cSt comparison chart

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
3,219
Location
Texas
Hello all-
I recently purchased an '07 3.5l Charger. It is still under warranty so I started looking for the thinnest 10w30 and 5w30 oils available. I decided to post my findings, I hope this is helpful to you. I used the BITOG calculator to determine temperatures other than 40*C and 100*C.

-20*C = -4*F
0*C = 32*F
25*C = 77*F
40*C = 104*C
100*C = 212*F



Ultra
-20*C 0*C 25*C 40*C 100*C
10w30 3031.94 559.54 123.16 61.9 10.3
5w30 2225.17 459.34 110.44 57.5 10.3

Platinum
10w30 3119.64 575.11 126.32 63.4 10.5
5w30 2225.17 459.34 110.44 57.5 10.3

Mobil 1
10w30 3291.16 600.48 130.66 65.3 10.7
5w30 2489.7 511.25 121.85 63.1 11.1

SynPower
10w30 3246.77 589.89 128.1 64 10.5
5w30 2308.06 474.5 113.58 59 10.5

Ultimate Durability
10w30 4783.47 556.57 125.92 63.9 10.8
5w30 3536.77 461.45 111.99 58.5 10.53

Edge (W/ Syntec and Titanium)
10w30 3294.47 576.14 122 60.46 9.82
5w30 2083.74 430.24 103.78 54.17 9.8

I'd like to post this as a picture so it isn't smooshed up but I can't figure out how, if someone could give me a tip it would be great.
 
Last edited:
Here is the table in a little cleaner format. Note that the Edge is the new formula and that Edge with Syntec and Edge with Titanium have the same numbers.

Capture.jpg
 
interesting. Looks like QSUD is lacking in the cold flow dept. I always read into things too much. Are you sure you got the #'s right between PP&PU 5w30? They are exact.
 
Yeah I think that there is an error somewhere with the numbers between the PP and Ultra in 5w30. I am inclined to believe that the error lies with the PP numbers, I had to go through the Shell website to find its numbers though and the PDS was of the new GF5, SN formula so who knows?
confused.gif
 
RamFan, I'm afraid you're playing a mug's game because comparing the kinematic viscosities of different oils is very misleading.
What you really need to do is compare the HTHS vis and VI's of various oils.
The following post explains why in more detail:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1993351&page=1

For example M1 10W-30 has a HTHS of 3.26cP and VI of 154 vs 3.13cP and 170 for M1 5W-30. What that means is that M1 10W-30 will be about 10% thicker at 100C than M1 5W-30, not the 4% thinner that the KV100 spec's would indicate. At 40C the 10W-30 will be 20% thicker and more than 30% at 0C.

I know this may be confusing, but in the next couple of days I'm planning on posting an fairly easy way (I hope) of calculating and graphing the actual real viscosity differences I mentioned.

Stay tuned.
 
Excellent data compilation! Although if you added Noack values you may be surprised which is the better oil. Another member did a Noack comparison so I can't take credit for this. It does stand for reason the lower the Noack the higher the POA and quality of the oil. Not being an Amsoil fan I still must give credit where credit is due.

01. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 10w30 5.70%
02. Red Line 5w30 6.00%
03. Red Line 10w30 6.00%
04. Amsoil XL 10w30 6.70%
05. Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel 10w30 6.70%
06. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 5w30 6.90%
07. Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 10w30 7.00%
08. Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel 5w30 7.60%
09. Valvoline Synpower 10w30 8.00%
10. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 0w30 8.65%
11. Amsoil XL 5w30 8.90%
12. Red Line 0w30 9.00%
13. Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 5w30 9.50%
14. Pennzoil Platinum 10w30 9.70%
15. Valvoline Synpower 5w30 10.50%
16. Quaker State Ultimate Durability 10w30 11.10%
17. Pennzoil Ultra 10w30 11.20%
18. Castrol Syntec 0w30 11.28%
19. Pennzoil Ultra 5w30 11.90%
20. Quaker State Ultimate Durability 5w30 12.30%
21. Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 12.50%
 
Originally Posted By: Radman
Excellent data compilation! Although if you added Noack values you may be surprised which is the better oil. Another member did a Noack comparison so I can't take credit for this. It does stand for reason the lower the Noack the higher the POA and quality of the oil. Not being an Amsoil fan I still must give credit where credit is due.

01. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 10w30 5.70%
02. Red Line 5w30 6.00%
03. Red Line 10w30 6.00%
04. Amsoil XL 10w30 6.70%
05. Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel 10w30 6.70%
06. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 5w30 6.90%
07. Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 10w30 7.00%
08. Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel 5w30 7.60%
09. Valvoline Synpower 10w30 8.00%
10. Amsoil 100% Synthetic 0w30 8.65%
11. Amsoil XL 5w30 8.90%
12. Red Line 0w30 9.00%
13. Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 5w30 9.50%
14. Pennzoil Platinum 10w30 9.70%
15. Valvoline Synpower 5w30 10.50%
16. Quaker State Ultimate Durability 10w30 11.10%
17. Pennzoil Ultra 10w30 11.20%
18. Castrol Syntec 0w30 11.28%
19. Pennzoil Ultra 5w30 11.90%
20. Quaker State Ultimate Durability 5w30 12.30%
21. Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 12.50%




Where does M1 fall in that list.
 
If the NOACK/PAO content assumption and chart's data is correct, why would a 10w-30 require a higher PAO content then 5w-30? To me, this seems counterintuitive to common tribologist logic.
 
[/quote]Where does M1 fall in that list. [/quote]

I contacted Mobil about Noack and they gave me a range i.e. 11-13%. No definitive answer from them unlike the other oil manufacturers. I am sure it could be added from virgin oil analyses found here on the board.
 
Originally Posted By: Radman
I contacted Mobil about Noack and they gave me a range i.e. 11-13%. No definitive answer from them unlike the other oil manufacturers. I am sure it could be added from virgin oil analyses found here on the board.


No garden variety VOA will provide the NOACK #.
 
At this point, I'm further behind than when I started reading this thread! Interesting stuff, but I'm getting lost in the details.
 
Originally Posted By: CarbonCrew
If the NOACK/PAO content assumption and chart's data is correct, why would a 10w-30 require a higher PAO content then 5w-30? To me, this seems counterintuitive to common tribologist logic.


Please do explain the “Tribologist logic”. Would it be conflicting with the accountant logic for profitable high selling 5W30?
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
It does appear that QSUD is not the oil I want to run in the winter.


Yes it does look as if that is the case. It is weird how it compares very consistently with the other oils in both flavors until you reach -20. Then it has substantially less flowing ability. Odd how that can occur, especially with the 40 and 100 temps being so similar to the rest.
 
IMO the NOACK percentage is one of the least important oil spec's and a higher than average value would not deter me from choosing any oil.
All SM and SN oil must have a percentage under 15 and that seems to eliminate any oil consumption due to evaporative losses. Keep in mind the NOACK test is done at 250C which is very hot indeed.
The lighter the oil the higher the NOACK % consiquently 0W-20 oils can have values approaching the 15% maximum.
An oil I'm familiar with, PP 0W-20, has a NOACK of 14% and a couple of members that have used this have noticed no measurable oil consumption over an OCI.

Now using the NOACK % as an indicator of a base oil's quality does have some validity to it but you must make sure the oil with the lower NOACK is just thicker; i.e., a higher HTHS viscosity.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Now using the NOACK % as an indicator of a base oil's quality


And that is how I use the NOACK # when comparing oils (all else being reasonably equal)
 
I think what he meant by the trib logic is why would a 10w30 use more PAO than a 5w30 as usually it's the other way around in order to achieve the larger spread without using more VII's, which are known to shear. The logic would be a 5w30 would use more group IV & V in order to achieve the larger spread without making the oil have to use more VII's.
 
Thanks shpankey, yes, that's exactly what I was getting at. Caterham's explanation does paint a more complete picture.

Caterham, do you know why the lighter oils tend to fair worse then their heavier counterparts in the NOACK percentages?
 
The problem with all this hard work is that it tells little about how the oil holds up in service. Tests to determine these characteristics of used-up oil, or half-used-up oil would tell much more. It isn't initial values that really matter to the engine, it is the values of the oil after it has considerable time in service. The most practical way to determine this is to look at many used oil analyses and try to determine trends of each brand as to the life of the oil and the wear particles in each.
 
Originally Posted By: Ken2
The problem with all this hard work is that it tells little about how the oil holds up in service. Tests to determine these characteristics of used-up oil, or half-used-up oil would tell much more. It isn't initial values that really matter to the engine, it is the values of the oil after it has considerable time in service. The most practical way to determine this is to look at many used oil analyses and try to determine trends of each brand as to the life of the oil and the wear particles in each.


While I agree completely with what you are saying in regards to what an oil looks like half used or fully used is an extremely important (if not the MOST) variable. I am simply looking for what oil initially has the best flowing ability at various temperatures that most people see. Often times I feel that people forget that 40*C is 104*F and they see a low 40*C stat and think, "Thats a thin oil for cold operation I think I'll use that over brand X" when in reality its nowhere near being a cold temperature.

The purpose of me gathering this data was to see what the oil looks like (in regards to thickness) at various common temps. I did it to help me find oils that I would feel confident in during my winter months and summer months while maintaining my warranty. The best way for me to stay within warranty confinements and still not be "wasteful" of the oil is to do OCs at the following intervals May-Oct (10w30); Nov-Jan,Feb-Apr (5w30). With that being said I wanted to find the thinnest 10w and then for the 5w I wanted to see how they stacked up against each other for my winter intervals.

I'm thankful I did, for the winter intervals price was a big player since 3 mo. on syn. is unbelievably tolerable I wasn't going to spend $8.50 a quart on Ultra, instead I would much rather have spent the $6.20 (roughly) on QSUD. Now that I've seen the numbers I certainly will not be buying the QSUD regardless of cost, instead I will be stocking up on PP and SP when they go on sale for my 5w winter intervals and Ultra and Edge for my 10w summer intervals.

All the oils are good oils, just because I won't use QSUD now does not mean that I will not use it in other applications. I used the 5w30 in my 4.7l Ram in GTMO and seeing the numbers now I do not feel bad that I did so. In those temperatures the QSUD is a fine oil and flows just as well as oils that cost $2-$3 more per quart.

This was simply a comparison between brands and weights, it was not meant to be a scientific conclusion to the performance of each oil. Rather it was me doing research for my own personal use, which I then shared with the BITOG world in order to make future cSt questions a little easier to answer since now you've got most of the major brands represented in one easy to read table.

V/R
Nico
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top