Here's one with
Pentosin Euro 5w40, 10k miles on the oil, on a MB 2005 S500 with 215k miles
Pentosin Euro 5w40, 10k miles on the oil, on a MB 2005 S500 with 215k miles
bobistheoilguy.com
Last edited:
Here's one with
Pentosin Euro 5w40, 10k miles on the oil, on a MB 2005 S500 with 215k miles
Pentosin Euro 5w40, 10k miles on the oil, on a MB 2005 S500 with 215k milesbobistheoilguy.com
Another Blackstone UOA unfortunately, can't use the fuel percentage.Here's some 5W-30 Motorcraft synthetic with 9,146 miles and 0.5% fuel dilution that sheared out of viscosity spec. Virgin KV100 is 10.5 cSt. So most of that 22.7% viscosity reduction must have been mechanical shearing.
UOA: 2019 Ford Ranger 2.3T Ecoboost
This is with the Ford Performance engine tune and the K&N air filter that goes with it. TBN is still good at 9k and OLM at 8%, 10k would be fine which is where the OLM would have been about at 0%. This is "normal" commuting and a few road trips. Motorcraft full synthetic 5w30 in and out, MC...bobistheoilguy.com
I was wondering what method Blackstone used. Good to know.Can't use the Blackstone fuel figures unfortunately, they are WAY off, that's what I meant when I was remarking on GC fuel dilution. The majority of the UOA's we see are Blackstone and they don't use GC, they just infer fuel from a generic flashpoint figure, which can be so far off it is useless.
Here's one that's GC, unfortunately, it's on a premium 0w-8, so probably no VII's, lol:I was wondering what method Blackstone used. Good to know.
I know it's subjective, but do you recall if you could really sense the smell of "gassy" oil at 5% dilution?No, it's not as bad, but MPFI engines still can dilute, my SRT HEMI's all did and so did the S62 in my M5, considerably (5% fuel in one case).
Not on the dipstick, but when I changed it? Yes, you could smell the fuel a bit.I know it's subjective, but do you recall if you could really sense the smell of "gassy" oil at 5% dilution?
I was very impressed with Toyota's setup, based upon 160k miles on my previous 2019 Lexus UX 250h.Toyota is the only marque I know of off the top of my head that has a hybrid GDI/MPFI setup. I outlined the caveats of GDI quite clearly in the post you responded to.
It's not just higher compression, it's the ability to manipulate the timing of the injection of the fuel to facilitate it, which you can't do with MPFI because it depends on the timing of the intake valve. That's how you can get away with higher compression ratios, boost, and 87 octane with GDI.
Ford was/is using reversion to "wash" the intake valves with the air/fuel charge on the EcoBoost as their way to mitigate IVD's, this was done with manipulation of the camshaft timing. Toyota has claimed their hybrid setup is to improve low speed performance/drivability, which is where their engines use MPFI, but of course keeping the intake valves clean is an obvious benefit of that system.
Personally, despite the performance benefits, I'm wary of GDI. Honda has had some considerable issues with fuel dilution, then there is LSPI, costly injection pumps, injectors...etc. While it shouldn't be a technology in its infancy at this point, given the considerable time that has elapsed since its introduction, in many ways it still feels like it is.
If you're worried about Vis loss just change the oil more often.I read a lot and post infrequently but this is a topic that I can't quite wrap my head around and perhaps the answer is obvious and I just don't see it.
I'm going to use PP 5/30 as an example but any other oil in the same grade with a 9 range cSt would be similar, I think.
We know that that shearing and dilution decrease the viscosity and Pennzoil, like the the others, routinely say their oil is resistant to shearing and stays in grade but they don't know what vehicle the oil is going on. If you have a diluter, such as certain Honda's, the oil is going to thin out without question.
If I run a recommended interval of say 5 -10k, the oil will shear or be diluted to a degree and my concern is that a thin 30 will end up as a thick 20 somewhere along the way. Running a 30 that has a cSt of 10 to 11 doesn't concern me.
I suppose I could understand using the PP 5/30 if I was driving a lot on a highway but driving around town a lot, I have my doubt the PP would be ideal and end up a 20. Wouldn't I better off using a higher cSt 30? Conversely, a car calling for a x/20 that dilutes or shears would seem to benefit from running the PP.
Agree. I bought my 17 Camry because it had MPFI and a 6 speed auto vs. Accord with DFI and CVT.Toyota is the only marque I know of off the top of my head that has a hybrid GDI/MPFI setup. I outlined the caveats of GDI quite clearly in the post you responded to.
It's not just higher compression, it's the ability to manipulate the timing of the injection of the fuel to facilitate it, which you can't do with MPFI because it depends on the timing of the intake valve. That's how you can get away with higher compression ratios, boost, and 87 octane with GDI.
Ford was/is using reversion to "wash" the intake valves with the air/fuel charge on the EcoBoost as their way to mitigate IVD's, this was done with manipulation of the camshaft timing. Toyota has claimed their hybrid setup is to improve low speed performance/drivability, which is where their engines use MPFI, but of course keeping the intake valves clean is an obvious benefit of that system.
Personally, despite the performance benefits, I'm wary of GDI. Honda has had some considerable issues with fuel dilution, then there is LSPI, costly injection pumps, injectors...etc. While it shouldn't be a technology in its infancy at this point, given the considerable time that has elapsed since its introduction, in many ways it still feels like it is.
The viscosity loss depends on both VII type and its SSI (Shear Stability Index). OCPs have a typical SSI range from 24 to 50. Star styrene-diene VIIs have a typical SSI from 4 to 28. There is no OCP that can be better than a Star VII with SSI 4 even after 90 (or 120 or …) cycles.ENGINE OIL VISCOSITY INDEX IMPROVER BEHAVIOUR AT EXTENDED SHEAR STABILITY TEST" From February 2008, so it's very recent. The gist of this is that two common types of VIIs (Polymethacrylates (PAMA) and Hydrogenated styrene-diene copolymers) used in motor oils failed the 90 cycle shear stability requirement and only one type (Olefin copolymers (OCP)) passed.
Please note that the cited conclusion is from member JAG, who I don't believe participates here anymore unfortunately.The viscosity loss depends on both VII type and its SSI (Shear Stability Index). OCPs have a typical SSI range from 24 to 50. Star styrene-diene VIIs have a typical SSI from 4 to 28. There is no OCP that can be better than a Star VII with SSI 4 even after 90 (or 120 or …) cycles.
The testing of shear stability of multigrade engine oils was performed by ASTM D 7109 method on samples with SAE 15W-40 viscosity grade. The same additive package (DI) has been used, with the same initial values for kinematic viscosity at 100 °C (KV 100 = 14,5 ± 0,1 mm2 /s) and dynamic viscosity at -20 °C (CCS -20 = 6 650 ± 50 mPa⋅s), but with addition of three types of commercial viscosity index improvers. The viscosity index improvers based on polymethacrylates (A), olefin copolymers of different manufacturers (B1, B2, B3 and B4) and styrene-isoprene copolymers (C) were compared. The aim of testing was to determine if the mentioned viscosity index improvers with extended test of shear stability (90 cycles) meet requirements of the new engine oil specifications. The research is performed in two phases. For determining of viscosity loss the sample has been taken after 30 and 90 cycles. Table 2 show test results of the engine oil shear stability depending on type and concentration of polymeric viscosity index improvers.
The data from the table 2 show that for the formulating of engine oils with conditions given in advance, the kinematic viscosity of base oils at 100 °C of certain samples did not differ significantly (0 – 0,37 mm2 /s) which is shown on Figure 2. Simultaneously, the concentration of viscosity index improvers was quite different (Figure 3) and significantly bigger for improvers based on OCP in relation to those improvers based on polymethacrylates (A) and styrene-isoprene (C).
Thanks, I am familiar with this article. it's a matter of choice)))I've also attached the document, as I was able to find it via the web archive, in case you want to read it.
Thanks, I am familiar with this article. it's a matter of choice)))
Results are typical for OCPs, but not for ”market general” sterene VIIs.
Here results from oil-club.ru for Mobil 1 FS 5W-40. (sorry for Russian). Viscosity loss after 90 cycles 0,9%.
View attachment 76016