Can someone explain Group 1, 2 and 3 oils

[Boeing 757 Pilot]

Can someone please explain the differences between Group 1, 2 and 3 oils. And what brand/type oils fall into each Group. THANKS

 

[Pro3qtr]

I also would like it dumbed down to my level Best oil for the money. I have no problem spending the coin, if it WORKS !

 

[Ray H]

According to my interpretation of the K.I.S.S. principle: Group I - The basic cold-filtered solvent-refined petroleum lube stock. Group II - Run a Group I or lesser petroleum lube stock through a catalyzed pressure cooker in the presence of hydrogen. Wonderful things happen: 1> most undesirable residual paraffin waxes are magically transformed* into desirable paraffin oil lube stocks 2> most undesirable residual cyclic ring solvent-type molecules ("aromatics") are also magically transfromed into desirable paraffin oil lube stocks, too. 3> most undesirable residual sulfer-containing molecules are stripped of the sulfer and then magically transformed into desirable paraffin oil lube stocks, too. The sulfer gook is recovered as saleable merchandise after filtration. Group III - Mo' & betta' effects of Group II by running the hydro-cooker longer and hotter. Removing the sulfer and aromatics to single digit parts per million results in better oxidative stability. Waxes, per se, are actually great lubes - in their liquid state. Their problem is that they crystalize out at relatively high temperatures compared to true oils, so cold weather operation becomes problematic because of gelling in the sump. Don't confuse "paraffin" with "wax". "Paraffin" is a type of organic compound, not a specific substance. "Waxes" are only one sub-category in the extensive list of "paraffins". Simultaneously, concentrating desirable paraffin base lube stocks in the entry volume results in higher quality base lube stock due to higher viscosity indexes (greater inherent viscosity range requires less VI improver additive). *This IS synthesis by accepted organic chemistry definition, folks - specifically, "isomerization". Another, more widely known, alternate synthesis modality is the building of an engineered molecule through the process of "polymerization" - PAOs (Group IV) [PolyAlphaOlefins] come into being through this method. [ May 22, 2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: Ray H ]

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, Ray, thank you for that explantion. Fairly decent job of "detuning". ..but... This leads me to another question... Why then if Group III oils are a further extension of Group II process techniques ...do many consider Group II oils "superior" to Group III ...or at least some seem to infer? Your rhetoric:

quote:

---

Removing the sulfer and aromatics to single digit parts per million results in better oxidative stability. Waxes, per se, are actually great lubes - in their liquid state. Their problem is that they crystalize out at relatively high temperatures compared to true oils, so cold weather operation becomes problematic because of gelling in the sump. Don't confuse "paraffin" with "wax". "Paraffin" is a type of organic compound, not a specific substance. "Waxes" are only one sub-category in the extensive list of "paraffins". Simultaneously, concentrating desirable paraffin base lube stocks in the entry volume results in higher quality base lube stock due to higher viscosity indexes (greater inherent viscosity range requires less VI improver additive).

---

...would appear to indicate ...that in any way anyone could choose to measure a multivisc oil ...Group III would be the choice by far. That is, NOT needing "enhancements" to perform in a broader range. So what's the "minus" to Group III that isn't with Group II?? Please apply the same "under 130 IQ filter for the explanation.

 

[G-MAN]

Gary, generally, from a spec standpoint, the only difference between hydrocracked/isodewaxed Group II and Group III is the viscosity index. Group III base oils will have a VI of 120 to 140 (which is fully into PAO territory). However, from a performance standpoint, running the additional isomeration required to boost the VI also results in additional saturation, which in turn results in a base oil that has far superior oxidation resistance and lower volatility to typical Group II. Nevertheless, catalysts technology has progressed to the point that Group II+ oils are now reaching previous Group III levels in these two categories. That is why Pennzoil could make the switch to all Group II+ base oil for their 5w20, when it used to require the addition of Group III in order to meet Ford's specs.

 

[Pro3qtr]

What oils are group 1,2,3 ??

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pro3qtr: What oils are group 1,2,3 ??

---

If you go in Wal-Mart and look at the the oils on the shelf, the only ones that you can pretty much count on being all or mostly Group I are the straight 30 weights (and 40s if there). All "regular" 5w30s will be Group II/II+, while 10w30 and 10w40 will have Group II and MAY have some Group I. HDEO oils MAY have some Group I in them as well. Most "synthetic" oils, with the exception of Mobil 1, will be all Group III, or they may be Group III with SOME Group IV.

 

[Pro3qtr]

Thanks G-Man !

 

[Gary Allan]

Okay... So ...although some seem to marvel at the improvements in Group II oil ...Group III (and now I hear Group IV) oils are in fact better. This follows normal reasoning where one would assume that each progressive group would be an advancement over the previous process and subsequent product produced. Thank you ..and if you have the patience to go further into the Group IV..NO WAIT!!!! ...a metacrawler search provided this "skinny" version of basick "group" designation. "Group think for the chemically challenged Anyone think it needs enhancement??

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

Can someone please explain the differences between Group 1, 2 and 3 oils. And what brand/type oils fall into each Group. THANKS

---

I'll second the question ...but I'll add: Most of us haven't had chemistry since high school and are very glad that we haven't since. We haven't had the need to figure out what a PAO is ..nor likely have the ability to understand the marvel of these three little letters. We can probably save you the exercize in demonstrating your vast knowledge in such chemical properties ...and ask that you merely state them "for effect". We don't typically know the value of "it has a high carbon ring in its molecular string" ..but could easily understand "that means it will do xxxyyyy in this situation and zzzzqqqq in that situation. That is, Keep It Simple Stupid K.I.S.S.