Updated M1 FS 0w-40 - More PAO

[Gokhan]

But they aren't formulated the same. The above assumes that they won't swap out cheaper base oils with the narrower spread, but that's exactly what they do. Look at these the below 5w-40 Euro example blended with PAO and AN:
View attachment 78963
Now, let's compare to these Group III examples:
View attachment 78964

MUCH higher VII content.

In fact, if we then compare to a few different 0w-40's:

1. Group III + PAO, low BOV, but VII load is actually lower than the above Yubase examples:
View attachment 78966

2. PAO/AN based. BOV balances to about the same as our Group III 5w-40's, VII load about the same:
View attachment 78967

3. PAO/Ester based, BOV is actually higher than the Group III 5w-40's, VII load is lower:
View attachment 78968

In all instances except the Yubase + PAO blend, the two base oil viscosities used are the same in the 0w-40 and our Group III 5w-40.

So, if the 5w-40's were being blended with straight or mostly PAO, like Mobil shows in the last two tables, yes, the BOV of the base oil blend would be higher and VII load lower, but we know that typical 5w-40's aren't blended that way. If we look at Castrol for example, their 5w-40 is straight Group III, while their 0w-40 is predominantly PAO-based.

This is the chasm between idealized blending philosophy and large, capitalist oil companies using the cheapest bases they can get away with while meeting the performance targets. If you go Unicorn shopping and buy something like Ravenol 5w-40, it should be blended more similar to the last table, but what you buy from Mobil, Shell, Valvoline or Castrol is going to be heavy on the Group III.

The wildcard seems to be the constant shuffling of the bases used in M1 FS 0w-40. Recently being 50-60% Group III with 10-20% PAO, similar to Formula M 5w-40, which is also 50-60% Group III (but they don't list the remaining base, so who knows what that is (could be EHC)), now 30-40% PAO.

In fact Mobil shows that you can get away with a good slug of 5cSt Group II+ in a 5w-40:
View attachment 78972
And even a bit more EHC 5cSt in a C3 5w-30:
View attachment 78973

It comes down more PAO in the base oil blend is going to mean less VII, you can't just go by the spread, because you may end up with the same VII content due to the bases selected to make the product blending more cost effective.

ExxonMobil EHC are API Group II base stocks (VI ≤ 119). They can't sell any oil labeled as full synthetic if there is any EHC in it. It would be sold as a synthetic blend.

PdsDetailsPage

EHC base stocks by ExxonMobil are designed for performance capability in a broad range of finished lubricant applications. With base oil interchange and viscosity grade read-across capabilities, ExxonMobil's EHC base stock slate offers broad coverage, enabling supply chain flexibility and...

www.exxonmobil.com

 

[OVERKILL]

ExxonMobil EHC are API Group II base stocks (VI ≤ 119). They can't sell any oil labeled as full synthetic if there is any EHC in it. It would be sold as a synthetic blend.

PdsDetailsPage

EHC base stocks by ExxonMobil are designed for performance capability in a broad range of finished lubricant applications. With base oil interchange and viscosity grade read-across capabilities, ExxonMobil's EHC base stock slate offers broad coverage, enabling supply chain flexibility and...

www.exxonmobil.com

Yes, I'm aware of what group the bases are in Gokhan, Mobil clearly markets them as such. I don't believe your claim about these bases not being able to be used in synthetic oils is correct however.

Let's look at an MSDS here:
AFE 0w-20 shows 1-5% Solvent dewaxed base oil, which is clearly not Group III, but rather Group I or II:

Mobil Super Synthetic 10w-30 shows 5-10% of that same base:

Amusingly, the EHC base oils share the same CAS # as many group III products:

@MolaKule or @High Performance Lubricants would know for sure, but I suspect you can mix in a fair bit of Group II/II+ before you need to start calling the product a synthetic blend. Looking at a Synthetic Blend product, I saw up to 40% of that same CAS #.

 

[Gokhan]

Yes, I'm aware of what group the bases are in Gokhan, Mobil clearly markets them as such. I don't believe your claim about these bases not being able to be used in synthetic oils is correct however.

Let's look at an MSDS here:
AFE 0w-20 shows 1-5% Solvent dewaxed base oil, which is clearly not Group III, but rather Group I or II:

Mobil Super Synthetic 10w-30 shows 5-10% of that same base:
View attachment 79007

Amusingly, the EHC base oils share the same CAS # as many group III products:

@MolaKule or @High Performance Lubricants would know for sure, but I suspect you can mix in a fair bit of Group II/II+ before you need to start calling the product a synthetic blend. Looking at a Synthetic Blend product, I saw up to 40% of that same CAS #.

No, API Group II base stocks can not be used in full-synthetic oils as part of the base oil.

The solvent-dewaxed Group I base stock you mentioned is not part of the base oil. It is part of the additive package used as an additive solvent.

There is nothing amazing about the CAS #, as the only difference between API Group II and API Group III is the VI, which is determined by the severity of the hydroprocessing, and they use the same feedstocks and reactors otherwise. (GTL API Group III uses natural-gas-derived feedstocks.) However, API Group I or API Group II base stocks cannot legally be part of the base oil in full-synthetic oils.

 

[kschachn]

No, API Group II base stocks can not be used in full-synthetic oils as part of the base oil.

Can you link to some rule or document that shows that? What is the controlling entity you're referring to here?

 

[930.engineering]

So why has VAG released 511.00 and Porsche C40 for their high performance applications? All based on 0w40 oils?

Not all. Very most VW 511 00 are actually 5W-40.*

VOLKSWAGEN 502 00 / 504 00 / 508 00 / 511 00 APPROVAL LISTS

Since I've noticed some members have repeatedly been searching for a dedicated list of Volkswagen approved engine oils and some tried to help by uploading PDF sheets, which inevitably suffer from getting outdated quite soon, I will post these links offcially provided by Volkswagen's "erWin"...

bobistheoilguy.com

*I'd almost bet there's just one single 511 00 being 0W-40 which is
M1 and both Audi and VW oils are actually M1 in different bottles.

 

[OVERKILL]

No, API Group II base stocks can not be used in full-synthetic oils as part of the base oil.

The solvent-dewaxed Group I base stock you mentioned is not part of the base oil. It is part of the additive package used as an additive solvent.

The 5-10% in the 10w-30 is significantly higher than the 1-5% in the 0w-20. I'd like a source for your claim, preferably something from the industry or from somebody who works in it. And of course this may be Group II, it doesn't have to be Group I, both can be produced using solvent dewaxing.

Also, if we are being difficult/pedantic, you didn't initially claim as part of the base oil blend, rather, you made the following absolute statement (emphasis added):

They can't sell any oil labeled as full synthetic if there is any EHC in it.

Clearly some Group I/II is being included in the above oils, in varying percentages.

There is nothing amazing about the CAS #, as the only difference between API Group II and API Group III is the VI, which is determined by the severity of the hydroprocessing, and they use the same feedstocks and reactors otherwise. (GTL API Group III uses natural-gas-derived feedstocks.) However, API Group I or API Group II base stocks cannot legally be part of the base oil in full-synthetic oils.

I said AMUSING, not "amazing", perhaps more work on reading what's presented and less work on sounding condescending? It would be greatly appreciated from this side of the screen, you come off as pretentious and I find it less than pleasant.

 

[Tifosi]

Not all. Very most VW 511 00 are actually 5W-40.*

VOLKSWAGEN 502 00 / 504 00 / 508 00 / 511 00 APPROVAL LISTS

Since I've noticed some members have repeatedly been searching for a dedicated list of Volkswagen approved engine oils and some tried to help by uploading PDF sheets, which inevitably suffer from getting outdated quite soon, I will post these links offcially provided by Volkswagen's "erWin"...

bobistheoilguy.com

*I'd almost bet there's just one single 511 00 being 0W-40 which is
M1 and both Audi and VW oils are actually M1 in different bottles.

OT: Are you here in the States? Ravenol oil are not an easy find here, at least not for me. The only two sources I know of are Amazon and eBay, neither one is well known for NOT selling counterfeit products, even motor oil. Also, any reason you have chosen Ravenol over Liqui Moly considering they are both from Germany.

Also, thank you for the information on VAG oil being rebranded M1. Looks like a lot of major manufactures all uses rebranded M1 oil, including Toyota/Lexus and Honda/Acura.

 

[OVERKILL]

OT: Are you here in the States? Ravenol oil are not an easy find here, at least not for me. The only two sources I know of are Amazon and eBay, neither one is well known for NOT selling counterfeit products, even motor oil. Also, any reason you have chosen Ravenol over Liqui Moly considering they are both from Germany.

Also, thank you for the information on VAG oil being rebranded M1. Looks like a lot of major manufactures all uses rebranded M1 oil, including Toyota/Lexus and Honda/Acura.

Blauparts sells Ravenol, FYI, and they often have it on sale.

 

[Tifosi]

Blauparts sells Ravenol, FYI, and they often have it on sale.

OT: I came across that as I was doing some research for fun. IIRC, they are the seller on Amazon. Have to admit, never heard of the brand until this week when I was looking to see which oil sponsors are involved in F1, other than the obvious. Interesting to see that while they are all Mercedes engine teams, Mercedes uses Patronas, Aston Martin uses Ravenol, McLaren is with Gulf and I think Williams uses Patronas as well.

 

[JHZR2]

I don’t know what to make of pour point claims. Chevron claims that their 15w-40 basic conventional HDEO pours at a temperature colder than -40. Their 10w-30 conventional at -47.

Conventional. HDEO. Maybe there are other tricks and formulation approaches being used?

Delo 400 SDE 15w-40 Pour Point?

While the other competitive 15w-40 HDEOs are pouring at -33 to -36, chevron is claiming theirs pours at -45. Is this believable? https://cglapps.chevron.com/sdspds/PDSDetailPage.aspx?docDataId=481951&docFormat=PDF I verified that their 10w-30 was a different value, -47F IIRC, so it’s not just...

bobistheoilguy.com

 

[edyvw]

OT: Are you here in the States? Ravenol oil are not an easy find here, at least not for me. The only two sources I know of are Amazon and eBay, neither one is well known for NOT selling counterfeit products, even motor oil. Also, any reason you have chosen Ravenol over Liqui Moly considering they are both from Germany.

Also, thank you for the information on VAG oil being rebranded M1. Looks like a lot of major manufactures all uses rebranded M1 oil, including Toyota/Lexus and Honda/Acura.

Motul sells VW511.00, C40. X-Clean 5W40 Gen2 if you need that.
Ravenol is different category over Liqui Moly. LM IMO is just average.

 

[OVERKILL]

I don’t know what to make of pour point claims. Chevron claims that their 15w-40 basic conventional HDEO pours at a temperature colder than -40. Their 10w-30 conventional at -47.

Conventional. HDEO. Maybe there are other tricks and formulation approaches being used?

Delo 400 SDE 15w-40 Pour Point?

While the other competitive 15w-40 HDEOs are pouring at -33 to -36, chevron is claiming theirs pours at -45. Is this believable? https://cglapps.chevron.com/sdspds/PDSDetailPage.aspx?docDataId=481951&docFormat=PDF I verified that their 10w-30 was a different value, -47F IIRC, so it’s not just...

bobistheoilguy.com

They might be using some good Group III in it or maybe a dash of PAO?

 

[Tifosi]

Motul sells VW511.00, C40. X-Clean 5W40 Gen2 if you need that.
Ravenol is different category over Liqui Moly. LM IMO is just average.

Thank you. I am only here purely for academic reasons. When it comes to motor oil, I am in the camp of as long as the specification fits, I will stay with what is readily available as long as it is not Castrol. In my area, Mobil 1 0W-40 can be found in every automotive store and Costco carry Mobil 1 0W-20. So, unless there is solid evidence that M1 is massively inferior to other brands, I have little to no reason to switch.

Why do you say Ravenol is in a different category and what category would that be? Why and how so is LM just average when compared to other European brands?

 

[edyvw]

Thank you. I am only here purely for academic reasons. When it comes to motor oil, I am in the camp of as long as the specification fits, I will stay with what is readily available as long as it is not Castrol. In my area, Mobil 1 0W-40 can be found in every automotive store and Costco carry Mobil 1 0W-20. So, unless there is solid evidence that M1 is massively inferior to other brands, I have little to no reason to switch.

Why do you say Ravenol is in a different category and what category would that be? Why and how so is LM just average when compared to other European brands?

There is nothing special to Liqui Moly. It is Group III oil with mediocre performance.
Most Ravenol products are PAO based with some really good performance specifications. I personally don’t use it as IMO Castrol 0W30/40 or Mobil1 0W40 are same category and dirt cheap, but if I had to choose between Ravenol or LM, it would be without doubt Ravenol.

 

[930.engineering]

Tifosi, nothing wrong with running Mobil1. I'd personally consider
M1 as the No 1 in quality for PCMOs among all the majors. To be
complete: I'd rate Castrol superior for transmission oils.
As edyvw pointed out almost all LiquiMoly PCMOs are HC (group 3)
based. AFAIK only LM's Synthoil 0W-40 is PAO (group 4) based, but
it's a pretty outdated formulation (easily recognized on the lack of
current approvals) and probably completely lacks any AN and ester
(group 5) content. On another side note: LM released a small number
of PAO based manual transmission oils quite recently.
Ravenol has a huge range of PAO based PCMOs (distincted by their
gold colored bottles) blended with some ester and AN. That's much
like Amsoil and Redline however most Ravenol fully synthetic PCMOs
come with reputable approvals. Another USP is their tungsten based
additive package (Vanderbilt Vanlube W-324).
Blauparts seems best to source Ravenol oils in the US. Since I'm based
in Europe I have easy access, though Ravenol's top-range oils are still
more expensive compared to the vast majority of competitors including
Mobil1 (ESP 5W-30 is like 40 € for a 5 l jug while Ravenol VMP 5W-30
and REP 5W-30 are 60 € without rebates) - very much like Motul or even
more expensive which I think is ok since very most Motul's approved oils
aren't group 4/5 based.
Would I run Ravenol if I'd live in the US or in Canada? Not sure on that,
perhaps. Given where I am the premium of 20 € is it worth it for me.
.

 

[Gokhan]

The 5-10% in the 10w-30 is significantly higher than the 1-5% in the 0w-20. I'd like a source for your claim, preferably something from the industry or from somebody who works in it. And of course this may be Group II, it doesn't have to be Group I, both can be produced using solvent dewaxing.

Also, if we are being difficult/pedantic, you didn't initially claim as part of the base oil blend, rather, you made the following absolute statement (emphasis added):



Clearly some Group I/II is being included in the above oils, in varying percentages.

I said AMUSING, not "amazing", perhaps more work on reading what's presented and less work on sounding condescending? It would be greatly appreciated from this side of the screen, you come off as pretentious and I find it less than pleasant.

Amusing sounds a lot better than amazing.

I doubt solvent-dewaxed Group II is used these days. It should be hydroprocessed stuff for Group II and Group III, and there is really no difference between Group II and Group III other than the arbitrary VI cutoff for Group III set at 120. The same equipment can make either by controlling the "severity" of the process. Now, which Group II or Group III is considered hazardous vs. not, I don't know. Here is an interesting read on Group II and solvent vs. catalytic (hydroprocessed) dewaxing.

The age of Group II by Steve Haffner (PDF)

So, solvent-based heavy refined oil is Group I. Heavy means heavier than 19 cSt at 40 °C; so, it is 4 cSt or higher at 100 °C. Every Mobil 1 MSDS has that.

Again, I am pretty sure that the Group I stuff is used as an additive or VII solvent. There is also a less likely possibility that it is used to improve the overall solvency and lubricity of the oil. There is also an ExxonMobil patent on improving solvency of their additives using Group I base stocks, but like with most patents, it's vague and its use is doubtful:

Lubricant composition with improved solvency (ExxonMobil patent on using Group I base stocks in their synthetic oils)

Regarding what is synthetic, there is none other than the BBB ruling that dictates what can be labeled what. That said, a reputable company like Mobil 1 wouldn't use EHC (Group II) to be part of its base oil and then sell it as "full synthetic." I can understand if they want to use Group I or Group II as additive or VII solvents. In fact, since the additive and VII are usually supplied by a third party, there isn't any control on what API group is used as a solvent, and they may favor Group II because of higher solvency over Group III.

Here is an interesting read on solvency. Solvency increases with the decreasing API group (excluding API Group V) and decreasing viscosity. It can both lead to deposits by preventing the contaminants from evaporating by dissolving them and help remove deposits by dissolving them from the metal. So, it is a double-edge sword:

Base Oil Report - Lubes'N'Greases

David Wedlock explains the importance of base oil solvency.

www.lubesngreases.com

A less interesting but relevant read on what can be sold as synthetic—short answer: anything can be sold as synthetic, as no one checks it.

Need To Know - Lubes'N'Greases

Tom Glenn challenges the unchecked use of the term synthetic lubricant.

www.lubesngreases.com

 

[4WD]

Amusing sounds a lot better than amazing.

I doubt solvent-dewaxed Group II is used these days. It should be hydroprocessed stuff for Group II and Group III, and there is really no difference between Group II and Group III other than the arbitrary VI cutoff for Group III set at 120. The same equipment can make either by controlling the "severity" of the process. Now, which Group II or Group III is considered hazardous vs. not, I don't know. Here is an interesting read on Group II and solvent vs. catalytic (hydroprocessed) dewaxing.

The age of Group II by Steve Haffner (PDF)

So, solvent-based heavy refined oil is Group I. Heavy means heavier than 19 cSt at 40 °C; so, it is 4 cSt or higher at 100 °C. Every Mobil 1 MSDS has that.

Again, I am pretty sure that the Group I stuff is used as an additive or VII solvent. There is also a less likely possibility that it is used to improve the overall solvency and lubricity of the oil. There is also an ExxonMobil patent on improving solvency of their additives using Group I base stocks, but like with most patents, it's vague and its use is doubtful:

Lubricant composition with improved solvency (ExxonMobil patent on using Group I base stocks in their synthetic oils)

Regarding what is synthetic, there is none other than the BBB ruling that dictates what can be labeled what. That said, a reputable company like Mobil 1 wouldn't use EHC (Group II) to be part of its base oil and then sell it as "full synthetic." I can understand if they want to use Group I or Group II as additive or VII solvents. In fact, since the additive and VII are usually supplied by a third party, there isn't any control on what API group is used as a solvent, and they may favor Group II because of higher solvency over Group III.

Here is an interesting read on solvency. Solvency increases with the decreasing API group (excluding API Group V) and decreasing viscosity. It can both lead to deposits by preventing the contaminants from evaporating by dissolving them and help remove deposits by dissolving them from the metal. So, it is a double-edge sword:

Base Oil Report - Lubes'N'Greases

David Wedlock explains the importance of base oil solvency.

www.lubesngreases.com

A less interesting but relevant read on what can be sold as synthetic—short answer: anything can be sold as synthetic, as no one checks it.

Need To Know - Lubes'N'Greases

Tom Glenn challenges the unchecked use of the term synthetic lubricant.

www.lubesngreases.com

Agree - but they sell EHC to a couple dozen formulator types - and that includes well known names …
XOM’s big use for EHC is Delvac and CAT lubes … drums and all …

 

[OVERKILL]

Amusing sounds a lot better than amazing.

Yes, makes a bit more sense doesn't it? LOL!

I doubt solvent-dewaxed Group II is used these days. It should be hydroprocessed stuff for Group II and Group III, and there is really no difference between Group II and Group III other than the arbitrary VI cutoff for Group III set at 120. The same equipment can make either by controlling the "severity" of the process. Now, which Group II or Group III is considered hazardous vs. not, I don't know. Here is an interesting read on Group II and solvent vs. catalytic (hydroprocessed) dewaxing.

The age of Group II by Steve Haffner (PDF)

So, solvent-based heavy refined oil is Group I. Heavy means heavier than 19 cSt at 40 °C; so, it is 4 cSt or higher at 100 °C. Every Mobil 1 MSDS has that.

I did some digging on the solvent dewaxed bases when I first stumbled across this artifact on the MSDS sheets a while back. I found that Calumet produces a reasonably broad slate of Solvent Dewaxed Group I/II products, The 600, 325, 150 and 100 in the following table are listed under this CAS #:

Shell also lists a "Group II+" 5cSt base oil in their SDS catalog under it:

Again, I am pretty sure that the Group I stuff is used as an additive or VII solvent. There is also a less likely possibility that it is used to improve the overall solvency and lubricity of the oil. There is also an ExxonMobil patent on improving solvency of their additives using Group I base stocks, but like with most patents, it's vague and its use is doubtful:

Lubricant composition with improved solvency (ExxonMobil patent on using Group I base stocks in their synthetic oils)

Certainly a possibility, the concentration in the 10w-30 is what caught my eye, which also doesn't seem to have any PAO, so you'd think that oil would need the least help in that regard.

Regarding what is synthetic, there is none other than the BBB ruling that dictates what can be labeled what. That said, a reputable company like Mobil 1 wouldn't use EHC (Group II) to be part of its base oil and then sell it as "full synthetic." I can understand if they want to use Group I or Group II as additive or VII solvents. In fact, since the additive and VII are usually supplied by a third party, there isn't any control on what API group is used as a solvent, and they may favor Group II because of higher solvency over Group III.

Well, with Mobil, "3rd party" in this case would be Infineum, so not really that far removed, but with other blenders, definitely.

On the use/concentration angle, that's why I brought it up. I didn't think there was anything other than the NAD ruling that dictated what "synthetic" is, and, if the concentration is low enough, even if it's just used to improve the overall solvency of the base oil blend (like POE often is, same with AN's) then I can see that being acceptable if it is balanced out by say PAO. As you noted, there really isn't a technical difference between these EHC Group II+ bases and Group III other than VI, so we get into something that's a bit murky.

Here is an interesting read on solvency. Solvency increases with the decreasing API group (excluding API Group V) and decreasing viscosity. It can both lead to deposits by preventing the contaminants from evaporating by dissolving them and help remove deposits by dissolving them from the metal. So, it is a double-edge sword:

Base Oil Report - Lubes'N'Greases

David Wedlock explains the importance of base oil solvency.

www.lubesngreases.com

A less interesting but relevant read on what can be sold as synthetic—short answer: anything can be sold as synthetic, as no one checks it.

Need To Know - Lubes'N'Greases

Tom Glenn challenges the unchecked use of the term synthetic lubricant.

www.lubesngreases.com

That's kinda what I figured (that last article). And yes, formulation is a balancing act, so solvency is yet another parameter that needs to be kept in check with respect to the performance of the overall product.

 

[Krieg]

Exxon/Mobil stated that the May 9, 2019, MSDS is the most current for 0W40. Ask and thou shall receive!

 

[OVERKILL]

Exxon/Mobil stated that the May 9, 2019, MSDS is the most current for 0W40. Ask and thou shall receive!

Clearly it's not, as there are several 2021 MSDS sheets that I've shown in the OP, lol. They just haven't updated the US one, so it's "the most current" one they have available for that market. It'll get updated eventually.

As I noted, this is a global product, so it doesn't differ market to market.