Interesting observation using Castrol Edge Full Syn 0W-16

[ZeeOSix]

I’m confused, are you saying that Valvoline 0W16 is thicker than 5W30 and more like a European 5w30? And I’m also confused about the monograde statement and the group Vll base stock. Are you saying it’s mostly a PAO oil and therefore able to stay in grade?

He's saying that if the shear rate is high enough, meaning much higher than the shear rate of 1M/sec used in the standard 150C HTHS viscosity measurement spec, that an oil with a better base oil and less VII can have more dynamic viscosity (cP) under those super high shear rate conditions than a thicker grade of oil that has more VII.

But if the shear rate is closer to the 1M/sec shear rate, then an oil with a higher HTHS spec is going to be more viscous at that standard or lower shear rate.

I'd like to see calculations of what the shear rates are on engine components like rod and crank journal bearings, cam lobes to followers and piston rings at max piston soeed, and at what engine RPM those components surpass the standard 1M/sec shear rate used to measure oil HTHS viscosity. I doubt people cruising in normal driving conditions below 3000 RPM are pushing the shear rate much over 1M/sec.

At at a shear rate of 1M/sec used in the standard HTHS test, almost all xW-30 grade oils are going to have a higher HTHS viscosity than a xW-20 grade oil.

 

[PWMDMD]

Again I trust my senses as much as measurements. Always have Always will

Sure about that?

Study on Engine Noise Level vs Oil Formulation

Thought this was somewhat interesting, especially the engine noise level vs oil formulation used data. We've all seen various threads where people say they can hear an engine noise level difference with different oils, and some say it's "all in their head" or "their ears aren't sensitive enough...

bobistheoilguy.com

This entire "paper" and specifically the paragraph below on engine noise says nothing meaningful about the ability of humans to perceive the sound differences between two oils whose viscosities differ by tiny amounts at operating temperature. There is nothing quantitative there comparing oils of different viscosities and the resultant level of noise they produce. How much of a difference must there be for a human to detect a difference in loudness? Under what conditions are humans capable of detecting this difference (in a sound-proof room, a garage, with dogs barking in the background, with road and other vehicle noise while moving)? Are there age groups who are capable of hearing this difference but others that can not? How does knowing something about an oil affect the listener's perception of loudness (ex. you know one is thicker than the other prior to listening)? Etc, etc, etc. It's not that there isn't a difference in noise level at all - I just call BS on people being able to detect that difference in real-world scenarios. But hey, I'm open to the idea that I could be wrong and I'd be happy to entertain verifiable and credible evidence from a trusted source saying otherwise.

"1.3. Effects of lubricant on the engine noise
When the engine changes in a large working condition, the moving parts inside the engine will be subjected to a large vibration shock. The buffering action of the lubricating oil will absorb a part of the impact and reduce the vibration of the parts. At the same time, under the oil lubrication, the vibration generated during the engine friction is reduced, thereby the mechanical noise of the engine is reduced [5].Under the cooling effect of the lubricating oil, the lubricating oil assists the engine to dissipate heat, and avoids the knocking due to the excessive temperature of the engine, thereby reducing the combustion noise of the engine. At present, the average indoor noise of small cars is about 65dB, and the average value of medium-sized cars is about 61.63dB [4]. Engine vibration will affect the service life of the engine, and the noise will affect the comfort of the vehicle. If the engine can reduce vibration and noise through the oil, it will improve the service life of engine and comfort inside the car [6-7]."

 

[bbhero]

Noise difference does happen....At times.

Does it matter ?

No in a vast, vast majority of cases...

Say a vehicle well taken care of and one oil sounds louder vs another oil... When both oils were just put in.

Any issue there ?

Absolutely not. The louder sounding oil is still working as it should be. For some very technical and scientific reason it just sounds louder vs another oil in the same vehicle

I do wonder what those legit very bad oils like the ones testing extremely bad on the PQIA site would sound like in a previously well maintained motor ???

With hardly no additives... Like API SA type oils.. And then some of those oils with silicon in them... Wonder how they would sound ?

I hypothesize those oils would likely be quite loud.. . But hey could be wrong about that.

There are times when different motor sounds are a problem... But that is for real mechanical issues. That's a whole different discussion all together.

 

[Retirednow]

I’ll go by UOA results, not ‘sounds’.

 

[IveBeenRued]

OP, I grabbed up 15 quarts of the Castrol 0W-16 oil during the recent Autozone clearance. Once I start running it in a few thousand miles, I’ll report back if I hear a difference. Of the 0W-16 oils that I’ve run in my RAV4 so far the loudest was M1AFE, followed by SuperTech, and the quietest was Valvoline. M1EP 0W-20 sounded about the same as SuperTech 0W-16.

Don’t worry about the folk sh**ting all of over your thread. I don’t know why these threads get so heated. There can be a difference in how an engine sounds with different oils. Does it make a difference in protection? No, it doesn’t seem to. That said, it is always nicer to have a quieter ride, so enjoy the Castrol!

 

[Urshurak776]

At least you're changing the oil which is better than 95% of drivers out there. Use your favorite 0w16 and be done with it. The car won't know the difference.

Sooo true!

A few years ago (we have moved since then) I had a neighbor that bought a brand new Nissan Frontier pickup. He had a side business doing landscaping, so he towed a trailer with equipment and stuff on weekends and some evenings. He asked me if I would help him change the oil himself as he had never done it and wanted to save some money. He had 23,000 miles on it (had truck about 10 months) and had NEVER done any maintenance on it at all! Nothing.....no oil, filters, nothing. Just put gas in it. I checked dipstick and it was about 3/4.

I asked him about his warranty and he wasn't worried about it, so, yeah. I made him agree I would have no responsibility at all for what happens here on out, so I changed it with him and showed him how to do it. To be honest, the oil didn't look as bad as I was expecting, and I cut the filter open and believe it or not, it looked okay also. No tears. Not even sure what Nissan uses for OEM filter. Put in 6 quarts of Havoline Full synthetic and a WIX / NAPA Gold filter. Since then, I have gotten him to change it between 7-10K. Better than before anyway. Still going strong.

Sorry OP for the de-rail, just got me thinking.

 

[Hermann]

Sooo true!

A few years ago (we have moved since then) I had a neighbor that bought a brand new Nissan Frontier pickup. He had a side business doing landscaping, so he towed a trailer with equipment and stuff on weekends and some evenings. He asked me if I would help him change the oil himself as he had never done it and wanted to save some money. He had 23,000 miles on it (had truck about 10 months) and had NEVER done any maintenance on it at all! Nothing.....no oil, filters, nothing. Just put gas in it. I checked dipstick and it was about 3/4.

I asked him about his warranty and he wasn't worried about it, so, yeah. I made him agree I would have no responsibility at all for what happens here on out, so I changed it with him and showed him how to do it. To be honest, the oil didn't look as bad as I was expecting, and I cut the filter open and believe it or not, it looked okay also. No tears. Not even sure what Nissan uses for OEM filter. Put in 6 quarts of Havoline Full synthetic and a WIX / NAPA Gold filter. Since then, I have gotten him to change it between 7-10K. Better than before anyway. Still going strong.

Sorry OP for the de-rail, just got me thinking.

It's about changing oil when needed. As someone else said "it's why we are here".
I merely expressed an observation. Thanks to ALL that posted.

 

[Hermann]

What?! Your senses are interpreted by your brain and therefore completely SUBJECTIVE. This is THE reason scientific instrumentation exists. Nothing manipulates sensory data more than the human brain.

My human brain likes what is sensing. The noise reduction is enough, that when the power meter was between 1/2 to 3/4 of the range, going up a long grade on a recent mountainous trip, the 4 cyl engine actually had a somewhat "snarky" sound. Just another observation. Long trips let you notice things that are not part of the everyday "ambience" and brings them to your attention.

 

[Gokhan]

I’m confused, are you saying that Valvoline 0W16 is thicker than 5W30 and more like a European 5w30? And I’m also confused about the monograde statement and the group Vll base stock. Are you saying it’s mostly a PAO oil and therefore able to stay in grade?

Yes, Mobil 1 Advanced Protection 0W-16 is thicker than most ILSAC 5W-30 oils as far as wear protection is concerned because it is a monograde. Its HTHS is lower, but it will be thicker in the valvetrain, timing chain, and upper cylinder rings, where most engine wear occurs. It will be even as thick in the bearings when the vehicle is tracked at extreme loads and extreme RPMs, which increases the temporary oil shear.

OK, there is actually a very small amount of VII—I estimate it to be about 0.3%—therefore, technically it is not a monograde but very close.

No, it's probably Group III+, and there is no such thing as Group VII.

 

[Titan]

...engine actually had a somewhat "snarky" sound. Just another observation.

I would consider "snarky" a negative sound. Just another observation. Both worth what any readers paid for them...nothing.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Yes, Mobil 1 Advanced Protection 0W-16 is thicker than most ILSAC 5W-30 oils as far as wear protection is concerned because it is a monograde. Its HTHS is lower, but it will be thicker in the valvetrain, timing chain, and upper cylinder rings, where most engine wear occurs. It will be even as thick in the bearings when the vehicle is tracked at extreme loads and extreme RPMs, which increases the temporary oil shear.

Have you calculated the shear rate of those engine components for a normal street driven vehicle that mostly stays below 3000 RPM? I can't see the shear rate of oil on a timing chain being over 1M/sec.

Not sure I'm totally buying it, because if xW-16 or xW-20 was so much better for high RPM wear then why don't motorcycle makers spec those oils for their engines that can rev to 10,000+ RPM, which certainly would push some engine components above the standard HTHS shear rate of 1M/sec.

 

[Oliveoil2]

Have you calculated the shear rate of those engine components for a normal street driven vehicle that mostly stays below 3000 RPM? I can't see the shear rate of oil on a timing chain being over 1M/sec.

Not sure I'm totally buying it, because if xW-16 or xW-20 was so much better for high RPM wear then why don't motorcycle makers spec those oils for their engines that can rev to 10,000+ RPM, which certainly would push some engine components above the standard HTHS shear rate of 1M/sec.

Because most motorcycles have a shared sump.

 

[Gokhan]

Have you calculated the shear rate of those engine components for a normal street driven vehicle that mostly stays below 3000 RPM? I can't see the shear rate of oil on a timing chain being over 1M/sec.

Not sure I'm totally buying it, because if xW-16 or xW-20 was so much better for high RPM wear then why don't motorcycle makers spec those oils for their engines that can rev to 10,000+ RPM, which certainly would push some engine components above the standard HTHS shear rate of 1M/sec.

Shear rates in timing chain and valvetrain in normal rpms will be over 100 million per second. See the Hugh Spikes paper in the whitepapers section here.

Motorcycles don't spec an ILSAC 5W-30—they spec SAE 40 and SAE 50, with HTFS typically over 3 cP, 4 cP, and even 5 cP. Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W-50 has HTHS = 5.8 cP and HTFS = 5.0 cP.

 

[ZeeOSix]

This entire "paper" and specifically the paragraph below on engine noise says nothing meaningful about the ability of humans to perceive the sound differences between two oils whose viscosities differ by tiny amounts at operating temperature. There is nothing quantitative there comparing oils of different viscosities and the resultant level of noise they produce.

The paper was a study of the oil formulation effect on the measured engine noise level, among a few other things. It wasn't a test of humans' ears to perceive differences in noises - that's dependent of how well someone's hearing is, and obviously some people can hear better than others. Section 3 says Oil A was 5W-20 and Oil B was 5W-30. They don't say what viscosity the debugging oil was, but they said Oil A, B and the debugging oil was sold on the market (Sec 5.2.1).

 

[ZeeOSix]

Shear rates in timing chain and valvetrain in normal rpms will be over 100 million per second. See the Hugh Spikes paper in the whitepapers section here.

I'll take a look. Can't believe that they would be running at 100 times more than the standard HTHS test rate of 1M/sec. The valve train runs at half the speed of the crankshaft, so how can they be running at a shear rate that high? Have you ran the calculations yourself to verify that paper?

Motorcycles don't spec an ILSAC 5W-30—they spec SAE 40 and SAE 50, with HTFS typically over 3 cP, 4 cP, and even 5 cP. Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W-50 has HTHS = 5.8 cP and HTFS = 5.0 cP.

Honda specs 5W-30 for some of their motorcycles ... many of them very high revving.

 

[Gokhan]

I'll take a look. Can't believe that they would be running at 100 times more than the standard HTHS test rate of 1M/sec. The valve train runs at half the speed of the crankshaft, so how can they be running at a shear rate that high? Have you ran the calculations yourself to verify that paper?


Honda specs 5W-30 for some of their motorcycles ... many of them very high revving.

Shear rate is the relative speed of sliding parts divided by the separation between them. When the separation is almost zero, the shear rate becomes very high.

I am not sure what you mean by verifying. They did a tremendous amount of research there with a newly developed viscometer capable of a shear rate of ten million per second. Regular viscometers can only go up to a shear rate of one million per second, which is the shear rate HTHS measured at. There is a lot of viscosity decrease going up from a shear rate of one million per second to ten million per second due to the increasing temporary shear of the VII. Therefore, HTHS doesn't tell the whole story. Even in the bearings, the shear rate will increase with decreasing minimum oil-film thickness (MOFT) at higher loads and/or increasing rpm.

VII (VM), shear, base-oil viscosity, HTHSV, friction, and wear: State of the art

I will discuss a recent paper on the subject in this thread.

bobistheoilguy.com

 

[ZeeOSix]

Shear rate is the relative speed of sliding parts divided by the separation between them. When the separation is almost zero, the shear rate becomes very high.

I am not sure what you mean by verifying. They did a tremendous amount of research there with a newly developed viscometer capable of a shear rate of ten million per second. Regular viscometers can only go up to a shear rate of one million per second.

VII (VM), shear, base-oil viscosity, HTHSV, friction, and wear: State of the art

I will discuss a recent paper on the subject in this thread.

bobistheoilguy.com

Is this the Hugh Spikes paper you mentioned in post #33?

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11249-018-1039-5.pdf

There is absolutely no information showing what the shear rates are inside any engine in that paper. Where is the information showing what the calculated shear rates are in all the engine components as a function of engine RPM, and the oil film thickness too of course? A thicker oil should give a larger MOFT, and therefore help reduce the shear rate. Just because they made a bench test machine that can shear at 100M/sec doesn't mean that engines cruising around at 3000 RPM or less are shearing oil at that rate.

 

[Odd_Ball]

'This is quieter, that is noisier' is all based on emotions and assumptions. Quietness isn't a measurable performance criteria for motor oil.

But you sure will get a lot of opinions and feelings about it. So there's that.

Good luck!

There are many things today that are "measurable performance criteria for motor oil" that were not 20 years ago.

As others have noted, engine noise is certainly a measurable quantity. Whether or not engine noise correlates to something we care about (e.g. engine life) we probably don't know. But it's certainly not implausible. It definitely indicates that there is something different between two oils when one is noticeable quieter than the other.

In any case, for some a quieter engine might be a desirable outcome in and of itself.

 

[Gokhan]

Is this the Hugh Spikes paper you mentioned in post #33?

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11249-018-1039-5.pdf

There is absolutely no information showing what the shear rates are inside any engine in that paper. Where is the information showing what the calculated shear rates are in all the engine components as a function of engine RPM, and the oil film thickness too of course? A thicker oil should give a larger MOFT, and therefore help reduce the shear rate. Just because they made a bench test machine that can shear at 100M/sec doesn't mean that engines cruising around at 3000 RPM or less are shearing oil at that rate.

The shear rates are given in the same thread I linked above, by a different paper.

VII (VM), shear, base-oil viscosity, HTHSV, friction, and wear: State of the art

I will discuss a recent paper on the subject in this thread.

bobistheoilguy.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the shear rates encountered in an internal-combustion engine:

Bearing: 100,000–5,000,000 (10⁵–5×10⁶) second⁻¹
Piston rings: 20,000,000 (2×10⁷) second⁻¹ (peak rate)
Valvetrain: 200,000,000 (2×10⁸) second⁻¹ (peak rate)

Note again that HTHS viscosity is measured and reported at 1,000,000 (1×10⁶) second⁻¹ shear rate, which lies somewhere near the middle of the shear-rate range for the bearings and its primary purposes are to correlate with the fuel economy and to serve as a sufficiently high viscosity for the protection of the bearings.

Shear rates are taken from the following paper:

Shear rates in engines and implications for lubricant design
R. I. Taylor (1) and B. R. de Kraker (2)
(1) Shell Global Solutions (UK), Manchester, UK (2) Shell Global Solutions US Inc., Houston, TX, USA March 1, 2017

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[ZeeOSix]

The shear rates are given in the same thread I linked above, by a different paper.

VII (VM), shear, base-oil viscosity, HTHSV, friction, and wear: State of the art

I will discuss a recent paper on the subject in this thread.

bobistheoilguy.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the shear rates encountered in an internal-combustion engine:

Bearing: 100,000–5,000,000 (10⁵–5×10⁶) second⁻¹
Piston rings: 20,000,000 (2×10⁷) second⁻¹ (peak rate)
Valvetrain: 200,000,000 (2×10⁸) second⁻¹ (peak rate)

Note again that HTHS viscosity is measured and reported at 1,000,000 (1×10⁶) second⁻¹ shear rate, which lies somewhere near the middle of the shear-rate range for the bearings and its primary purposes are to correlate with the fuel economy and to serve as a sufficiently high viscosity for the protection of the bearings.

Shear rates are taken from the following paper:

Shear rates in engines and implications for lubricant design
R. I. Taylor (1) and B. R. de Kraker (2)
(1) Shell Global Solutions (UK), Manchester, UK (2) Shell Global Solutions US Inc., Houston, TX, USA March 1, 2017

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It says "peak shear rates can be as high has as". Exactly what kind of engine(s) at what max RPM are they talking about? Quote from the article:

"It is found that shear rates in journal bearings are typically in the range of 10^5 to 5 × 10^6 s−1, whilst peak shear rates for the piston rings can be as high as 2 × 10^7 s−1, and for the valve train, peak shear rates can reach 2 × 10^8 s−1."

Do a calculation on a 2" dia big end rod bearing turning at 6,000 RPM (V8 at high RPM) with a MOFT of say 30 microns and see what the shear rate is.
In that example I calculated the shear rate as shown below:

S = Velocity between the parts divided by the distance between the parts (the oil film thickness).
S = 628.32 in/sec divided by 0.0011811 in = 531,979/sec (0.53 x 10^6/sec).
S = About half of the 150C HTHS rate of 1M/sec ... which correlates with the numbers quoted in the article.

If someone is normally cruising around at 2000 - 3000 RPM, then the shear rate in the journal bearings is going to be 2 to 3 times less than 0.5 x 10^6/sec. And likewise, the shear rate going on every place else in the engine will be 2 to 3 times less than what it would be at 6,000 RPM.

If the MOFT was only 15 microns, then the shear rate would be real close to 1M/sec.
I'd like to see the engine that can reach 2 x 10^8/sec in the valve train (and at what RPM), when the cam(s) rotate at half the speed of the crankshaft RPM. Maybe it's because the MOFT is like 1-2 microns. I'll have to run the numbers to see.