NOAK for M1 0w-40 and 5w-50

[buster]

Got this from Mobil 1 New Zealand Technical Department

The Noack volatility % for MOBIL 1
0w40
is 8.8% and MOBIL 1 5w50 is 9.4%

These are excellent numbers for oils with such huge viscosity ranges.

 

[haley10]

This is true, but is not the NOACK of 10W-30 and 15W-50 much superior??

The Euro cars spec.the 0W-40, but I'm not convinced it so stable.

 

[Sin City]

Thanks for posting the NOACK for the Mobil 1 5W-50. I do think that is fairly high though. the old PAO Castrol Syntec 5W-50 had a NOACK of only 7.5%. I asked Castrol what the NOACK was for their current Syntec 5W-50 and they said that information was proprietary

.

 

[buster]

Yes, Mobil 1 15w-50 is 5% and 10w-30 is 8%. Some say NOAK has an effect on consumption. Based on the small polls done on BITOG, I don't think it does. Anything below 10% is good. Redline and Amsoil X-30 are excellent at 5-6%.

[ March 27, 2004, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

 

[haley10]

Buster I see the point, but I still feel that if you drive hard in extreme heat that noack will relate to consumption. For easier driving maybe not, but high speed long trips, yes.

People using Amsoil 0-30 and M1 15-50 seem not to have consumption issues.

 

[Primus]

Previous versions of M1 5W-50 and 0W-40 had relatively 6.9 % and 10 % NOACK volatility. Unfortunately I could keep the info on 5W-50 only:

M1 5W-50 .... Density ...... FP ......... NOACK ......... HT/HS
SJ (SH) ........ 0.871 ...... 240 C ..... 6.7 % (6.9) .... 4.2 (4.4)
SL ............... 0.859 ...... 236 C ..... 9.4 % ............... ?

As for PDSs presented at manufacturers sites or sites of their dealers I would not trust them much: 1). sometimes PDSs are not updated in time; 2). it's quite often real meanings differ from those indicated in PDS as typical properties and not always to the better side.

If it's requested by a dealer, the manufacture will provide it with actual oil characteristics for each shipments. The main issue whether the dealer asked for it and whether it will agree to share this info with a retail buyer.

 

[buster]

quote:

---

People using Amsoil 0-30 and M1 15-50 seem not to have consumption issues

---

Problem is, many see zero consumption with Mobil 1 10w-30 and better consumption with Amsoil 0w-30 which has a 8.6% NOAK vs their 5w-30 at 5%. The correlation doesn't workout as I've noticed. I could be wrong but I don't see it. Viscosity plays a role for sure. Consumption is mostly due to driving conditions and the engine. A good synthetic will always be better with consumption.

 

[G-MAN]

Hey Buster, know why the Noack went up with the SL version? SuperSyn PAO + hi treat rate of alkylated aromatic and no base oil esters.

[ March 28, 2004, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: G-Man II ]

 

[Motorbike]

If the 0w-40 Supersyn is supposedly loaded up with VII's , can those that have made this claim explain why the 0w-40 has a good bit higher flash point than the rest of the SS line up if this is indeed an esterless formulation ?

[ March 28, 2004, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]

 

[buster]

quote:

---

Hey Buster, know why the Noack went up with the SL version? SuperSyn PAO + hi treat rate of alkylated aromatic and no base oil esters

---

This is an old post, but I think G-Man was right and I also think this is why Mobil has since removed Noak #'s from their PDS. They used to be available. They say AN's are cheaper then Esters but are they as good???

 

[bruce381]

AN's have advantage in a few area's do not have mobil data in front of me but remember that compared to esters in general cost, hydrolitic stability, pour point and I think VI.
Bruce

 

[TooSlick]

Flash point of the reformulated Amsoil 0w-40 is only 435F, but the Noack is a low 6.7%. So you can't necessarily tell anything about high temp evaporation by simply looking at the Flash point.

Folks may recall that the extreme temp properties of the Mobil 1 SL formulations changed from the previous SJ versions. The pour points went up by about 10F-15F and the flash points went down by about 10F-15F, and there were the usual rumors about group III basestocks replacing PAOs'. However I think it's more likely that this was the effect of replacing esters as the carriers for the additives with the AN's.

I do think the AN's are one reason why the Mobil 1 formulations resist oxidative thickening so well, so it's a mixed bag as far as the properties of the fully formulated lubes.

Tooslick

 

[kang]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't know, so I'll ask: What is NOAK? Is it NOAK or NOACK (I see both in this thread)?

(Yes, I already checked http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/oilglossary.html and it's not there...)

Thanks

 

[kang]

Thanks Andy.

 

[AndyH]

kang: "Noack" is the correct spelling. Found this info with a Google search:

quote:

---

Noack Method: Significance & Use
The Noack Volatility Test is used to determine evaporation loss of lubricating oils, an issue of particular importance in engine lubrication. Portions of an oil can evaporate under high temperature conditions, potentially altering oil properties such as viscosity. A low Noack score indicates an oil that will maintain its original protective and performance qualities for a longer amount of time. These oils perform better under heat, translating to better engine protection, longer oil life, and improved fuel economy.

The Noack Volatility Test has long been a specification test for European motor oils. With the advent of ILSAC (International Lubricants Standardization and Approval Committee) and its GF-series specifications, this volatility test first entered United States test specs in 1992, becoming a requirement for North American motor oils when API SH/ILSAC GF-1 oils were introduced. In 1996, volatility limits tightened to 22% with GF-2 oils’ entrance on the market, then were again lowered in 2001 – this time for all grades – to 15% (or 13% for European synthetic motor oils) with GF-3 oils’ introduction.

Volatility of engine oil, which has been shown to significantly impact oil consumption, is determined almost entirely by the base oil. Thus, lower oil consumption demands lower volatility base oils. All of this favors a shift from conventional solvent refined (API Group I) stocks to hydroprocessed stocks (Group II) with modestly lower volatility, helping blenders meet the volatility limit of 15% evaporation in the Noack test, as proposed by GF-3 for motor oils.

Growing environmental concern in recent years has extended Noack’s original application scope, with car manufacturers applying evaporation limits for hydraulic, gear box and shock absorber oils. But, as these oils are extremely volatile at the standard Noack test temperature of 250°C, additional temperatures (i.e. 200°C, 150°C, or even 100°C) are applied to replicate actual operating conditions for these oils.

---

More info here:
http://www.paclp.com/profile/releases/1102nck_procB.htm