G052527A2 Oil Replacement

[Jsingh1]

So,

my question here is, do I get a gear oil that is fully synthetic so Group III probably, or one with Ester technology, Group V.
For example, Millers have 2 oils that meet my spec.

1. Millers EE Performance 75W - 6.3cSt at 100c - which is a synthetic base oil with Ester formulation, NANODRIVE technology.
2. Millers XF Premium 75W - 6.1cSt at 100c -which is fully synthetic.

The XF is nearly half the price though.

 

[MolaKule]

So,

my question here is, do I get a gear oil that is fully synthetic so Group III probably, or one with Ester technology, Group V.
For example, Millers have 2 oils that meet my spec.

1. Millers EE Performance 75W - 6.3cSt at 100c - which is a synthetic base oil with Ester formulation, NANODRIVE technology.
2. Millers XF Premium 75W - 6.1cSt at 100c -which is fully synthetic.

The XF is nearly half the price though.

The first 9 oils in your list should meet your viscosity requirements.

Most MTF's are mixes of Group III-V base oils with an additive package composed of friction modifiers for the synchro's and an anti-wear component consisting of ZDDP.

Other additives are anti-rust, metal inhibitors, and anti-oxidants.

 

[Jsingh1]

"Phosphoric acid esters - ami salt - new"
ECHA: 01-2119493620-38

Does this mean it has esters in the original oil?

 

[Jsingh1]

^ Anyone???

Reason being, the Fuchs has the same additives / chemicals as the original oil, but is thicker.

The miller oils and others are thinner but have different chemical mixtures...

 

[MolaKule]

"Phosphoric acid esters - ami salt - new"
ECHA: 01-2119493620-38

Does this mean it has esters in the original oil?

View attachment 194684

ZDDP IS an ester.

 

[Jsingh1]

ZDDP IS an ester.

Just wondering how can you tell it's a ZDDP, I thought that would contain ZINC but it doesn't say it in the name anywhere ..

 

[MolaKule]

Just wondering how can you tell it's a ZDDP, I thought that would contain ZINC but it doesn't say it in the name anywhere ..

See full explanation here: https://bobistheoilguy.com/

A Review of Mineral and Synthetic Base Oils​

"...For example, a very useful ester in additive chemistry is the ZDDP molecule, whose function is as an Anti-Wear (AW) and Oxidation Inhibitor (OI). Members of the zinc dialkyldithiophosphate category are substances prepared by reacting phosphorous pentasulfide (P2S5) with one or more primary or secondary C3-C10 branched or linear alcohols to form the phosphorodithioic acid ester. The only exception is the alkaryl dithiophosphate where the alcohol moiety is tetrapropenylphenol. The dithiophosphoric acid ester is further diluted with 10-15 wt-% highly refined lubricating base oil (typical CAS #s 64742-54-7 and 64741-88-4) before it is neutralized with zinc oxide. The oil acts as a solvent in the neutralization reaction, manages the viscosity of the final product and improves consistency. The zinc complex that is formed upon neutralization is not a salt in the traditional sense, since the Zn-S bond is more coordinate covalent in character than ionic. (American Chemistry Council Publication 210-144870). There are about 15 versions of ZDDP chemistry..."

 

[Jsingh1]

See full explanation here: https://bobistheoilguy.com/

A Review of Mineral and Synthetic Base Oils​

"...For example, a very useful ester in additive chemistry is the ZDDP molecule, whose function is as an Anti-Wear (AW) and Oxidation Inhibitor (OI). Members of the zinc dialkyldithiophosphate category are substances prepared by reacting phosphorous pentasulfide (P2S5) with one or more primary or secondary C3-C10 branched or linear alcohols to form the phosphorodithioic acid ester. The only exception is the alkaryl dithiophosphate where the alcohol moiety is tetrapropenylphenol. The dithiophosphoric acid ester is further diluted with 10-15 wt-% highly refined lubricating base oil (typical CAS #s 64742-54-7 and 64741-88-4) before it is neutralized with zinc oxide. The oil acts as a solvent in the neutralization reaction, manages the viscosity of the final product and improves consistency. The zinc complex that is formed upon neutralization is not a salt in the traditional sense, since the Zn-S bond is more coordinate covalent in character than ionic. (American Chemistry Council Publication 210-144870). There are about 15 versions of ZDDP chemistry..."

Cheers MolaKule.

Therefore, this oil must be a group V and is not pure synthetic?

Please check this file for the chemical mixtures, it is translated from Polish.
Do you think it is best advised to use a synthetic oil with Ester formulation as a replacement, or will just fully synthetic be ok, which is also cheaper.

 

[MolaKule]

Cheers MolaKule.

Therefore, this oil must be a group V and is not pure synthetic?

Please check this file for the chemical mixtures, it is translated from Polish.
Do you think it is best advised to use a synthetic oil with Ester formulation as a replacement, or will just fully synthetic be ok, which is also cheaper.

I would recommend you go back and read and study the full document:

See full explanation here: https://bobistheoilguy.com/

A Review of Mineral and Synthetic Base Oils​

 

[Jsingh1]

I would recommend you go back and read and study the full document:

See full explanation here: https://bobistheoilguy.com/

A Review of Mineral and Synthetic Base Oils​

Thanks, I understand now, I see the bit about esters and lubricating bases etc. like in the original VW oil.

But I will ask this as I can't seem to find it in the document ..
1. is an ester based product better/worth the cost difference vs. Pure syn with no ester
2. is viscosity or chemical composition more important?

As some fluids I have found, have less viscous than the original but have the same chemical composition, whereas others are thin but without esters / the same composition.

 

[MolaKule]

But I will ask this as I can't seem to find it in the document ..
1. is an ester based product better/worth the cost difference vs. Pure syn with no ester
2. is viscosity or chemical composition more important?

I suggest you do some additional reading and study the article again with some additional research, because your understanding of what is a synthetic base oil is lacking. PAO group IV and Group V esters are BOTH synthesized hydrocarbon base oils.

The article was not an article on the economics of the oil industry, but dealt with lubricant chemistry and the fact that an engine lubricant is a mix of both base oils AND the additive chemistry.

That is, a PCMO or transmission oil or gear lube formulation is a mix of various base oil types of various viscosities, married with an additive package that contains a mix of chemistries, all designed to arrive at a specific performance target.

 

[Jsingh1]

I suggest you do some additional reading and study the article again with some additional research, because your understanding of what is a synthetic base oil is lacking. PAO group IV and Group V esters are BOTH synthesized hydrocarbon base oils.

The article was not an article on the economics of the oil industry, but dealt with lubricant chemistry and the fact that an engine lubricant is a mix of both base oils AND the additive chemistry.

That is, a PCMO or transmission oil or gear lube formulation is a mix of various base oil types of various viscosities, married with an additive package that contains a mix of chemistries, all designed to arrive at a specific performance target.

No offence but I'm just asking for opinions, I'm not clued up on this otherwise I wouldn't be asking?

for example, my 1st question:
Millers do two oils and they're both compatible:
Millers EE Performance 75W - which is a synthetic base oil with Ester formulation.
Millers XF Premium 75W - which is fully synthetic.
That is their own words.

2nd question is because some oils are thin and cheap, but the chemical composition is totally different to the original VW one, whereas things like the FUCHS Sintofluid 75W, is very closely matched in terms of composition but thicker.

 

[MolaKule]

No offence but I'm just asking for opinions, I'm not clued up on this otherwise I wouldn't be asking?

for example, my 1st question:
Millers do two oils and they're both compatible:
Millers EE Performance 75W - which is a synthetic base oil with Ester formulation.
Millers XF Premium 75W - which is fully synthetic.
That is their own words.

I do not see a question but a comment. What is the question?

2nd question is because some oils are thin and cheap, but the chemical composition is totally different to the original VW one, whereas things like the FUCHS Sintofluid 75W, is very closely matched in terms of composition but thicker.

Again, I do not see a question but a comment.

What oils in your opinion are thin and cheap?

What is the chemical composition and the viscosity of the oils you speak of and how did you determine that?

Do you have a detailed listing of the chemical composition and viscosity of the oils you speak of?

 

[Jsingh1]

I do not see a question but a comment. What is the question?

Again, I do not see a question but a comment.

What oils in your opinion are thin and cheap?

What is the chemical composition and the viscosity of the oils you speak of and how did you determine that?

Do you have a detailed listing of the chemical composition and viscosity of the oils you speak of?

Just referring to the 2 questions in post #30.

If you looked at the translated PDF I also sent in post #28, you can see the chemical composition.

Also, post #19 shows the viscosity of some brands.

Now, FUCHS sintofluid 75W is quite similarily composed, but the viscosity is a lot thicker it seems, 40.8 vs 27.6 at 40c.

However, you then have oils that are like LIQUI MOLY MTF 5300, the chemical composition is different to the original but the viscosity is similar, 30.8 vs 27.6.

If you'd like a very detailed chart i can do that, lol.

 

[kschachn]

Just referring to the 2 questions in post #30.

If you looked at the translated PDF I also sent in post #28, you can see the chemical composition.

That's an SDS, not a chemical composition. As someone who once wrote SDS (then MSDS) for a living there is a huge difference between the two.

It's often confused and mistaken however.

 

[Jsingh1]

That's an SDS, not a chemical composition. As someone who once wrote SDS (then MSDS) for a living there is a huge difference between the two.

It's often confused and mistaken however.

Really? Why is it different? Genuine question.
I thought since it tells you the chemicals involved that it's the same thing? It's the only thing I have to base the chemicals off, I'm just comparing it to the original VW oil SDS.

 

[kschachn]

Really? Why is it different? Genuine question.
I thought since it tells you the chemicals involved that it's the same thing? It's the only thing I have to base the chemicals off, I'm just comparing it to the original VW oil SDS.

An SDS is solely designed to document hazardous components in a substance to warn first reponders, users, and other entities that may come into contact with the substance. It in no way is a complete documentation of the composition, especially if the constituent is non-toxic. In addition, for the compounds it does list they can be quite vague ranges of percentages and a manufacturer can exclude some things (proprietary) under some conditions.

Also if a manufacturer is trying to protect trade secrets don't underestimate the degree of obfuscation that may be going on. The SDS will still be accurate for LD50 or flammability or other toxicity statements but I can tell you that if you can mislead your competitors then you might take the opportunity to do so. No manufacturer will ever give away a trade secret on an SDS, ever.

SDS are and should be used for safety purposes and nothing else. Maybe you can read the tea leaves and come up with some conclusions but maybe not. So for some things like comparing base stocks on some oils it may be indicative. However it is not and is never is a "chemical composition" as you stated.

 

[Sandstorm]

An SDS is solely designed to document hazardous components in a substance to warn first reponders, users, and other entities that may come into contact with the substance. It in no way is a complete documentation of the composition, especially if the constituent is non-toxic. In addition, for the compounds it does list they can be quite vague ranges of percentages and a manufacturer can exclude some things (proprietary) under some conditions.

Also if a manufacturer is trying to protect trade secrets don't underestimate the degree of obfuscation that may be going on. The SDS will still be accurate for LD50 or flammability or other toxicity statements but I can tell you that if you can mislead your competitors then you might take the opportunity to do so. No manufacturer will ever give away a trade secret on an SDS, ever.

SDS are and should be used for safety purposes and nothing else. Maybe you can read the tea leaves and come up with some conclusions but maybe not.

Well said

 

[MolaKule]

If you'd like a very detailed chart i can do that, lol.

Well, we're trying to seriously answer your questions and you are doing this LOL thing.

So think seriously about the real questions you want to ask and discard the fluff and unnecessary side comments--or this thread will be closed because we're not going to entertain the same repetitive questions for an infinite period.

See KSCHACHN's comments in Post #37 as it is very germane to your comments and is a good response.

No company is going to divulge their formulations and the chemistry it contains, period. The exact mix of base oils and additive chemistry is called "Proprietary" and is protected by "Trade Secret" laws.

If you have some $800.00 forensics analysis of each of the oils then we could discuss the pro's and cons of each of your fluids of interest in a PM, but I would not publish them in a public forum.

 

[Jsingh1]

Therefore, why is section 3 labelled 'Composition/information on ingredients' while giving percentages and substance registry numbers (CAS), in the case of VW, with the mixture concentrations adding up to approx 100%.

Well, we're trying to seriously answer your questions and you are doing this LOL thing.

Young British Sarcasm it was.