CATERHAM

[CATERHAM]

The highest VI of any commercially available VII free, fully formulated oil is no higher than the low 170's, that I know of.
But, and think Tom would agree, the use of a small amount of VIIs can actually be beneficial. Most VII free oils tend to thicken due to oxidation with extended OCIs, consiquently the use of some VIIs can offset this tendancy while improving the oils VI at the same time.
Red Line's VI free 0W-20 (166 VI) does tend to thicken a bit from the used oil analysis I've seen while Red Line 0w30 (183 VI) doesn't nor does Red Line 0W-40 (197 VI) although we really are splitting hairs. It's worth noting that even Red Line 0W-40 with it's 197 VI is remarkably shear resistant.

 

[Tom NJ]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
But, and think Tom would agree, the use of a small amount of VIIs can actually be beneficial.


Yes, I agree. It adds a little "cushion" to the oil and, as you say, helps offset thickening a bit. The base oils I have in mind, however, are very oxidatively stable, and I tend to boost anti-oxidants a lot.

Tom

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
But, and think Tom would agree, the use of a small amount of VIIs can actually be beneficial.


Yes, I agree. It adds a little "cushion" to the oil and, as you say, helps offset thickening a bit.


I also tend to think (or at least hope?) that RL (and the other 'top-shelfers') uses ONLY the best, and MOST shear stable VIIs for the application, regardless of cost/scarcity.

 

[dparm]

My Motul 300V 5w30 used oil analysis showed that it did indeed thicken in about 2500 miles of service, so that would support the theory. I don't think they use any VIIs in it.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

That would be nice, but raises the question "required by whom?" Personally I wouldn't want to see government get that deep in the pants of private businesses.

I think that's an easy one: it could be required by the organizations offering the approvals (API, ILSAC, etc). I agree this would be overreaching on the part of a governmental organization, but there's no reason these organizations couldn't require more accurate and useful labeling as part of the approval process.

The problem is that these approval organizations are actually trade organizations whose members are the oil companies. Generally they don't like to put restrictions on themselves, especially with regard to valuable label space. After all these years, the only things they require on labels are the SAE Viscosity Grade and certification marks, if any.
Tom

Since there is universal agreement from us consumers of motor oil that bottle labeling is inadequate, why not send the SAE and the API a letter spelling out our concerns and recommendations. BITOG being a 37,000 plus member organization might have some impact and I'm sure a mass consumer response has never been received by them before.

 

[Tom NJ]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
...why not send the SAE and the API a letter spelling out our concerns and recommendations. BITOG being a 37,000 plus member organization might have some impact...


A waste of good ink. Trade organizations look after their members - it's their mission.

Tom

 

[wiswind]

Caterham, you mention Red Line 0W-20 "thickening", can you explain that to me?
Is the HTHS increasing from the 3.0 you mentioned?
Is the cold flow viscosity increasing?
Does the 0W-20 thicken enough to be "thicker" than the Red Line 0W-30?

I am one of those consumers that find the labeling and specifications confusing.
I did not understand Viscosity Index (VI) until you posted information on it (after I had orderd a case of Red Line 5W-20, which I have used since before Red Line came out with their 0W-xx oils).

Another question (if I have not been pushy enough already).
I had been looking at the Red Line spec sheet.....
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @-35C
0W-20 55
0W-30 56
0W-40 57

Does this mean that the cold flow of all 3 of these in an engine will be very close?
I recall something about this being a "pumpability" measurment which is more accurate in real world application in cold temps than a standard viscosity measurement.