New Quaker State Ultimate Protection

Isn't the virgin TBN pretty well worthless on most lubricants now, since they may contain non metallic additives that neutralize the relatively weak acids that come from today's ultra low sulfur fuels, while the standard method of calculating TBN test mostly just looks at the metallic additives.
I think it's more the massive reduction in sulphur in fuels has reduced the requirement for huge TBN's.
 
Saw this yesterday for the first time. Same $22.99 as the regular QS full syn.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1058.jpeg
    IMG_1058.jpeg
    336.2 KB · Views: 84
Looking at the MRV viscosity of ultimate protection vrs full syn.
Can this be right ?
No idea what the values mean but there is a big difference. View attachment 180744View attachment 180745
Mini rotary viscometer is the testing equipment. -35c is -31F so most would never experience that very often if ever. But it does show the Ultimate stays thinner at arctic temperatures.
 
I experienced QSFS 5/30 going very quickly down to 9.7 vis and staying there regardless of mileage or application. Results of multiple UOA on 3 different engines were excellent, 2 being BMW. It will be interesting if this version retains viscosity to spec.
 
I would recommend sticking with the grade toyota recommends. We had a 2019 Highlander 3.5L that blew two engines in the first 10k miles. That new hybrid will call for 0W-16.
When you blew two engines was it because you didn't or didn't follow toyota's grad reccomendations?
 
Back
Top