Shell Formula & PYB 10w-40 SM vs SN

[tstep]

With all the emphasis for resource conserving (understood that 10w-40 is not exactly resource conserving), why would SOPUS 10w-40 class oils get thicker when transition from SM to SN? Was SM perhaps too light w/ observable consequences being reported? Were the SL oils as light as SM, but with higher levels of plating additives? Are the SN formulations are nearly in the 15w40 range to compensate for lower levels plating metals relying more on film thickness? Couple of comparisons below:

Pennzoil conventional SM ..............Pennzoil conventional SN
KV40 = 96.9 .........KV40 = 104.7
KV100 = 14.0 ........KV100 = 15.5
HTHS = 3.7 ..........HTHS = 3.8
Pour Point = -30 ....Pour Point = -42

Shell Formula has a similar viscosity increase in the 10% range along with the same 10-15 degree lowering of the pour point. Values are nearly identical to Pennzoil conventional. Quaker State however, looks as though they did not change the formuation from SM to SN.

 

[oggb]

It's probably due to the use of higher quality base stocks to meet the requirements of API SN.

 

[dave1251]

HTHS is about the same but pour point is improved. It is not that much "thicker" at operating temperature this looks improved overall to me.

 

[tstep]

I thought maybe the pour point would be an indicator of a better base. Just seems odd to have a 10% increase in KV and also odd to have Shell follow suit (unless it is the same oil repackaged) when the market trend is toward thinner oils.

But as stated, the HTHS is very similar.

 

[dave1251]

It makes since because of the oils are provided by Shell.

 

[Garak]

Where did you find this data sheet? When I look here, I find substantially different numbers for the SN, in line with what you posted for the SM numbers.

Perhaps you have a newer sheet than I do. The SN sheet I linked above is dated November of 2010.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Where did you find this data sheet? When I look here, I find substantially different numbers for the SN, in line with what you posted for the SM numbers.

Perhaps you have a newer sheet than I do. The SN sheet I linked above is dated November of 2010.


http://www.epc.shell.com/Docs/GPCDOC_X_cbe_24855_key_140007054913_201202271120.pdf

 

[Garak]

Thanks for the link. That's definitely a newer sheet than the one I was looking at. The one I was looking at was probably an "edit" where they just changed SM/GF-4 references to SN/GF-5 and left everything else alone.

Now, to see if I can find it myself on the Shell site without digging up something ancient again....

Bingo. If I want to find it, I have to set my country to the U.S. If I set it to Canada, I have the choice of SM/GF-4 Pennzoil or the old SN/GF-5 sheet (the one I referenced). If I choose the U.S., I get the old SM/GF-4 sheet or the one you showed me.

It might aid people if they put a reference date in the columns for these products, especially if they're keeping out of date spec sheets online. There are valid reasons for keeping old sheets out there, but it would be nice if there were a way to more easily filter them.

 

[dparm]

Shell is not consistent with updating spec sheets. This is a bit of a turn off as I look for my next oil to try...

 

[Garak]

Agreed. It's not bad for me, who just needs something SM/GF-4 or better in a 5w30. Anyone needing European specifications, like yourself, has a chore on his hands.