Lubrizol paper on oil trends in Europe

Messages
43,676
Location
'Stralia
http://www.lubrizol.com/EngineOilAdditives/ACEA/ConferencePapers/FuelEconomy.pdf As I've said before, Europe doesn't have CAFE, but CO2 limits by any other name are a fuel economy standard. Couple of interesting points that I got out of it. * trends in basestocks was interesting, reduction in GrIV in passenger cars (more GrIII obviously), reduction in GrI in HDMOs; * OCI optimisation from an environmental perspective; * the chart of manufacturer's versus weight versus CO2 (mileage) was interesting. Cut the following chart out as an excerpt, as it demonstrates something that I have tried to convey a number of times. While HTHS is clearly the main factor in frictional losses and fuel economy, for a given HTHS it's counter productive to chase high KV100 (or VI), as losses in the non high shear areas (oil lines, coolers, filters, squirters etc.) are higher than a KV100 which is closer to the high shear @100. It was seriously part of my driver in buying Edge 5W30 A3/B4 over the marginally more expensive 5W40 (both were on massive sale, so both were really same price). Edit : note that the reference oil in the economy table is 15W40.
 
Last edited:
Messages
706
Location
Virginia
For the 40 grades, the xW appears to be contributing to the fuel economy improvement. So once you've gotten HTHS to a minimum, the next avenue for fuel economy improvement is going to 0w.
 
Messages
14,050
Location
Kendall, FL
Also of interest, along with the move to GrIII, is the statement under each graph, 'Engine oils have moved to lighter viscosity grades and higher quality base oils.' This must indicate how far GrIII has come when compared to GrIV.
 
Last edited:
Messages
40,827
Location
Great Lakes
Originally Posted By: wemay
Also of interest, along with the move to GrIII, is the statement under each graph, 'Engine oils have moved to lighter viscosity grades and higher quality base oils.' This must indicate how far GrIII has come when compared to GrIV.
Maybe they were just referring to the move from Group I to group III?
 
Messages
3,377
Location
BC, Canada
aa1986 brings up an interesting observation. Which engine oil will provide better fuel economy 0W20 or 5W16? An SAE 20 is a 10W20, as an SAE 30 is 15W30. Therefore European diesel automobiles sold in NA, may one day specify 10W20 for CAFE purposes. Is the VI race over?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Shannow

Thread starter
Messages
43,676
Location
'Stralia
Riggaz, here's one I posted before from my library of old manuals and stuff. Back when Shell XHVI was a "mineral with the performance of a synthetic", they sold Shell XMO, which was a 15W30...it was actually a straight weight (no VII) that used the inherent VI of the GrIII to provide the "multigrade" aspects (like Amsoil's SAE30/10W30 these days) With improvements in dewaxing and the like, I agree with used_Oil that "straight" SAE grades are probably closer to a lower "W" than they are marketed at. e.g. one of my favourite (on paper) oils has always been Delvac 1630 http://www.enginemarineservices.com/medias/MobilDelvac16301640.pdf If it was available in 20L drums, I'd be in. 122 VI from a "straight" 30 KV100 provides an Australia wide usefull cold end performance.
 
Messages
9,783
Location
Saskatoon canada
Originally Posted By: riggaz
Ah I see what he means now but XHVI is a grIII synthetic and not a proper mineral oil, is that right?
Group 3 from what I've learned here are shells new gas to liquid stuff,which I wouldn't consider a mineral oil however hydrocracked basestocks start off as crude and are highly refined. The impurities are all removed which is why they perform almost as well as the next group up. Oil formulation is a balancing act. You can't just add one thing without compensating with another. That's what is refered to as balance here.
 

Shannow

Thread starter
Messages
43,676
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: riggaz
Ah I see what he means now but XHVI is a grIII synthetic and not a proper mineral oil, is that right?
Back in the day, before GrIII=synthetic, Shell marketted it as a mineral "with the performance of a synthetic", and a less than synthetic price...in the modern world, it's a synthetic, and priced the same.
 
Messages
1,016
Location
UK
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: riggaz
Ah I see what he means now but XHVI is a grIII synthetic and not a proper mineral oil, is that right?
Group 3 from what I've learned here are shells new gas to liquid stuff,which I wouldn't consider a mineral oil however hydrocracked basestocks start off as crude and are highly refined. The impurities are all removed which is why they perform almost as well as the next group up. Oil formulation is a balancing act. You can't just add one thing without compensating with another. That's what is refered to as balance here.
Not quite. Shell's new GTL base oils are, by definition, Group III but then so are hydrocracked base oils. The main difference between GTL and 'conventional' Group IIIs is the source of the hydrocracker feedstock - GTL gets it from a gas-to-liquid (Fischer-Tropsch) process whereas 'conventional' Group III gets it from a crude oil refinery. The end result is a very similar thing. Group III is defined as a base with the following properties: Saturates: >90% Sulfur: <0.03% VI: >120
 
Top