Rethink and understand SAE viscosity: a 0W-20 can be thicker than a 0W-40 or 5W-40

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,042
Location
PNW
So what’s 4000+ fpm work out to for shear rate in the ring pack?
Keep in mind that the thinner the oil film layer between the moving parts, the higher the shear rate is at a constant velocity. A film thickness twice as thick will have 1/2 the shear rate compared to a film thickness that is 1/2 as thick. And the film thickness between moving parts tends to increase with velocity ... at least in journal bearings (ie, the MOFT is a function of journal bearing RPM).

1666928433137.png
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,042
Location
PNW
Took the data from the Excel spreadsheet in post #1 and plotted the calculated HTFS vs the KV100 and HTHS. The X-Axis is the ranking in the table from highest HTFS to lowest. Obviously, there isn't a real strong correlation between KV100 to HTHS and HTFS, but the correlation between HTHS and HTFS is pretty strong.

1666939643487.jpeg
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Messages
346
In the past it was 10w40, when it went to 5W30 caused a lot of engine damage, today it is 0W20 and soon even thinner. None of these predictions have come true. And there will be no excessive wear and tear this time either, even if the rule will soon be 0W16 and thinner.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
4,503
How have you two missed this? I'm dead serious, is this selective amnesia? Like, with over 40 accounts on here spanning a decade, you absolutely have to have seen these discussions, there is no way you missed them.

Here's a recent one:

This is from the white bottle 5W-30:
View attachment 123357

Two PAO's, one less than 60%, the other less than 30%.

And Joe, YOU POSTED IN THAT THREAD!!!! So you clearly read it! Good God! :oops:
What does all that mean. Only you could decipher something like that. Please refer to previous about Group V origin... Someone is in a MOOD 🙄

Good God!

They need to change the verbiage on their website. Just sayin. :D

It's carefully crafted, just like the wording used by Motul, to get folks to think it's "ester oil". While it does have some significant ester content, the majority of the base oil blend is PAO, which makes perfect sense for an automotive engine oil, it's not going in a jet turbine.

Some kind episode.. sheesh!

Goodnight, @OVERKILL and I hope you have a better day today, bud.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,858
Location
Ontario, Canada
What does all that mean. Only you could decipher something like that.
That's nonsense, most people on here know that dodecene homopolymer and dodecene trimer are types of PAO. We've been discussing this presentation on SDS sheets for many years now, you've seen the discussions, you've participated in the threads. Heck, as I noted, you participated in that particular thread that was quite recent, where I posted that snippet once again.

I don't know if you suffer from retention issues, and if so, well, I'm sorry to hear that, but this is a well-trodden path and so having somebody who should know better, based on his time here and participation in threads on the subject, trot-out that Redline is fully ester-based yet again, when it's been very well established for years now, that this is not the case, is frustrating.

I don't need to "refer" to your previous post. You claimed it was Group V (it's mostly Group IV) and this was the reason it didn't shear. Both of those posits are incorrect, and were responded to.

My day was just fine, I just find you frustrating to deal with at times, which also isn't news to you, it has been that way since you first joined, many, MANY aliases ago.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,858
Location
Ontario, Canada
In the past it was 10w40, when it went to 5W30 caused a lot of engine damage, today it is 0W20 and soon even thinner. None of these predictions have come true. And there will be no excessive wear and tear this time either, even if the rule will soon be 0W16 and thinner.
Wut? 10W-40 was actually warned against by manufacturers because it used very thin, cheap base oils and a ton of VII and caused deposits. Hence Mobil's marketing back in the day of their 5W-20 offering better protection than 10W-40. It had a heavier base oil blend.

You seem to be conflating hip-shot "back in the day" lore with tribology, once against smearing the nuance to take a simplified overly basic position. As I said before, I highly encourage you to abandon this practice and embrace the nuance.
 

4WD

$50 site donor 2023
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
20,686
Location
Texas via IAH
Wut? 10W-40 was actually warned against by manufacturers because it used very thin, cheap base oils and a ton of VII and caused deposits. Hence Mobil's marketing back in the day of their 5W-20 offering better protection than 10W-40. It had a heavier base oil blend.

You seem to be conflating hip-shot "back in the day" lore with tribology, once against smearing the nuance to take a simplified overly basic position. As I said before, I highly encourage you to abandon this practice and embrace the nuance.
7CF75E24-38C9-40CD-B624-96ABC5E4C3A5.jpg
 

4WD

$50 site donor 2023
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
20,686
Location
Texas via IAH
Keep in mind that the thinner the oil film layer between the moving parts, the higher the shear rate is at a constant velocity. A film thickness twice as thick will have 1/2 the shear rate compared to a film thickness that is 1/2 as thick. And the film thickness between moving parts tends to increase with velocity ... at least in journal bearings (ie, the MOFT is a function of journal bearing RPM).

View attachment 123364

Skim Boarding explained ? 😷
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
4,503
That's nonsense, most people on here know that dodecene homopolymer and dodecene trimer are types of PAO. We've been discussing this presentation on SDS sheets for many years now, you've seen the discussions, you've participated in the threads. Heck, as I noted, you participated in that particular thread that was quite recent, where I posted that snippet once again.
I didn't know that. And dont assume what I read or didn't. Calls for speculation.
I don't know if you suffer from retention issues, and if so, well, I'm sorry to hear that, but this is a well-trodden path and so having somebody who should know better, based on his time here and participation in threads on the subject, trot-out that Redline is fully ester-based yet again, when it's been very well established for years now, that this is not the case, is frustrating.
Then be frustrated, they tout their Ester bases, as pointed out.
I don't need to "refer" to your previous post. You claimed it was Group V (it's mostly Group IV) and this was the reason it didn't shear. Both of those posits are incorrect, and were responded to.
You actually do, I addressed your concern.. you will get no satisfaction from me.
My day was just fine, I just find you frustrating to deal with at times, which also isn't news to you, it has been that way since you first joined, many, MANY aliases ago.
Apparently, it is not. Stop lying.
Goodness gracious someone has urinated in your Cheerios this morning. Good morning. Now let's do this quickly. (You will get no satisfaction from me.)

That's nonsense, most people on here know that dodecene homopolymer and dodecene trimer are types of PAO. We've been discussing this presentation on SDS sheets for many years now, you've seen the discussions, you've participated in the threads. Heck, as I noted, you participated in that particular thread that was quite recent, where I posted that snippet once again.

Not sure most people here know that. Some? Sure. I don't. You'd have to ask every person. I didn't know that. And dont assume what I read or didn't. Calls for speculation.

Been pointed out that Redline touts Group V and you even said so. You just ignore. That's all. Now moving on..


I don't need to "refer" to your previous post. You claimed it was Group V (it's mostly Group IV) and this was the reason it didn't shear. Both of those posits are incorrect, and were responded to.
You actually do, you're just in some kind of a mood and this post is about as far as I'm prepared to go there with you. It actually is a Group V oil. If it isn't then tell them to stop saying it is, no games today.

I don't know if you suffer from retention issues, and if so, well, I'm sorry to hear that, but this is a well-trodden path and so having somebody who should know better, based on his time here and participation in threads on the subject, trot-out that Redline is fully ester-based yet again, when it's been very well established for years now, that this is not the case, is frustrating.
Then be frustrated, they tout their Ester bases, as pointed out. Redline isn't even the Bee's Knees anymore. Referencing what they said is in there isn't anything wrong, that is all. Now moving on..

No satisfaction out of me today. Told you..

My day was just fine, I just find you frustrating to deal with at times, which also isn't news to you, it has been that way since you first joined, many, MANY aliases ago.
Sure doesnt look that way, sorry. Thank you, and I'm your Huckleberry.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,248
Location
Great White North.. eh
Ok, so do i grab the jug of 5w20, or 20w50 for the wet clutch bike! I'm so confused... :unsure: :cool:

I leave BITOG for months, sometimes years, and it's like this place has been frozen in time.

PS: How's the Dr's Ferrari running with the 20 weight? :cool::LOL:

PPS: My approach; throw some oil in the engine, call it a day, and go riding 🤙
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
28,606
Location
CA
Been pointed out that Redline touts Group V and you even said so. You just ignore. That's all. Now moving on..
"Full-synthetic ester formula for passenger cars, light trucks, performance vehicles and marine applications"


Nowhere does that imply 100% ester formula. To me, the wording simply implies that their formula contains ester.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,858
Location
Ontario, Canada
Goodness gracious someone has urinated in your Cheerios this morning. Good morning. Now let's do this quickly. (You will get no satisfaction from me.)



Not sure most people here know that. Some? Sure. I don't. You'd have to ask every person. I didn't know that. And dont assume what I read or didn't. Calls for speculation.

Been pointed out that Redline touts Group V and you even said so. You just ignore. That's all. Now moving on..



You actually do, you're just in some kind of a mood and this post is about as far as I'm prepared to go there with you. It actually is a Group V oil. If it isn't then tell them to stop saying it is, no games today.


Then be frustrated, they tout their Ester bases, as pointed out. Redline isn't even the Bee's Knees anymore. Referencing what they said is in there isn't anything wrong, that is all. Now moving on..

No satisfaction out of me today. Told you..


Sure doesnt look that way, sorry. Thank you, and I'm your Huckleberry.
We're done Joe, I'm not going to bother, you clearly don't want to get it, and that's your prerogative, just don't expect further engagement from me in the future, I'm done wasting my time and feel a bit foolish to have bothered getting wrapped-up in your drama again, something I thought I had learned the lesson on back when you were GearHeadTool, but apparently that lesson faded and here we are, with me wasting my time yet again.

Enjoy your weekend.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,858
Location
Ontario, Canada
"Full-synthetic ester formula for passenger cars, light trucks, performance vehicles and marine applications"


Nowhere does that imply 100% ester formula. To me, the wording simply implies that their formula contains ester.
Listen, you can explain it to him, but you can't understand it for him. It's like smashing your head against a wall, just an absolute waste of time unfortunately.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
4,503
"Full-synthetic ester formula for passenger cars, light trucks, performance vehicles and marine applications"


Nowhere does that imply 100% ester formula. To me, the wording simply implies that their formula contains ester.
And I get that now.

Guys. Pause. Hit pause. I'm not about adjusting my statements, or adjusting facts into my learning. None of that is an issue.

But when I look at a post and see "Any other spurious stuff youd pike to posit?" Unm.. look it's as simple as this we all have bad days and I'm not even mad.

I don't even prefer Redline oil anymore for what it's worth so that reference was only to this larger topic I thought we were talking about J300 here. Cool?
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
4,503
We're done Joe, I'm not going to bother, you clearly don't want to get it, and that's your prerogative, just don't expect further engagement from me in the future, I'm done wasting my time and feel a bit foolish to have bothered getting wrapped-up in your drama again, something I thought I had learned the lesson on back when you were GearHeadTool, but apparently that lesson faded and here we are, with me wasting my time yet again.

Enjoy your weekend.
Beyond what you already have, lol. No satisfaction out of me. None. Go with that. You can do whatever you have to do, nobody can tell anyone else what to do and expect that person to listen, just know that what you're saying wasn't correct and you're not getting any satisfaction out of me so you have a great day.

Enjoy the Charger or whatever it is that you do. I'm fine.

And I'm not even going to touch on this other person you keep referencing so have a great day.

Moving on. This topic is about SAE J300 spec. Next up about that?
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,858
Location
Ontario, Canada
Think Buster had determined </=30% and than mainly PAO … Still a very solid synthetic lube …
Yes, there was some guestimation that it might be between 15-30% POE, certainly not the majority base oil, which is PAO, but a healthy dose above and beyond what Mobil uses in some of their oils, like the 0W-40.

The issue came with the use of oxidation as a means to guess the percentage, which we had a few experts chime-in on and basically say "you can't do that". While high virgin oxidation can indeed point to ester content, you can't use the magnitude of that figure to determine a percentage, which is what we were trying to do, so that has subsequently been abandoned.

Like Motul, Redline uses the ester verbiage to draw attention to the product and some folks will naturally infer that it's majority Group V based rather than Group IV based, with that language, and that's the point. It's (effective) marketing. In fact, they don't even call out the majority base oil (they make no mention of PAO in their advertising language) which would further drive that inference.

But, as I noted, we've discussed this so many times on here I've lost count.
 

4WD

$50 site donor 2023
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
20,686
Location
Texas via IAH
Yes, there was some guestimation that it might be between 15-30% POE, certainly not the majority base oil, which is PAO, but a healthy dose above and beyond what Mobil uses in some of their oils, like the 0W-40.

The issue came with the use of oxidation as a means to guess the percentage, which we had a few experts chime-in on and basically say "you can't do that". While high virgin oxidation can indeed point to ester content, you can't use the magnitude of that figure to determine a percentage, which is what we were trying to do, so that has subsequently been abandoned.

Like Motul, Redline uses the ester verbiage to draw attention to the product and some folks will naturally infer that it's majority Group V based rather than Group IV based, with that language, and that's the point. It's (effective) marketing. In fact, they don't even call out the majority base oil (they make no mention of PAO in their advertising language) which would further drive that inference.

But, as I noted, we've discussed this so many times on here I've lost count.
Don’t think they have changed marketing - got this for my generator a 2-3 weeks back …

0D70429C-83B2-409B-8EEF-515BFA133B6C.jpeg
 
Joined
May 3, 2022
Messages
119
Location
Egypt
Why don't motorcycles that rev to 10,000 to 15,000 RPM (and obviously put oil into some crazy shear rates) use xW-20 or thinner oils if viscosity and HTHS doesn't have a bearing on engine wear?
I see your point.
Although XW-20 is more shear stable than say 20W-50, it's HT/FS would be 2.4 (that's pretty thick for the grade) (HT/HS started at 2.9). That leaves higher temperatures, as a second factor further reducing the HT/FS to an alarming figures in extended high RPM operation, which cannot be considered for these high performance engines because it wouldn't bear the elevated temperatures. But 20W-50 even if it is less shear stable, will retain HT/FS 3.5 for instance (HT/HS started at 4.7), and will have more headroom for higher temperatures to continue providing a safe film and minimize boundary lubrication incidents. Add to that, even if the oil permanently sheared, no VIIs, worst case, it's still able to provide a safe, effective film.

On the other hand, HT/HS is relevant to the bearings where VIIs can still contribute to viscosity at this shear rate.

So, XW-20 can be thicker than XW-40 in some cases if we're talking about HT/FS which is relevant to to the valves train and piston rings, but it doesn't mean it will protect the bearings better than XW-40 when it comes to HT/HS.
Both HT/HS and HT/FS have their place in correlation to engine wear and eventually they may be two sides of the same coin.
 
Top