QS UD & PP 2012 PDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
40,233
Location
NJ
Has anyone been able to locate the most recent QS UD and PP data sheets? Shell is the worst when it comes to keeping them up to date and readily available.

I found one QS UD Data Sheet, but on the page where the Data was, it had a 2011 date. Ridiculous.

QSUD is using PAO/Esters in their blends now per the MSDS.
 
IIRC one of our resident expert ChemE here (Molakule?) stated We'd be seeing application of different esters in most all ILSAC GF5 lubes. I was surprised as you to see the blends "revealed' in the msds posted here recently by (?). Was that a translation of a Korean MSDS?

excerpt from XOM recent patent application++ for a LOW HTHS(2.9) improved fuel economy lubricant:

[0018] Esters comprise a useful base stock. Additive solvency and seal compatibility characteristics may be secured by the use of esters such as the esters of dibasic acids with monoalkanols and the polyol esters of monocarboxylic acids. Esters of the former type include, for example, the esters of dicarboxylic acids such as phthaiic acid, succinic acid, alkyi succinic acid, alkenyi succinic acid, maleic acid, azelaic acid, suberic acid, sebacic acid, fumaric acid, adipic acid, linoleic acid dimer, malonic acid, alkyl ma!onic acid, alkenyi ma!onic acid, etc., with a variety of alcohols such as butyl alcohol, hexyl alcohol, dodecyl alcohol, 2-ethylhexyl alcohol, etc. Specific examples of these types of esters include dibutyl adipate, di(2-ethylhexyl) sebacate, di-n-hexyl fumarate, dioctyl sebacate, diisooctyl azelate, diisodecyl azelate, dioctyl phthalate, didecyl phthalate, dieicosyl sebacate, etc.

[0Θ1 ] Particularly useful synthetic esters are those which are obtained by reacting one or more polyhydric alcohols, preferably the hindered polyols (such as the neopentyl polyols, e.g., neopentyi glycol, trimethylol ethane, 2-methyl- 2 -propyl- 1,3 -propanediol, trimethylol propane, pentaerythritol and dipenta- erythritol) with alkanoic acids containing at least about 4 carbon atoms, preferably € 5 to C 30 acids such as saturated straight chain fatty acids including caprylic acid, capric acid, lauric acid, myristic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, arachic acid, and behenic acid, or the corresponding branched chain fatty acids or unsaturated fatty acids such as oleic acid, or mixtures of any of these materials.

[0020] Suitable synthetic ester components include the esters of trimethylol propane, trimethylol butane, trimethylol ethane, pentaerythritol and/or di pentaerythritol with one or more monocarboxylic acids containing from about 5 to about 10 carbon atoms. These esters are widely available commercially, for example, the Mobil P-41 and P~51 esters of ExxonMobil Chemical Company).


++ Patent Application US2012/044305
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: threeputtpar
Originally Posted By: ruxCYtable
Here's QSUD Feb 2013

Shell Product Catalogue


The page with the specs is marked March 2011, though.
I see that now but I assume that is a mistake. The document is dated February 2013 I think they just forgot to update the dates on all the pages.
 
Poor marketing for such a good product line. I'll pass.
 
what do you think the marketing spin is on this one: changes from meets or exceeds to approved?

Meets or exceeds API SN and prior Service Classifications
• Meets or exceeds API SN with Resource Conserving and prior Service Classifications (SAE 0W‐20, 5W‐20, SAE
5W‐30 and SAE 10W‐30)
• Meets or exceeds the requirements of ILSAC GF‐5, GF‐4, GF‐3 and GF‐2 (SAE 0W‐20, 5W‐20, SAE 5W‐30 and
SAE 10W‐30)
• Meets or exceeds the requirements for GM 6094M (SAE 5W‐20, 5W‐30, SAE 10W‐30)
• Approved for GM dexos1TM (SAE 5W‐30)
• Approved for Honda HTO‐06 (SAE 5W‐30) for Acura turbocharged engines
 
Originally Posted By: ruxCYtable
Originally Posted By: threeputtpar
Originally Posted By: ruxCYtable
Here's QSUD Feb 2013

Shell Product Catalogue


The page with the specs is marked March 2011, though.
I see that now but I assume that is a mistake. The document is dated February 2013 I think they just forgot to update the dates on all the pages.

The odd pages 2013, even 2011, probably a missed edit.
 
Based on the PQIA Testing
there appears to be very little difference between the two products.

Viscosity #'s within .1 and .2 of each other. Viscosity index within 1 point of each other. Cold pumping #'s very close. QSUD beat PP's volatility #'s. The only thing PP seemed to have a bigger advantage on was TBN of 9.0 vs 8.5. I know SOPUS is doing the good/better/best with QSUD/PP/PU but the line between good/better is awful blurry according to these tests.

Notice how all of SOPUS volatility #'s lead the pack! No wonder their oils are forum favorites!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: buster
Poor marketing for such a good product line. I'll pass.
You'll pass on a good product because of poor marketing? So, will you go for a bad product if they have good marketing?
confused2.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom