What is the best oil ingredient to protect against cold start wear?

One unfortunate chance would be that of pressure "regulators" bleeding off volume flow. For example one of them after the pump but before a route of twin oil coolers would not have me expecting any viscosity to be great in winter.
Chances of wax plugging up the entry these days are low. Wax ain't a prominent degradation product, me thinks.
 
That’s not true though.
Why is it not true? If you could back your statement that would be great. 0w oils are rated as such due viscosity at certain temps and flow rate. From what I know, a 0w will flow the same a say a 5w at start up, but up to a certain point, say -40, the 0w will flow better, and that's not subjective.

We can also factor in certain additives I guess, which reduce wear at start up.
 
Why is it not true? If you could back your statement that would be great. 0w oils are rated as such due viscosity at certain temps and flow rate. From what I know, a 0w will flow the same a say a 5w at start up, but up to a certain point, say -40, the 0w will flow better, and that's not subjective.

We can also factor in certain additives I guess, which reduce wear at start up.
Yes the winter rating is determined at a specific temperature but it is not based on "flow rate". For the purposes of your post "flow" is not relevant.
 
One unfortunate chance would be that of pressure "regulators" bleeding off volume flow. For example one of them after the pump but before a route of twin oil coolers would not have me expecting any viscosity to be great in winter.
Chances of wax plugging up the entry these days are low. Wax ain't a prominent degradation product, me thinks.
Wax is present in all Group III and lower base oils, that's the purpose of using PPD's in blends, to prevent wax crystals from forming. This is where PAO has an advantage, as it doesn't have any wax in it, which is why it has inherently insanely low pour points and why its viscosity tends to be so linear as temperature drops.
 
I actually wasn't confused. I am just trying to parse hyperbole from facts when it comes to advertising claims.
I use Red Line in some of my rigs so the ester's and boron are covered. I also like the boron because it absorbs neutrons and doesn't allow my power plant to go critical.:)

Yes, we don't want your "pile" to go critical.:D:eek:

One will have to admit the advertising term "Magnatec" or whatever is 'catchy' and it portrays the image or concept of something being attracted magnetically to steel, but you will note they really don't define this term, as is typical of advertising
claims. I know of no additive chemistry for engine oils that includes magnetized particles.

Polar attraction itself is not a magnetic phenomenon, rather it involves charges of different signs for the attraction (a coulombic action).

So maybe they should advertise their oils with the made-up word, "Polartec" instead of Magnatec?
 
Ingredient? The oil itself. Cold and thin works best, pumps out fast, etc.
Or, coat everything inside with an appropriate DuPont Molykote product.
 
In my view PAO has its main advantage over good HC (...XHVI, GTL) in branched structures. Good grp. III oils are oils and not that much wax. But looking forward to stand corrected.
 
In my view PAO has its main advantage over good HC (...XHVI, GTL) in branched structures. Good grp. III oils are oils and not that much wax. But looking forward to stand corrected.
Perhaps, but in grand scheme of "PCMO" does all that really matter?
 
In my view PAO has its main advantage over good HC (...XHVI, GTL) in branched structures. Good grp. III oils are oils and not that much wax. But looking forward to stand corrected.

You can see the pour points for Yubase Group III for example aren't great:
http://www.yubase.com/eng/product/pr_technical_01typical.html

And here's Shell's XHVI 4cSt base:
Screen Shot 2020-09-24 at 1.55.01 PM.webp


Here is SpectraSyn 4 in comparison:

Screen Shot 2020-09-24 at 1.57.36 PM.webp


This is why when they are testing for MRV, they use PPD's:

Screen Shot 2020-09-24 at 1.58.42 PM.webp
 
I'm not saying pour points were all the same throughout. But the explanation I see is not really in much wax content. If you turn away from some definitions of wax towards some formation of wax as an expression of higher solidification temperatures this somehow becomes a circular reasoning not explaining higher pour points, right? Better let us stick to not seeing too much wax in those, unless there really is so much wax left...
 
Section I: Group I through 3 base oils.
Solvent Refining
[Definition of Wax:
Wax is a large hydrocarbon molecule that prevents oil from flowing at colder temperatures; paraffin, a flammable, whitish, translucent, waxy solid consisting of a mixture of saturated hydrocarbons, and obtained by distillation from petroleum or shale and used in candles, cosmetics, polishes, and sealing and waterproofing compounds; In chemistry, paraffin is used synonymously with alkane, indicating hydrocarbons with the general formula [CnH2n+2].

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/

Hence the need for Pour Point Depressants (PPD's)
 
My colder war temperatures preferably are -70°C from now on. To have enough wax in PAO for no longer defending :-)
 
Back
Top Bottom