Infineum comments on HTHS limits for PC-9...

[Joe90_guy]

I stumbled upon what I think is an old Infineum presentation on the internet.

I'm not altogether sure what to make of it, or what's behind it, but it seems to contain a great deal of data on the various types of viscosity loss (KV100, HTHS, KO30, etc).

I tried copying the link over but this doesn't work..

The file exists as a pdf that can be found on 'Elit-oil.io.ua > Files' and the name of the PDF is 00011631.pdf

The easiest thing is to just type the title of this thread into Google and download the PDF yourself.

If any kind person does know how to copy the link, can they add it to the post. Thanks.

 

[Quattro Pete]

http://elit-oil.io.ua/files/0001/16/00011631.pdf

 

[OneEyeJack]

Need more help with link info.

Go to "Switch to Full Reply Screen" and setup the link from there.

 

[Garak]

Thanks for that. I'll have to take some time and go through this.

 

[Joe90_guy]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
http://elit-oil.io.ua/files/0001/16/00011631.pdf


Many thanks. Why couldn't I do that??? Must be going daft in my dotage...

 

[SR5]

Thanks Joe90,

It looks interesting, I need to read it a second time in more detail, but they seem to be suggesting that the After Shear HTHS is an important performance indicator.

And here is a nice little summary of SSI (Shear Stability Index)

https://www.oronite.com/paratone/calcviscosity.aspx

For those like me who need to be reminded of these things.

 

[Shannow]

SR5,
HTHS is really the determinant in areas that require protection from viscosity rather than additives.

So it's sensible that the last half an OCI should protect properly, so post shear HTHS is worth reviewing.

As per previous thread, there's a race between shear thinning and oxidative thickening in an engine, while these tests test just the shear thinning side (which is great for a standardised test).

Here's one of the few data sheets that I've seen that display the post shear HTHS

http://www.schaefferoil.com/documents/230-711-td.pdf

I think something smells about this data sheet, as can be seen from Joe's link (and others), the percentage HTHS loss is typically about half the percentage KV loss.

The linked data sheet shows nearly 14% HTHS loss, which should make it 28% (ish) KV100 loss and drop it out of grade (10-12cst is a pretty broad range, but even 12 gets knocked out at less than 25%.

But they list the KV loss as only 9.2%, which clearly doesn't add up to what oils "typically" get up to.

 

[Joe90_guy]

I had another read of the presentation. I started wondering why Infineum would go to so much trouble basically to stick with a existing spec regime (the one in CH-4 based on KO30).

Then it occurred to me that maybe someone, somewhere, concerned about 10W30 HDDO shear, proposed a shift in the HTHS spec from 2.9 min to 3.3 min (this is alluded to in the presentation) or even 3.5 min (borrowing the ACEA limit). If this was the case, this would have been prejudicial for the Shellvis VII polymers that Infineum sell (but only in the 10W30 grade, with the more widely use 15W40s being okay).

It looks like API CI-4 (what PC-9 morphed into) did indeed finally carry a 3.5 min HTHS for all viscosity grades. Not sure what this did for 10W30s (HDDO isn't my forté).

 

[SR5]

Hi Shannow, yes I agree having a HTHS reserve for long oil change intervals is important. It would be good if everybody published starting HTHS and post shear test HTHS in their data sheets. It would help you judge the quality of the VII package. I suspect some oils wouldn't age as well as others.

This is just a dream, it's hard enough getting Zinc/Phos/SAPS, TBN, Noack and regular HTHS & KV out of most manufacturers. Well almost impossible to be honest. So a shear HTHS & KV is a big ask.

I really don't understand why the manufacturers don't supply better product info sheets. They know the answers already, they know most people don't care and don't change their own oil, so who cares if a few oil nerds sweat over which TBN and SAPS level is best for their next oil change.

 

[Jetronic]

or do like I do...

My car requires 2.9 HTHS minimum, so I use an A3/B4/C3 oil, hich after initial shear and a bit of fuel dilution isn't likely to drop below 2.9...

I also drive low rpmp when in traffic (1000-1200 rpm typically), and very highrpm and load when the roads are clear (4000+ on my diesel) so a bit extra hths isn't going to hurt any. It's the mid rpm (2000-2500) where I'm not much, and which is easiest on oil. this region probably needs the least HTHS esp with moderate loads.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
It looks like API CI-4 (what PC-9 morphed into) did indeed finally carry a 3.5 min HTHS for all viscosity grades. Not sure what this did for 10W30s (HDDO isn't my forté).

Obviously, you don't need my help interpreting ACEA specifications. But, I might be able to give you a bit of a background as to what was going on in North America, though certainly not to the same degree of detail as some other posters might. At least I can let you know a couple things based upon what was on our shelves.

At the times you're alluding to, when CI-4 came out, much of the "mess" in North American HDEOs was finally straightened out. CH-4 wasn't even terribly problematic. Before that, though, there was the very real risk of running into HDEOs with HTHS significantly less than 3.5, venturing well into ILSAC territory. The 10w-40 matter on SAE J300 at the time wasn't helpful. You could even find a fair number of fuel economy PCMOs that still did cover a current (at the time) API diesel specification. So, grabbing a 10w-40 with a CF rating was little guarantee of anything by way of HTHS.

The protocol at the time was to stick to "real" HDEOs. That is, don't grab some Essolube 10w-30 PCMO off the shelf that has a CF rating. Buy the Esso XD-3 (or competitor's HDEO equivalent) in the 10w-30. Of course, the people who used 15w40 didn't have a lot to worry about, but those who lived in certain climates and with certain applications that called for a 10w-30 for parts of the year would benefit from caution.

There was an XD-3 5w30 back around the CG-4 days, but by the time the CJ-4 rollout was ongoing, the product was deprecated. It took a pretty long time until we got another 5w30 HDEO on our shelves, but they're back.