ISO-SYN additive package

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bror - I don't think that Pennzoil or anyone else sells a "pure" Group II plus oil. If you wade through the various Chevron links and associated publications, they indicate that other producers make a low viscosity Group II plus base oil similar to their 5R. No other Group II plus base stocks are indicated.

The best conventional oils are blends of all hydrocracked Group II base stocks. It is the absence of Group I base oils in the blend that provides the greatest improvement in oil stability. Even thought a Group II base can contain as much as 10% unsaturated hydrocarbons, typical hydrocracked Group II base oils contain dispersant and anti-wear compounds. This, plus the need for less VI improver allows for the competitive prices. Good chemistry and efficient manufacturing procedures keeps the costs low.
 
Chevron's product book also shows a 4R and 7R in UCBOs.
Their thickest II shown is 600R at 12.5@100C.
The 5R is in the II listings at 117 VI and 4.7 cSt@100c.
Perfect for ATFs and 5W20s?
 
UF,

The 5R, 4 Cst, 117 VI base stock is actually the one most commonly used to make 15w-40 diesel oils ....I just read an article on this in last months Lubes 'n Greases magazine ....

The heavier petroleum basestocks can't be used to make multigrades, since the cold flow properties just aren' there ....They can be used to make your favorite monogrades
wink.gif


4 Cst Group III base stock - PP of approx -20F

4 Cst PAO base stock - PP of approx -75F

Even the Group III stock require significant "doping" with PPD's ....

Tooslick
 
quote:

Originally posted by Ray H:

quote:

Originally posted by Robbie Alexander:
What, 120... I don't buy that. Common... I just started using a new oil and it is suppose to be a Basestock Group II or II+ and it has a VI of 150. What's up! there's gotta be more to it than just that.

Robbie, the answer should be obvious: Viscosity Index Improver - part of the finished lube oil's additive package.


Okay... BUT:
The other (older one) is a DIFFERENT BASESTOCK and DIFFERENT REFINING process. It's (older*one) Vi was between 90-135 depending on the weight and type of viscosity (straight or multi)...
the new, oil uses NOTHING the same from the older oil, it was done from scratch...

I guess my question is HOW can you have 2 different (completely) basestocks and additives and Refining methods, and still come up with a Group II or II+?
 
quote:

So is Pennzoil the only company currently packaging a Group II+ (base) oil as their "regular" conventional?

Can anyone address this? I seem to remember a Pennzoil rep saying that all Pennzoil motor oils were made from group II+. Johnny?
confused.gif
 
Well I thought that the base oils that came from the Excell Paralube plant which was a joint venture of Pennzoil /Conoco that were used in the Pennzoil Multi Vis oil was group II+ only, same as Conoco Hydroclear - Motorcraft but now that Shell has aquired things and sold their 1/2 of the plant my answer is...dunno
smile.gif


It's still a good oil with a meritless reputation for having a bunch of wax in it and causing the headlights to blow out among a host of other wives tales .
 
quote:

Originally posted by Motorbike:
It's still a good oil with a meritless reputation for having a bunch of wax in it and causing the headlights to blow out among a host of other wives tales .

You're absolutely right, though Pennzoil with PureBase does make your springs sag...
 
quote:

Originally posted by Robbie Alexander:
I guess my question is HOW can you have 2 different (completely) basestocks and additives and Refining methods, and still come up with a Group II or II+?

Either I've been sniffing too much oil, (very possible...) or you're confusing finished lube oils with their base stocks. If I'm reading your statement correctly, you're stating that the finished product is Group II or Group II+ or whatever? If that's what you intended to say, you have it wrong. It's the base stocks, themselves, that are designated Group I, Group II, Group II+, Group III, etc., not the additive package, and not the finished motor oil sold at retail. Whatever base stocks the blender has chosen are then blended with an appropriate additive package to produce the finished motor oils we buy off the shelf. If you were to purchase and dump pure Group II+ (or even pure Group IV or Group V for that matter) base lube stock in your engine, you would NOT be happy with the results. Without the appropriate additive package - EP agent(s), detergent/dispersant, pour point depressant, VII polymer "goo", etc. you'd be looking at relatively accelerated wear, poorer cold cranking characteristics, and poorer high temperature film strength than provided by a finished equivalent oil optimized with an appropriate additive package. You CAN make a reasonable finished oil even with a Group I base stock and a robust additive package tailored to that base stock. But, you can make an even much better finished oil with Group II+ base stock and a robust additive package tailored to THAT base stock. If I've misunderstood your statement, enlighten me.

[ December 09, 2003, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: Ray H ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Ray H:
---- But, you can make an even much better finished oil with Group II+ base stock and a robust additive package tailored to THAT base stock. If I've misunderstood your statement, enlighten me.
Heck I don't know what I'm trying to ask, and I can't fully explain it either...

Okay: Old oil was for sure a base stock of a group II oil. Been around a long long time, however it would not, no matter what type of engineering pass muster with the standards necessary for an SL oil.

New oil is suppose to be a group II too, and is a totally different oil (different BASESTOCK ENTIRELY), the new oil has a different refining method, everything but one or two things is different, and this different basestock can not accept the same additives as the older oil because of clashes between the additives (with each other) and with the oil.

I guess my question is HOW can this be possible?
Am I in the forest and can't see the trees?
 
I found this on the Chevron website and thought I'd resurrect this thread and clear up an old issue about Chevron Supreme's base oil:

http://www.chevron.com/prodserv/nafl/auto/content/promotions.shtm

"In order to satisfy both viscosity and volatility requirements for SAE 5W-30, a new Group II+ base oil was used to formulate this product. Furthermore, due to the higher fuel economy hurdle required for GF-3, viscosity grades SAE 5W-30 and 10W-30 required the use of a friction modifier, an additional component, as part of their additive package.

As mentioned above, all Chevron Supreme non-synthetic multigrade products are formulated with ISOSYN™. Excellent oxidation stability is an inherent benefit of ISOSYN™ base oils. They provide improved low temperature performance and better dispersancy characteristics when formulating, making it easier to meet performance requirements."


--- Bror Jace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top