New Pennzoil Platinum 0w20 SN PDS -2012

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Ibrahim
Although I'm more excited about Pennzoil ULTRA 0W20 SN, it's TDS is not available at the moment but SDS is!

NOTE: Very High Flash Point & Mediocre Pour Point!

http://www.epc.shell.com/Docs/GSAP_msds_00113583.PDF

Ibrahim, as far as the Canadian market is concerned none of the aftermarket oil formulators can compete on price with the OEM 0W-20s particularly Toyota at $5.75/L.
PP 0W-20 is available at Walmart for 9 bucks/qt and only the uniformed consumer would pay that not to mention it's an inferior product.

In the US market I think the 0W-20 grade is a problem for the non OEM suppliers. Formulating a technically competitive product; namely a 200+ VI shear stable oil is too expensive to make at the price point the OEMs are selling their own 0W-20 grade at. Since the Japanese OEMs are not requiring that their 0W-20 oil be used (unlike many manufacturers) that leaves the aftermarket formulators to simply offer a 0W-20 grade that they can make money on. It's not like the average consumer will know the difference, at least not initially.

 

[bourne]

Originally Posted By: Obos
Well let's put it this way:

Toyota and Honda, who build the most reliable engines, spec what they need out of oil.

Oil companies make oil to the spec of the car manufacturers.

Mercedes recommends Mobil 0w40 with a VI of 185

Toyota and Honda recommend their OEM oils with VI of 220+.

This lower VI PP oil meets the specs for Chrysler

I think it's fair to say that car manufacturers know what the oil needs are. Oil makers know how to meet the specs. Not what the specs should be.



Mazda factory OE fill VI : 220+
Mazda Dealer Bulk 0w20 program : Edge 0w20 with some of the poorest specs among the above mentioned oil.
Mazda OM recommends 0w20 in US, yet 5w20 and 5w30 is spec'd for Mexico.

Honda allows for use of 5w20 if 0w20 isnt available in most of their vehicles.
Latest Honda SN rated syn/syn blend 0w20 oil : Less than 200 VI compared to their SM rated version which looked similar to TGMO.
Honda dealers around in my area also use Valvoline products alot, imagine Synpower 0w20

Fact of the matter is, fluids are picked for certain purposes. High VI fluids help manufacturers achieve better emissions and fuel economy numbers. Nowadays, more than ever, vehicles are NOT being made to last forever ( manufacturers would go out of business if they did ). The service intervals are weak at best ( easier to sell a car with less maintainence required ). What some of the members here and myself are concerned with is, finding a solution which satisfies the manufacturer requirements, while providing enough protection to appease us.


High VI is great and all, but I doubt there is a vehicle stranded on the side of the road because the owner used the lowly M1 0w20 AFE instead of the super duper OE high VI 220++++++ juice!

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: tig1
What about the MRV at -40 being 17700? M1 0-20 is 9200. Can someone explain this large differance? Isn't the lower number showing a more robust base stock? Just asking.

No, higher the MRV, more robust is the base stock, as the NOACK will be lower.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: bourne
Originally Posted By: Obos
Well let's put it this way:

Toyota and Honda, who build the most reliable engines, spec what they need out of oil.

Oil companies make oil to the spec of the car manufacturers.

Mercedes recommends Mobil 0w40 with a VI of 185

Toyota and Honda recommend their OEM oils with VI of 220+.

This lower VI PP oil meets the specs for Chrysler

I think it's fair to say that car manufacturers know what the oil needs are. Oil makers know how to meet the specs. Not what the specs should be.



Mazda factory OE fill VI : 220+
Mazda Dealer Bulk 0w20 program : Edge 0w20 with some of the poorest specs among the above mentioned oil.
Mazda OM recommends 0w20 in US, yet 5w20 and 5w30 is spec'd for Mexico.

Honda allows for use of 5w20 if 0w20 isnt available in most of their vehicles.
Latest Honda SN rated syn/syn blend 0w20 oil : Less than 200 VI compared to their SM rated version which looked similar to TGMO.
Honda dealers around in my area also use Valvoline products alot, imagine Synpower 0w20

Fact of the matter is, fluids are picked for certain purposes. High VI fluids help manufacturers achieve better emissions and fuel economy numbers. Nowadays, more than ever, vehicles are NOT being made to last forever ( manufacturers would go out of business if they did ). The service intervals are weak at best ( easier to sell a car with less maintainence required ). What some of the members here and myself are concerned with is, finding a solution which satisfies the manufacturer requirements, while providing enough protection to appease us.


High VI is great and all, but I doubt there is a vehicle stranded on the side of the road because the owner used the lowly M1 0w20 AFE instead of the super duper OE high VI 220++++++ juice!


+1
I wonder why Amsoil and Red Line, two highly respected boutique oil companies aren't on the high VI bandwagon? Antiquated formulations? Or are they sticking with something that works and protects well? Maybe their base stocks are superior and don't need all the VI to get the desired results? Thinking out loud that's all.

 

[CATERHAM]

" I wonder why Amsoil and Red Line, two highly respected boutique oil companies aren't on the high VI bandwagon? Antiquated formulations? Or are they sticking with something that works and protects well?"

Red Line certainly is with their 0W-30 (183 VI) and 0W-40 (197 VI) both of which have proved to be shear stable.

 

[Trav]

Quote:
It's not like the average consumer will know the difference, at least not initially.

And probably never will! In fact i would bet that the difference they see is the lack of deposits!
XOM said High VI oils have deposit problems, now you know better than XOM, Shell, Amsoil, Redline, BP, etc?

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: buster
http://www.epc.shell.com/Docs/GPCDOC_X_cbe_24855_key_140007466171_201212050515.pdf

Mighty impressive specs. Looks to be the new juice on the block.

NOACK is impressive, clearly indicating that there is PAO (Group IV) in the mix.

On the other hand, 40 C viscosity is not impressive -- you will see little benefit of "0W" in 0W-20 in most operating conditions, except really cold starts.

Due to its very low NOACK, this oil would be suitable for turbocharger-equipped engines. Its low VI also indicates only modest use of VIIs, which is also good for deposit and sludge control.

If you have a high-performance or turbo car, this should be a good oil, despite the very low viscosity. It's also good for extended-drain applications because of its PAO content and low NOACK.

I definitely give thumbs up to Pennzoil for finally formulating a mainstream 0W-20 with low NOACK for a change, which would be good for even turbo engines.

However, I will stick with the Toyota 0W-20 SN, which has a far better VI and is probably more optimized and better engineered, as the Toyota engineers work together with ExxonMobil to formulate the Toyota oils. More VIIs help with the viscoelasticity of the oil and therefore increase the oil-film thickness substantially, and the high VI results in better fuel economy. I also think that ExxonMobil has the Infineum trinuclear moly in the Toyota 0W-20 SN, which should increase the strength of the antiwear film many times compared to other types of moly and antiwear additives, resulting in great protection against wear.

 

[Obos]

Best of both worlds is higher quality base stock and higher VI

That's what M1 0w40 does. I don't think anybody would argue that it's not protecting or that it can't stand up to higher intervals.

 

[asharris7]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
It's not like the average consumer will know the difference, at least not initially.

And probably never will! In fact i would bet that the difference they see is the lack of deposits!
XOM said High VI oils have deposit problems, now you know better than XOM, Shell, Amsoil, Redline, BP, etc?

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?



Wow, why so hostile? Can't there just be a "agree to disagree?" Nobody's car will be on the side of the road due to oil failure because any of these oils.

 

[Obos]

A big give away when evaluating all of this is price, discounts and rebates.

You can't buy the oils with the highest quality base stocks at a substantial discount. $5 a quart for M1 0w40 is a steal and the lowest you can get it for.

You can't get Toyota, Honda or Mazda 0w20 at less than $5 a quart unless you work hard.

You can pick up QSUD 0w20 for $20 for 5 quarts everyday at Walmart and you can get $10 and $20 off in rebates at that price.

The highest quality base stocks cost money. They are capable of supporting higher VI's.

You can't quote a XM statement about VII's shearing when of course they are alluding to competitors who use inferior base stocks with high levels of VII. For goodness sake, XM make the Toyota motor oil!

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
It's not like the average consumer will know the difference, at least not initially.

And probably never will! In fact i would bet that the difference they see is the lack of deposits!
XOM said High VI oils have deposit problems, now you know better than XOM, Shell, Amsoil, Redline, BP, etc?

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?



I trust the API and ILSAC GF-5 test protocols for deposit control, which are fairly stringent (even if 0W20 are exempt from TEOST33, which is a turbo test). If an oil meets those requirements, I won't be concerned about deposits.

As far as "trusting large oil companies that spend trillions of dollars on research" or whatever, I'm cognizant of the fact that almost ALL oils are a compromise to a degree. It's silly to think that Mobil or Sopus make the "absolute best oil they can, no matter what". They're in the business of selling oil, and margin dollars factor into their decisions. I think it's reasonable to believe that margin on finished lubricants is a little less important to car manufacturers, since they're in the car business. So, it seems reasonable that there may be some added value in the lubes sold by the OEM's.

The one question I do have regarding the high VI oils is just how high is the VI after 2-3,000 miles? It's entirely possible that the SOPUS oil may have a similar VI after some extended use. We really won't know until there are multiple UOA's w/both 40C and 100C viscosity.

 

[Obos]

Originally Posted By: Trav

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?



In your circle of trust, do you include XM and Toyota working together to produce Toyota 0w20 with the high VI that you don't like?

Or would you exclude that particular oil from your circle even though countless millions have been spent to produce it?

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Obos
Best of both worlds is higher quality base stock and higher VI

That's what M1 0w40 does. I don't think anybody would argue that it's not protecting or that it can't stand up to higher intervals.

0W-20 vs. 0W-40 is like apples vs. oranges. The only effect of using 0W-40 is decreased fuel economy and an increased-sized hole in their pockets for the large majority of drivers.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Quote:
It's not like the average consumer will know the difference, at least not initially.

And probably never will! In fact i would bet that the difference they see is the lack of deposits!
XOM said High VI oils have deposit problems, now you know better than XOM, Shell, Amsoil, Redline, BP, etc?

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?


Don't forget that VIIs also increase the viscoelasticity of the oil, which increases the oil-film thickness exponentially. So, yes, (especially the low-quality) VIIs increase the deposits and sludge and could be problematic in turbo engines but they also increase the oil-film thickness substantially, which is great for preventing wear. Therefore, high-VI oils are not as bad as you think. They offer great advantage in preventing wear in addition to increasing the fuel economy.

 

[Obos]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan

0W-20 vs. 0W-40 is like apples vs. oranges. The only effect of using 0W-40 is decreased fuel economy and an increased-sized hole in their pockets for the large majority of drivers.
I think you have misunderstood my point.

There are a couple of posts saying high VI is bad and does not protect. These posts are not factoring in the quality of the base stock.

If high VI is automatically bad, then that logic needs to extend to oils like M1 0w40 and also the Redline and Amsoil high VI oils that another poster brought up.

Nobody would say those oils won't protect solely because they have higher VI than 5 / 10 / 15 / 20 years ago.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Obos
I think you have misunderstood my point.

There are a couple of posts saying high VI is bad and does not protect. These posts are not factoring in the quality of the base stock.

If high VI is automatically bad, then that logic needs to extend to oils like M1 0w40 and also the Redline and Amsoil high VI oils that another poster brought up.

Nobody would say those oils won't protect solely because they have higher VI than 5 / 10 / 15 / 20 years ago.

I think there are very few people on this forum who think that high-VI oils are bad. I strongly believe that Toyota 0W-20 SN, Eneos Sustina, some other new Japanese oils, etc., which all have VIs in excess of 200, are some of the best oils out there. As I said, VIIs are very beneficial in protecting against wear by increasing the viscoelasticity and therefore the film strength of the oil. In addition, high-quality VIIs in combination with high-quality dispersants don't lead to deposit and sludge problems as much, which could otherwise be a problem in turbo engines.

I definitely agree with you that high-VI oils are usually excellent oils and also part of the reason for the high VI is the better base oil (such as Group III+).

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Obos
Originally Posted By: Trav

I guess the question is does one trust the people who spend countless millions on R&D and produce this stuff or a self proclaimed internet expert?



In your circle of trust, do you include XM and Toyota working together to produce Toyota 0w20 with the high VI that you don't like?

Or would you exclude that particular oil from your circle even though countless millions have been spent to produce it?


That's a good question. Maybe Toyota tells XOM what they want and XOM makes it? I mean think about it, its done in other industries, the paint industry one I'm very familiar with. Certain paint companies make paints under different labels. EG: Paint Fair got some of their primers from Muralo, and sold it for less. At the end of the day its the extra income they're looking at for their efforts. I'd guess the oil industry does the same thing. XOM and Sopus sell their competition base stock.

 

[bourne]

I believe we are talking about high VI in the same product weight range, ie 0w20.

Anyone think that XOM is producing Toyota oil because Toyota made the spec and the oil manufacturers/blenders bid to produce oil that meets that minimum spec, and XOM was the cheapest ???? Instead of having mental images of a group of Toyota and XOM engineers wearing white coats huddled together in a lab underground somewhere make this magic juice ???

Im sure its a great product but VI is just a piece of the pie that is PCMO. Maybe equivalent results can be achieved using different methods. I wish we put alot of miles on our Mazda, I would totally make it into a guinea pig. Sadly that car will see maybe 8k miles a year.

 

[Obos]

So XM only make that oil because Toyota ask for it? Otherwise they don't believe in it?

But XM make the high VI 0w40. Probably because Mercedes ask them for it I suppose?

Ok so that makes sense. But what about the Amsoil and Redline high VI that someone earlier claimed were low VI and tried and trusted? I can't find a reason why those two respected boutique oil manufacturers would go the high VI route.

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: JOD
[/quote]
Quote:

The one question regarding the high VI oils is just how high is the VI after 2-3,000 miles? It's entirely possible that the SOPUS oil may have a similar VI after some extended use. We really won't know until there are multiple UOA's w/both 40C and 100C viscosity.

When oils shear it's primarily reflected in a loss of viscosity in the KV100 spec', the KV40 tends to be less effected hence a loss in VI. The new ultra high VI oils are no different in that regard, so their may a small reduction in VI but the same effect will apply to lower VI oils.
The new 200+ VI oils are only possible due to a new type of very high VI PMA polymer that has proven to be very shear stable:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2828149&page=1

The Sustina 0W-20 with it's 229 VI has proven to be very shear stable. In fact we have a recent 10,400 mile UOA and VOA of the same oil. There is zero viscosity loss.