Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Castrol GTX 15w50 Zddp content?
- Thread starter FCD
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Thanks mate.
I wonder what it's probable TBN range is, as a rough guess.
You would hope it would be better than the HX3 at 6.2 TBN.
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Thanks mate.
I wonder what it's probable TBN range is, as a rough guess.
You would hope it would be better than the HX3 at 6.2 TBN.
Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Thanks mate.
I wonder what it's probable TBN range is, as a rough guess.
You would hope it would be better than the HX3 at 6.2 TBN.
Just checking the Euro GTX 15W-50 PDS again, it claims A3/B3 so that means a min TBN of 8.0 which is fine.
FCD, the GTX sounds a better oil than the HX3 if the price is right.
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Thanks mate.
I wonder what it's probable TBN range is, as a rough guess.
You would hope it would be better than the HX3 at 6.2 TBN.
Just checking the Euro GTX 15W-50 PDS again, it claims A3/B3 so that means a min TBN of 8.0 which is fine.
FCD, the GTX sounds a better oil than the HX3 if the price is right.
Originally Posted By: FordCapriDriver
It's funny that at the same store , HX3 is 35 Euro / 5L , VR1 is 33 despite the fact that VR1 is a far superior oil
FCD, so how much is the GTX 15W-50 ?
It's funny that at the same store , HX3 is 35 Euro / 5L , VR1 is 33 despite the fact that VR1 is a far superior oil
FCD, so how much is the GTX 15W-50 ?
Originally Posted By: Thebimmerfan
The choice is yours man, but IMO you'll have much more where to chooze if you include some racing viscosities like 10W-50 and 10W-60 in your search. I'm sure a largely available oil like Castrol Edge (Titanium FST) 10W-60 or other similar one won't be much more expensive than the archaic 20W-50 dino elixirs you're looking for, but quality-wise it would be much superior, will have much better cold start behaviour, much higher HTHS and with that better protection at high temperatures and is generally quite a superior product. I know some spanish web sites (Pidenosaceite.com por ejemplo) where Edge 10W-60 has almost the same price as the Valvoline VR1 20W-50 that you are talking about, but it's up to you man.
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
The choice is yours man, but IMO you'll have much more where to chooze if you include some racing viscosities like 10W-50 and 10W-60 in your search. I'm sure a largely available oil like Castrol Edge (Titanium FST) 10W-60 or other similar one won't be much more expensive than the archaic 20W-50 dino elixirs you're looking for, but quality-wise it would be much superior, will have much better cold start behaviour, much higher HTHS and with that better protection at high temperatures and is generally quite a superior product. I know some spanish web sites (Pidenosaceite.com por ejemplo) where Edge 10W-60 has almost the same price as the Valvoline VR1 20W-50 that you are talking about, but it's up to you man.
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
Joe90_guy, like the Appendix E base stock interchange where certain things are permissible as long as viscosity and HTHS are going up ?
What would be the typical "meets and has been tested in all the tests" starting brew have been ?
Obviously Mobil's range have a step between the ILSAC grades and the 40s, indicating something different between them
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
Joe90_guy, like the Appendix E base stock interchange where certain things are permissible as long as viscosity and HTHS are going up ?
What would be the typical "meets and has been tested in all the tests" starting brew have been ?
Obviously Mobil's range have a step between the ILSAC grades and the 40s, indicating something different between them
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Originally Posted By: Thebimmerfan
The choice is yours man, but IMO you'll have much more where to chooze if you include some racing viscosities like 10W-50 and 10W-60 in your search. I'm sure a largely available oil like Castrol Edge (Titanium FST) 10W-60 or other similar one won't be much more expensive than the archaic 20W-50 dino elixirs you're looking for, but quality-wise it would be much superior, will have much better cold start behaviour, much higher HTHS and with that better protection at high temperatures and is generally quite a superior product. I know some spanish web sites (Pidenosaceite.com por ejemplo) where Edge 10W-60 has almost the same price as the Valvoline VR1 20W-50 that you are talking about, but it's up to you man.
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
Isn't Thebimmerfan refering to the full synthetic Castrol Edge (Formula R) 10W-60 (TWS) that was used in the M5 BMWs etc. ?
I thought it was a well tested and developed endurance race type of oil for production cars. It's rated A3/B4, has a TBN of 11.2 and a HTHS of 5.1 cP. I ran it in my shared sump (wet clutch) motorcycle and it was significantly more shear stable than the mineral Castrol GTX 20W-50 was in a motorcycle. The same oil is used in the engine & gear box in a shared sump bike, and those gears can shear the oil down quickly. The Valvoline mineral 20W-50 sheared down quickly too, and started giving bad gear changes, just like the GTX 20W-50. The full synthetic 10W-60 lasted about 3X longer than either mineral 20W-50, according to motorcycle gear change quality.
Originally Posted By: Thebimmerfan
The choice is yours man, but IMO you'll have much more where to chooze if you include some racing viscosities like 10W-50 and 10W-60 in your search. I'm sure a largely available oil like Castrol Edge (Titanium FST) 10W-60 or other similar one won't be much more expensive than the archaic 20W-50 dino elixirs you're looking for, but quality-wise it would be much superior, will have much better cold start behaviour, much higher HTHS and with that better protection at high temperatures and is generally quite a superior product. I know some spanish web sites (Pidenosaceite.com por ejemplo) where Edge 10W-60 has almost the same price as the Valvoline VR1 20W-50 that you are talking about, but it's up to you man.
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
Isn't Thebimmerfan refering to the full synthetic Castrol Edge (Formula R) 10W-60 (TWS) that was used in the M5 BMWs etc. ?
I thought it was a well tested and developed endurance race type of oil for production cars. It's rated A3/B4, has a TBN of 11.2 and a HTHS of 5.1 cP. I ran it in my shared sump (wet clutch) motorcycle and it was significantly more shear stable than the mineral Castrol GTX 20W-50 was in a motorcycle. The same oil is used in the engine & gear box in a shared sump bike, and those gears can shear the oil down quickly. The Valvoline mineral 20W-50 sheared down quickly too, and started giving bad gear changes, just like the GTX 20W-50. The full synthetic 10W-60 lasted about 3X longer than either mineral 20W-50, according to motorcycle gear change quality.
Here is a link to a thread with a VOA of Castrol - Formula R / TWS / Edge 10W-60
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2988455
It includes some comments from Doug Hillary who helped develop it.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2988455
It includes some comments from Doug Hillary who helped develop it.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
No. Nothing is equal. The 15/20W-50 oils OP is talking about (Castrol GTX and Valvoline VR1) are mineral oils, the 5W-50, 10W-50 and 10W-60 oils that I have used have always been synthetic, so a few differences...Both GTX 15W-50 and VR1 20W-50 don't even show HTHS values in their specifications sheets, only viscosity at 100 degrees Celsius, Valvoline VR1 20W-50 has viscosity index of 136, Castrol GTX 15W-50 has viscosity index of 143 which mean that both oils will have quite low HTHS values and won't tolerate heat very well - or if performing good with high temperature they must be a punishment for the engine at cold start being too viscous at low oil temp, while a full synthetic oil like Castrol Edge with a VI of 173 would be much more stable and won't lose viscosity drastically under high load - that's why it's a race oil, while having a really good cold start and cold flow characteristics.
I personally prefer a synthetic oil with better basestock offering protection in a wider range of temperatures like Castrol Edge 10W-60, more when price is almost the same.
All things being equal, a 20W50 oil will have a higher HTHS, a lower Noack and contain at least half the VII polymer than a 10W50 oil. You can mitigate the 10W50 position by adding more and more synthetic base oil but you could do the same thing with the 20W50 and get an even better oil!
One thing to consider is that 10W50 and especially 10W60 oils are unlikely ever to have been put through their paces on the usual raft of industry standard engine tests. They are generally products of extrapolation; legitimate and otherwise!
No. Nothing is equal. The 15/20W-50 oils OP is talking about (Castrol GTX and Valvoline VR1) are mineral oils, the 5W-50, 10W-50 and 10W-60 oils that I have used have always been synthetic, so a few differences...Both GTX 15W-50 and VR1 20W-50 don't even show HTHS values in their specifications sheets, only viscosity at 100 degrees Celsius, Valvoline VR1 20W-50 has viscosity index of 136, Castrol GTX 15W-50 has viscosity index of 143 which mean that both oils will have quite low HTHS values and won't tolerate heat very well - or if performing good with high temperature they must be a punishment for the engine at cold start being too viscous at low oil temp, while a full synthetic oil like Castrol Edge with a VI of 173 would be much more stable and won't lose viscosity drastically under high load - that's why it's a race oil, while having a really good cold start and cold flow characteristics.
I personally prefer a synthetic oil with better basestock offering protection in a wider range of temperatures like Castrol Edge 10W-60, more when price is almost the same.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SR5
[
Isn't Thebimmerfan refering to the full synthetic Castrol Edge (Formula R) 10W-60 (TWS) that was used in the M5 BMWs etc. ?
I thought it was a well tested and developed endurance race type of oil for production cars. It's rated A3/B4, has a TBN of 11.2 and a HTHS of 5.1 cP. I ran it in my shared sump (wet clutch) motorcycle and it was significantly more shear stable than the mineral Castrol GTX 20W-50 was in a motorcycle. The same oil is used in the engine & gear box in a shared sump bike, and those gears can shear the oil down quickly. The Valvoline mineral 20W-50 sheared down quickly too, and started giving bad gear changes, just like the GTX 20W-50. The full synthetic 10W-60 lasted about 3X longer than either mineral 20W-50, according to motorcycle gear change quality.
You've got it right mate, that's exactly what I've meant. Absolutely agree with you.
[
Isn't Thebimmerfan refering to the full synthetic Castrol Edge (Formula R) 10W-60 (TWS) that was used in the M5 BMWs etc. ?
I thought it was a well tested and developed endurance race type of oil for production cars. It's rated A3/B4, has a TBN of 11.2 and a HTHS of 5.1 cP. I ran it in my shared sump (wet clutch) motorcycle and it was significantly more shear stable than the mineral Castrol GTX 20W-50 was in a motorcycle. The same oil is used in the engine & gear box in a shared sump bike, and those gears can shear the oil down quickly. The Valvoline mineral 20W-50 sheared down quickly too, and started giving bad gear changes, just like the GTX 20W-50. The full synthetic 10W-60 lasted about 3X longer than either mineral 20W-50, according to motorcycle gear change quality.
You've got it right mate, that's exactly what I've meant. Absolutely agree with you.
Okay, so many questions here.
Answers in no particular order are...
a) if you have an all mineral core program, you can add 10% synthetic base oil with very little testing or 30% with some engine testing. If your core program is synthetic, it gets too complicated to explain in a few words.
b) I don't know, but would suspect that a 20W50 mineral would have a higher HTHS than a full synthetic 10W50. The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties. If you compare a 10W60 to a 20W50 then yes it could well have a higher HTHS but if you compared it to a 20W60, then it probably wouldn't.
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
e) I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program. In terms of full synthetic market volumes 0W40's are relatively big whereas both 10W50's and especially 10W60's will be miniscule. The viscosity grade read-across rules allow you to assume if a test passed on a 0W40, a similarly formulated oil will pass as a 10W60. Some engine tests would need to be re-run as 10W60 and passed to carry the spec luggage labels but most wouldn't which was sort of the point I was trying to make.
f) Motorcycle oils where the crankcase and sump share the same oil are something of a speciality niche and all bets regarding what's good and what's bad would be off (there's no test in either the API or ACEA sequences that simulates this). Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
If I missed anything, just shout and I'll do my best to answer.
Answers in no particular order are...
a) if you have an all mineral core program, you can add 10% synthetic base oil with very little testing or 30% with some engine testing. If your core program is synthetic, it gets too complicated to explain in a few words.
b) I don't know, but would suspect that a 20W50 mineral would have a higher HTHS than a full synthetic 10W50. The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties. If you compare a 10W60 to a 20W50 then yes it could well have a higher HTHS but if you compared it to a 20W60, then it probably wouldn't.
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
e) I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program. In terms of full synthetic market volumes 0W40's are relatively big whereas both 10W50's and especially 10W60's will be miniscule. The viscosity grade read-across rules allow you to assume if a test passed on a 0W40, a similarly formulated oil will pass as a 10W60. Some engine tests would need to be re-run as 10W60 and passed to carry the spec luggage labels but most wouldn't which was sort of the point I was trying to make.
f) Motorcycle oils where the crankcase and sump share the same oil are something of a speciality niche and all bets regarding what's good and what's bad would be off (there's no test in either the API or ACEA sequences that simulates this). Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
If I missed anything, just shout and I'll do my best to answer.
Last edited:
HX3 is PYB. Same TBN and all.
Thanks Joe90,
Your input is always welcome.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties.
I'm still getting my head around VII chemistry (and the shorthands used). If you could explain a little more about various VII and what they are good at plus what they are bad at. Things like expense, shear stability, volatility, chemistry, engine cleanliness , HTHS ability and dose rate. I know this is a BIG question, but whatever you can tell me would help I'm sure.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
This makes a lot of sense to me. A fresh sump of good heavy mineral oil dosed up on ZDDP for an afternoon at the track was what a lot of the local guys did in the old days. Just keep it fresh.
I work at a large research university and I was talking to the group putting an experimental race car together and I asked them what oil they used and why. It was a full synthetic Penrite 10-Tenths Racing oil (100% PAO & Ester), a very good oil IMO. When asked why, they said because Penrite was their sponsor, and this is what they gave them to use. Fair enough.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program.
Reading the comments from Doug Hillary in the Castrol Formula R / TWS / Edge 10W-60 thread linked to above, it sounds like the TWS developed by Castrol for BMW endurance racing has a very long history. For me, the Castrol full synthetic 10W-60 (under it's various names) was in the local shops for years before the 0W-40 appeared on the scene. To me this is the "original" 10W-60 that appeared long before all the other 10W-60s appeared on the market. Certainly from my Australian perspective, which I admit, may be a limited view.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
Laugh !!! Them were the days !
Back then my biggest concern was finding some money to put petrol in the tank, and keeping the car in one piece. For oil I grabbed 5L of GTX 20W-50 and that was that. When very short of money the Castrol XL 20W-50 was a bit cheaper, but I never knew the difference (and still don').
Your input is always welcome.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties.
I'm still getting my head around VII chemistry (and the shorthands used). If you could explain a little more about various VII and what they are good at plus what they are bad at. Things like expense, shear stability, volatility, chemistry, engine cleanliness , HTHS ability and dose rate. I know this is a BIG question, but whatever you can tell me would help I'm sure.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
This makes a lot of sense to me. A fresh sump of good heavy mineral oil dosed up on ZDDP for an afternoon at the track was what a lot of the local guys did in the old days. Just keep it fresh.
I work at a large research university and I was talking to the group putting an experimental race car together and I asked them what oil they used and why. It was a full synthetic Penrite 10-Tenths Racing oil (100% PAO & Ester), a very good oil IMO. When asked why, they said because Penrite was their sponsor, and this is what they gave them to use. Fair enough.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program.
Reading the comments from Doug Hillary in the Castrol Formula R / TWS / Edge 10W-60 thread linked to above, it sounds like the TWS developed by Castrol for BMW endurance racing has a very long history. For me, the Castrol full synthetic 10W-60 (under it's various names) was in the local shops for years before the 0W-40 appeared on the scene. To me this is the "original" 10W-60 that appeared long before all the other 10W-60s appeared on the market. Certainly from my Australian perspective, which I admit, may be a limited view.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
Laugh !!! Them were the days !
Back then my biggest concern was finding some money to put petrol in the tank, and keeping the car in one piece. For oil I grabbed 5L of GTX 20W-50 and that was that. When very short of money the Castrol XL 20W-50 was a bit cheaper, but I never knew the difference (and still don').
And just to have it all in one place.
From this thread on the full synthetic Castrol 10W-60
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2988455
A bit of history from Doug Hillary in a 2013 post.
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Yes as OVERKILL has alluded too I was involved with this product very early in its life - late 1960s. It was really a road going version of the famous Shell R30 and R40 easter based racing lubricants. My family used these in racing motorcycle. I was involved in my Career training with Castrol via BMC
The road going version was Castrol Formula R Synthetic - rated API SE. It had a 15w-50 viscosity, was red in colour and of course emitted the beautiful castor based odour in use
In the 1970s and 1980s I used/field tested the probuct in many diesel and petrol engines as it evolved and this involved hundreds of UOAs. I visited Japan, US and Europe to deal with various engine manufacturers and in the use of this product. In some small high speed diesel engines (Kubota,Isuzu etc) we ran up to 3000hrs without change
Two versions were later marketed - one "exclusively by BMW". I met with some BMW and Castrol engine/product development people at the Nurburgring a few years ago at a 24Hr event. They spoke so highly of the product it still amazes me. They also told me that the last of the German Castrol development team had recently died. They said that I was probably the last of that mob - wow............!
A great product in the correct application
And the VOA of the Castrol 10W-60 gives Zinc values (922 ppm) consistent with the levels given by BobbyDarvo for the GTX 15W-50. Just an interesting observation
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
From this thread on the full synthetic Castrol 10W-60
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2988455
A bit of history from Doug Hillary in a 2013 post.
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Yes as OVERKILL has alluded too I was involved with this product very early in its life - late 1960s. It was really a road going version of the famous Shell R30 and R40 easter based racing lubricants. My family used these in racing motorcycle. I was involved in my Career training with Castrol via BMC
The road going version was Castrol Formula R Synthetic - rated API SE. It had a 15w-50 viscosity, was red in colour and of course emitted the beautiful castor based odour in use
In the 1970s and 1980s I used/field tested the probuct in many diesel and petrol engines as it evolved and this involved hundreds of UOAs. I visited Japan, US and Europe to deal with various engine manufacturers and in the use of this product. In some small high speed diesel engines (Kubota,Isuzu etc) we ran up to 3000hrs without change
Two versions were later marketed - one "exclusively by BMW". I met with some BMW and Castrol engine/product development people at the Nurburgring a few years ago at a 24Hr event. They spoke so highly of the product it still amazes me. They also told me that the last of the German Castrol development team had recently died. They said that I was probably the last of that mob - wow............!
A great product in the correct application
And the VOA of the Castrol 10W-60 gives Zinc values (922 ppm) consistent with the levels given by BobbyDarvo for the GTX 15W-50. Just an interesting observation
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Zinc is probably in the 900-1000 region
Last edited:
SR5,
VII polymers are easy to understand in concept but very difficult to get your head round numerically. All of the professional oil formulators I had to deal with in my past life used to struggle with this.
Okay, from the top...
Olefin Co-Polymers (OCPs) are the most widely used of the VII polymers. They are made from ethylene & propylene which are the two simplest and cheapest olefins you can get hold of. The polymers can be made long or short. The long ones are more polymerically efficient at achieving a simple viscometric balance (KV100 & CCS) but tend to shear under mechanical & thermal stress. These are the so-called high Shear Stability Index (SSI) OCPs beloved by the US. The shorter, less efficient but more shear stable, low SSI OCPs are the norm in Europe.
The Shellvis VII polymers are made from stryene and butadiene. They can also contain extra hydrogen. Like OCPs, they can be made to various SSIs These olefins are more chemically complex and costly than simple ethylene and propylene. As a rough rule of thumb, Shellvis pure rubber is twice the price of pure OCP rubber.
At equal SSI, Shellvis is undeniably more polymerically efficient (ie you need less rubber) than OCP at achieving a simple KV100/CCS. However when you factor in cost, OCP is far more cost efficient. This largely explains why OCP is more widely used.
However life is never so simple. Today's engine oils can also be limited by Noack, HTHS, Bosch KO30 Shear and even viscometrically sensitive engine tests. Often an oil can be 'tight' on several limits simultaneously. However what limits are 'tight', and what limits 'float', will differ from viscosity grade to viscosity grade.
In certain circumstances, Shellvis can match or exceed the cost performance of OCP. This tends to happen more in the top-tier engine oils but often things can be confusing. There are still a lot of formulators that subscribe to the 'it's more expensive so it must be better for top-tier' philosophy.
One area where OCP's tend to trounce Shellvis VIIs is HTHS. At 100C & extreme shear (the conditions used in Bosch shear), the two VIIs are about the same. However when you ramp up to 150C (HTHS temperature), Shellvis starts to fall apart in a way that OCPs don't.
I would describe myself as very much in the OCP camp. I honestly don't like Shellvis. It's not just the high cost; it's the way they encourage 'bad outcomes' (eg low Group III 10W40's) and 'cheat' certain engine tests.
VII polymers are easy to understand in concept but very difficult to get your head round numerically. All of the professional oil formulators I had to deal with in my past life used to struggle with this.
Okay, from the top...
Olefin Co-Polymers (OCPs) are the most widely used of the VII polymers. They are made from ethylene & propylene which are the two simplest and cheapest olefins you can get hold of. The polymers can be made long or short. The long ones are more polymerically efficient at achieving a simple viscometric balance (KV100 & CCS) but tend to shear under mechanical & thermal stress. These are the so-called high Shear Stability Index (SSI) OCPs beloved by the US. The shorter, less efficient but more shear stable, low SSI OCPs are the norm in Europe.
The Shellvis VII polymers are made from stryene and butadiene. They can also contain extra hydrogen. Like OCPs, they can be made to various SSIs These olefins are more chemically complex and costly than simple ethylene and propylene. As a rough rule of thumb, Shellvis pure rubber is twice the price of pure OCP rubber.
At equal SSI, Shellvis is undeniably more polymerically efficient (ie you need less rubber) than OCP at achieving a simple KV100/CCS. However when you factor in cost, OCP is far more cost efficient. This largely explains why OCP is more widely used.
However life is never so simple. Today's engine oils can also be limited by Noack, HTHS, Bosch KO30 Shear and even viscometrically sensitive engine tests. Often an oil can be 'tight' on several limits simultaneously. However what limits are 'tight', and what limits 'float', will differ from viscosity grade to viscosity grade.
In certain circumstances, Shellvis can match or exceed the cost performance of OCP. This tends to happen more in the top-tier engine oils but often things can be confusing. There are still a lot of formulators that subscribe to the 'it's more expensive so it must be better for top-tier' philosophy.
One area where OCP's tend to trounce Shellvis VIIs is HTHS. At 100C & extreme shear (the conditions used in Bosch shear), the two VIIs are about the same. However when you ramp up to 150C (HTHS temperature), Shellvis starts to fall apart in a way that OCPs don't.
I would describe myself as very much in the OCP camp. I honestly don't like Shellvis. It's not just the high cost; it's the way they encourage 'bad outcomes' (eg low Group III 10W40's) and 'cheat' certain engine tests.
Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
Okay, so many questions here.
Answers in no particular order are...
a) if you have an all mineral core program, you can add 10% synthetic base oil with very little testing or 30% with some engine testing. If your core program is synthetic, it gets too complicated to explain in a few words.
b) I don't know, but would suspect that a 20W50 mineral would have a higher HTHS than a full synthetic 10W50. The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties. If you compare a 10W60 to a 20W50 then yes it could well have a higher HTHS but if you compared it to a 20W60, then it probably wouldn't.
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
e) I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program. In terms of full synthetic market volumes 0W40's are relatively big whereas both 10W50's and especially 10W60's will be miniscule. The viscosity grade read-across rules allow you to assume if a test passed on a 0W40, a similarly formulated oil will pass as a 10W60. Some engine tests would need to be re-run as 10W60 and passed to carry the spec luggage labels but most wouldn't which was sort of the point I was trying to make.
f) Motorcycle oils where the crankcase and sump share the same oil are something of a speciality niche and all bets regarding what's good and what's bad would be off (there's no test in either the API or ACEA sequences that simulates this). Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
If I missed anything, just shout and I'll do my best to answer.
OMG...
a) What special testing to use 100% synthetic oils, what core program, what things man?.. It's not complicated, you make it so...
b) I think in my previous post gave you some clear enough reasons why a mineral 20W-50 with a viscosity index of 130ish won't have higher HTHS than a full synthetic 5/10W-50 with VI in the 180 range. If you didn't get it you can read it again.
c) I put VR1 against a propper racing oil because the mate was searching for a stout oil in 15/20W-50 region and knowing that the prices of mineral VR1 and full synthetic Edge 10W-60 are almost equal I thought it wouldbe a good idea to use some higher class oil, without spending much more, didn't expect someone would be unable to get it. And ZDDP/phosphorus levels in Valvoline VR1 aren't so impressive either.
d) If only teams competing in 24 Hours Of Lemans were supposed to use full synthetic oils, I guess this type of oils would be still unknown for the wide public, but as we can see they are gaining every day more territory among the drivers in all the world. I know Corsas with more than 400whp - their owners don't use 3$/quart oils and with serious reasons - noone wants to spend 10 000$ preparing his car only to see a rod through the block in the third minute on the track, so even without racing in 24 Hours Of Le Mans AFAIK OP have plans to FI his Capry, so a little bit of extra protection is always wellcome.
e)...sincerely won't comment on this point, if anybody else wants, he/she's wellcome...
d) Motorcycle engines oftenly run over 20 000rpms and have ridiculously high requirements towards oils. A bike engine is a perfect test for the quality of an oil, I would say if a bike's engine likes an oil then this oil is a good one. You can not take out motorcycles' engines that easily of the equation, that's irresponsible.
Okay, so many questions here.
Answers in no particular order are...
a) if you have an all mineral core program, you can add 10% synthetic base oil with very little testing or 30% with some engine testing. If your core program is synthetic, it gets too complicated to explain in a few words.
b) I don't know, but would suspect that a 20W50 mineral would have a higher HTHS than a full synthetic 10W50. The 20W50's would almost certainly be blended with 22 SSI OCP VII whereas the full synthetic oil would very likely be blended with Shellvis VII. Shellvis has poor HTHS properties. If you compare a 10W60 to a 20W50 then yes it could well have a higher HTHS but if you compared it to a 20W60, then it probably wouldn't.
c) VR1 is called a 'racing oil' but in reality, probably isn't. It's just a bog standard 20W50 with extra ZDDP & detergent. It's not a fair comparison to put it up against a 'proper' racing oil.
d) Actually a mineral oil WILL take the heat like a synthetic, it just won't take it for as long. If you just want an oil for an afternoon of track racing your souped-up Corsa, then the the 20W50 will probably be fine as long as you drain it afterwards. If you want to do the Le Mans 24 Endurance, maybe you should go synthetic. In my experience race teams always seem to have unlimited funds and only ever use synthetics whether they or justified or not.
e) I would hazard a guess that most synthetic 10W60's are extrapolations from a 0W40 full synthetic program. In terms of full synthetic market volumes 0W40's are relatively big whereas both 10W50's and especially 10W60's will be miniscule. The viscosity grade read-across rules allow you to assume if a test passed on a 0W40, a similarly formulated oil will pass as a 10W60. Some engine tests would need to be re-run as 10W60 and passed to carry the spec luggage labels but most wouldn't which was sort of the point I was trying to make.
f) Motorcycle oils where the crankcase and sump share the same oil are something of a speciality niche and all bets regarding what's good and what's bad would be off (there's no test in either the API or ACEA sequences that simulates this). Having said that, my old Morris 1100 specified 'shared' 20W50 for both engine and gearbox and survived (I use the word in its loosest possible sense because it truly was a deathtrap or a car and it's probably fairer to say I survived it!)
If I missed anything, just shout and I'll do my best to answer.
OMG...
a) What special testing to use 100% synthetic oils, what core program, what things man?.. It's not complicated, you make it so...
b) I think in my previous post gave you some clear enough reasons why a mineral 20W-50 with a viscosity index of 130ish won't have higher HTHS than a full synthetic 5/10W-50 with VI in the 180 range. If you didn't get it you can read it again.
c) I put VR1 against a propper racing oil because the mate was searching for a stout oil in 15/20W-50 region and knowing that the prices of mineral VR1 and full synthetic Edge 10W-60 are almost equal I thought it wouldbe a good idea to use some higher class oil, without spending much more, didn't expect someone would be unable to get it. And ZDDP/phosphorus levels in Valvoline VR1 aren't so impressive either.
d) If only teams competing in 24 Hours Of Lemans were supposed to use full synthetic oils, I guess this type of oils would be still unknown for the wide public, but as we can see they are gaining every day more territory among the drivers in all the world. I know Corsas with more than 400whp - their owners don't use 3$/quart oils and with serious reasons - noone wants to spend 10 000$ preparing his car only to see a rod through the block in the third minute on the track, so even without racing in 24 Hours Of Le Mans AFAIK OP have plans to FI his Capry, so a little bit of extra protection is always wellcome.
e)...sincerely won't comment on this point, if anybody else wants, he/she's wellcome...
d) Motorcycle engines oftenly run over 20 000rpms and have ridiculously high requirements towards oils. A bike engine is a perfect test for the quality of an oil, I would say if a bike's engine likes an oil then this oil is a good one. You can not take out motorcycles' engines that easily of the equation, that's irresponsible.
Last edited:
Sorry for being inactive i ahd no clue that this thread had been moved to the Euro forum , anyway GTX is significantly cheaper at 24 Euro for 5 Litres ,at the same store they also sell Shell HX5 20w50 and HX7 15w50 , i know these oils are better than HX3 woudl they be worth giving a try after VR1? i think HX5 is a conventional and HX7 is a Semi synthetic
Originally Posted By: Thebimmerfan
No. Nothing is equal. The 15/20W-50 oils OP is talking about (Castrol GTX and Valvoline VR1) are mineral oils, the 5W-50, 10W-50 and 10W-60 oils that I have used have always been synthetic, so a few differences...Both GTX 15W-50 and VR1 20W-50 don't even show HTHS values in their specifications sheets, only viscosity at 100 degrees Celsius, Valvoline VR1 20W-50 has viscosity index of 136, Castrol GTX 15W-50 has viscosity index of 143 which mean that both oils will have quite low HTHS values and won't tolerate heat very well - or if performing good with high temperature they must be a punishment for the engine at cold start being too viscous at low oil temp, while a full synthetic oil like Castrol Edge with a VI of 173 would be much more stable and won't lose viscosity drastically under high load - that's why it's a race oil, while having a really good cold start and cold flow characteristics.
I personally prefer a synthetic oil with better basestock offering protection in a wider range of temperatures like Castrol Edge 10W-60, more when price is almost the same.
Why does low VI lead to low HTHS ?
Why is 20W..."punishing" ?
Why is 20W50 less stable at high temperatures ?
Here's two mobil offerings.
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_Super_1000.aspx
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_5W-50.aspx
Could you explain your premise through them as examples ?
the 20W50 dino is only 127VI, so must clearly demonstrate your point.
Here's a couple of Mobil oils
M
No. Nothing is equal. The 15/20W-50 oils OP is talking about (Castrol GTX and Valvoline VR1) are mineral oils, the 5W-50, 10W-50 and 10W-60 oils that I have used have always been synthetic, so a few differences...Both GTX 15W-50 and VR1 20W-50 don't even show HTHS values in their specifications sheets, only viscosity at 100 degrees Celsius, Valvoline VR1 20W-50 has viscosity index of 136, Castrol GTX 15W-50 has viscosity index of 143 which mean that both oils will have quite low HTHS values and won't tolerate heat very well - or if performing good with high temperature they must be a punishment for the engine at cold start being too viscous at low oil temp, while a full synthetic oil like Castrol Edge with a VI of 173 would be much more stable and won't lose viscosity drastically under high load - that's why it's a race oil, while having a really good cold start and cold flow characteristics.
I personally prefer a synthetic oil with better basestock offering protection in a wider range of temperatures like Castrol Edge 10W-60, more when price is almost the same.
Why does low VI lead to low HTHS ?
Why is 20W..."punishing" ?
Why is 20W50 less stable at high temperatures ?
Here's two mobil offerings.
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_Super_1000.aspx
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_5W-50.aspx
Could you explain your premise through them as examples ?
the 20W50 dino is only 127VI, so must clearly demonstrate your point.
Here's a couple of Mobil oils
M
Originally Posted By: Thebimmerfan
d) Motorcycle engines oftenly run over 20 000rpms and have ridiculously high requirements towards oils. A bike engine is a perfect test for the quality of an oil, I would say if a bike's engine likes an oil then this oil is a good one. You can not take out motorcycles' engines that easily of the equation, that's irresponsible.
Please name one bike engine that can even peak at 20,000 rpm, let alone "oftenly run over".
Bike engines are a perfect test for bike oils, but car engines put different demands on the oil, as do truck engines and ship engines. High revs does not automatically equate to high stress.
d) Motorcycle engines oftenly run over 20 000rpms and have ridiculously high requirements towards oils. A bike engine is a perfect test for the quality of an oil, I would say if a bike's engine likes an oil then this oil is a good one. You can not take out motorcycles' engines that easily of the equation, that's irresponsible.
Please name one bike engine that can even peak at 20,000 rpm, let alone "oftenly run over".
Bike engines are a perfect test for bike oils, but car engines put different demands on the oil, as do truck engines and ship engines. High revs does not automatically equate to high stress.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Why does low VI lead to low HTHS ?
Why is 20W..."punishing" ?
Why is 20W50 less stable at high temperatures ?
Here's two mobil offerings.
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_Super_1000.aspx
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_5W-50.aspx
Could you explain your premise through them as examples ?
the 20W50 dino is only 127VI, so must clearly demonstrate your point.
Here's a couple of Mobil oils
M
Didn't you know that an oil with 20W-50 viscosity and an VI of 130 means this oil will be or too thick at cold start/flow or too unstable at high (above 150 Celsius) temps?..
Don't you really know why an 20W-xx oil is too punishing the mechanics below 0 temps? Maybe you live in Brazil?..
What more to say...
Why does low VI lead to low HTHS ?
Why is 20W..."punishing" ?
Why is 20W50 less stable at high temperatures ?
Here's two mobil offerings.
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_Super_1000.aspx
http://www.mobil.com/Australia-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil1_5W-50.aspx
Could you explain your premise through them as examples ?
the 20W50 dino is only 127VI, so must clearly demonstrate your point.
Here's a couple of Mobil oils
M
Didn't you know that an oil with 20W-50 viscosity and an VI of 130 means this oil will be or too thick at cold start/flow or too unstable at high (above 150 Celsius) temps?..
Don't you really know why an 20W-xx oil is too punishing the mechanics below 0 temps? Maybe you live in Brazil?..
What more to say...
Last edited:
- Status
