quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
To those that just provided insults or information bundled with insults, I think we all could have done without that.
You invited insults, when you insulted other people in this thread, and especially in other threads when you first showed up here. One example:
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
We are all allowed our opinion, and mine is that you are wrong on all counts.
And when I posted a graph from the Chevron-Phillips website to provide substance to what I was saying, you responded with:
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
...I recall it was you that posted that misleading graph of PAO viscosity vs temp compared to a GIII with PPD.
Perhaps if you were less pompous when you first arrived, and showed some respect from those who really tried to provide you with information, you'd avoid reaping what you've sown.
So for conclusions:
1. As a base oil PAO's are pretty impressive products, with good flash points, low volatility, and excellent pour points.
2. As base oils Group III's are claimed to have better solubility of additives, and natural lubricity.
3. As final blended products in the typical viscosity grades these gaps tend to close.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
4. Both products require significant viscosity index improvers to get good multi-grade performance. Perhaps one more than the other depending on the specific base oil. But, in any case both products will be susceptable to viscosity breakdown.
Depends on the grade. One can make a 10w30 or 5w20 out of PAOs without VIIs. Some manufacturer spec'd these grades for all but the coldest climates.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
5. Group III's need additives to reduce CCS/MRV, but with them they can equal or outperform PAO's.
If PAOs are formulated to emphasize cold temperature performance, they will beat current Group IIIs everytime. And if your favorite group III formulation, Petro-Canada 0w30, really wants to impress people, have them commission a test on their 0w30 and an equivalently formulated for cold temps premium PAO based
after both have been used for the typical manufacturer's OCI. Let's see what the MRVs, CCSs, Gelation Indexs are then.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
6. Flash points of Group III's can equal or better PAO's in final blend form. But, at the present time PAO's have an advantage in volatility. When more advanced Group III's such as GTL's come to market that gap will cose and Group III's may even outperform.
There is a persistent problem throughout this thread, and other threads, with your generalizations of Group III properties. Recall that all that is needed for a base oil to be a Group III is:
Saturates greater than %90
Aromatics less than %10
Sulphur less than %.03
Viscosity Index greater than 120
That leaves a lot of wiggle room for varying qualities of Group III basestock. In other words, just because a finished lube is made with Group III basestock, doesn't endow it with all the best qualities you list here.
Compare the above with
ALL PAOs
Saturates greater than %100
Aromatics less than %0
Sulphur less than %0
Viscosity Index ~ 126 to 200+
Quite a bit less variance in quality.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
7. The two products may degrade differently with age. Both will thin out primarily at higher temperatures due to loss of viscosity index improvers. Group III's will tend to thicken at lower temperatures due to loss of those additives.
As mentioned above, one can make a 10w30 or 5w20 out of PAOs without VIIs. That right there would cover the needs of most of N. America.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
8. Additive breakdown is likely a none issue for those who stay with OEM OCI's.
You have no evidence that this holds true for cold temp performance. SM/GF-4 allows an oil to degrade to the the next higher grade MRV limits and a yield stress less than 35 Pa after the Sequence IIIG test, so in effect a 0w30 becomes a 5w30. As mentioned above, you have no evidence that a Group III 0w30's MRV, CCS, Gelation Index will match that of a equivalent PAO after it's used for a typical manufacturer's OCI.
Further, if the low bar is the goal, one may as well use a Group II/II+ based SM/GF-4 5w30/5w20. Not much of N. America sees -30°C/-22°F type temps.
quote:
Originally posted by Ron AKA:
And if I'm allowed one prediction:
The market share for PAO based oils will shrink over time and be reduced to the die hards that buy based on base oil content rather than final product performance.
Sowing more seeds?
I'll agree that VHVI Group III/III+ based oils oils can be formulated to provide performance to meet most needs. And if it can be done at a price/performace advantage, yes PAOs marketshare may shrink over time. But currently there are those that want the best at any price, or are in artic conditions, or are in some competetive event where only the best will do, that only PAOs/Esters will fulfill that need. Further, who knows what advancements may come about in the future to trump all.
I will give you one kudos, Ron. You did make me go back and re-read most of the stuff I poured over when I joined this community 3 years ago. On the other hand, I proved to myself I've been correct all along.
