Nobody has proven to my satisfaction it isn't the moly, in fact the white paper maybe reveals it's more likely. Interesting and informative posts no doubt good stuff. If your theory is that it isn't the moly then name a high hths or whatever oil (not redline) you think might help the tick, and I will try and get someone with hemi tick to run it. Maybe even me and my OCI is coming up soon. So far 5 years quiet on redline, I may decide to give something a shot that will work in an mds engine. Hopefully someone here might consider running it as well. That is why I'm coming forward here, there has to be more guys with hemi tick then just us on the ram forums I would think.
Molybdenum, Cam wear and Hemi tick
- Thread starter burla
- Start date
- Status
burla, I was the one who wrote that Redline 5W-20 solved the cold start clatter on my son's 2017 Jeep Rubicon.
I have a question for you. You're running 5W-30 in your hemi, right? Living in Cali, why would you not chose 10W-30 instead?
Scott
I have a question for you. You're running 5W-30 in your hemi, right? Living in Cali, why would you not chose 10W-30 instead?
Scott
Simply because how 5w30 operates in the triangle of viscosity. Noack is a wash at 6 both, 5w30 has ten points better at v-index. It seams to be a better base, and some of the guys have said they believe 10w30 to have a better additive package, as in high additives. I opt for what I believe to be the better base because the additives in 5w30 and pretty hearty imo.
5w30 redline
cSt 11.9
hths 3.7
10w30 redline
cst 11.4
hthe 3.5
5w30 redline
cSt 11.9
hths 3.7
10w30 redline
cst 11.4
hthe 3.5
Normally the shorter the distance between the winter rating and the weight, the stronger the base is going to be when testing visc. 5w30 redline is an anomaly here, I don't protest to know why. I know if even 5% "better" visc at operating temps, I will go for that, especially since I am paying for a premium oil.
Toggled the comment to see his answer:
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Toggle the display of this post
"Nobody has proven to my satisfaction it isn't the moly, in fact the white paper maybe reveals it's more likely. Interesting and informative posts no doubt good stuff. If your theory is that it isn't the moly then name a high hths or whatever oil (not redline) you think might help the tick, and I will try and get someone with hemi tick to run it. Maybe even me and my OCI is coming up soon. So far 5 years quiet on redline, I may decide to give something a shot that will work in an mds engine. Hopefully someone here might consider running it as well. That is why I'm coming forward here, there has to be more guys with hemi tick then just us on the ram forums I would think."
That sales white paper doesn't specify anything. I was looking for the SDS on Redline but their website is lacking that information. The uoa and VOA info I could dig up is years old so it's not reliable.
I am not trying to start an argument here but you seem to think otherwise. Oil additives work together to produce the effect that the end user is looking for. Redline oil has a reputation for being a tougher oil due to its viscosity and protection factor. Moly is but one additive. Zinc and phosphate also contribute. Boron is another additive that is very important in this case. In the old days the "better" oils had a good slug of moly and boron. We should not overlook boron in that respect.
If there is a recent uoa somewhere, it would be helpful to this discussion. A sales brochure is intended to convince a buyer about that product, even if there are scientific reports attached.
Carry on.
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Toggle the display of this post
"Nobody has proven to my satisfaction it isn't the moly, in fact the white paper maybe reveals it's more likely. Interesting and informative posts no doubt good stuff. If your theory is that it isn't the moly then name a high hths or whatever oil (not redline) you think might help the tick, and I will try and get someone with hemi tick to run it. Maybe even me and my OCI is coming up soon. So far 5 years quiet on redline, I may decide to give something a shot that will work in an mds engine. Hopefully someone here might consider running it as well. That is why I'm coming forward here, there has to be more guys with hemi tick then just us on the ram forums I would think."
That sales white paper doesn't specify anything. I was looking for the SDS on Redline but their website is lacking that information. The uoa and VOA info I could dig up is years old so it's not reliable.
I am not trying to start an argument here but you seem to think otherwise. Oil additives work together to produce the effect that the end user is looking for. Redline oil has a reputation for being a tougher oil due to its viscosity and protection factor. Moly is but one additive. Zinc and phosphate also contribute. Boron is another additive that is very important in this case. In the old days the "better" oils had a good slug of moly and boron. We should not overlook boron in that respect.
If there is a recent uoa somewhere, it would be helpful to this discussion. A sales brochure is intended to convince a buyer about that product, even if there are scientific reports attached.
Carry on.
Who is arguing? lol.
I simply said the info was fantastic keep it coming, but nobody has convinced me it isn't the moly. Read moly basics, read the white paper, moly bible on Shaeffers, it is "possible" the moly is the answer or part of the answer. It is a high temp, high pressure, additive. Safe to bet hemi tick is a high temp high pressure situation. Not any arguing or drama except for what you are bringing. I am willing to say it isn't the moly, but I need to see widespread success and something your selling w/o moly. Yet to be proven is all I'm say'n.
I simply said the info was fantastic keep it coming, but nobody has convinced me it isn't the moly. Read moly basics, read the white paper, moly bible on Shaeffers, it is "possible" the moly is the answer or part of the answer. It is a high temp, high pressure, additive. Safe to bet hemi tick is a high temp high pressure situation. Not any arguing or drama except for what you are bringing. I am willing to say it isn't the moly, but I need to see widespread success and something your selling w/o moly. Yet to be proven is all I'm say'n.
Last edited by a moderator:
All other oils tested were high in all the other additives and no success. Even ZDDP additives on top of the engine oil it was used in, no success. High boron Amsoil repeatedly never has close to the success rate as redline. It is either the moly, or the base of redline that is the difference. Many times even going up in weight out of brand, no success, but even 5w20 redline is quieting ticks. How in the world can you spout it isn't the moly and that's that? Whatever, the rest of this is just talk, we need people to run stuff and test it. As it stands now, Redline is the only oil that has worked. List I oils that I remember tested many weights, PYB, PP, PUP, M1. RP, Amsoil SS, Lucas additives, MOS2, Valvoline, and I am sure I am missing some. We have tried QSUD tor Castrol that much that I remember, certainly not in the 0w40. People only tended to go to redline after trying oils because nobody wanted to spend the money. Then they were met with a high success rate and riding their engine of the ticking condition.
What you are finding out is that BITOG has a fair number of people who are directly involved in the oil industry. Blenders, tribologists plus mechanics and engine builders. These experts like to see scientific evidence that correlates with the subject. Many of us, myself included have been corrected on comments made. I appreciate the expertise that is found here.
Your premise is that moly is the key for solving the tick in your hemispherical engines. It may well be true, however producing a white paper on tri-nuclear molybdenum when we don't even know that Redline uses it is a gap in the process. Assumption and theory will not prove anything. Your results, as good as they are would not stand up to scientific scrutiny.
The Redline is working for you and for others. I think you have accomplished your goal of spreading the word. It probably didn't need 10 pages but there it is.
My final post on this subject. Now you understand why I blocked you.
Your premise is that moly is the key for solving the tick in your hemispherical engines. It may well be true, however producing a white paper on tri-nuclear molybdenum when we don't even know that Redline uses it is a gap in the process. Assumption and theory will not prove anything. Your results, as good as they are would not stand up to scientific scrutiny.
The Redline is working for you and for others. I think you have accomplished your goal of spreading the word. It probably didn't need 10 pages but there it is.
My final post on this subject. Now you understand why I blocked you.
Originally Posted By: SLO_Town
burla and others:
A somewhat related observation about my son's brand new 2017 Jeep Rubicon with the 3.6L V6 and valve train "tick". Redline 5W-20 seeming to have stopped it.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthr...sto#Post4497002
Just adding to the discussion.
Scott
Folks:
I just spoke with my son 5 minutes ago. He has not driven his Jeep since Monday morning. He did a cold start late Thursday afternoon. That's 4 days. No valve train clatter. To quote him, he is "convinced" that Redline is somehow suppressing the cold start valve train clatter.
We offer this as nothing more than anecdotal evidence from two honest guys. FWIW.
Scott and Jim
burla and others:
A somewhat related observation about my son's brand new 2017 Jeep Rubicon with the 3.6L V6 and valve train "tick". Redline 5W-20 seeming to have stopped it.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthr...sto#Post4497002
Just adding to the discussion.
Scott
Folks:
I just spoke with my son 5 minutes ago. He has not driven his Jeep since Monday morning. He did a cold start late Thursday afternoon. That's 4 days. No valve train clatter. To quote him, he is "convinced" that Redline is somehow suppressing the cold start valve train clatter.
We offer this as nothing more than anecdotal evidence from two honest guys. FWIW.
Scott and Jim
Originally Posted By: burla
Simply because how 5w30 operates in the triangle of viscosity. Noack is a wash at 6 both, 5w30 has ten points better at v-index. It seams to be a better base, and some of the guys have said they believe 10w30 to have a better additive package, as in high additives. I opt for what I believe to be the better base because the additives in 5w30 and pretty hearty imo.
5w30 redline
cSt 11.9
hths 3.7
10w30 redline
cst 11.4
hthe 3.5
Wow...RL 5W30 is beefier than the 10W30 at temp!
If the two have the same NOACK loss, I can't see a reason to run the 10W30 unless it's cheaper or there is some major additive advantage compared to their 5W30.
Simply because how 5w30 operates in the triangle of viscosity. Noack is a wash at 6 both, 5w30 has ten points better at v-index. It seams to be a better base, and some of the guys have said they believe 10w30 to have a better additive package, as in high additives. I opt for what I believe to be the better base because the additives in 5w30 and pretty hearty imo.
5w30 redline
cSt 11.9
hths 3.7
10w30 redline
cst 11.4
hthe 3.5
Wow...RL 5W30 is beefier than the 10W30 at temp!
If the two have the same NOACK loss, I can't see a reason to run the 10W30 unless it's cheaper or there is some major additive advantage compared to their 5W30.
As they're not something I'm that familiar with, I've been giving myself a crash course in polyol ester base oil technology to see if this might throw some light on why Redline oil fixes Hemi 'tick' while other oils don't.
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
Last edited:
Forgive me for changing the subject slightly.Thinking about the use of VII Polymer,is this responsible for the deposits shown in the scorched earth test,where many PAO and Ester based oils showed significant deposits/evidence of thickening, after being subjected to extreme temperatures,or is it due to something else?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
As they're not something I'm that familiar with, I've been giving myself a crash course in polyol ester base oil technology to see if this might throw some light on why Redline oil fixes Hemi 'tick' while other oils don't.
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
SonofJoe, thanks for adding you input. Your thinking is plausible. IMO, this has been an interesting thread.
Scott
As they're not something I'm that familiar with, I've been giving myself a crash course in polyol ester base oil technology to see if this might throw some light on why Redline oil fixes Hemi 'tick' while other oils don't.
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
SonofJoe, thanks for adding you input. Your thinking is plausible. IMO, this has been an interesting thread.
Scott
If my Ram develops the tick, I would have no problem trying Redline in it to see if it works. Currently, I am using Amsoil XL 5w20 and there are no ticks.
Here some specs on an ester oil I used for a long time.
I wouldn't recommend it for the Hemi, though
https://www.mobil.com/English-US/Aviation/pds/GLXXMobil-Jet-Oil-II
I wouldn't recommend it for the Hemi, though
https://www.mobil.com/English-US/Aviation/pds/GLXXMobil-Jet-Oil-II
Originally Posted By: SLO_Town
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
As they're not something I'm that familiar with, I've been giving myself a crash course in polyol ester base oil technology to see if this might throw some light on why Redline oil fixes Hemi 'tick' while other oils don't.
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
SonofJoe, thanks for adding you input. Your thinking is plausible. IMO, this has been an interesting thread.
Scott
That does make sense. Take a hammer and an anvil and make them as slick as possible and they will still make noise when you strike the anvil. Put a piece of rubber (or a pile of moly) on top of the anvil and it will deaden the sound of the hammer strike.
On the other hand, moly (or something else in Redline) may keep the lifters from seizing internally and allow them to function properly with zero lash. I think that this is more likely than a cushioning effect from the oil.
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
As they're not something I'm that familiar with, I've been giving myself a crash course in polyol ester base oil technology to see if this might throw some light on why Redline oil fixes Hemi 'tick' while other oils don't.
PAO is typically made by polymerising Decene. Polyol esters quite different and are made by reacting a complex alcohol (with more than one -OH group) with a fatty acid. There seems to be loads of different ways to play the polyol ester game. For the alcohol, you can use Glycol (two -OH's), Glycerol and TMP (three -OH's) and Pentaerythritol (four -OH's). For the fatty acids, they vary in chain length and degree of saturation, and you probably fit the acid type to how heavy or light you want the base oil to be.
Anyways, here's a comparison of PAO 6 (probably the commonest type of PAO) and something called Hatcol 2352 (a Polyol Ester based on Pentaerythritol). I chose these because they have very similar viscocities at 100°C...
PAO6 H2352
KV100 5.8 5.6
KV40 31.0 29.6
VI 138 132
KV-40 7800 15000
Flash Point 246 263
Pour Point -57 -50
Density 0.827 0.963
Noack 6.4 2 (no decimal point provided)
What I see here sort of jives with what I remember about them from way back.
First, from a basic viscometric perspective, Esters are WORSE than PAO. PAO has a marginally higher VI but far superior cold flow properties. So a Redline oil is just as likely as any other synthetic, to contain VII polymer. I find it hard to believe that Redline 5W30 is VII-free so I don't think 'tick' and VII are related.
Second, the Polyol Ester has a much lower Noack than PAO. This is partly because Esters tend to be very pure whereas most base oils are a mish-mash of light, medium and heavy molecules. This accounts for the low Noacks of all of the Redline oils.
The final thing I see in this comparison is that the Ester is significantly denser than PAO. Now whilst I think that the high levels of ZDDP & Moly in Redline will have the biggest effect on friction & wear, I can't help but think that this very high density might be helping with 'tick'. I do 'get' the whole thing about chemical tribofilms but people sometimes forget that oil has a 'physical' as well as a 'chemical' dimension to it's performance. If you assume that 'tick' is caused by two surfaces momentarily bashing into each other, having an oil with better 'cushioning' properties might be just what you need.
PS - apologies about the numbers not lining up. They do in what I wrote...
SonofJoe, thanks for adding you input. Your thinking is plausible. IMO, this has been an interesting thread.
Scott
That does make sense. Take a hammer and an anvil and make them as slick as possible and they will still make noise when you strike the anvil. Put a piece of rubber (or a pile of moly) on top of the anvil and it will deaden the sound of the hammer strike.
On the other hand, moly (or something else in Redline) may keep the lifters from seizing internally and allow them to function properly with zero lash. I think that this is more likely than a cushioning effect from the oil.
Originally Posted By: Ether
Forgive me for changing the subject slightly.Thinking about the use of VII Polymer,is this responsible for the deposits shown in the scorched earth test,where many PAO and Ester based oils showed significant deposits/evidence of thickening, after being subjected to extreme temperatures,or is it due to something else?
I've been asked this before, and although I can't be 100% sure, I think the answer is no.
The first thing to say is that when you 'cook' an engine oil like this, at temperatures way beyond what they were designed to be used at, you're going to unleash all manner of chemical reactions which will result in the production all sorts of heavy polymerisation and condensation products which could easily plop out of solution. These reactions could involve VII but VII tends to be chemically very inert so the stuff you see in the videos is far more likely to be due to reactions involving ZDDP, Ashless, Detergent and AO.
I suspect that the reason why some synthetics do so badly on this test is because light synthetic base oils (especially stuff like Group III's and GTL) have worse solvency properties relative to something like a heavy Group I base oil (which will still contain some multi-ring aromatics).
Hope this helps...
Forgive me for changing the subject slightly.Thinking about the use of VII Polymer,is this responsible for the deposits shown in the scorched earth test,where many PAO and Ester based oils showed significant deposits/evidence of thickening, after being subjected to extreme temperatures,or is it due to something else?
I've been asked this before, and although I can't be 100% sure, I think the answer is no.
The first thing to say is that when you 'cook' an engine oil like this, at temperatures way beyond what they were designed to be used at, you're going to unleash all manner of chemical reactions which will result in the production all sorts of heavy polymerisation and condensation products which could easily plop out of solution. These reactions could involve VII but VII tends to be chemically very inert so the stuff you see in the videos is far more likely to be due to reactions involving ZDDP, Ashless, Detergent and AO.
I suspect that the reason why some synthetics do so badly on this test is because light synthetic base oils (especially stuff like Group III's and GTL) have worse solvency properties relative to something like a heavy Group I base oil (which will still contain some multi-ring aromatics).
Hope this helps...
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Here some specs on an ester oil I used for a long time.
I wouldn't recommend it for the Hemi, though
https://www.mobil.com/English-US/Aviation/pds/GLXXMobil-Jet-Oil-II
Interesting...
Again note the very high density (1.0035) of what is in effect a light, low viscosity base oil (KV100 = 5.1 cst).
Here some specs on an ester oil I used for a long time.
I wouldn't recommend it for the Hemi, though
https://www.mobil.com/English-US/Aviation/pds/GLXXMobil-Jet-Oil-II
Interesting...
Again note the very high density (1.0035) of what is in effect a light, low viscosity base oil (KV100 = 5.1 cst).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked