Too many VI modifiers a bad thing?

[blackman777]

It used to be that wide VI == bad, because it meant more VI modifiers and less lubrication. (Plus the additives broke-down and became sludge.) Does no one think too many VIM additives could be a bad thing?

Speaking for myself I always try to pick the oil that has no VIMs. For example: Amsoil 5w-20 which is innately wide VI without modifiers.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
Does no one think too many VIM additives could be a bad thing?

The term you're looking for is VII - Viscosity Index Improver.

Yes, too much VII can be bad. You're not exactly discovering America here.

This has been discussed hundreds of times on BITOG. However, a high VI can be achieved without using high amounts of VII. It depends on the quality of oil bases used.

Quote:

Speaking for myself I always try to pick the oil that has no VIMs. For example: Amsoil 5w-20 which is innately wide VI without modifiers.

How do you know this? Most companies will not tell you just how much VII is used in their oil.

 

[Donald]

Mercruiser sells 25W50 oil which is just a blend, no VI.

 

[y_p_w]

SAE 30 by definition has no VI improver. It may in fact have multiweight properties if a modern base oil is used, but the only target is that it's in the range for a 30 weight oil at 100 deg C.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
SAE 30 by definition has no VI improver. It may in fact have multiweight properties if a modern base oil is used,

On this point, according to API, if it can meet the test for 10w-30 classification, then it has to be classified as such. At least that's what I think Tom NJ from PQIA mentioned before.

 

[blackman777]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: blackman777
Does no one think too many VIM additives could be a bad thing?

The term you're looking for is VII - Viscosity Index Improver.

How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term. Just the same as some people say "hood" and others say "bonnet". In the english language there is rarely only one correct way to say terminology.

As for amsoil, their former XL-7500 had no VI additives (they told me when I asked). At the time (2000) they were the only company making xW-20 synthetic. I have no idea what the current formulation has, but I did notice the 5w20 pricetag was cheaper (versus 0w20) so I just stuck with it.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term. Just the same as some people say "hood" and others say "bonnet". In the english language there is rarely only one correct way to say terminology.

My apologies. I guess I've seen the acronym VII used here on BITOG a lot more.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
At the time (2000) they were the only company making xW-20 synthetic.


Mobil's first synthetic PCMO was a 20-weight and that was in the 1970's. They had a 0w-20 out ~2000 and before that a 5w-20. The 0w-20 briefly disappeared and then came back under the AFE moniker.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: blackman777
Does no one think too many VIM additives could be a bad thing?

The term you're looking for is VII - Viscosity Index Improver.

How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term. Just the same as some people say "hood" and others say "bonnet". In the english language there is rarely only one correct way to say terminology.

As for amsoil, their former XL-7500 had no VI additives (they told me when I asked). At the time (2000) they were the only company making xW-20 synthetic. I have no idea what the current formulation has, but I did notice the 5w20 pricetag was cheaper (versus 0w20) so I just stuck with it.

They were not making the only 20 wt synthetic. There were lots of racing oils that did, especially those targeted towards qualifying and/or drag racing.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
SAE 30 by definition has no VI improver. It may in fact have multiweight properties if a modern base oil is used,

On this point, according to API, if it can meet the test for 10w-30 classification, then it has to be classified as such. At least that's what I think Tom NJ from PQIA mentioned before.

I doubt it would meet 10W-30. There are also other reasons why a SAE 30 would be desirable, especially higher allowed amounts of phosphorous.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
SAE 30 by definition has no VI improver. It may in fact have multiweight properties if a modern base oil is used,

On this point, according to API, if it can meet the test for 10w-30 classification, then it has to be classified as such. At least that's what I think Tom NJ from PQIA mentioned before.

I doubt it would meet 10W-30. There are also other reasons why a SAE 30 would be desirable, especially higher allowed amounts of phosphorous.


According to a post made by Pablo, the oil AMSOIL markets as an SAE 30 (but I think the key here is that it isn't API approved) is actually a 10w-30 with no VII's.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term.


It is not RUDE.

VII is the most common term for a polymer that modifies base oils to cover a wider temperature spec.

Viscosity Index Modifier is rarely used although quite appropriate.

In the chemical/tribologcal literature, the term to describe viscosity modifiers is "Visosity Control Additives," which covers VII's as well as PPD's.

So let's get not bent out of shape, since all these terms are ok, albeit VII being the most common.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
SAE 30 by definition has no VI improver. It may in fact have multiweight properties if a modern base oil is used,

On this point, according to API, if it can meet the test for 10w-30 classification, then it has to be classified as such. At least that's what I think Tom NJ from PQIA mentioned before.

I doubt it would meet 10W-30. There are also other reasons why a SAE 30 would be desirable, especially higher allowed amounts of phosphorous.


According to a post made by Pablo, the oil AMSOIL markets as an SAE 30 (but I think the key here is that it isn't API approved) is actually a 10w-30 with no VII's.


Right. The base oil used has a 10W30 VI without the addition of polymers.

 

[volk06]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: blackman777
Does no one think too many VIM additives could be a bad thing?

The term you're looking for is VII - Viscosity Index Improver.

How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term. Just the same as some people say "hood" and others say "bonnet". In the english language there is rarely only one correct way to say terminology.

As for amsoil, their former XL-7500 had no VI additives (they told me when I asked). At the time (2000) they were the only company making xW-20 synthetic. I have no idea what the current formulation has, but I did notice the 5w20 pricetag was cheaper (versus 0w20) so I just stuck with it.


You really need to grow some thicker skin if you're going to let that bother you. He wasn't being rude at all.

 

[kschachn]

"Correct".

Since you are on the subject it is English language, not english. And AMSOIL, not amsoil.
Plus "pricetag" is two words: price tag.

Originally Posted By: blackman777
How RUDE. Yes you are correction to use VII, but VIM is ALSO a proper term. Just the same as some people say "hood" and others say "bonnet". In the english language there is rarely only one correct way to say terminology.

As for amsoil, their former XL-7500 had no VI additives (they told me when I asked). At the time (2000) they were the only company making xW-20 synthetic. I have no idea what the current formulation has, but I did notice the 5w20 pricetag was cheaper (versus 0w20) so I just stuck with it.

 

[jrustles]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
"Correct".

Since you are on the subject it is English language, not english. And AMSOIL, not amsoil.
Plus "pricetag" is two words: price tag.


i'm sorry but that was really annoying to have read

 

[Clevy]

Getting back to the question in the past VII would shear fairly quickly and that led to all sorts of problems.
For example in the 80's many domestic oem's preferred viscosity was a 10w-30 unless the engine was going to be operated in colder temps,only then was a 5w-30 acceptable.
Just off the top of my head I think the cut off temp was 16c or lower for switching grades.
However most of today's quality lubricants use VII's that are more shear resistant than was used in the past.
For example tgmo 0w-20 has shown via used oil analysis to remain in grade for the most part at oem stated intervals,from what I've seen,so historically yes VII tended to shear and potentially cause issues at longer than specified intervals but today's products don't seem to suffer as what was experienced historically.

You're right that if more VII are part of an oil formula that leaves less room for actual oil however I don't feel its a big issue simply because today's lubricants contain additives that perform light years ahead of what has been available previously.
So I really don't feel its an issue worth getting too concerned about but that's my personal opinion.

 

[gpshumway]

One thing to remember about VIIs is they undergo temporary shear, so they don't raise the HTHSV (or any HSV) nearly as much as they raise the KV. So an oil which achieves a given VI using VIIs will have higher KV100 to get the same HTHSV.

https://www.oronite.com/paratone/shearrates.aspx

All things equal I'll take an oil without VIIs. Temporary shear, permanent shear, deposits, all bad things. A pinch isn't bad, but today's best base stocks need little help.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

According to a post made by Pablo, the oil AMSOIL markets as an SAE 30 (but I think the key here is that it isn't API approved) is actually a 10w-30 with no VII's.


10W-30 with no viscosity index improvers would be a 10 weight oil.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

According to a post made by Pablo, the oil AMSOIL markets as an SAE 30 (but I think the key here is that it isn't API approved) is actually a 10w-30 with no VII's.


10W-30 with no viscosity index improvers would be a 10 weight oil.


Not really.

This would be a product formulated with a base oil with the proper viscosity characteristics and which could span the viscosity range and merit a 10W30 rating as well.

I think the product in question is:

Amsoil's ACD