Quote:
Some of Valvoline's SAE 30 specs are better:
VI = 113
Pour Point = -17F
I'm having a hard time believing that Valvoline is not using at least some VII's -- with a VI that is up around 113. Schaeffers 7000 (mixed with PAO) only has a VI of 105.
This thread is certainly interesting. I could see a straight grade Group I outperforming a multi-grade Group I, but what about against a modern Group II?
I've seen evidence suggesting that Group II's can outperform Group I's substantially when it comes to wear. This is where Group II/III oils seem to excel -- which is probably why the UOA's with conventional (Grp II) show such good wear characteristics (if one goes by the UOA's). We see modern Group II's performing as well as synthetics (and perhaps better than some PAO based motor oils like Mobil 1).
In this test (Cummins M11 see page 17)
Global Base Oil Product Trends.pdf the crosshead wear on the Group II based oil was less than half that of the Group I base oil.
In this test, the EHC (Group II from Exxonmobil) had substantially less wear than the Group I (see table 10 and 11 near bottom of page) …
patentstorm … …
Table 10
………………………………… … … … … Grp…. I … II
Avg. Cam + Lifter Wear, microns … 15.4 … 9 … 30 Max.
Cam + Lifter Wear, microns … ….. …74 … 20 … 64
Table 11
Avg. Cam Wear, microns…………… 83.6 … 18 … 130 max
Max. Cam Wear, microns ………….. 231 … 27 …. 380 max