One thing people here have noticed about the new Havoline DS is that the 30-weight versions are 9.7 cst, just barely a 30-weight, presumable so the oil doesn't shear much (less VI), and delivers good mileage. A lot of people have made the general statement that this is a 'new' tactic, blending an oil very thin to get the benefit of the grade lower, but getting the name recognition of the grade they want.
This isn't a new tactic, IF the information I found on a Caddy board is correct:
"BTW...some of the oil makers back in the 70's and 80's knew of the potential issues with the 10W40 SE and SF oils. They wanted to offer a 10W40 product to be competitive in the market place (due to the public's perception that the 10W40 was the best thing around) but did not want to run the risk of the high VI content or using a better VI package that would have put them in a poor price position in the market place....so.....10W40 Texaco Havoline, for example, was "barely" 40 weight. Just barely. Just high enough in viscosity when hot to squeek thru the lower end of the 40 weight specs hot. Just barely enough VI improver to make it the "40" designation. There were some competitors 10W30 oils that were as thick hot as the 10W40 Havoline due to the limited use of the VI package to just barely meet the spec while minimizing the VI content."
Interesting that it is Havoline doing it both times.....although this is probably also true of Pennzoil 10W-40, which is currently 13.6 cst, a very thin 40-weight. I just always assumend that in the 'old days' thicker was better, so that any oil would be more likely to be blended to the thick end of the grade. Interesting stuff!
This isn't a new tactic, IF the information I found on a Caddy board is correct:
"BTW...some of the oil makers back in the 70's and 80's knew of the potential issues with the 10W40 SE and SF oils. They wanted to offer a 10W40 product to be competitive in the market place (due to the public's perception that the 10W40 was the best thing around) but did not want to run the risk of the high VI content or using a better VI package that would have put them in a poor price position in the market place....so.....10W40 Texaco Havoline, for example, was "barely" 40 weight. Just barely. Just high enough in viscosity when hot to squeek thru the lower end of the 40 weight specs hot. Just barely enough VI improver to make it the "40" designation. There were some competitors 10W30 oils that were as thick hot as the 10W40 Havoline due to the limited use of the VI package to just barely meet the spec while minimizing the VI content."
Interesting that it is Havoline doing it both times.....although this is probably also true of Pennzoil 10W-40, which is currently 13.6 cst, a very thin 40-weight. I just always assumend that in the 'old days' thicker was better, so that any oil would be more likely to be blended to the thick end of the grade. Interesting stuff!
