The elements and the point spread...

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

Hello fellow oil researchers, just have some questions that I would like to get answered. Did some searching and the posts are starting to get kinda old and just wanted to see if anything has changed.

First.

Point Spread. I was always taught to not use an oil with a "large" viscosity point spread. Mainly due to all the junk that has to be added to make it so "broad" range can actually cause deposit formations on things like turbo journals and such. Since I am running a 0w40 Oil in my car, that is a pretty hefty 40 pt spread. I realize you buy an oil for what its spec'd for, but this is just something I am curious about when looking at an oil that meets a spec. For my application we will use VW 502/504. If I can get a spec'd oil that is a 5w30, or a 0w30 vs a 5w40 or a 0w40 would the lower point spread be better? Better in that it has less stuff in it to make the spread, and that "stuff" causing deposits on hot spots of the engine like turbo journals.

Question 2.

I see a switch in technology in oil. Seems Boron, the new Moly out (I forget the name of it, but its like a "nano" type Moly) vs more old school stuff like Zinc and Phosphorous. Good Examples of opposites. GC 0w30 and M1 0w40. Both are loved on this site but have totally different additive packs. You look at Redline too full of moly (not sure what kind) tons of calcium and ZPPD. I am just naming a few as examples. Since I am no chemist, are there certain "elements" that are known to be better for wear vs another. If an engine is "tough" on oil, or has potential to wear out an oil fast, do some elements, hold up better to fuel dilution and acids better than others to prevent wear? If so, which ones do you really want to have in the oil you choose?

I realize these topics may have been brought up many times, but most I have read are over 10 years old and we all know how much oils have changed over 10 yrs. Just wanted more recent info from the folks in the know.

Thanks for your time as always.

Jeff

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
First.

Point Spread. I was always taught to not use an oil with a "large" viscosity point spread. Mainly due to all the junk that has to be added to make it so "broad" range can actually cause deposit formations on things like turbo journals and such. Since I am running a 0w40 Oil in my car, that is a pretty hefty 40 pt spread. I realize you buy an oil for what its spec'd for, but this is just something I am curious about when looking at an oil that meets a spec. For my application we will use VW 502/504. If I can get a spec'd oil that is a 5w30, or a 0w30 vs a 5w40 or a 0w40 would the lower point spread be better? Better in that it has less stuff in it to make the spread, and that "stuff" causing deposits on hot spots of the engine like turbo journals.

The 'stuff' you're talking about are VIIs (viscosity index improvers). Lots of VIIs is bad, as it can lead to deposits as the VIIs break down and the oil shears. However, by using high quality oil bases, it is possible to minimize the need for VIIs. Current version of M1 0w-40 is fairly shear stable - probably does not contain a whole lot of VIIs. Due to the different composition of oils, you can't always assume that lower viscosity spread = fewer VIIs.

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

Does the fact that M1 0w40 (as an example only) does shear to a 30w within 3000 miles (as seen by my uoa) does this reflect the breakdown of VII's? Then the good base stocks take over and hold on for the long haul?

Does that make sense?

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Does the fact that M1 0w40 (as an example only) does shear to a 30w within 3000 miles (as seen by my uoa) does this reflect the breakdown of VII's?

Yes, but all oils shear. I feel like I keep repeating myself here, but as I pointed out before, M1 0w-40 starts out as a very thin 40-grade - right near the 30/40 range border, so even very tiny amount of shearing will make it drop into the 30-grade range. Just keep that in mind.

Another reason for viscosity drop (apart from VIIs) could be fuel contamination.

 

[dparm]

Jeff:


Point spread is not as big of an issue as it once was. Modern base stocks and VIIs are far better at maintaining that spread (by not breaking down, or by not being necessary at all). 20-30 years ago, this was not the case. I'm not sure why people condemn oils because of how their viscosity drops a bit over the service life; the OEMs even know it happens and allow for it (Lubrizol's website has some specifics on what's permissible). I think we've thoroughly covered this topic in the multitude of threads in the Euro Oils sub-forum. Go back and re-read some of Doug Hillary's stuff about Castrol TWS and its predecessors -- he talks about it in great detail.


Second, there's not really a single element or even several elements that are "better". As we have talked about on here repeatedly, it's the particular combination, quantity, and interaction with the basestocks (among other things) that matter. The overall package is what matters and additives will come and go. Right now, antimony is all the rage, but something better will come along. The only way to know if a certain combination is "best" is to try it in your engine and get it analyzed. VOAs and spec sheets only tell part of the story.


I don't think much has changed over the last 10 years with regards to the theory, but MolaKule and others can of course correct me if I'm wrong. This thread feels like a re-hash of Motor Oil 101 and the other "hot" discussions we've had before.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Right now, antimony is all the rage, but something better will come along.


WHO is using this in any quantity right now besides RLI??

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

I am sorry guys for seeming like I am repeating things. I just am curious too about the new technologies in the oils these days. Like the new nano moly. I believe M1 uses it among others I am sure.

The fact I am curious about, and many can argue I am sure is, do the "boutique" oils like RL and Amsoil with their claim of being "real" synthetic (though amsoil does have group 3) makes any real world difference these days?

Or is it that the big guys like Mobil, Pennzoil, Castrol etc, are able to just make up for lesser base stocks by having superior additive packs?

additionally, in DI motors, does anyone have any idea if the Additive packs of these oils weather High, Mid, or Low saps = less valve deposit issues, vs. lets say NOACK? I know about the study from the sponsor on this site about Low SAPS, but is there any "real" world proof? Like 2 cars same motors both DI one used High SAPS, one LOW SAPS and both went 100k miles and the engines torn down to see? Anything like that available? THAT would be proof for me. Not necessarily what happens in a lab.

I see so many advertisements about this oil being 40% cleaner than this one, and this one leaves 20% less of this or that. Even on this site, the add from Pennzoil shows their Ultra on the top of the competitors on pistons right? You guys have seen it. Then you go to Castrols site and they are claiming to be 40% better than their competitors? SO??? It makes for a very confusing market.

This is why I posted this. Yes, its a little Oil 101, but cars have changed over the years, oil has changed over the years, fuel delivery has changed over the years, all this adds up to needing an oil that can hold up and keep the engine clean EVERYWHERE including Intake Valves.

Jeff

 

[Ayrton]

Mobil 1 and Castrol haven't completely abandoned Group IV base stock. Castrol has it heavily in 0w30 and 0w40. Mobil 1 has it heavily in 0w-30 and probably 0w-20.

They simply make a decision on the best base stock for that particular product and factor in performance, cost, etc.

Of course, others can give better feedback than me.

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

I think more importantly than the base stocks, at least now a days, is the additive pack. An oil like other things is only as good as the sum of its parts. In this case Additive pack.

The argument over Group 3, 4, 5, VISOM, GTL is all personal, in most cases no one really would know a difference in the "real" world.

Additive packs though?? That is the game changer IMO. Curious how different brands have different approaches, and what works well in one engine vs. another. Takes allot of trial and error to find what works well in one particular application.

Jeff

 

[sparky123]

Reading the topic heading I thought we were going to talk about the Super Bowl! I use GC 0w-30 in my Golf and think it is a superior oil in my application. Where can you find its "add pack." Looking at Castrol's website there's very little info on this oil and it's dated 2002! No info at all on 0w-40 that I could find.

 

[sparky123]

Jeff, yes it seems different oils use different approaches. Calcium vs. Magnesium. Some use varies amounts of Boron and Molybelium as well. Others little or none. Interest topic and I'm learning from alot from your posts here on BITOG. Bill

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

Thanks Bill, we are all here with a common interest, that to learn

This site is very informative, while at the same time very biased. You just pick through everything and try to piece together what you feel fits. I have found many knowledgeable people here that are so helpful. They get frustrated with me at times, but they are always helpful.

As for the additive pack for GC 0w30, just look up on Google search BITOG GC VOA and it will come up. The VOA doesn't tell EVERYTHING but gives you an idea of whats inside. It just seems the VAG cars like Castrol products. I have not used Castrol (maybe factory fill?) yet. I am leaning towards trying the 0w30.

Its not that I am "cheap" but the M1 0w40 is so easy to find and less expensive. Unless you happen to find the GC on sale somewhere. I just think my car has more turbo lag with M1 and the engine has a slight "bob" in the engine at start up with it. When I had PU in I didn't notice these things.

Then again, the PU sheared to 11.20 @ 100c so maybe due to it being slightly "lighter" so to speak may have helped with my complaints about the M1 compared to the PU.

Funny how different oils act different in different applications. Trial and error by far are the only method to really know what your car may like or dislike.

Jeff

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

I have noticed too with the LOW SAPS 30w Oils, at least the test through the Lubrizol report on LOW SAPS and intake Valve Deposits, It seems that the oils tested being heavy 30w's with LOW SAPS ALSO had Low NOACK. For Example M1 ESP 5w30 is LOW SAPS and has a NOACK of 5.8%. So maybe its not JUST the LOW SAPS but a combo of LOW SAPS and Low NOACK?

Thing is no one has any real world proof. Other than the Europeans dont have this issue for various reasons.

Just Curious to me. If its a gas issue, I think the low Sulfur gas here in California is pretty close to what they have in EU. So why does my TBN on my 502 oil drop from almost 12 to 3.6 in 3k miles? Is it the Ethanol then? Curious.

Jeff