How Mobil Tested Mobil 1 Extended Performance
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
"A grade is a starting place that falls within a range. Nothing more. Otherwise oil blenders would be formulating at the bottom of every range. Reading comprehension has nothing to do with mathematics."
OK I'm an Oil blender we shoot for Mid range as does everyone because of the effect of shearing if I blended to the bottom range I'd be OUT OF GRADE in the shearing portion of the API approval and thus my oil would NOT be in grade. And if the oil shears out of grade it is OUT OF GRADE.
Yes there is a range say 12.5 to 16.5 for 40wt anywhere in the range you are ON grade but to pass the shear tests you are better off at the mid point. Also blends DO vary in vis and shooting for a mid range will assure ON grade oils.
Bruce
OK I'm an Oil blender we shoot for Mid range as does everyone because of the effect of shearing if I blended to the bottom range I'd be OUT OF GRADE in the shearing portion of the API approval and thus my oil would NOT be in grade. And if the oil shears out of grade it is OUT OF GRADE.
Yes there is a range say 12.5 to 16.5 for 40wt anywhere in the range you are ON grade but to pass the shear tests you are better off at the mid point. Also blends DO vary in vis and shooting for a mid range will assure ON grade oils.
Bruce
No. A grade is defined as a range of viscosities under specified test conditions.
http://www.infineum.com/information/api-viscosity-2004.html
Manufacturers specify an oil grade because they want you to use an oil that falls into that viscosity range over the OCI they recommend.
Wow, man. Your repartee just slays me.
Exactly correcto mundo
said it better than I did.
Bruce
said it better than I did.
Bruce
Guy has cam scoring problems using Mobil 1 PCMO when club racing. Cam scoring not present when using Delvac 1. Less wear probably due to increased levels of anti-wear additives in Delvac 1 and being a thicker oil, a hypothesis supported by lots of observations and what we know about wear protection provided by oil. Will change mind when evidence starts suggesting that Mobil 1 PCMO provides better wear protection than Delvac 1, or that thinner oil provides better wear protection than thicker oil, or that less anti-wear additives provide better protection than more.
If you're suffering from cam scoring when club racing or just plain getting it on, are you going to consider using the data available, or wait until the results of a two year study comparing the wear protection of Delvac 1 and Mobil 1 PCMO show up in your favorite peer reviewed journal ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_proof#Scientific_method_and_the_practice_of_science
Scope and goals
The scientific method can be applied to anything within the range of our experiences. As long as something has an impact on our lives we can formulate theories and try to predict, what this impact might be. The impact itself is an experiment, testing whether our theory was right. It can also be applied, starting with step four or step three, to theories coming from different sources than the scientific method itself, as long as those make prediction, or it is possible to deduce some.
People use this method all the time. They have theories about devices and make predictions how those will react to their actions. If a device does not work as expected the experiment disproves their theory. If they adjust their theory they are applying the scientific method, if they nevertheless stick to their theory they don't.
The scientific method doesn't aim at giving an ultimate answer. It's iterative and recursive nature implies, that it will never come to an end. So any answer it gives is a provisional answer. Hence it can't prove or verify anything in a strong sense. But if a theory passed many experimental tests without being disproved, it is considered superior to any theory, which has not yet been put to a test.
If you're suffering from cam scoring when club racing or just plain getting it on, are you going to consider using the data available, or wait until the results of a two year study comparing the wear protection of Delvac 1 and Mobil 1 PCMO show up in your favorite peer reviewed journal ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_proof#Scientific_method_and_the_practice_of_science
Scope and goals
The scientific method can be applied to anything within the range of our experiences. As long as something has an impact on our lives we can formulate theories and try to predict, what this impact might be. The impact itself is an experiment, testing whether our theory was right. It can also be applied, starting with step four or step three, to theories coming from different sources than the scientific method itself, as long as those make prediction, or it is possible to deduce some.
People use this method all the time. They have theories about devices and make predictions how those will react to their actions. If a device does not work as expected the experiment disproves their theory. If they adjust their theory they are applying the scientific method, if they nevertheless stick to their theory they don't.
The scientific method doesn't aim at giving an ultimate answer. It's iterative and recursive nature implies, that it will never come to an end. So any answer it gives is a provisional answer. Hence it can't prove or verify anything in a strong sense. But if a theory passed many experimental tests without being disproved, it is considered superior to any theory, which has not yet been put to a test.
I originally wrote my quote with a qualification of synthetic long oil drain interval oils but the sentence became long and awkward. Rather than edit for two sentences I cut out the qualification changing the meaning. Sorry, next time I will leave my original meaning intact so as not to cause any confusion.
On the shearing part. yes the ranges were designed for conventional oils which use lots of VII which do cause the shearing loss of viscosity. From all the synthetic UOA I have seen on synthetic oils I don't see shearing as a problem and I see synthetic oils formulated at around 10cst Mobil 1 for 30w and I also see oils formulated at 12cst GC.
It would appear that hitting the midpoint with synthetic oils is much harder to do given these two examples.
If all the synthetic blenders put their oils in the midrange, how would I get my thick 30w with >3.6 HTHS? I would have to move up to a middle 40 weight as my only option.
Until recently with the advent of the newer euro oils being available here in the USA, the same engine would get spec'ed for a 50w in Australia, 40w or 50w in Europe, and 30w or 20w in the USA. Oil weight decisions by auto makers seem to be more geo/political than scientific.
When I read that 3mp believes that auto makers spec an oil weight for a mechanical reason I just have to smile. The exception being some of the German/European manufacturers or performance cars which receive synthetic from the factory.
Which oil would you say has more life left in it? One which starts out at 10.1cst and is now at 11.9cst after use or one which starts out at 11.9 cst and hasn't been used yet. Assume all other variables to be the same. ie. rate of oxidation,add packs,...
Would they both be in equal shape at 12.5cst and have the same amount of life left in them?
There appears to be two scools of thought here on this forum.
1. Those who condemn both at 12.5 based on the end of the range.
2. Those who condemn both based on when their condition warrents it regardless of a range.
I fall into camp #2.
How about a Poll.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=011519
Sorry, It was intended to slay other.quote:
Originally posted by 427Z06:
Wow, man. Your repartee just slays me.
What was the intent of your childish remark below?
"Dude, you can stop with the silly middle school mathematics."
As usual, most people will quote references with their point of view.
Let's go back to my original statement:
"Oh Boy, there's some scientifically derived data one should bet their life on."
Yes they(you?) arrived at a conclusion using a loose form of the scientific method.
How about verification?
Science is a social enterprise, and scientific work will become accepted by the community only if they can be verified. Crucially, experimental and theoretical results must be reproduced by others within the science community...
now here's the "bet your life on" part
...Researchers have given their lives for this vision; Georg Wilhelm Richmann was killed by ball lightning to his forehead (1753) when attempting to replicate the 1752 kite experiment of Benjamin Franklin.
So I stand by my original statement. I.e., I wouldn't bet my life (or my camshafts) given the limited amount of verification of their scientific theory.
Let's look at a different data set, the Sequence IIIG test. A V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine operates at 125 bhp, 3600 rpm, and 150°C oil temperature for 100 hours. Keep in mind that this test is run on 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oils. To pass the test, there must be less than .002" average cam-plus-lifter wear at the conclusion of the test.
That's 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oil on an engine at ~2/3 throttle for 100 hours with the oil temp at 150C.
Estimate of the viscosity of the average 5w20 conventional at that temp, 3.7 cSt.
[ July 14, 2005, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
Let's go back to my original statement:
"Oh Boy, there's some scientifically derived data one should bet their life on."
Yes they(you?) arrived at a conclusion using a loose form of the scientific method.
How about verification?
Science is a social enterprise, and scientific work will become accepted by the community only if they can be verified. Crucially, experimental and theoretical results must be reproduced by others within the science community...
now here's the "bet your life on" part
...Researchers have given their lives for this vision; Georg Wilhelm Richmann was killed by ball lightning to his forehead (1753) when attempting to replicate the 1752 kite experiment of Benjamin Franklin.
So I stand by my original statement. I.e., I wouldn't bet my life (or my camshafts) given the limited amount of verification of their scientific theory.
Let's look at a different data set, the Sequence IIIG test. A V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine operates at 125 bhp, 3600 rpm, and 150°C oil temperature for 100 hours. Keep in mind that this test is run on 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oils. To pass the test, there must be less than .002" average cam-plus-lifter wear at the conclusion of the test.
That's 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oil on an engine at ~2/3 throttle for 100 hours with the oil temp at 150C.
Estimate of the viscosity of the average 5w20 conventional at that temp, 3.7 cSt.
[ July 14, 2005, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
Sorry, I have a wacky sense of humor. No offense intended.
A number of bad microbes are named after the people who died due to studying them.
0.002in is 0.05mm, which seems like a lot of wear for 100 hrs. It's been awhile but I seem to recall that it's about the tolerance range of clearance that I had when adjusting the valves on some of my bikes.
"Let's look at a different data set, the Sequence IIIG test. A V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine operates at 125 bhp, 3600 rpm, and 150°C oil temperature for 100 hours. Keep in mind that this test is run on 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oils. To pass the test, there must be less than .002" average cam-plus-lifter wear at the conclusion of the test.
That's 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oil on an engine at ~2/3 throttle for 100 hours with the oil temp at 150C."
0.002in is 0.05mm, which seems like a lot of wear for 100 hrs. It's been awhile but I seem to recall that it's about the tolerance range of clearance that I had when adjusting the valves on some of my bikes.
"Let's look at a different data set, the Sequence IIIG test. A V-6 fuel-injected gasoline engine operates at 125 bhp, 3600 rpm, and 150°C oil temperature for 100 hours. Keep in mind that this test is run on 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oils. To pass the test, there must be less than .002" average cam-plus-lifter wear at the conclusion of the test.
That's 5w20 GF-4/SM conventional oil on an engine at ~2/3 throttle for 100 hours with the oil temp at 150C."
???
A few of points to be made here....
One is that in this forum there isn't an expectation for 'scientifically proven' data, even disregarding the fact that science doesn't 'prove' things.
Another is that simple observations are often the foundation of scientific findings, even if that wasn't the intent here.
Another is that qualitative data like the statement below still offer the possibility of rank ordering oil performance, which is probably what most would be happy with.
Finally, there is probably a simple, well accepted explanation for the observation, which was offered in the rest of my post.
"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 1sttruck:
I've run across comments from club racers who used Delvac 1 to fix cam scoring and other problems that they experienced with Mobil PCMOs, typically 30 weights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh Boy, there's some scientifically derived data one should bet there life on. "
A few of points to be made here....
One is that in this forum there isn't an expectation for 'scientifically proven' data, even disregarding the fact that science doesn't 'prove' things.
Another is that simple observations are often the foundation of scientific findings, even if that wasn't the intent here.
Another is that qualitative data like the statement below still offer the possibility of rank ordering oil performance, which is probably what most would be happy with.
Finally, there is probably a simple, well accepted explanation for the observation, which was offered in the rest of my post.
"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 1sttruck:
I've run across comments from club racers who used Delvac 1 to fix cam scoring and other problems that they experienced with Mobil PCMOs, typically 30 weights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh Boy, there's some scientifically derived data one should bet there life on. "
Sure, at first glance .001" of camshaft and .001" of lifter wear at 100 hours seems like a lot. (Although if you ever owned a SBC/BBC with solid lifters it would provide a viable theory on why you had to adjust the valves on a very regular basis.
But if you consider it's a push-rod pig-iron engine with flat tappet camshaft and lifters run for 100 hours on 3.7 cSt oil, I think it's pretty impressive.
Take this engine, drop it in a mid-size car, add an oil heater in the pan to keep sump temperature at 302F, along with 5w20 conventional SM oil, set the cruise control for 100 mph and drive it for 4 days straight. If all I got was .001" of camshaft and .001" of lifter wear I'd be impressed. And actual testing on the better GF-4/SM conventional oils are actually getting 2/3 this wear limit.
Now imagine the results you would get if you used your favorite full synthetic 10w30 and kept the sump temperatures below 249F (6.7cSt) with a modern valve-train. (By the way, that's roughly the same percentage increase in viscosity as one would have when going from a 5w20 to a 15w40 at 100C.)
In summary, I understand that some engines may require thicker oils because of their design and/or the application they're used in. But I have a hard time accepting the theory that thicker oil is needed in all engines to prevent untimely camshaft wear in all applications. We've seen to many push-rod pig-iron flat tappet engines go 300K miles on lesser quality 5w30 or 10w30 conventional oils, and testing both in the laboratory and in the field substantiate such results.
"Take this engine, drop it in a mid-size car, add an oil heater in the pan to keep sump temperature at 302F, along with 5w20 conventional SM oil, set the cruise control for 100 mph and drive it for 4 days straight. If all I got was .001" of camshaft and .001" of lifter wear I'd be impressed. And actual testing on the better GF-4/SM conventional oils are actually getting 2/3 this wear limit."
With 0.001 in of wear in 150 hrs at 100mph for a good 5W20, one can see why they use heavier oils in Europe. I don't get over there often, but I do recall moving over for faster cars that were blinking at me when I was topped out cruising about 125 mph on a 750cc bike with a passenger. When traveling in Germany on the autobahn as a pasenger, where 80 mph to 85 mph seemed to be minimum for cars. My driver was averaging around 95 mph to 100 mph, with her husband in tow in another car, and we were just going places, not having sport or anything. Other trips with other people produced similar speeds.
It's now a good reason why I'll never use a 20W oil.
With 0.001 in of wear in 150 hrs at 100mph for a good 5W20, one can see why they use heavier oils in Europe. I don't get over there often, but I do recall moving over for faster cars that were blinking at me when I was topped out cruising about 125 mph on a 750cc bike with a passenger. When traveling in Germany on the autobahn as a pasenger, where 80 mph to 85 mph seemed to be minimum for cars. My driver was averaging around 95 mph to 100 mph, with her husband in tow in another car, and we were just going places, not having sport or anything. Other trips with other people produced similar speeds.
It's now a good reason why I'll never use a 20W oil.
Last time I drove on the AutoBahn people weren't required to install oil heaters in their engine's sump to keep the oil at 302F(150C).
All kidding aside, my limited experience with MBs, BMWs, Porsches and Audi's leads me to believe that 5w20s just won't work well in them in all but the mildest of applications. But I'm sure you could put a quality 5w20 in a Honda and run it flat out on the AutoBahn from one end of the country to the other with nary a problem.
[ July 24, 2005, 03:59 AM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
All kidding aside, my limited experience with MBs, BMWs, Porsches and Audi's leads me to believe that 5w20s just won't work well in them in all but the mildest of applications. But I'm sure you could put a quality 5w20 in a Honda and run it flat out on the AutoBahn from one end of the country to the other with nary a problem.
[ July 24, 2005, 03:59 AM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
But they don't because there is no CAFE and in europe it's felt that a 30w works better for everday use and a 40w may work even better under severe service. That you could run flat out all day with a 20w is more of an assumption than the cam wear issue on race cars being cured by a 40w. Can't do it here and they don't do it there.
Wrong. Totally different engine design.
"That you could run flat out all day with a 20w is more of an assumption than the cam wear issue on race cars being cured by a 40w. Can't do it here and they don't do it there."
Agreed. But, anyone have a Honda in Wyoming?
Agreed. But, anyone have a Honda in Wyoming?
It's about 483 miles from Hamburg to Munich. Unless you plan you trip during peak traffic events, it shouldn't take "all day" if your going as fast as the Autobahn, the vehicle and your driving skills allow.
And I have to laugh that we went from heresay by someone with a biased opinion on cam wear issues by a few amateur racers without any details on the engines, modifications, environment, etc, to 40 wt solves all cam wear issues on all race cars.
[ July 24, 2005, 03:45 PM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked