Shell's GTL technology: A step up from Group III?

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
The graph below is from a research project at Oak Ridge National Labs with GM, and they accidentally showed a result that Mobil wishes nobody sees:

You do realize how tiny those numbers are, right? And roughly ten percent of a very tiny number is an even tinier number, and ten times a very tiny number is still a very tiny number.

Statistically significant may not amount to a hill of beans in the real world. Having engines go hundreds of thousands of miles on conventional (and that's not far fetched), I can assure you I'm not worried about base stocks.

 

[CrawfishTails]

Garak, why not offer some actual useful real information for a change? Your posts are always bland beyond infinity.

Anybody using delvac in a G37 has already demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of oil.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
When are people going to learn that grouping really doesn't matter?


Then how else do you explain why Mobil conventional oil Group II does not perform nearly as well in Boundary Lubrication (BL) as Mobil1 synthetic Group III ? The graph below is from a research project at Oak Ridge National Labs with GM, and they accidentally showed a result that Mobil wishes nobody sees:

Mobil conventional has a comparable, if not more, additive package density as Mobil1 synthetic. Further proof that Group matters is when you notice German Castrol 0w-30 or 0w-40 performs to LL-01 and MB 229.5 without any boron or moly helper additives, so we're left with the conclusion Group matters. Still not convinced? How do you explain why NO dexos1 oils are Group II ?


Great, thanks for reading into something incorrectly.

If you had comprehended the discussion below it, which was there before you made this response, it was all about group III and its performance and benefit. Had you taken the half second to review the patents I linked, it would have been clear that the group III GTL is a desirable component.

Plus if you had spent half a second on here you'd observe that the wife's tale that doesn't really matter is the whole group III "fake synthetic" discussion, while grp III+ performs within a very close range as PAO in many relevant parameters.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Garak, why not offer some actual useful real information for a change? Your posts are always bland beyond infinity.

Anybody using delvac in a G37 has already demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of oil.


Incredible, you come on here and preface many of your posts with insults and passive aggressive comments for no reason. I dont care to know your far fetched reasons why either, so don't bother responding. You won't get a rebuttal.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Garak, why not offer some actual useful real information for a change? Your posts are always bland beyond infinity.

I offered a very important observation. Should you choose to ignore it, that's at your peril. With such a lovely little presentation you showed us, I want to see the error analysis. An engineer, physicist, or mathematician would want to verify the rigour in that, first.

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Anybody using delvac in a G37 has already demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of oil.

Obviously. It's only done with the blessing of Imperial Oil and at least one of the most highly respected posters here. I've overseen the maintenance of many vehicles, each going hundreds of thousands of miles, so I'm confident in my ability to choose oil, I'm confident in what API, ILSAC, and the ACEA do, what blenders provide us, and what automakers sell us, from conventional through the high end products. I also get Delvac 1 at a regular price that's cheaper than the regular price on conventional here (at least at our normal retail channels), not to mention cheaper than the normal U.S. price on the same product.

I understand, most particularly, using a world class product at a bargain basement price.

 

[LubricatusObsess]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Just answering the OP's original question, I've not seen any solid evidence that GTL is really that fantastic. Intuitively it seems a cleaner base stock, with very very little waxy stuff left in it would perform better, so its preferable, I'd guess anyway.

LubricatusObsess, remember those SOPUS cleaner piston marketing items were there before GTL hit the scene.


Oh! did not know that, thanks! The perhaps they are spiking with really high detergent/dispersant additives?

 

[buster]

GTL's may have better solvency than PAO's, but i'm not entirely sure. I believe I read they do. Otherwise, no better than a Group IV. More cost effective possibly.

 

[Leonardo629]

BMW just did us a favor by switching over to SOPUS oil. I guess we'll see an abundant of UOA reports in the coming months/years to draw conclusion on.

Engine design also trumps oil brands in my opinion. I feel like I can throw any 0W20 oil in my Accord and it'll just hum along until eternity.

 

[buster]

Quote:
Engine design also trumps oil brands in my opinion. I feel like I can throw any 0W20 oil in my Accord and it'll just hum along until eternity.




I totally agree. And some of the best really long drain UOA's are in very good engines where many oils could achieve similar results.

 

[RGR]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Just answering the OP's original question, I've not seen any solid evidence that GTL is really that fantastic. Intuitively it seems a cleaner base stock, with very very little waxy stuff left in it would perform better, so its preferable, I'd guess anyway.

LubricatusObsess, remember those SOPUS cleaner piston marketing items were there before GTL hit the scene.


But not the Noack and pour point properties...go natural gas base stocks!!

 

[RGR]

Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
The graph below is from a research project at Oak Ridge National Labs with GM, and they accidentally showed a result that Mobil wishes nobody sees:

Why? It would strike me as some sort of empirical proof as to why someone would pay more for their synthetics as compared to the normal stuff. Marketing value is still value, and Mobil would know that.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: RGR
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Just answering the OP's original question, I've not seen any solid evidence that GTL is really that fantastic. Intuitively it seems a cleaner base stock, with very very little waxy stuff left in it would perform better, so its preferable, I'd guess anyway.

LubricatusObsess, remember those SOPUS cleaner piston marketing items were there before GTL hit the scene.


But not the Noack and pour point properties...go natural gas base stocks!!


True. Not as good as PAO, but better than traditional Group III bases it would seem.

 

[GenaFishbeck]

Originally Posted By: wemay
I know it's classified as a GrpIII so if not 'a step forward' then what difference does it make over non-GTL GrpIII base stocks?


You are correct wemay, PurePlus GtL Base Oil is considered a Group III, full synthetic base oil - based on the API 1509 classification system. Group III means “all hydroprocessing/hydrocracking + isomerization” base oil (which is considered synthetic) but Group III can also mean “Gas to Liquids (GtL), which is what the Shell PurePlus products are made from (immensely simplified, GtL means: “from Natural Gas/Methane to hydrocracker to base oil,” which is also considered synthetic).

The Pennzoil Platinum and Pennzoil Ultra Platinum motor oils are both made using the API Group III Gas to Liquids/full synthetic base oil, which is a truly “synthesized from natural gas” synthetic base oil – which is a different process than traditional Group III base oils.

With regard to the Base Oil itself, the PurePlus base oils have a number of better intrinsic properties compared with traditional Group III base oils, as measured in fully formulated engine oils. As tested with the same additive package combined with various base oils, GTL base oils consistently have shown:

-- Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils. Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils.
-- Better (lower) low-temperature properties. PurePlus base oils have consistently lower viscosity at cold temperatures (-25 to -35C). Products formulated with PurePlus base oils have less than half the pumping viscosity at -30C and -35C.
-- Better oxidation stability, which supports better viscosity stability – and better performance throughout the oil drain interval. Viscosity stability maintains fuel economy.
-- Better piston deposit cleanliness. Finished products formulated using PurePlus base oils have delivered a piston deposit merit rating of 0.8 merits higher on average than other Group III base oils in the Sequence IIIG oxidation and deposit tests.

Hope some of this information helps! -The Pennzoil Team

 

[wemay]

Thank you, much appreciated.

 

[Danh]

Originally Posted By: GenaFishbeck
Originally Posted By: wemay
I know it's classified as a GrpIII so if not 'a step forward' then what difference does it make over non-GTL GrpIII base stocks?


You are correct wemay, PurePlus GtL Base Oil is considered a Group III, full synthetic base oil - based on the API 1509 classification system. Group III means “all hydroprocessing/hydrocracking + isomerization” base oil (which is considered synthetic) but Group III can also mean “Gas to Liquids (GtL), which is what the Shell PurePlus products are made from (immensely simplified, GtL means: “from Natural Gas/Methane to hydrocracker to base oil,” which is also considered synthetic).

The Pennzoil Platinum and Pennzoil Ultra Platinum motor oils are both made using the API Group III Gas to Liquids/full synthetic base oil, which is a truly “synthesized from natural gas” synthetic base oil – which is a different process than traditional Group III base oils.

With regard to the Base Oil itself, the PurePlus base oils have a number of better intrinsic properties compared with traditional Group III base oils, as measured in fully formulated engine oils. As tested with the same additive package combined with various base oils, GTL base oils consistently have shown:

-- Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils. Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils.
-- Better (lower) low-temperature properties. PurePlus base oils have consistently lower viscosity at cold temperatures (-25 to -35C). Products formulated with PurePlus base oils have less than half the pumping viscosity at -30C and -35C.
-- Better oxidation stability, which supports better viscosity stability – and better performance throughout the oil drain interval. Viscosity stability maintains fuel economy.
-- Better piston deposit cleanliness. Finished products formulated using PurePlus base oils have delivered a piston deposit merit rating of 0.8 merits higher on average than other Group III base oils in the Sequence IIIG oxidation and deposit tests.

Hope some of this information helps! -The Pennzoil Team


Gosh, if Shell is proud of the Noack volatility of its "PurePlus" products and views it as a differentiating factor, why do you no longer disclose these values in the TDS documents available? You say volatility is lower, but unless there's a disclosed value it seems like just marketing talk to me.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: GenaFishbeck
Originally Posted By: wemay
I know it's classified as a GrpIII so if not 'a step forward' then what difference does it make over non-GTL GrpIII base stocks?


You are correct wemay, PurePlus GtL Base Oil is considered a Group III, full synthetic base oil - based on the API 1509 classification system. Group III means “all hydroprocessing/hydrocracking + isomerization” base oil (which is considered synthetic) but Group III can also mean “Gas to Liquids (GtL), which is what the Shell PurePlus products are made from (immensely simplified, GtL means: “from Natural Gas/Methane to hydrocracker to base oil,” which is also considered synthetic).

The Pennzoil Platinum and Pennzoil Ultra Platinum motor oils are both made using the API Group III Gas to Liquids/full synthetic base oil, which is a truly “synthesized from natural gas” synthetic base oil – which is a different process than traditional Group III base oils.

With regard to the Base Oil itself, the PurePlus base oils have a number of better intrinsic properties compared with traditional Group III base oils, as measured in fully formulated engine oils. As tested with the same additive package combined with various base oils, GTL base oils consistently have shown:

-- Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils. Better (lower) volatility, a key property to reducing oil consumption. GTL base oils typically have between 1-2% better volatility than other Group III base oils.
-- Better (lower) low-temperature properties. PurePlus base oils have consistently lower viscosity at cold temperatures (-25 to -35C). Products formulated with PurePlus base oils have less than half the pumping viscosity at -30C and -35C.
-- Better oxidation stability, which supports better viscosity stability – and better performance throughout the oil drain interval. Viscosity stability maintains fuel economy.
-- Better piston deposit cleanliness. Finished products formulated using PurePlus base oils have delivered a piston deposit merit rating of 0.8 merits higher on average than other Group III base oils in the Sequence IIIG oxidation and deposit tests.

Hope some of this information helps! -The Pennzoil Team


How is the wax content of the GTL-derived base vs regular Group III? Does it require less in the way of PPD's? How does it compare to PAO in this regard?

 

[Tony10s]

Here are my

in response to a previous post in this thread. I have not been a member for that long, but as far as I am concerned, Garak contributes to the site with many helpful posts (and I'm sure that there are many others who agree) and has been a member for a long time (has made thousands of posts) ... I'm sure Garak has much more than a basic understanding of motor oil, oil filters, etc.

 

[147_Grain]

Originally Posted By: Tony10s
Here are my

in response to a previous post in this thread. I have not been a member for that long, but as far as I am concerned, Garak contributes to the site with many helpful posts (and I'm sure that there are many others who agree) and has been a member for a long time (has made thousands of posts) ... I'm sure Garak has much more than a basic understanding of motor oil, oil filters, etc.

+1 and Amen!

 

[Garak]

Thanks for all the kind words.

On topic, the new PP is pretty much everywhere up here, but I haven't seen the new PU yet! We've seen some pretty good sales on the new Platinum, if one is patient enough.

 

[Tony10s]

^^^ We don't have Pennzoil Ultra Platinum in the local stores in my area either. The PUP that I am currently using is the last I had in stash, which I bought at a WM not in my area. I won't be buying any more though because there are other motor oils that I like just as well, both conventional and synthetic.