a typo. 10W-x oils must be tested for pumping viscosity at -30 C; so, the pour point needs to be well above that. Chances are that when the guy was typing it, he accidentally interchanged 2 and 4 and they both have the same pour point, which is 42 C.

This Russian test is a good evidence for that Group III fully synthetic oils can match or even outperform Group IV fully synthetic oils in protection against high-temperature deposits. The low NOACK volatility of the 10W-x viscosity grade, good oxidation properties of the Group III base oil, along with its high viscosity index, which allowed the use of minimal amount of viscosity-index-modifier polymers, resulted in one of the least high-temperature deposits among all oils tested.
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
That's obviously a typo. 10W-x oils must be tested for pumping viscosity at -30 C; so, the pour point needs to be well above that. Chances are that when the guy was typing it, he accidentally interchanged 2 and 4 and they both have the same pour point, which is 42 C.

In fact, he did the same kind of typo twice in the same sentence some other place in the datasheet. lol

"Real Long-trem wear protection of engine parts (distribution, ring, plunger and liner) increasign engine life"
 
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: yannis
Gokhan said:
Therefore, as for as VII deposits are concerns, which could lead to sludge, I would most worry about 10W-40. In fact, I believe GM explicitly recommended against 10W-40 in the early days precisely for this reason.


It's also interesting that the 5W-40s in the study did not do too well. Apparently 5W-40s use cheaper base oil and VIIs than the more expensive 0W-40s. Food for thought...

Moral of the study: You will be OK with quality synthetics as far as deposit formation is concerned but if you have a demanding application such a turbocharger-equipped engine, stay away from the thinnest grades such as 0W-20. 0W-40 or a quality fully synthetic 5W-30 (perhaps also a 0W-30), especially the A3/Bx-type, may work best in such applications.

Then in this respect (your statement to use 0w40 or 5w30 and not 0w20),
would you agree that a decent 5w20 grade like one identified above will be an equal contender to the 5w30 grade and far superior to the 0w20 grades in terms of high-temperature deposits ?
Will these decent quality 5w20 grade oils not have nearly similar oil consumption as the 5w30 grade oils, and less than the 0w20 grade oils?
Is NOACK the only determining parameter for how much oil consumption will happen for a given engine oil ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top