Is PAO an advantage with a VW turbo?

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by KCJeep
Curious if you know whether PAO stands up to turbo abuse better than all Group III oils. I do 10k OCIs on the Tiguan and have already purchased some Valvoline Euro 5w40 for it's upcoming change, but as far as I know it's Grp III entirely and later I got to thinking (the BITOG curse).

I can dump the Valvoline in the Kia no problem it's about due as well.

Only readily available Euro oil with significant PAO I can think of is Castrol 0w40 (what's in it now) are there others?

Thanks

If everything else is the same, PAO is better of course because it has higher oxidation resistance. This results in longer oil life and less engine and turbocharger deposits.

The most-demanding specs like the Euro-OEM 0W-20 oils tend to use PAO.

The add pack still needs to be good and compatible with the base oil though.

Don't forget about POE and AN.

Castrol 0W-40 is about one-half-PAO. There is no POE or AN. The rest is Group III.

M1 0W-40 is about one-quarter-PAO. The rest is mostly GTL (Group III+++) and up to about 10% of the base oil is POE. POE can make a big difference in turbocharger and other demanding applications, as it has a very high cleaning power.

I would go with M1 0W-40.

Not according to this SDS:
https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-fs-0w-40/

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Not according to this SDS:
https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-fs-0w-40/

I was giving the percentage of PAO in base oil. The base-oil should be no more than about 75% of the finished oil in a typical full-SAPS 0W-40, the rest being the detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) package and VII. A full-SAPS 0W-40 would have particularly high DDI and VII contents.

MSDS says 10-20% PAO. Dividing that by 75% results in 13-27% PAO in base oil.

 

[TiGeo]

Originally Posted by KCJeep
Originally Posted by TiGeo
What specifically do folks think they get with a group 4 over 3? Lower wear? Stays within viscosity longer?


I was thinking about it from the high heat due to the turbo. Was curious if PAO would be any advantage. I have had multiple UOAs from several vehicles with Grp III oils and the results were great. Never done one on the turbo though.


All my UOAs using a primarily Group 3 oil (Liquimoly) in my turbocharged and modified car that I beat on look v. good. I think the focus on what group the base stock is is trumped by the approvals.

 

[wemay]

I don't think KCJeep is saying GrpIII won't do a great job. The question is would an oil containing more GrplV do the job better. For instance, after a given number of miles would the engine have less deposits, less signs of wear, less varnish, consume less, etc., even if the Grplll is well within acceptable results.

And since we're on the topic, GTL even outperforms PAO in certain independent testing we've had posted here in the past.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4622877/PAO_properties_compared_to_GTL

As we often do here..."splitting hairs"

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by edyvw
Not according to this SDS:
https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-fs-0w-40/

I was giving the percentage of PAO in base oil. The base-oil should be no more than about 75% of the finished oil in a typical full-SAPS 0W-40, the rest being the detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) package and VII. A full-SAPS 0W-40 would have particularly high DDI and VII contents.

MSDS says 10-20% PAO. Dividing that by 75% results in 13-27% PAO in base oil.

And where is POE here? Give us some more should not, typical etc.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by wemay
I don't think KCJeep is saying GrpIII won't do a great job. The question is would an oil containing more GrplV do the job better. For instance, after a given number of miles would the engine have less deposits, less signs of wear, less varnish, consume less, etc., even if the Grplll is well within acceptable results.

And since we're on the topic, GTL even outperforms PAO in certain independent testing we've had posted here in the past.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4622877/PAO_properties_compared_to_GTL

As we often do here..."splitting hairs"

Is this:
My wear numbers with xxxx oil was 14. With this xxxx oil is 12. That is it, I won lottery.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by wemay
I don't think KCJeep is saying GrpIII won't do a great job. The question is would an oil containing more GrplV do the job better. For instance, after a given number of miles would the engine have less deposits, less signs of wear, less varnish, consume less, etc., even if the Grplll is well within acceptable results.

And since we're on the topic, GTL even outperforms PAO in certain independent testing we've had posted here in the past.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4622877/PAO_properties_compared_to_GTL

As we often do here..."splitting hairs"

Is this:
My wear numbers with xxxx oil was 14. With this xxxx oil is 12. That is it, I won lottery.

Ok, ok...

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by edyvw
Not according to this SDS:
https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-fs-0w-40/
I was giving the percentage of PAO in base oil. The base-oil should be no more than about 75% of the finished oil in a typical full-SAPS 0W-40, the rest being the detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) package and VII. A full-SAPS 0W-40 would have particularly high DDI and VII contents.

MSDS says 10-20% PAO. Dividing that by 75% results in 13-27% PAO in base oil.

And where is POE here? Give us some more should not, typical etc.

Wow.

You did not know that the MSDS values don't list the base oil but the finished oil, and a good chunk of the percentage comes from the detergent and VII, especially in a full-SAPS oil, and you are mocking other board members to cover up your ignorance?

POE is inferred from the FTIR oxidation results.

If you are ignorant on a subject, why don't you kindly ask questions so that you can learn instead of rudely pretending to know something that you don't know.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by wemay
I don't think KCJeep is saying GrpIII won't do a great job. The question is would an oil containing more GrplV do the job better. For instance, after a given number of miles would the engine have less deposits, less signs of wear, less varnish, consume less, etc., even if the Grplll is well within acceptable results.

And since we're on the topic, GTL even outperforms PAO in certain independent testing we've had posted here in the past.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4622877/PAO_properties_compared_to_GTL

As we often do here..."splitting hairs"

What people don't understand is that (1) "GTL" does not refer to a particular base oil or base-oil quality and (2) GTL is Group III. GTL only refers to the feedstock used in making the base oil, which is natural-gas-based. Actual GTL base stocks vary greatly in quality, and this depends on the severity of the hydroprocessing as in any other Group III base stock. It is much cheaper to make a, say, Group III++++ or Group IIId GTL base stock than a Group III++++ or Group IIId petroleum base stock because when you start with a natural-gas-based feedstock, the severity of the process needs to be less, therefore decreasing the cost to that of making a Group I base stock through traditional refining.

Shell GTL base stocks don't seem to be particularly high in quality, meaning they don't run their hydroprocessing severely enough.

Mobil 1's internal tests showed that Shell's GTL-based Pennzoil Platinum with PurePlus has showed no improvement whatsoever over the previous petroleum-based Pennzoil Platinum, and Mobil 1 greatly outperforms Pennzoil Platinum with PurePlus GTL in oxidation tests.

 

[blingo]

Would be quite a difference in base oil quality found in a pic. So, what do you believe happens to Shell's GTL as you wanted to show starting after 50 or 75 hours that might happen to others starting after 150 hours?

 

[wemay]

I'm not surprised that any test Mobil1 runs would 'outperform' whom ever the opposition was. This goes for all oil companies, not just Mobil.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by blingo
Would be quite a difference in base oil quality found in a pic. So, what do you believe happens to Shell's GTL as you wanted to show starting after 50 or 75 hours that might happen to others starting after 150 hours?

The test evaluates the viscosity increase due to oxidative thickening in a finished oil. Oxidation resistance of the finished oil is related to both the base-oil quality and antioxidant type and content. Once the oil thickens beyond a certain point, it is no longer serviceable because it has oxidized too much. Oxidation resistance and OCI length is what separates a conventional oil from a synthetic oil and a premium synthetic from a low-quality synthetic.

https://www.astm.org/Standards/D6984.htm

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by wemay
I'm not surprised that any test Mobil1 runs would 'outperform' whom ever the opposition was. This goes for all oil companies, not just Mobil.

It's true that companies tend to cherry-pick what makes them look better.

However, (1) this is an internal document, not marketing communication; (2) there is little reason to doubt that the comparison of PP without PurePlus and PP with PurePlus is not honest, and (3) per my previous point, GTL does not refer to base-oil quality and it is a type of Group III base oil -- if PP already had a Group III+++ base oil before the PurePlus GTL, they did not have much room for improvement, as the Mobil 1 study showed.

Again, GTL is more for economical reasons, not for quality reasons, as GTL is much, much cheaper to make than petroleum-based Group III.

This is not to say that GTL base oils are not of high-quality -- it is important to understand that they vary in quality and they are still Group III base oils, and PAO certainly has a significant edge over GTL in base-oil quality. They also have recently made some newer enhanced low-viscosity PAO base stocks that leave GTL base stocks totally in the dust. It is hard for base stocks made through hydroprocessing of hydrocarbons to compete with true synthetics custom-made in a laboratory.

 

[blingo]

But what - specific to Shell's Alkanes in there - could happen after these 50 or 75 hours instead of 150 hours to competitors alkanes according to your belief? Topoi of antioxidants wouldn't speak against Shell's GTL as insinuated. So your elaborated beliefs regarding Pure Plus would be interesting.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by blingo
But what - specific to Shell's Alkanes in there - could happen after these 50 or 75 hours instead of 150 hours to competitors alkanes according to your belief? Topoi of antioxidants wouldn't speak against Shell's GTL as insinuated. So your elaborated beliefs regarding Pure Plus would be interesting.

Again, the study evaluates one finished oil against another, and it shows that GTL hasn't improved over petroleum-based Group III in Pennzoil Platinum's case. It does not question Shell's ability or inability of picking the proper antioxidant.

 

[blingo]

You wanted to question brand's base oil quality / sufficient severity of hydroprocessing... and chose to illustrate with this pic. I knew what to think of the essay but chose to ask.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by blingo
You wanted to question brand's base oil quality / sufficient severity of hydroprocessing... and chose to illustrate with this pic. I knew what to think of the essay but chose to ask.

You are being argumentative. It is not an apples vs. oranges comparison. It is comparing the PP before and after the GTL transition, and it is showing nearly identical results. That's all there is to it.

 

[wemay]

But I've also read some white papers posted by Gokhan where he mentions...

Originally Posted by Gokhan
GTL seems to beat PAO in many instances as well. Go figure. GTL can have slower oxidation, less engine deposits...


It comes from the link I posted in a previous reply. Could this just be old information and advances in PAO have now widened the gap?

 

[blingo]

The Mobil 1 ain't that heavy in PAO either and so it shows by its curve about the same performance - just later in run time. No more progress beyond the non Pure Plus XHVI or whatever by Exxon? It was bogus throughout to begin insinuating with this poor pic.
That's what was more to it from your side, Gokhan.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by blingo
You wanted to question brand's base oil quality / sufficient severity of hydroprocessing... and chose to illustrate with this pic. I knew what to think of the essay but chose to ask.
You are being argumentative. It is not an apples vs. oranges comparison. It is comparing the PP before and after the GTL transition, and it is showing nearly identical results. That's all there is to it.

Look back at his posting history and you'll see that this has been a common theme. In fact, you were the one who pointed that out before.