BITOG Collective Knowledge

[Moondawg]

I have heard it said that the posters on this forum represent the accumulated wisdom about oil and oil/engine related subjects. I believe it.

 

[Uregina09]

I think that's giving a significant number of folks credit when none is due.

 

[Nick1994]

Depends on who you ask Here's some words of wisdom about viscosity... "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994

Depends on who you ask Here's some words of wisdom about viscosity... "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

I like that quote! I believe its a good balance!

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994

Depends on who you ask Here's some words of wisdom about viscosity... "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

Same with the winter W cold start performance. "As much as you need, but no more than you need. "

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: Rolla07

Originally Posted By: Nick1994

Depends on who you ask Here's some words of wisdom about viscosity... "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

I like that quote! I believe its a good balance!

Lol not my quote, I've seen it tossed around here before so I've snagged it

 

[Slick17601]

The sad thing is the best resources left the board years ago like Johnny, Terry Dyson and Tooslick. And of course, Bob passed away.

 

[Bambam]

Originally Posted By: Slick17601

The sad thing is the best resources left the board years ago like Johnny, Terry Dyson and Tooslick. And of course, Bob passed away.

Yup, too many internet know it all's badgered unmercifully until great people threw their hands in the air and moved on..

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: SR5

Originally Posted By: Nick1994

Depends on who you ask Here's some words of wisdom about viscosity... "As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

Same with the winter W cold start performance. "As much as you need, but no more than you need. "

I could say that using a 0 weight oil is not necessary in my application, but prove to me that using any 0w20, 0w30, or 0w40 causes any lube related issues? Plus the Mobil AFE 0w20, 0w30 and 0w40 are great products.

 

[SR5]

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: SR5

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

Maybe i misinterpreted your comment! the above makes perfect sense.

 

[LaCocina27]

Originally Posted By: Moondawg

I have heard it said that the posters on this forum represent the accumulated wisdom about oil and oil/engine related subjects. I believe it.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: SR5

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

Very well stated.

 

[LaCocina27]

Originally Posted By: wemay

Originally Posted By: SR5

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

Very well stated.

Indeed. That quoted text, as well as

Quote:

"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

should be the main takeaways from this thread, as far as knowledge, before this thread inevitably devolves into mindless bickering. Which it hopefully will not.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: SR5

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

Agreed

 

[Bandito440]

Oh boy. For someone that’s been registered for three days, you sure are bold. Are you getting this rain in Bayonne?

Originally Posted By: LaCocina27

Originally Posted By: wemay

Originally Posted By: SR5

Just like the previous comment "as thin as possible, as thick as necessary" does not imply any lube related engine failures if you go a bit thicker. My comment does not imply any engine issues if you go to a colder W rating. The reason MB specs a 0W40 is because it works everywhere in the world, even if it is a bit thicker (40) than some sedate drivers need in a cold climate, and even though 0W is not needed for anybody in a hot climate. It's good world spec oil. Valvoline published some great spec sheets before for their full synthetics. When you looked at the Noack volatility the 0W20 was more volatile than the 5W20 and the 5W30 was more volatile than the 10W30. This is comparing the same family of products that were formulated the same. Sure compare a PAO to a Group II and you can find an exception. But whenever you compare like with like, a lower cold starting ability comes with a higher volatility and often less shear stability due to more VII polymers. The oil itself doesn't shear, it's the VII polymers that shear, and the wider the grade the more VII polymers are used. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti 0W oils. Infact I got a great deal on some SynPower 0W40 and I happily used it in my very hot climate. I just would have preferred a great deal on some SynPower 10W30, as I didn't need an oil that thick, and I didn't need a cold start that low. But don't worry mate, my car survived fine.

Very well stated.

Indeed. That quoted text, as well as

Quote:

"As thin as possible, as thick as necessary..."

should be the main takeaways from this thread, as far as knowledge, before this thread inevitably devolves into mindless bickering. Which it hopefully will not.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Bandito440

Oh boy. For someone that’s been registered for three days, you sure are bold. Are you getting this rain in Bayonne?

Have you already updated the list?

 

[ndfergy]

In no particular order there are many contributors I've learned a lot from: Molakule, Solarent, SonofJoe, Shannow, Brocluno, Garak, Doug Hillary, John Browning, Gokham, G-man, Terry Dyson, SR5, Johnny, jrustles, A.Harmon, plus many more I can't name off the top of my head. However, the one contributor that stands out the most to me is Tom NJ. Below is one of his posts that really put things in perspective: Base oil quality is no longer defined by just three simple categories consisting of conventional, semi-synthetic, and synthetic. With the introduction of new processes and feed stocks over the past dozen years, we now have numerous base oils grades and blends thereof, resulting in a continuum of base oil quality, such as: Grp I Grp I & II blend Grp I & III blend Grp II Grp II & III blend Grp II+ Grp III Grp III & IV blend Grp III+ Grp III & IV & V blend Grp III+ & IV & V blend Grp IV & V blend While the exact quality order of such base oil selections is debatable and dependent on component grade and ratios, the point is that the quality steps are now so small as to make labels such as semi-synthetic and synthetic difficult if not impossible to place. The industry chose to draw a line between Grp II and Grp III in defining “synthetic”, but the difference is merely a single VI point, and therefore meaningless from a performance standpoint. Certainly there is a meaningful difference between the low end and high end of the spectrum, such as Grp I vs a Grp IV/V blend, but the difference between adjacent levels, and really even levels that are three, four, or five apart, is easily blurred by the additive system. Hence, the great debate over “synthetic” versus “true synthetic” is dead. The use of the word synthetic today only signifies that the base oil blend leans toward the higher end of quality continuum, and translating that further into finished oil performance becomes a stretch. Unless you have a special engine or driving conditions, you are better served concentrating on specifications and approvals rather than base oils for estimating oil performance. Tom NJ

 

[LaCocina27]

Originally Posted By: ndfergy

In no particular order there are many contributors I've learned a lot from: Molakule, Solarent, SonofJoe, Shannow, Brocluno, Garak, Doug Hillary, John Browning, Gokham, G-man, Terry Dyson, SR5, Johnny, jrustles, A.Harmon, plus many more I can't name off the top of my head. However, the one contributor that stands out the most to me is Tom NJ. Below is one of his posts that really put things in perspective: Base oil quality is no longer defined by just three simple categories consisting of conventional, semi-synthetic, and synthetic. With the introduction of new processes and feed stocks over the past dozen years, we now have numerous base oils grades and blends thereof, resulting in a continuum of base oil quality, such as: Grp I Grp I & II blend Grp I & III blend Grp II Grp II & III blend Grp II+ Grp III Grp III & IV blend Grp III+ Grp III & IV & V blend Grp III+ & IV & V blend Grp IV & V blend While the exact quality order of such base oil selections is debatable and dependent on component grade and ratios, the point is that the quality steps are now so small as to make labels such as semi-synthetic and synthetic difficult if not impossible to place. The industry chose to draw a line between Grp II and Grp III in defining “synthetic”, but the difference is merely a single VI point, and therefore meaningless from a performance standpoint. Certainly there is a meaningful difference between the low end and high end of the spectrum, such as Grp I vs a Grp IV/V blend, but the difference between adjacent levels, and really even levels that are three, four, or five apart, is easily blurred by the additive system. Hence, the great debate over “synthetic” versus “true synthetic” is dead. The use of the word synthetic today only signifies that the base oil blend leans toward the higher end of quality continuum, and translating that further into finished oil performance becomes a stretch. Unless you have a special engine or driving conditions, you are better served concentrating on specifications and approvals rather than base oils for estimating oil performance. Tom NJ

Excellence.

 

[LaCocina27]

Here is some more oil knowledge. They left out the As thin as possible but as thick as necessary part, but I'm sure it's some kind of universal truth, be it rain or shine