Where can I find mobil 1 0W-40 in Canada (Québec)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would a Winston Cup car run a multigrade oil at all? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to simply run 30 weight oil for qualifying?

[ October 12, 2002, 12:21 PM: Message edited by: Patman ]
 
A multigrade oil is still going to reduce friction better than a straight weight oil, since it is easier to shear or deform between metal surfaces. This is not shear in the sense of viscosity loss, but rather how the fluid behaves as the opposing surfaces move relative to one another.
Go back and read Bobs comments on Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids and you'll understand this better ....

A good analogy of thick and thin oils ....Stir a glass of water and then stir a glass water thickened with cornstarch. The additional energy required to stir the more viscous fluid translates to frictional losses in the drivetrain - engine/transmission/differential. Using low viscosity oils minimizes these frictional losses, so you achieve maximum fuel efficiency and power. Heat generation is also reduced with low viscosity lubes - this has a positive effect on the life of seals and gaskets which are composed of elastomeric materials, ie synthetic rubber.

In the case of a 0w-40 vs a 5w-30 oil, you might think the 0w would provide better fuel efficiency. However at operating temp, the Mobil 1, 0w-40 is about 20% thicker than their 5w-30 or 10w-30. In this case I am referring to the comparative, high temp/high shear viscosities. This is the relevant parameter as it reflects the viscosity of the oil in the bearings, between the piston rings and cylinder walls and in the valvetrain.

TooSlick
 
quote:
Originally posted by TooSlick:
A good analogy of thick and thin oils ....Stir a glass of water and then stir a glass water thickened with cornstarch. The additional energy required to stir the more viscous fluid translates to frictional losses in the drivetrain - engine/transmission/differential. Using low viscosity oils minimizes these frictional losses, so you achieve maximum fuel efficiency and power. Heat generation is also reduced with low viscosity lubes - this has a positive effect on the life of seals and gaskets which are composed of elastomeric materials, ie synthetic rubber.

TooSlick
Click to expand...
TooSlick,

I'm no fluid dynamics expert, but doesn't metal-to-metal contact generate more heat than a viscous fluid sandwiched between the two surfaces?

I'm not arguing your point because physics is physics. But please educate me here. How does a 40wt. oil generate more heat when it is better in preventing metal-to-metal contact than 30wt. at a given RPM/Load? Since the 30wt. is liable to be squeezed out sooner than a 40wt., wouldn't that generate a lot of heat due to metal-to-metal friction?

I hope I made sense
pat.gif


smile.gif


Oz
 
Oz,

This idea that 30wt oils result in excessive metal to metal contact and excessive wear is not supported by the facts. I do oil analysis testing on all sorts of engines and I rarely if ever see significant differences in wear rates between 30wt and 40wt oils. This idea that you HAVE to use a 0w-40 synthetic or a 15w-40 petroleum oil in an engine designed for a 5w-30 or 10w-30 oil is simply bad advice. Even down here in Alabama, about 75% of what I sell for gas engines is a 0w-30 synthetic and i've never had any issues come up.

If I lived in Canada, I'd never run anything heavier than a 10w-30 synthetic in any gas engine, unless it was excessively worn and was burning/leaking oil. Delvac 1 is an excellent oil for diesels and older worn gas engines, but I'd run Mobil 1, 0w-30 or 5w-30 in the wintertime in Canada in any newer engine.

Tooslick
 
Be careful when assuming all of Canada is cold in winter. Here in Toronto it's pretty mild. It rarely goes below 0F. Most winter nights it goes down to about 15 to 20F. Daytime highs are usually right around 30-32F. So we can easily get away with a 10w30 here all year round. I can't ever imagine needing a 0w30, unless I lived somewhere that got down below -40 degrees often.
 
Patman,

This has nothing to do with having to get your car started in cold weather. A 0w-30 synthetic will provide better performance and fuel efficiency than a 10w-30 even if you live in a warm climate. I live in Alabama & picked up about a 3%-4% gain in fuel efficiency in both my personal vehicles going from the Amsoil 10w-30 to their 0w-30. My wear rates are actually a bit lower with the 0w-30 - suspect this is due to the better flow on startup in my OHC engines.

The 0w-30 and 0w-40 synthetic grades are the wave of the future ...most of the high end synthetics used in Europe are now either 0w-30, ACEA A5/B5 rated or 0w-40, ACEA A3/B4 rated formulations. Since Europe is about five years ahead of north america when it comes to oil, I expect the same trend in the US ....

TooSlick
 
quote:
Originally posted by TooSlick:
[QB
The 0w-30 and 0w-40 synthetic grades are the wave of the future
TooSlick[/QB]
Click to expand...
That's why so many full synth's are reducing the the amount of synth's they are using in their blend now? Like castrol and amsoil are doing?

Another point.. I do many analysis as well, and quite frankly Ted, I don't see much difference between the 10w ,5w ,15w,0w when it comes to comparisions. It's really amazing we even got an engine to pass by 10,000 miles without a synth.(sarcasim there folks) I think you give synth's way to much credit for car engines Ted. There isn't any evidence that a full synth is going to protect better than a blend or mineral at proper intervals, otherwise we'd have more engines in the junkpile than we do now.

Another point I thought was interesting, the analysis spreadsheet provided by bill, looking at the numbers crunched by tweeker on that, it appeared that the 40wt was providing lower wear numbers than any other wt oil. Now on the flip side, the 20w50 was producing slightly higher wear numbers, so this kinda looks like the 30wt oils where somewhere in the middle for wear #'s.

This boils down to a balance between additive packages, and flow properties and given this information, you'll notice that it appeared the flow properties of the 40wt in those instances is the better choice.

One thing to remember, we are talking ppm's and not chucks of metal here, so I have not seen where most all types of oils don't provide good service and there is many more engines out there on mineral oils that have proven more miles than any synth has as to date. I also believe that since the newer specs offered from the newer GF-3 mineral oils, this gap of a full synth vs mineral has dramiticly closed and there fore many oil companies are reducing the amount of full synth in their base oil for cost reasons and joining the bandwagon with castrol syntec. Case in point amsoils latest change in one of their lines.

Here is a copy of tweekers #'s he compiled based on bill's data...
code:
Wear by oil weight: ppm miles ppm / mile
Click to expand...
It appears he had factor'd in other things and re calc'd his findings, so here is the new #'s based on wear #'s and not with any additives and such included as was before.

code:
Wear by oil weight: ppm miles ppm / mile

10W/40 272 68730 0.0040

20W/50 96 16440 0.0058

15W/40 302 39755 0.0076

0W/30 293 18000 0.0163

10W/30 2786 137900 0.0202

5W/30 7346 274986 0.0267

5W/20 1266 26420 0.0479

totals 12361 582231 0.0212


Click to expand...
notice that this is avgs' and how the thicker hydro dynamic fluids are more incline to produce less wear #'s and how the lower viscosity #'s are showing higher. This is interesting to say the least. This goes along with supporting my theory with fluid viscosity or "film thickness"="film strength".

[ October 14, 2002, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: BOBISTHEOILGUY ]
 
Bob,

You have all different types of engines being used in these tests, with widely varying numbers of miles and duty cycles. If you want to compare, say 1999-2001 Nissan Maxima engines or V-6 Acura engines, then the data makes some sense. As it is now, you have so many uncontrolled variables that you can only compare within a particular type of engine, under the same type of driving conditions.

Amsoil has gone to the Group III stocks for the XL-7500 Series oil they sell to quick lubes, where it competes with other Group III products like Castrol Syntec and Valvoline. They still use PAO/Esters for their top of the line, extended drain oils. The Group III's don't hold up as well over extended drains and require more "doping" with additives to perform like PAO's in low/high temps. The chemical engineers at ExxonMobil will tell you exactly the same thing ....

I expect the next 1-2 rounds of API oil upgrades will eliminate some of the straight Group II and Group I/II blended oils. In 10-15 years, I would expect synthetic blends to be the cheapest oil available, with a middle tier of Group III oils and the Group IV/V synthetics on the top ....Mark my words
wink.gif


TooSlick
 
Bob, where did the wear numbers come from that you posted? Were the numbers distilled from the posts on this board?
 
Ken,

The ILSAC and API upgrades normally occur about the same time ...now that GF-4 has been delayed until they resolve the ZDDP issue, I'd expect them to come out about the same time.
I like the idea of treating phosphorus level and volatility together in determining a limit for GF-4.
This is what Amsoil has been promoting for years, since it is the amount of oil you burn that determines the effect on the cat, not just the baseline amounts ....

TooSlici
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jay:
Bob, where did the wear numbers come from that you posted? Were the numbers distilled from the posts on this board?
Click to expand...
All this came from Bills oil analysis info he posted..
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000174

Down a little ways in where tweeker had compile the data into the info you are seeing in my prev post.

Sprintman, most of the 10w's,5w's and 0w's are amsoil or mobil. Look at bill's spread sheet and you can see each of the analysis done and all the details.

bob
 
quote:
Originally posted by TooSlick:
Oz,

This idea that 30wt oils result in excessive metal to metal contact and excessive wear is not supported by the facts. I do oil analysis testing on all sorts of engines and I rarely if ever see significant differences in wear rates between 30wt and 40wt oils. This idea that you HAVE to use a 0w-40 synthetic or a 15w-40 petroleum oil in an engine designed for a 5w-30 or 10w-30 oil is simply bad advice. Even down here in Alabama, about 75% of what I sell for gas engines is a 0w-30 synthetic and i've never had any issues come up.

If I lived in Canada, I'd never run anything heavier than a 10w-30 synthetic in any gas engine, unless it was excessively worn and was burning/leaking oil. Delvac 1 is an excellent oil for diesels and older worn gas engines, but I'd run Mobil 1, 0w-30 or 5w-30 in the wintertime in Canada in any newer engine.

Tooslick
Click to expand...
TooSlick,

Point taken. However, can you explain this:

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000168

Yes, I know that's one test. But you think the low numbers are caused by the quality of the basestock or the viscosity weight used?

And how do you explain why the europeans use 5W40 as factory fill?

Just curious,

Oz
 
Oz,

Most high end European engines call for an ACEA, A3/B3/B4 oil. This specification calls for a minimum, high temp/high shear viscosity of 3.5 centipoise @ 150C. It is physically very hard to meet this spec with a 30wt oil, even a full synthetic. There are some xw-30 synthetics that meet these specs - they are formulated towards the upper end of the 30wt range in terms of viscosity. Any oil that grades out as a 0w-40/5w-40/10w-40 @ 100C is going to be thick enough to meet the HT/HS spec @ 150C. This has nothing to do with the quality of the oil, per se, just how thick it is.

For example, Mobil 1, 0w-30 "tri-synthetic" easily met the limits for wear and engine deposits in the ACEA A3/B3 tests and actually tested out about the same as their 0w-40. However, they couldn't advertise it as such because it's too thin to meet the high shear viscosity spec.

I'm not familiar with the Castrol 10w-50, however the synthetic engine oils sold in Europe - like this formulation - are generally better than the off the shelf synlubes sold in the US.

TS
 
Ferrari,

The ASTM D4683, high temp/high shear test is always performed @ 150C/ 302F - with a shear rate of 100,000 cycles/sec.
 
quote:
Originally posted by TooSlick:
Oz,

Most high end European engines call for an ACEA, A3/B3/B4 oil. This specification calls for a minimum, high temp/high shear viscosity of 3.5 centipoise @ 150C. It is physically very hard to meet this spec with a 30wt oil, even a full synthetic. There are some xw-30 synthetics that meet these specs - they are formulated towards the upper end of the 30wt range in terms of viscosity. Any oil that grades out as a 0w-40/5w-40/10w-40 @ 100C is going to be thick enough to meet the HT/HS spec @ 150C. This has nothing to do with the quality of the oil, per se, just how thick it is.

For example, Mobil 1, 0w-30 "tri-synthetic" easily met the limits for wear and engine deposits in the ACEA A3/B3 tests and actually tested out about the same as their 0w-40. However, they couldn't advertise it as such because it's too thin to meet the high shear viscosity spec.

TS
Click to expand...
Exactly TooSlick! Thicker oils provide better high temp. protection, which a 30wt. cannot handle. I personally do not see how a 30wt. would last longer in my high-revving Honda B16 than 40wt. would. Driving along the highway at 60mph(100km/h), my engine is churning at roughly 3800RPM! OUCH!

gr_eek2.gif


Oz
 
Oz,

I have to ask ...is english your second language???

For gas engine cars, I would use an oil that meets all the latest European specs, including ACEA A3/B3/B4 and VW 502/505. If they also meet the specs for Porsche,BMW "Longlife" and Mercedes, so much the better.

These are the hardest tests to pass - much, much harder than the API/SL specifications. For example, the VW "T-4" test, which is part of the VW 502/505 requirement, runs for 248 hours in a 2.0L, VW engine under high load. You are not allowed to add any makeup oil during the test. This is equal to a drain interval of 10,000-12,000 miles ....This test measures viscosity increase, TBN depletion and piston deposits.

You want the best oil available - that's it! I don't care if it's a 0w-30 or a 20w-50, if it passes all these tests it's excellent stuff. I'd use the SAE grade that is appropriate for your engine, climate and driving conditions.
 
quote:
Originally posted by TooSlick:
Oz,

I have to ask ...is english your second language???

For gas engine cars, I would use an oil that meets all the latest European specs, including ACEA A3/B3/B4 and VW 502/505. If they also meet the specs for Porsche,BMW "Longlife" and Mercedes, so much the better.

These are the hardest tests to pass - much, much harder than the API/SL specifications. For example, the VW "T-4" test, which is part of the VW 502/505 requirement, runs for 248 hours in a 2.0L, VW engine under high load. You are not allowed to add any makeup oil during the test. This is equal to a drain interval of 10,000-12,000 miles ....This test measures viscosity increase, TBN depletion and piston deposits.

You want the best oil available - that's it! I don't care if it's a 0w-30 or a 20w-50, if it passes all these tests it's excellent stuff. I'd use the SAE grade that is appropriate for your engine, climate and driving conditions.
Click to expand...
TooSlick,

I thought you would've caught on to what I said...but I guess not...so let me rephrase myself.

Earlier you said it is hard for 30wt. oils to meet certain standards set forth by ACEA. One of them being HT/HS. Now - dare I ask - why is that? From what you said earlier, you were hinting its because it will shear too easily under those conditions...hence 40wt. oils are easier to retain higher values regarding this test - while certain 30wt. oils that do meet are on the higher end of the its viscosity range. Coincidence?

Now, is there a direct correlation to this when it comes to actually preventing metal-to-metal? And are we to disregard what the Europeans do even though you say they are 5 years ahead of us and actually think way beyond the motives behind CAFE?

What do you think?

Oz
 
Grrrr...where is the edit button when you need it
pat.gif
Please disregard my comment about

quote:
And are we to disregard what the Europeans do even though you say they are 5 years ahead of us and actually think way beyond the motives behind CAFE?
Click to expand...
I wanted to elaborate on that statement, but my mind is quite muddled at the moment.

Regards,

Oz
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

redhat
0W-40 Dexos?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Nicasio
Parking Lot
Mercedes 229.5 engine oil - Castrol vs. Mobil 1 vs. Pennzoil
Replies
16
Views
6K
wavinwayne
Ed_Flecko
Suggestions for a slightly different oil?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Triple_Se7en
Z
I took the HPL plunge....
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
ZZman
JavierH19
0w-8 has gone mainstream. M1 AFE 0w-8.
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
5K
MolaKule
Back
Top