What's the reason Valvoline uses sodium?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SR5
Joe, always good to hear from you.

In the PQIA VOA analysis above Valvoline SynPower has 2100 ppm Ca, 460 ppm Na, and no Mg or Mo. So much more Ca than Na. The Royal Purple is much the same.

So do you think the Na is a friction modifier or part of the TBN over base ?

These VOA are 3 years old, and I suspect both Valvoline and RP have been using Na for much longer than that, so it must be sorted to some degree.

The rep that valvoline has on the street around me is that it's slippery/low friction oil, but the TBN depletes a bit quicker than most.



It's always hard to be precise but 2013 ppm of Calcium metal is roughly equivalent to 1.7% of 300 TBN Calcium Sulphonate so this would put 5.1 TBN into the oil. Say the oil contains about 5% of 20 TBN ashless dispersant so there's another 1 TBN. Hard to estimate how much 135 TBN diphenyl amine AO is in this specific oil but for the sake of argument, say 1.0% so there's another 1.35 TBN taking the total up to roughly 6.9 TBN out of a measured total of 7.9.

So, yes, I guess whatever sodium compound is in this oil is contributing to TBN but a minor amount relative to other sources. I'm currently working through an old 1997 Lubrizol patent on sodium additives that might throw some light on what this stuff is and what it's functions are.

PS - I should have added that a lot of these types of compounds contain nitrogen because they start their reactive life as alkyl amines which are basic (alkaline). That the sodium salt might be basic should therefore come as no surprise.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Sodium is a flavor enhancer; just like pepper is.


True, but sodium can drive up blood pressure in some individuals. Boy I'd hate to give it up!
 
Originally Posted By: SR5
Very nice paper Shannow, thanks for that.

Please give me a minute as I read through 21 pages of organic chemistry.


NP, it's not commentary on my part (out of my depth good and proper on this one), just mentions some of the species discussed, but has other stuff too...

Weasley, good stuff about the centrifuges..."my" Parsons turbines had centrifuges, with a seal water supply...and oil pre-heaters...and a never could be attained moisture target ppm, as the silly thing added water when there was none (not that Parsons made sure that steam never got into the oil)...were great at "washing out" varnish however.
 
Hmmm.....interesting. I wonder if Valvoline have a standard starting add pack, based on Ca, and then they add Na on top of that to reach the required spec of the oil. Some sort of two stage production flexibility approach to their multiple oil formulations. Who knows? Not me, I'm just guessing.

Another thing that always struck me about Valvoline, is the friction modifiers in their VR-1 race oils. I often run car race oils in my motorcycle (wet clutch) applications. Castrol and Shell say nothing about bikes, Penrite say it's fine, but Valvoline specifically point out that their VR-1 race oils are not suitable for wet clutch motorcycles. I always wondered if this was related to the Na, or the organic friction modifiers used?

It may be that sodium is a minor part of their formulation and that all the interesting stuff is happening in other parts. Just thinking out loud.
 
I'd bet the package & oil was developed (probably by Lz) as a single 'from the ground up' development. The fact that the Valvoline & Amsoil VOAs are so similar says to me this is a market general system that has been hawked around to anyone willing to buy it. I'm not sure of my facts but if memory serves, Lubrizol were late to the Moly party (two industry minnows, Ashai Denka and Vanderbilt, seem to have sown up the Moly IP positions very early on) so maybe Lz thought it better to avoid Moly entirely and find something else that did roughly the same thing that they could use.
 
Originally Posted By: userfriendly
Perhaps off topic, but all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1387971.html


I remember this well. In the 80s and 90s, Exxon (Paramins) and Lubrizol were forever at each others throats in the courts as they fought to be top dog in the lubricant additive industry. Lz sued Exxon over the Meinhardt dispersant patent and took them for about 80 mill. A few years later Exxon sued Lz over copper AOs and got their money back. These days they are a bit less macho and a bit more sensible and cross-license a lot of IP. Everybody wins.
 
Originally Posted By: BigD1
Playing its part in the Lubrizol HyperZDP(TM) System.

http://newscenter.lubrizol.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=250972&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1649954

Mobil Super conventional has a heavy dose of sodium too, and I think the Mobil Super severe service test proves that sodium works pretty dang good in motor oil.

https://mobiloil.com/en/article/why-the-...lts-mobil-super

Recent PQIA results for Mobil Super 5000 conventional.

http://pqiadata.org/MobilSuper5W20.html



In my humble opinion, the people that were responsible for HyperZDP should be collectively taken outside and shot! This is what happens when you game the system to the detriment of consumers and reality.

It starts by some twonk saying, oo look, ZDDP breaks down in the 250C Noack test and evaporates off. In true crying wolf fashion there are shouts that this must mean catalyst poisoning! Then someone patents using heavy ZDDP to prevent said evaporation. And then this gets worked into the API protocols as a Phosphorus retention test based on the equally bonkers Sequence IIIG test which allows 90% oil loss before the test is declared invalid. Now because the ZDDP is heavier, you need to add more ZDDP for a given level of phosphorus in oil which adds cost. Then there's probably a cross-licensing fee to use the patent. And the sad fact is that heavy ZDDPs generally perform worse than lighter ZDDPs because they activate at high temperatures. And someone got an award for this???
 
A lot of good oil are in Na. Redline, most Valvolines, Mobil conventional. I notice those get dark quickly in my applications, Exception is RL, maybe a cleaning impact.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.


It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.


That's what I read somewhere, it's a cheaper alternative to calcium and magnesium.
Cost effective, corporate talk for cheap.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: artificialist
Sodium is listed as a containment because it is found in some types of antifreeze. As for why Valvoline uses it, I don't know.


It is used for the dispersant/detergent package. According to many publications it is more cost effective versus calcium and magnesium.


That's what I read somewhere, it's a cheaper alternative to calcium and magnesium.
Cost effective, corporate talk for cheap.


If this is the case, I wonder if there is a reason Mobil, Castrol, or Pennzoil use calcium and magnesium instead? What is the drawback they see with using it?! Thats what Id be curious to know. If its cheaper and just as good, then why still choose to use calc/mag?
 
Originally Posted By: Rolla07


If this is the case, I wonder if there is a reason Mobil, Castrol, or Pennzoil use calcium and magnesium instead? What is the drawback they see with using it?! Thats what Id be curious to know. If its cheaper and just as good, then why still choose to use calc/mag?


Brand differentiation? Perhaps they perceive their add pack as superior thus hoping it will sell their oil over a competitor with Na?
 
+1
In August '12 I posted the cleanest UOA you'll ever see from any BMW, even for the mere 4K I ran it over two summer months.
The oil was green bottle Maxlife and the UOA showed plenty of sodium along with good residual TBN and very low wear metals.
I'm not informed enough to debate the relative merits of a sodium based add pack, but I can't see any downside to it.
The many loyal Valvoline users are neither stupid nor crazy.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
+1
In August '12 I posted the cleanest UOA you'll ever see from any BMW, even for the mere 4K I ran it over two summer months.
The oil was green bottle Maxlife and the UOA showed plenty of sodium along with good residual TBN and very low wear metals.
I'm not informed enough to debate the relative merits of a sodium based add pack, but I can't see any downside to it.
The many loyal Valvoline users are neither stupid nor crazy.


+1
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
+1
In August '12 I posted the cleanest UOA you'll ever see from any BMW, even for the mere 4K I ran it over two summer months.
The oil was green bottle Maxlife and the UOA showed plenty of sodium along with good residual TBN and very low wear metals.
I'm not informed enough to debate the relative merits of a sodium based add pack, but I can't see any downside to it.
The many loyal Valvoline users are neither stupid nor crazy.


Why is Valvoline in none of the vehicles in your signature? lol
 
He is probably like me and many others going for the best deal especially with rebates, and having a MEIJER near him and in this day and age Amazon has great deals also. That's my opinion
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom