PQIA tests ten 5W-20s - one gets an Advisory

[webfors]

VWB FTW!

Never tried the nextgen stuff. VWB noack was always higher than the competitors (from what I recall) but that never stopped it from being a very strong UOA performer in a multitude of applications.

The PYB/SOPUS noack is impressive. The GTL base stock is the future right now and it continues to impress. I wouldn't expect it to be a staple in PYB. But who knows, 99% of consumers don't have a clue about any spec, base stock, additives or motor oil in general. So whatever SOPUS can produce in the most abundance at the right price will be the winner. Maybe that's GTL right now.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Solarent
Not to speak on behalf of Shell, but I think it's funny how a single isolated test (even done by the good folks at PQIA) and people are declaring that GTL must be being added to PYB... yeah right - I don't believe that for one second.

There had been some indication here (the Q&A, perhaps, I don't remember for sure) that SOPUS would use other base stocks in PYB if they were low on the normal Group II/II+ stuff. That's not exactly the same as using GTL because they had a surplus of that.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Solarent
There could be multiple reasons for these samples to have lower NOACK's that have nothing to do with GTL stocks.

Care to offer any alternative reasons?


From a formulation standpoint I can think of two ways to decrease NOACK with a GroupII:

1. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of very high viscosity PAO,
2. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of high vis polymer ester.

Of course, there are many combinations of various base oils and additive combos that could accomplish this.

 

[tinmanSC]

Originally Posted By: Stelth
Looks like PQIA's NOACK machine is busted.

Yeah, I don't understand how these results could be correct. *confused*
and no response from valvoline on this issue??? When the viscosity was a bit off on Maxlife Dex/Merc Valvoline had a response within hours. This seems very strange to me....

 

[bourne]

Also, why test Nextgen, when you are not testing any other company's recycled oil products in the group. I would be way more interested in seeing VWB results, as that is more popular than Nextgen, especially in the bulk market.

 

[fdcg27]

The cost of the feedstock for this GTL plant must be very low considering the region in which it's located, which is the reason the facility was built to begin with.
As long as revenue exceeds variable cost, then why wouldn't Shell use this basestock in all of their oils?
It may well be that GTL Grp III from the Qatar plant is less costly to use delivered to a US blending plant than is Grp II produced locally.
We just don't know what Shell's rationale is, but I think that these two products must be using a GTL Grp III basestock.
The NOACK and cold spec numbers make no sense otherwise.
If soemone could identify these low NOACK products by lot numbers, just think of all of the BITOGers who'd be examining oil bottles at Walmart and all of the parts chains.
Nobody else outside of SOPUS would know.

 

[C4Dave]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Solarent
There could be multiple reasons for these samples to have lower NOACK's that have nothing to do with GTL stocks.

Care to offer any alternative reasons?


From a formulation standpoint I can think of two ways to decrease NOACK with a GroupII:

1. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of very high viscosity PAO,
2. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of high vis polymer ester.

Of course, there are many combinations of various base oils and additive combos that could accomplish this.


Would this also give low CCS values?

 

[BrandonT]

How do we know if the PYB on the shelf right now is this new formulation?

 

[cheesepuffs]

Originally Posted By: BrandonT
How do we know if the PYB on the shelf right now is this new formulation?


Yes, I also wanna know. If anybody here learns of date codes or something like that then please post them.

Do you guys think this possible GTL based PYB is across all viscosities or is it only 5w-20?

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: cheesepuffs
Do you guys think this possible GTL based PYB is across all viscosities or is it only 5w-20?


That`s what I`m wanting to know too.

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: cheesepuffs
Do you guys think this possible GTL based PYB is across all viscosities or is it only 5w-20?


The 5w30 PYB NOACK is 14.4 in the PQIA's other test.

A single sample batch test can catch substandard bottle or lax QC but I would not be wear about generalizing too much from it.

 

[Lex94]

Go buy a bottle of Castrol GTX 5w20 and a bottle of PYB 5w20 and put some of each in your toaster oven and fire it up. You will know pretty quick any difference in NOACK or just how much your wife really loves you as well.

I suspect the GTL process is cheaper than refining crude and not some over supply issue. The future looks like GTL with the abundance of NatGas thru fracking in the USA.

 

[daves87rs]

Man....makes me think these two might not be a bad choice...

 

[martinq]

Gotta say it's interesting that, yet again, the oils with the lowest NOACK also have the highest VI and are the lightest cold-cranking (-30).

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
They will write some half-baked PR letter and force the PQIA to post it with an editorial contraction and make them delete the test just like they did with that MaxLife transmission garbage they hock.

Hahahaaa, you're a really cheery fellow. Sounds like you know very little about MaxLife ATF.

Keep on championing the ignorance, it must do something for you.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: C4Dave
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Solarent
There could be multiple reasons for these samples to have lower NOACK's that have nothing to do with GTL stocks.

Care to offer any alternative reasons?


From a formulation standpoint I can think of two ways to decrease NOACK with a GroupII:

1. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of very high viscosity PAO,
2. Use a high percentage of low and medium vis GroupII and a very low percentage of high vis polymer ester.

Of course, there are many combinations of various base oils and additive combos that could accomplish this.


Would this also give low CCS values?


Looking at
http://www.aftonchemical.com/ProductDataSheets/Lubricant Components/HiTEC-5710_PDS.pdf
and
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Apps/RefiningTechnologies/Files/conference_2010_highqtltylubes_March.pdf

and the 5W-20 VIs looking all to be mid 140s(ish), I can see it being so....

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: martinq
Gotta say it's interesting that, yet again, the oils with the lowest NOACK also have the highest VI and are the lightest cold-cranking (-30).


I'm not sure if this was written with a little bit of sarcasm, but hasn't it typically been the opposite, or at least SAID to be the opposite: oils with high VI also often have a high volatility number?

And if so, that was probably the point of your comment. I ask in complete ignorance...I don't remember which way the correlation between VI and NOACK went...

 

[LEADED]

Mola do U think that this is Sopus strategy for upcoming GF6 PCMO under one umbrella to cover multiple specs DEXOS et all, maybe SOPUS is alredy ahead of the game ,if U have use it.

 

[Mathson]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
PQIA continues its series on 5W-20 motor oils. Valvoline NextGen gets an Advisory for a high Noack.


Would this indicate that Ashland is only sampling a portion of batches rather than QCing every batch, or that there is a problem in their basic process of reusing motor oil?



There should be no expectation that every batch is tested.

There are quality control techniques, specifically SPC (statistical process control) that eliminates the need to do 100% compliance checks; if one can show that a process is "extremely repeatable" in producing a compliant product, the requirement to inspect the product is reduced.

I would suspect that the "feed stock" portion of their nextgen production would be heavily metered, but the additives and subsequent packing etc, not so much. JMO.



Well this is only a lack of QC IMO. In my work place (one of the majors) every batch of every blend is tested. Every first and the last bottle of every fill is tested and compared to the filled batch that the filling line flushes are adequate. There are just so many things that can go wrong quality wise. Are the lines pigable or do you use compressed air or both? Is the air dry? How well can you drain filling machine, lines etc. Is the previous product filled synthetic --> More flushing. IR fail otherwise.

It's a little bit different than using a pipette in a lab when you have a couple of miles of piping and batches of couple hundred tons.

Just my few cents.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I have been hearing a lot of good about the PYB oils. After looking at this test and studying some VOAs and UOAS.

I may have to pick up the PYB for both vehicles!

It'll wax my engines up