DI intake valve deposits

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,663
Just would like the forums view on this quote from Penzoil in regards to intake valve deposits and oil and what not.

Oil volatility is not a significant factor for inlet valve deposits in a direct injection gasoline engine. The significant factor is viscosity modifier type and concentration, so using fully synthetic narrow span viscosity grades such as 5W-20 is beneficial. In North America, there is no specification calling for NOACK of less than 10%. The most important thing for DI engines is engine design, to better prevent deposits on ITV’s (In Take Valves), since there is no fuel wash as in PFI (Port Fuel Injection) engines. "

So if this is the case would an oil like Redline 5w30 be of benefit?

Jeff
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Just would like the forums view on this quote from Penzoil in regards to intake valve deposits and oil and what not.

Oil volatility is not a significant factor for inlet valve deposits in a direct injection gasoline engine. The significant factor is viscosity modifier type and concentration, so using fully synthetic narrow span viscosity grades such as 5W-20 is beneficial. In North America, there is no specification calling for NOACK of less than 10%. The most important thing for DI engines is engine design, to better prevent deposits on ITV’s (In Take Valves), since there is no fuel wash as in PFI (Port Fuel Injection) engines. "

So if this is the case would an oil like Redline 5w30 be of benefit?

Jeff

Yeah, but, all oils that meet MB 229.5 have NOACK less then 10% (M1, PU 5W40, GC).
It is just that Redline 5W30, 5W40, 5W40 Euro have extremely low NOACK of 6% (for example Amsoil 5W40 is 8.7%).
That is why I will never use Castrol 5W40 because it does not meet MB 229.5, which means NOACK is higher then 10%.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
In North America, there is no specification calling for NOACK of less than 10%.

There are cars currently sold in North America that call for specs which require NOACK to be less than 10%.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
In North America, there is no specification calling for NOACK of less than 10%.

There are cars currently sold in North America that call for specs which require NOACK to be less than 10%.

Yes they are
smile.gif

and, they should know that
smile.gif
 
But penzoil seems to think it's the viscosity modifiers is a possible cause of the deposits so using an oil with a narrow viscosity index is better?

Kinda goes against what bitog usually say to look for?

Curious on this one. Strange find on this one.

Jeff
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
But penzoil seems to think it's the viscosity modifiers is a possible cause of the deposits so using an oil with a narrow viscosity index is better?

Presumably they are saying that viscosity index modifiers break down and cause deposits. But how are these deposits making their way onto the valves? The only way this can happen is if they travel via vapors. And guess what, lower volatility (NOACK) = fewer vapors. If you eliminate/reduce the vapors, you are in effect not allowing these broken down VI modifiers to travel to the valves. So, you want both low VII and low NOACK. You also want low SAPS, IMO.

At least that's how I see it, but I'm not a chemical engineer, so I'll let others chime in.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
But penzoil seems to think it's the viscosity modifiers is a possible cause of the deposits so using an oil with a narrow viscosity index is better?

Presumably they are saying that viscosity index modifiers break down and cause deposits. But how are these deposits making their way onto the valves? The only way this can happen is if they travel via vapors. And guess what, lower volatility (NOACK) = fewer vapors. If you eliminate/reduce the vapors, you are in effect not allowing these broken down VI modifiers to travel to the valves. So, you want both low VII and low NOACK. You also want low SAPS, IMO.

At least that's how I see it, but I'm not a chemical engineer, so I'll let others chime in.


Well, I think this debate is going to be present until they come up with additional port injector (and many are testing thet) so that valves could be washed.
I always used GC or few time M1 in CC. So both are below 10%.
Got Tiguan, used one. Carfax reported that it was serviced during free maintenance period in VW. So because I wanted SEL, with approx. 30K and CPO, I flew to VA and drove it to San Diego. In TN, check engine light goes on. In SD, VW says it is intake manifold.
I truly believe it is because of that Castrol 5W40 and the fact that car was driven by older person, which means no high rpm's (probably
smile.gif
).
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
But penzoil seems to think it's the viscosity modifiers is a possible cause of the deposits so using an oil with a narrow viscosity index is better?

Presumably they are saying that viscosity index modifiers break down and cause deposits. But how are these deposits making their way onto the valves? The only way this can happen is if they travel via vapors. And guess what, lower volatility (NOACK) = fewer vapors. If you eliminate/reduce the vapors, you are in effect not allowing these broken down VI modifiers to travel to the valves. So, you want both low VII and low NOACK. You also want low SAPS, IMO.

At least that's how I see it, but I'm not a chemical engineer, so I'll let others chime in.


I'm not chemical engineer either but for Pennzoil to make that claim I believe it.
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX

Kinda goes against what bitog usually say to look for?



What does BITOG usually say to look for?

Either there is the crowd that takes what is cheapest, and thinks that oil is oil...

Ot those that look for low volatility, minimal VII, high quality oils with low NOACK and good HTHS... Dont confuse wider spread with quality lubes that are good blends of quality basestocks and try to minimize volatility... IMO.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
But penzoil seems to think it's the viscosity modifiers is a possible cause of the deposits so using an oil with a narrow viscosity index is better?

Presumably they are saying that viscosity index modifiers break down and cause deposits. But how are these deposits making their way onto the valves? The only way this can happen is if they travel via vapors. And guess what, lower volatility (NOACK) = fewer vapors. If you eliminate/reduce the vapors, you are in effect not allowing these broken down VI modifiers to travel to the valves. So, you want both low VII and low NOACK. You also want low SAPS, IMO.

At least that's how I see it, but I'm not a chemical engineer, so I'll let others chime in.


I'm not chemical engineer either but for Pennzoil to make that claim I believe it.


I would venture to guess that the volatilized components from VII break down are different materials, and perhaps more deposit forming, than the regular hydrocarbons found in a basestock.
 
Doesn't most of the intake valve deposits come from the PCV ?
And since there is no fuel wash with D.I. ,I can see why a lower NOACK would put less crud into PCV system.
 
Really no need to spend a bunch of money on RedLine 5w30 or other boutique oils. The whole line of common SOPUS 5w30's have low volatility. PP, QSUD, FS(syn). I imagine their 5w20's are low NOACK too but waiting for PQIA to test them
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
so using fully synthetic narrow span viscosity grades such as 5W-20 is beneficial.

Yet, none of the Euro DI engines specify such a grade.
 
What I have read allot on this site is higher the VI The better to some degree. So is it possible those additives to create such may contribute to the crud build up?

If that is the case how does M1 0w40 have a NOACK under 10%? Theory out the window??

I mentioned redline because their 5w30 has the hths close to M1 0w40 and PU 5w40 it has a lower VI (if that's good?) And a NOACK of 6%. Redline does not recommend the use of their euro 5w30 low saps. When I asked them why they stated their is nothing that their engineers and chemist have found that the saps are a main contributor.

I'm not trying to cause trouble hear is just something I found and know people here may have more insight.

Jeff
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
What I have read allot on this site is higher the VI The better to some degree. So is it possible those additives to create such may contribute to the crud build up?

Don't confuse high VI with large amounts of VI improvers/modifiers. High VI can be achieved by using high quality base stocks and thus not requiring the use of large amounts of VI improvers/modifiers.

Quote:
If that is the case how does M1 0w40 have a NOACK under 10%? Theory out the window??

VI and NOACK are two different things, not necessarily related.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
What I have read allot on this site is higher the VI The better to some degree. So is it possible those additives to create such may contribute to the crud build up?

Don't confuse high VI with large amounts of VI improvers/modifiers. High VI can be achieved by using high quality base stocks and thus not requiring the use of large amounts of VI improvers/modifiers.

Quote:
If that is the case how does M1 0w40 have a NOACK under 10%? Theory out the window??

VI and NOACK are two different things, not necessarily related.


I understand Thanks for that clarification.

I'm confused then why the VI is less then for the RL 5w30 since it uses high group base stocks which may be assumed as group 5.

I realize everything is blended with mix of this and that but I always thought RL to be a step above M1. Maybe I just am reading between the lines?

Currently I an running M1 0w40 by the way.

Jeff
 
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
I'm confused then why the VI is less then for the RL 5w30 since it uses high group base stocks which may be assumed as group 5.

I realize everything is blended with mix of this and that but I always thought RL to be a step above M1. Maybe I just am reading between the lines?

Why are you comparing RL 5w-30 to M1 0w-40? VI is just a calculated value. You take the viscosity at 40C and viscosity at 100C, and this gets you the VI. The "I" in VI stands for Index for a reason.
smile.gif


If you want to compare apples to apples, compare M1 0w-40 to RL 0w-40.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
I'm confused then why the VI is less then for the RL 5w30 since it uses high group base stocks which may be assumed as group 5.

I realize everything is blended with mix of this and that but I always thought RL to be a step above M1. Maybe I just am reading between the lines?

Why are you comparing RL 5w-30 to M1 0w-40? VI is just a calculated value. You take the viscosity at 40C and viscosity at 100C, and this gets you the VI. The "I" in VI stands for Index for a reason.
smile.gif


So it is normal that a 5w-30 will have a lower VI than a 0w-40, because there is typically a smaller viscosity spread in a 5w-30 oil vs. a 0w-40. If you want to compare apples to apples, compare M1 0w-40 to RL 0w-40.


I am using RL 5w30 as an example for my application because that is what they recommend for my car whereas M1 recommends the 0w40.

That is why I am comparing the 2. Of the 2 if it means anything M1 is VW approved but I know RL is a excellent product. It's not really about my VW its about what may benefit ANY DI motor.

I'm just looking at these 2 oils as examples only to what Penzoil said in my original post is all.

Jeff
 
Last edited:
I see. Well, Redline's 5w-30 VI of 166 is still fairly high, IMO. That's about the same as GC - another great oil. And of course there is more to a good oil than just high VI.
 
Thanks for the posts I'm trying not to make this seem like past posts I've done about 502 oils. I just came across the penzoil blog and thought it was interesting. Especially for those with a DI motor.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top