shell ultra 5w40 vs motul 8100 oil control rings

[Shannow]

Re GrI and GrII, in the turbine engineering part of my career, I (and many of my peers) got burned badly when Oz lost our refining capacity, and they switched all the turbine oils from GrI to GrII.

Varnish and sludge just about killed two of my units, the lack of polarity in the GrII resulting in deposits of sludge all through the governor and valve hydraulics...

 

[userfriendly]

Stories like that is why I wanted to ask SonofJoe the question. Do group IIs act like synthetics, or more like group I's in the solubility department?
Not that automotive applications are going to see varnishing up, by adding a quart of synthetic when low, but for the cleaning action of mono-grade engine oils.
Because of the lack of technical support in the past, I kept my single grade observations to myself.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly

Because of the lack of technical support in the past, I kept my single grade observations to myself.

Relax, you are amonst friends (mostly).

I love a good monograde story. If my climate can handle 20W-50 year round, a SAE 30 should do me fine. No problems for people who see well below freezing, I wouldn't use a monograde then either.

 

[userfriendly]

A good mono-grade story, by Userfriendly;

When my dad quit driving (he died), I bought my brother out of his half of the car that since new, had 5w30 SJ 3,000 mile oil changes.
The mileage was about 45,000, 70% highway, but daily short tripping for smokes and the Globe 'n Mail.

A few months after I took possession, the oil had just been done and was clear on the dipstick, I changed the oil again
after only 2,500 miles, 100% highway.

Out with the brand name mineral 5w30, and in went Delo 400 SAE 40. For the first thousand miles or so, the engine smelled hot
and like oil burning. Not out of the tail pipe, but under the hood.
When my brother moved to the USA, I bought his car, different brand of car, same story.

Back in the day, switching a car over to a group III or IV from mineral 5w30, would have the same result, but I didn't expect it with a mono-grade.

The End

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
A good mono-grade story, by Userfriendly;

When my dad quit driving (he died), I bought my brother out of his half of the car that since new, had 5w30 SJ 3,000 mile oil changes.
The mileage was about 45,000, 70% highway, but daily short tripping for smokes and the Globe 'n Mail.

A few months after I took possession, the oil had just been done and was clear on the dipstick, I changed the oil again
after only 2,500 miles, 100% highway.

Out with the brand name mineral 5w30, and in went Delo 400 SAE 40. For the first thousand miles or so, the engine smelled hot
and like oil burning. Not out of the tail pipe, but under the hood.
When my brother moved to the USA, I bought his car, different brand of car, same story.

Back in the day, switching a car over to a group III or IV from mineral 5w30, would have the same result, but I didn't expect it with a mono-grade.

The End

This is really interesting! Can you provide is with some sort of explanation what is causing oil burning? I've had similar happen to me, although with multigrade HDEO in a petrol car.

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: chrisri

It was a genuine question, I haven't starting anything. Really can't remember those back then in my local (northern Adriatic-Croatia,Italy). Maybe up north in colder climates?
I can tell you, if they were available they must have been mega expensive for sure. Even today OEMs requires 5w30/40 (Euro makes).
Cheers.


All good mate. I saw it as a genuine and reasonable question. It's hard to remember the state of play of oil in the 90's.

You actually did me a favour. I typed in the specs directly from an old empty bottle of TXT that I have in my old empty oil bottle collection. My wife thinks an old empty oil bottle collection is crazy (she is probably correct), so the look on her face when she saw me at the breakfast table transcribing the old Euro oil specs onto the computer, because somebody asked, was pure gold.

It was almost as good as the look she gave me when, deciding to throw a few old bottles out, I meticulously photographed the bottles and labels for future reference, before disposal.


Hehe, men's toys. I still keep Autobianchi's Abarth instrument cluster and tonnes of other stuff for 15 years now, LOL. Wife knows I'm a bit strange by now.

 

[userfriendly]

Chrisri;

After a few hundred miles of a mono-grade or HDEO synthetic in an engine where a mineral multi-grade was previously used,
the engine cleaned up, stopped running hot, never burnt oil and lived happily ever after.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly

After a few hundred miles of a mono-grade or HDEO synthetic in an engine where a mineral multi-grade was previously used,
the engine cleaned up, stopped running hot, never burnt oil and lived happily ever after.


The way I read this, is that regular mineral PCMO's have cheap polymer VII's that breakdown and contaminate the engine. The synthetic HDEO has more robust VII's, both in terms of mechanical shear stability and thermal stability, plus a strong oxidation resistant base oil, so the HDEO contaminate less. The monograde has no VII's to break down and contaminate.

Then you have the limited solubility of contaminants in engine oil. A Group 1 monograde offers more base oil solubility and no VII to quickly saturate the oil. The HDEOs have less base oil solubility, but more dispersant to carry the diesel soot load.

So you have two oil types that offer lower polymer VII contamination rates, and higher contamination solubility rates. It makes sense to me that these clean up the engine. Happy to be corrected by somebody that knows more.

 

[userfriendly]

But, in Shannow's example, both were VII free (sans vinyl) mono-grade mineral. What went wrong?

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
But, in Shannow's example, both were VII free (sans vinyl) mono-grade mineral. What went wrong?


I think in Shannow's example they went from high solubility Group 1 to a low solubility Group 2 that caused everything to fall out of solution. Had they stayed using group 1 or started from the beginning on group 2, I believe they would have been OK.

But Shannow is the best person to answer this, as he was Jonny-On-The-Spot when it all happened.

I think Group 1 oils are a double edged sword, they offer higher contamination solubility, but the least oxidation resistance. Used for a short OCI they can clean you up, but left in too long and they go the other way and gum you up.

 

[userfriendly]

This almost sounds like a play, or game theory.

The original hydraulic fluid was group I. AU would likely have imported that from Sinapore for use in their thermal, well I call them coal fired steam generators.

As you said SR5, group I is not very resistant to oxidation, but that did not present a problem.

So why try and fix a problem that did not exist?

That is the question.

 

[Shannow]

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/428/varnish-power

Oz lost it's on shore refining capacity, and as ALL the lube base-stocks were being imported, they only imported GrII and up (according to suppliers)...they changed, and we didn't know.

The GrI while not as oxidation resistance, had MUCH better capacity to handle oxidation products. The GrII would show up fine in all the standard testing for oxidation, but couldn't handle the products that
a) were there already; and/or
b) that it made.

So the underground tank got filled up with GrII, without us knowing, then started to be added to the system.

First the centrifuges started showing black mollasses, then the governor filters started to clag up, as the varnich falls out of suspension in the cold spots (where you find it isn't where it's being made in the system).

Bloke who came after me did a full replacement, plush caustic flush of the affected units, and it was back inside a year.

I commissioned an undergrad thesis on Varnish formation, and using a specially calibrated flat bed scanner to carry out patch colorimetry testing (wasn't YET an ASTM standard, and they were hideously expensive to get done, but the colour changes in the insoluble fraction were the only indicator that you would get before you had problems.

We still have problems on start-up of the remaining units, as the (hydrogen) seal oil strainers are very very fine, and clag up until the system gets back to running temperature.

 

[Ducked]

Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Dieselgate put blood in the water. The press, governments and environmental legislators are now actively looking for the next scandal. If that scandal involves bashing the Germans, so much the better! And of course, with the push to measuring 'on-the-road' emissions of 'real' cars, it's going to be easier to pick up on the things that go wrong; things like late onset oil ring sticking (or LOORS for short). And any fifth rate hack, could read this BITOG thread and pick up the story and run with it.


Well, yeh, you could be right about the zeitgiest, but you seem to be now discounting a point I think you yourself made early on. As I understand it, this is happening to oldish, out of warranty vehicles (though I didn't notice a typical age-of-onset mentioned.)

Manufacturers generally don't care about oldish, out of warranty vehicles, and governments are actively hostile to them, as shown by various environmentally and economically questionable cash-for-clunkers schemes.

This isn't a cheat. If its dirty, it'll fail emmissions and in many jurisdictions you'll either have to fix or scrap it. Publicity would have to be quite bad before that isn't a win for manufacturer and govt alike.

Given that big car and big oil companies make a big deal out of cooperating on development, any finger-pointing/buck-passing fight would damage both of them, so you'd think they might have the tactical sense to avoid it.

And I doubt fifth rate hacks read. They don't write as if they do.

 

[CR94]

But it isn't primarily happening to old vehicles. Older engines of the same brands typically lasted much longer before developing such serious problems. It's happening to well-maintained vehicles that are barely middle-aged and otherwise in good condition.

If it "isn't a cheat," it's certainly showing disregard for the intent of emissions requirements.

 

[Ducked]

Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: userfriendly

After a few hundred miles of a mono-grade or HDEO synthetic in an engine where a mineral multi-grade was previously used,
the engine cleaned up, stopped running hot, never burnt oil and lived happily ever after.


The way I read this, is that regular mineral PCMO's have cheap polymer VII's that breakdown and contaminate the engine. The synthetic HDEO has more robust VII's, both in terms of mechanical shear stability and thermal stability, plus a strong oxidation resistant base oil, so the HDEO contaminate less. The monograde has no VII's to break down and contaminate.

Then you have the limited solubility of contaminants in engine oil. A Group 1 monograde offers more base oil solubility and no VII to quickly saturate the oil. The HDEOs have less base oil solubility, but more dispersant to carry the diesel soot load.

So you have two oil types that offer lower polymer VII contamination rates, and higher contamination solubility rates. It makes sense to me that these clean up the engine. Happy to be corrected by somebody that knows more.



That all seems OK, but it doesn't seem to be the whole story, since (as I understand it) Sonofjoe's suggested fix uses mineral 20/50, not synthetic HDEO. I believe he said this is because of the higher solvation offered by mineral oil compared to synthetic oil.

 

[userfriendly]

The mono-grade mineral SAE 40 I used would either be a 20W40 or 25W40, depending on the blend and how deep into the SAE 40 grade it was.
HDEO additives can also affect the cranking test of the W grade. In my case, the SAE 40 had a thicker base oil than 20W50.

 

[SR5]

Castrol use to sell an oil called GP50 it approximated an SAE 50 for race and track cars, but was really a narrow band multigrade, rather than a true monograde. This was to give it a better safety margin for starting on colder days over a true SAE 40 or 50.

The same oil has now been rebadged as Edge 25W50, the only mineral Castrol Edge that I know about. I think it has quite a light VII load.

 

[Popsy]

I think the Delo 400 SD 15W30 may not have much VII, if any.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Popsy
I think the Delo 400 SD 15W30 may not have much VII, if any.


I agree, I would love to get my hands on some of that stuff.
Wish they sold it here.

 

[B320i]

Filled up at BP today to take advantage of a 4c/L discount IGA give for "select" stations. Any BP station is largely more expensive, although I'm generally more convinced their fuel does meet the claimed octane ratings.

Anyhow, I saw the Castrol Edge 25w-50 stuff on their shelf, $92 for 5L... MMM, I'll just stick with my KMart $22 for 5L, thanks! Even 1L of GTX 15w-40 was nearly $20. Guess that's fuel stations for you.