15W30 base?

Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
5,878
Location
Paramount, California
I've noticed that most tractor supply stores sell 15W30 at a good price around here. I am curious what kind of base is used in this type of oil. Is it possible to make such an oil without using any VII using a group II base? Is it a "modern SAE30"? Here's some date about the most common one, Elf Agritec FE 15W30:

Supposed to provide the best shear resistance according to them.

International standardsACEA E7API CI-4/SL
Manufacturer approvals✓ Cummins CES 20078
✓ Deutz DQC III-10
✓ MB-Approval 228.3
Meets✓ Caterpillar ECF-2/ECF-1-a
✓ Case MS 1121
✓ CNH MAT 3507
✓ Cummins CES 20077/20076
✓ New Holland NH 324H

ELF AGRITEC FE 15W-30UnitTest methodResult
Density at 15°Ckg/m3ASTM D1298883
Viscosity at 40°Cmm2/sASTM D44591
Viscosity at 100°Cmm2/sASTM D44512.5
Viscosity index-ASTM D2270133
Pour point°CASTM D97-30
T.B.NmgKOH/gASTM D289610
Sulphated ash% m/mASTM D8741.5
There is no way with a conventional base oil, as SAE 30 has KV100 ~ 10 cSt. However, it is possible with a PAO/ester base oil. Amsoil used to have a PAO/ester-based SAE 30/SAE 10W-30 oil without VII, which has been discontinued.

 
Joined
Jan 20, 2022
Messages
93
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Messages
5,346
Location
Decatur AL USA
I'm taking a look at a few SAE30, a Fuchs with a VI of 129 and a Motul with a VI of 112 however the ratings scare me a bit, API SF, SG and SJ... Looks like we're far from a modern add pack. Some of them have a TBN over 7 however.

Could be the target market doesn't use emissions aftertreatment and desires high ZDDP so phosphorus is to high for anything post SJ.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2019
Messages
3,870
Location
Muncie, Indiana
They don't alllow the high phosphorus on dual rated 15W-40 anymore. I may be mistaken on the other grades.
That's only if they are dual rated, if an oil claims both a C rating and a S rating it must conform the the resource conserving S-rating limits, however mono grades, Xw40, Xw50, and Xw60, if they only claim an S rating don't have any limit.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Messages
5,346
Location
Decatur AL USA
That's only if they are dual rated, if an oil claims both a C rating and a S rating it must conform the the resource conserving S-rating limits, however mono grades, Xw40, Xw50, and Xw60, if they only claim an S rating don't have any limit.

An xW-40 has to conform to the same S limits as the ILSAC Grades. It doesn't matter if it has a C rating. Again I may have misunderstood on the other grades as I was researching xW-40 specifically.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2019
Messages
3,870
Location
Muncie, Indiana
An xW-40 has to conform to the same S limits as the ILSAC Grades. It doesn't matter if it has a C rating. Again I may have misunderstood on the other grades as I was researching xW-40 specifically.
Go to page 121 in the 1509 doccument and look down the columns, Xw40 would be in the "all other grades" column which has no limit on max phosphorus while any oil claiming API SP Resource Conserving or are non resource conserving but of the viscosity grades "SAE 0W-16, SAE 5W-16, SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 0W-30, SAE 5W-30, SAE 10W-30" have a 0.8% limit by weight of phosphorous. I guess techincally a dual rated oil could continue to exceed the S rating limit upto the C rating limit if it only claims CJ-4 or older, but if CK-4 or FA-4 is claimed then the API SP Resource conserving limit applies, although I'm not sure why they bothered specifying FA-4 in the sub note, as FA-4 automatically would have to meet the limit since all FA-4 oils are 0W-30, 5W-30, or 10W-30.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Messages
5,346
Location
Decatur AL USA
Go to page 121 in the 1509 doccument and look down the columns, Xw40 would be in the "all other grades" column which has no limit on max phosphorus while any oil claiming API SP Resource Conserving or are non resource conserving but of the viscosity grades "SAE 0W-16, SAE 5W-16, SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 0W-30, SAE 5W-30, SAE 10W-30" have a 0.8% limit by weight of phosphorous. I guess techincally a dual rated oil could continue to exceed the S rating limit upto the C rating limit if it only claims CJ-4 or older, but if CK-4 or FA-4 is claimed then the API SP Resource conserving limit applies, although I'm not sure why they bothered specifying FA-4 in the sub note, as FA-4 automatically would have to meet the limit since all FA-4 oils are 0W-30, 5W-30, or 10W-30.

According to 115 of that document the "S" phosphorus limit doesn't apply to any grade if it doesn't contain the "API Certification Mark" (Startburst) and the C rating precedes the S Rating on the label.

All of this is in direct contradiction to the information I had received previously that as of May 1, 2020 all S rated oils would have to meet the lower phosphorus limit whether an ILSAC grade or not.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2019
Messages
3,870
Location
Muncie, Indiana
According to 115 of that document the "S" phosphorus limit doesn't apply to any grade if it doesn't contain the "API Certification Mark" (Startburst) and the C rating precedes the S Rating on the label.

All of this is in direct contradiction to the information I had received previously that as of May 1, 2020 all S rated oils would have to meet the lower phosphorus limit whether an ILSAC grade or not.

Are you talking about the footnote that says:
"f For all viscosity grades: If CH-4, CI-4 and/or CJ-4 categories precede the "S" category and there is no API Certification Mark, the “S” category limits for phosphorus, sulfur, and the TEOST MHT do not apply. However, the CJ-4 limits for phosphorus and sulfur do apply for CJ-4 oils. This footnote cannot be applied if CK-4 or FA-4 is also claimed. Note that these “C” category oils have been formulated primarily for diesel engines and may not provide all of the performance requirements consistent with vehicle manufacturers' recommendations for gasoline-fueled engines."

That page is for SM, but it's saying that if CI-4 or before is claimed no limit is imposed, if CJ-4 is claimed the CJ-4 limit is imposed, and that footnote does not apply if CK-4 of FA-4 is claimed, as if you go down to the SN or SP parts of the doccument it says:

"For all viscosity grades: If CH-4, CI-4 and/or CJ-4 categories precede the "S" category and there is no API Certification Mark, the “S” category limits for phosphorus and sulfur do not apply. However, the CJ-4 limits for phosphorus and sulfur do apply for CJ-4 oils, and the phosphorus 124 API 1509 limit in the “SP with “Resource Conserving”” column (0.08% mass maximum) applies when CK-4 with SP or FA-4 with SP is claimed. Note that these “C” category oils have been formulated primarily for diesel engines and may not provide all of the performance requirements consistent with vehicle manufacturers' recommendations for gasoline-fueled engines."
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
An xW-40 has to conform to the same S limits as the ILSAC Grades. It doesn't matter if it has a C rating. Again I may have misunderstood on the other grades as I was researching xW-40 specifically.

Nope, that's why oils like M1 0w-40 still have much higher levels of phosphorous, but can be SN for example, while GC stopped at SL, as the limit on ILSAC grades was imposed with SM.

If you look at this chart for SP/GF-6, you'll note xW-40 doesn't appear in the list of grades at the top, because it's not an ILSAC grade. And then the footnote beside the %0.08 limit for phosphorous is #4, which states it doesn't apply to non-ILSAC grades.
Screen Shot 2022-02-16 at 7.09.12 PM.jpg

With that established, we can see on the CK-4 table, it shows a phos limit of %0.12 and footnote 26, which indicates that this limit is %0.08 to obtain the API S claim, for ILSAC grades, but we've already established of course that xW-40 isn't an ILSAC grade, so that doesn't apply.

Screen Shot 2022-02-23 at 1.49.21 PM.jpg
 
Top