Improved Oil Comparison Chart

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
3,219
Location
Texas
Yesterday I posted a thread comparing cSt values of a few of the name brand oils. After receiving some criticism I've made the appropriate changes and corrected one of the values.

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 using during the 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.

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.

Enjoy.

cStimproved.jpg


The original thread can be found here: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2171530#Post2171530
 
Last edited:
I see that the QSUD (now) has cold weather properties that are similar to the others (as opposed to the original thread). I'm glad to see that and I'll probably pick some up the next time at at WM....
 
Agreed, the difference is <10% on all of these. The lower NOACK on SynPower would probably make me lean that way.
 
Judging from the HTHS numbers, I would say there is no reason to run 10w30 in the summer. The 5w30's are all within a few percent of the 10w30's. I wish the HTHS for Valvoline Synpower was available, because the low NOACK number stands out from the rest.

And just like always, about half the numbers that Castrol should be putting on their PDS are AWOL.

And on a related subject, I ran across some interesting factoids while researching viscosity calculators.
Room temperature viscosity of common foods:
honey = 2200 centistokes
mayo = 6250 centistokes
sour cream = 19000 centistokes
Kinda makes you respect your oil pump doesn't it? At -20C, it's got to pump oil that has the thickness of honey.
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman

And on a related subject, I ran across some interesting factoids while researching viscosity calculators.
Room temperature viscosity of common foods:
honey = 2200 centistokes
mayo = 6250 centistokes
sour cream = 19000 centistokes
Kinda makes you respect your oil pump doesn't it? At -20C, it's got to pump oil that has the thickness of honey.

Interesting, I've been trying to find something to compare what these thickness values represent compared to other things. Never did I imagine that the comparison object would have been food lol.
 
I just did a quick comparison with Valvoline WB to see how much the numbers differed, and I've got to say they are vastly different.

Is there an interest for a conventional oil spreadsheet?
 
Originally Posted By: RamFan
I just did a quick comparison with Valvoline WB to see how much the numbers differed, and I've got to say they are vastly different.

Is there an interest for a conventional oil spreadsheet?



I'd like to see it if you have the time to do it.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
Originally Posted By: RamFan
I just did a quick comparison with Valvoline WB to see how much the numbers differed, and I've got to say they are vastly different.

Is there an interest for a conventional oil spreadsheet?



I'd like to see it if you have the time to do it.


Me too! and thanks for doing this!
 
Below are the two charts. You'll see that the Castrol GTX values are very different then the other oils. I double checked the numbers before posting and they indeed are correct. If someone could enlighten me as to how that happens it would be appreciated.

Synthetic Oils
cStimproved.jpg


Conventional Oils
ConventionalcSt.jpg
 
For GTX, compare the Cold Cranking Simulator and Low Temperature Pumpability numbers. They are the ones that determine the W-rating. The GTX 10w30 sure has similar KV numbers to the 5w30, but is trending higher at 0 and -20C. Maybe its viscosity increases enough at -25C to only qualify for the 10w rating.

Or maybe it just reflects Castrol's generally lackadaisical approach to putting accurate information on their PDS's.
 
Don't know if someone can correct me, but If im reading this properly, it appears that PP is on the thinner side when it comes to 5W30 fluids? Compared to M1 anyways.
 
Originally Posted By: Steve S
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Visc-wise, these oils are all similar.
Could it be called GPIII ?

Meaning? I don't get why the base oil is coming into question. All the synthetic oils contain a portion of group III base oils.
 
Originally Posted By: RamFan
Originally Posted By: Steve S
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Visc-wise, these oils are all similar.
Could it be called GPIII ?

Meaning? I don't get why the base oil is coming into question. All the synthetic oils contain a portion of group III base oils.
Not all synthetics start with group 3 basestock. If your gonna spend the money on synthetics there are only 3 that are worth your money. Royal purple(contains moly)red line and AMSOIL. The rest of this stuff while good oils aren't worth it. Mobil 1 is the biggest load I ever read about. They have a great marketing team tho
 
Hi,
Clevy - You said:
"If your gonna spend the money on synthetics there are only 3 that are worth your money. Royal purple(contains moly)red line and AMSOIL. The rest of this stuff while good oils aren't worth it. Mobil 1 is the biggest load I ever read about"

Thank you for your very informative Post - now I know!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top