Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
A higher VI
BASE OIL is GENERALLY more stable for a given viscosity. It is not suggesting a high VI oil is more stable. The VI for a finished lubricant does not directly represent that of the base oils used to blend it.
Hi OVERKILL,
You are completely correct. I sort of knew the VI of the base oil was not the same as the VI of a finished product. I just didn't realise that "base oil oxidation stability increases with increasing V.I." Which I found interesting. Sorry if I caused any confusion to any readers.
From another thread
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Properly treated Group IIs are much better on oxidation and sludge formation than their old, Group I counterparts. …….. if 15W40 is SN, it's a sure sign it's Group II.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3841980/1
I have mostly used synthetics in the last ten years, but since reading many posts on BITOG, I feel I have been selling the modern mineral oils short, and I feel like giving them another go. My interest right now, and I feel this may be the case for a few other readers, is what clues to look for to try and distinguish a better quality mineral oil from one of lesser quality.
It sounds like in North America, you pretty much have only SN mineral oil for sale. Here, and I assume in other places around the world, SN / SM / SL minerals oils are commonly for sale, as well as some older SG mineral oils.
Any advice on final product selection would be welcome. I feel the OP was asking for similar guidance, knowing it's a complex situation and absolutes are not possible.