Relationship between winter viscosity and pour point?

That is why I said we could see PAO % based on the pour point. Yes, 0W with -50 and below will have it, in decent amounts.
5W -45 can be achieved with GrIII. Castrol is good example of that (5W40).
It's because many tend to think that these big companies use PAO so sparingly because it's expensive. Well, high quality Group III base stock can be just as expensive. The added expense comes from the need to use Esters and ANs (or at least ANs) to balance out the formulation when a majority PAO motor oil is formulated. That's not the case with Group III though, as Group III oils have better additive response, solvency, and don't shrink seals. Other than achieving a lower pour point, PAO has no real advantages. Oh, one more thing: because some blenders don't want to spend even more money on mPAO, usually they just use thinner PAO base stocks and add more VII to make the grade. That's not ideal. Though Mobil 1 FS 0W-40 still rocks! 😁
 
It's because many tend to think that these big companies use PAO so sparingly because it's expensive. Well, high quality Group III base stock can be just as expensive. The added expense comes from the need to use Esters and ANs (or at least ANs) to balance out the formulation when a majority PAO motor oil is formulated. That's not the case with Group III though, as Group III oils have better additive response, solvency, and don't shrink seals. Other than achieving a lower pour point, PAO has no real advantages. Oh, one more thing: because some blenders don't want to spend even more money on mPAO, usually they just use thinner PAO base stocks and add more VII to make the grade. That's not ideal. Though Mobil 1 FS 0W-40 still rocks! 😁
Mobil1 0W40 is good, Castrol Edge 0W40 is good. I had impressive results using Edge 0W40 on track.
But the new API SP version is a departure from PAO based to Group III.
As I stated numerous times, the final result is what matters.
 
Mobil1 0W40 is good, Castrol Edge 0W40 is good. I had impressive results using Edge 0W40 on track.
But the new API SP version is a departure from PAO based to Group III.
As I stated numerous times, the final result is what matters.
I ran Edge 0W-40 for a couple of years in our Santa Fes, no complaints. The new API SP version is hard to find. On paper it doesn't look great, but I don't know how it is in practice.
 
Mobil1 0W40 is good, Castrol Edge 0W40 is good. I had impressive results using Edge 0W40 on track.
But the new API SP version is a departure from PAO based to Group III.
As I stated numerous times, the final result is what matters.
Agreed. I can't believe people actually think they can accurately judge an oil's performance by looking at the percentage of PAO content, estimated VII content, or additives a VOA, even going as far as saying certain oils that have proven to be great products are inferior just because they think it doesn't contain enough zinc, moly, calcium, PAOs, esters, etc.
 
Agreed. I can't believe people actually think they can accurately judge an oil's performance by looking at the percentage of PAO content, estimated VII content, or additives a VOA, even going as far as saying certain oils that have proven to be great products are inferior just because they think it doesn't contain enough zinc, moly, calcium, PAOs, esters, etc.
I know several PAO based oils on Euro side of oils that still don’t have MB229.5 which was introduced in 2009.
There is no doubt when making superb product, real synthetics are used. I will always go with Mobil1 0W40 or Castrol 0W30 A3 over Castrol Edge 5W40, which IMO, is Castrol’s “barely made it,” product, and it has always been.
But I also have on shelf bunch of Motul X-Cess which is Group III and really, really good performance numbers.
It was for free, so who cares :)
 
It's because many tend to think that these big companies use PAO so sparingly because it's expensive. Well, high quality Group III base stock can be just as expensive. The added expense comes from the need to use Esters and ANs (or at least ANs) to balance out the formulation when a majority PAO motor oil is formulated. That's not the case with Group III though, as Group III oils have better additive response, solvency, and don't shrink seals. Other than achieving a lower pour point, PAO has no real advantages. Oh, one more thing: because some blenders don't want to spend even more money on mPAO, usually they just use thinner PAO base stocks and add more VII to make the grade. That's not ideal. Though Mobil 1 FS 0W-40 still rocks! 😁
IIRC, Group III additive response is almost as bad as PAO, it also has horrible solvency but it doesn't have the seal shrink tendency PAO has. They both, because they are ultra-pure, have the same issues except for that last one, which requires more "accommodation" via formulation as you noted, using AN's, Esters, or both. The Mobil blending guide examples typically used a small percentage of ester for this purpose.

Of course being "not as bad" has its advantages and makes Group III easier, or perhaps "less challenging" might be better phrasing, to blend with. PAO, by itself, also has better oxidation resistance, but that can be dealt with via additives for Group III nowadays.

PAO's main feature, and the reason HPL (and others) use it in their 0W-xx's is of course that it has no wax, so there's nothing to crystallize like with Group III, that requires PPD's. This is why the pour points are so low and this unrivalled cold temperature performance and high VI offsets the low VI and relatively poor cold temp performance of the AN's.

One thing we discussed in the past (@Shannow myself and some others) were the requirements for the Winter rating, which allow an oil to "slip" a Winter grade in service. PPD's, like VII's and other additives, do degrade in use, so if your cold temperature performance is predecated on the function of PPD's, it would not be unusual, and would be acceptable in fact, for that performance to degrade to the point that it no longer met its original Winter grade in use. So your 0W-20 could end up a 5W-20 for example, or your 0W-40 a 5W-40 (or 5W-30 if you have VII shear too).
 
IIRC, Group III additive response is almost as bad as PAO, it also has horrible solvency but it doesn't have the seal shrink tendency PAO has. They both, because they are ultra-pure, have the same issues except for that last one, which requires more "accommodation" via formulation as you noted, using AN's, Esters, or both. The Mobil blending guide examples typically used a small percentage of ester for this purpose.

Of course being "not as bad" has its advantages and makes Group III easier, or perhaps "less challenging" might be better phrasing, to blend with. PAO, by itself, also has better oxidation resistance, but that can be dealt with via additives for Group III nowadays.

PAO's main feature, and the reason HPL (and others) use it in their 0W-xx's is of course that it has no wax, so there's nothing to crystallize like with Group III, that requires PPD's. This is why the pour points are so low and this unrivalled cold temperature performance and high VI offsets the low VI and relatively poor cold temp performance of the AN's.

One thing we discussed in the past (@Shannow myself and some others) were the requirements for the Winter rating, which allow an oil to "slip" a Winter grade in service. PPD's, like VII's and other additives, do degrade in use, so if your cold temperature performance is predecated on the function of PPD's, it would not be unusual, and would be acceptable in fact, for that performance to degrade to the point that it no longer met its original Winter grade in use. So your 0W-20 could end up a 5W-20 for example, or your 0W-40 a 5W-40 (or 5W-30 if you have VII shear too).
I don't work in the industry, so I don't know any better beyond what I pick up from here and there.

Considering the additive fallout we've seen a few years ago in Pennzoil products (I think Shell fixed that), you're right. A few years before I joined BITOG, I stopped by here in my quest to learn more about motor oil and saw someone that was somewhat disgruntled and displeased with the brownish goop in their PUP container. Since I knew even less back then than I know now, I moved on thinking that it was just dirt in Pennzoil's bottling system and stuck to Mobil 1. At the time, I also saw similar reviews and complaints elsewhere online.

I bought Lifeguard 8 ATF for the RAM 1500. Never used it though, and sold it, decide to go with AMSOIL ATL instead. The bottles said to shake well before use. It's a Group III ATF, so no surprise there. Shell makes Lifeguard 8 by the way. I guess they don't go out of their way to blend it with expensive co-bases like the small blenders do.

As for additive response, Group III is marginally better, you're absolutely right. However, I have no clue how that is quantified. It sounds cool though, lol.
 
I don't know how long their website has been that way as I just noticed it a couple weeks ago, but I agree about it not looking good especially after at least one person brought it to their attention and they didn't correct it yet (if it's an error as we suspect).

Potential errors aside, a listed pour point of only -27 degrees F for their top of the line 5W30 oil sure doesn't look good, that's the worst I have seen in a while by a large margin and IMO a legitimate concern if someone believes it and lives somewhere cold.
It may not be a mistake Project farm did a video with M1 5W- 30, and 5W-30 high mileage vs Supertech 5W-30 syn and 5W-30 high mileage and the vanilla Mobil 1 5W-30 poured the slowest.
 
It may not be a mistake Project farm did a video with M1 5W- 30, and 5W-30 high mileage vs Supertech 5W-30 syn and 5W-30 high mileage and the vanilla Mobil 1 5W-30 poured the slowest.
Still has to pass the CCS (-30C) and MRV (-35C) tests though. Pour Point was abandoned because it proved to be wildly inaccurate for predicting an oil's performance in an engine; the oil's ability to get to the pick-up and be pumped.
 
more great info + although i forget stuff @ 74 YO some things i never forget like the graph by machinerylubrication.com showing how group III + lower oils thicken much faster than PAO's, they thin faster in heat but to a lesser degree. retired + enjoy info on line more than todays TV!
 
Back
Top