Walmart SuperTech Synthetic spec sheet info

[dustyroads]

Originally Posted By: earlyre
good/bad news, so far no one(including blackstone) has charged anything to my card # that was written on the slip so...


My belief is that some postal worker (in each case) considered my kit as "suspicious" and it was tossed in a dumpster.

I don't know but it's infuriating to lose the money spent and the info that was never gleaned.

 

[earlyre]

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3405878/Meijer_Synthetic_5w20_%28Warren%29#Post3405878
VOA Finally came today.

 

[earlyre]

motorguy222 recently pointed out that Warren Distribution, and Warren oil/ Warren UniLube are different companies.

www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3423090/Re:_Wpp_and_WPP...#Post3416726

Meijer oil, such as the one i'm currently using, (and posted the above VOA link,) are Warren-Unilube(per MSDS), label on back of Bottle says "Packaged By Warren Oil Company, inc., Dunn, NC 28334"

therefore NOT related to this supertech. sorry for the any confusion.

 

[yvon_la]

This oil has to be annoying for othe in the oil industry.that line that mention viscosity at 150 (astm d5481)this alone makes a huge difference .oil industry usually try to stay away from the d5481 .as temperature rise oil flaw pop up

 

[SirTanon]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I continue to be impressed with this oil. It has far exceeded my expectations. The engine smoothness is uncanny. I'm at the point now that if Walmart was to switch suppliers, I'd seriously consider mail ordering MAG1 oil from Warren.


Wow.. this is actually kinda funny, considering some of the other threads on this subject.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: yvon_la
This oil has to be annoying for othe in the oil industry.that line that mention viscosity at 150 (astm d5481)this alone makes a huge difference .oil industry usually try to stay away from the d5481 .as temperature rise oil flaw pop up


??????

All PCMO's and HDEO's list HTHS, which is measured at 150C.

Originally Posted By: ASTM

ASTM D5481 - 13

Standard Test Method for Measuring Apparent Viscosity at High-Temperature and High-Shear Rate by Multicell Capillary Viscometer


You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[pbm]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
SPK200 "Sludge up" - what do you mean? Some Cream around the fill cap inn the winter.?Sounds like you have a PCV issue.

I have seen too much varnish and experienced sticking TC tensioner on the newish Subaru running M1 0w20 and QSUD. The Valvoline 0w20 seems to keep the fill hole and the visible VCT spotless - though that doesn't equate to well lubed or long engine life. I have PU 5w20 in there now -a Noisy oil at start of OCI due to extremely high DD doping - hopefully it'll even out after 1500 miles. I would say typical of a non majority ester syn LL oil.



Arco:
What do you mean by "DD doping"?
Are you saying the old PU had "high DD doping"?

 

[yvon_la]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: yvon_la
This oil has to be annoying for othe in the oil industry.that line that mention viscosity at 150 (astm d5481)this alone makes a huge difference .oil industry usually try to stay away from the d5481 .as temperature rise oil flaw pop up


??????

All PCMO's and HDEO's list HTHS, which is measured at 150C.

Originally Posted By: ASTM

ASTM D5481 - 13

Standard Test Method for Measuring Apparent Viscosity at High-Temperature and High-Shear Rate by Multicell Capillary Viscometer


You have no idea what you are talking about.
my bad then !was sure this number wasnt easily avail (willingly shown like here)sorry then if it is easilly gotten .i stand corrected

 

[OVERKILL]

Yes, it is a standard measure. Check the Mobil PDS's for example:

http://www.exxonmobil.com/pdssearch/search.aspx?chooseLanguage=en&CountryValue=Canada

Their 0w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-20_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 0w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-30_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 5w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_5W-20.aspx
Their 5w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-French/Lubes/PDS/IOCAF2PVLMOMobil1_5W-30.aspx

...etc.

HTHS (at 150C) is listed on every single one.

 

[yvon_la]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Yes, it is a standard measure. Check the Mobil PDS's for example:

http://www.exxonmobil.com/pdssearch/search.aspx?chooseLanguage=en&CountryValue=Canada

Their 0w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-20_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 0w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-30_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 5w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_5W-20.aspx
Their 5w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-French/Lubes/PDS/IOCAF2PVLMOMobil1_5W-30.aspx

...etc.

HTHS (at 150C) is listed on every single one.
ty for info!isnt those value a bit low for hths or there is no requirement?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: yvon_la
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Yes, it is a standard measure. Check the Mobil PDS's for example:

http://www.exxonmobil.com/pdssearch/search.aspx?chooseLanguage=en&CountryValue=Canada

Their 0w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-20_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 0w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_0W-30_Advanced_Fuel_Economy.aspx
Their 5w-20: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-English/Lubes/PDS/IOCAENPVLMOMobil_1_5W-20.aspx
Their 5w-30: http://www.mobil.com/Canada-French/Lubes/PDS/IOCAF2PVLMOMobil1_5W-30.aspx

...etc.

HTHS (at 150C) is listed on every single one.
ty for info!isnt those value a bit low for hths or there is no requirement?


Those values are normal for their respective grades on this side of the pond.

The HDEO's and Euro oils have higher HTHS values.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: yvon_la
isnt those value a bit low for hths or there is no requirement?

Beyond what Overkill mentioned, those values are required to be that low for ILSAC approval. Look at Delvac 1 LE 5w-30. I'm sure it's got the phosphorous levels for GF-5. It certainly doesn't have the HTHS levels for GF-5, given that it has CJ-4 approval.

 

[Shannow]

yvon_la,
what's interesting on this product data sheet is that it includes high shear at 100C, which IS a somewhat rare parameter to see anywhere.

Oils with Viscosity Index Improvers have historically had an issue with the viscosity measured in a typical viscometer being greater than the viscosity that is experienced in the bearing...it's called temporary viscosity loss, a loss in high shear conditions that recovers when it's not being sheared at that rate.

The high shear rate is of the order of what's seen in an engine, and CATERHAM is probably pretty close to the mark with his measurement of it.

Look at this oil, it's KV100 is 11 under the standard testing, but under high shear rates, the effective viscosity of that oil is 7.26...that's what is being seen in the bearing. If it was a "straight" SAE 30, the high shear 100 and the KV100 should be the same.

The temperature of 150C for the typical HTHS on most PDS' was adopted...not sure on why the 150C was chosen, but 120-130C is probably readily attainable in the temperature rise across the working bearing, so 150C isn't that extreme.

 

[yvon_la]

Hths value at 100c ?i dont understand?so the 100c test is rarely hths?so basicly people couldnt compare hths 150 value with the 100 c value directly (since it isnt a hths 100c)?outch .i am beginning to remember why i hate mathematic.i hadnt notice that.

Ps:wow are kv100 value always so far from hths100 value?outch !i wonder wich car maker check when saying 10 per 1000 rpm .the kv100 value or the hths100 value .if it is the hths100 value?outch !

 

[yvon_la]

Shannow!you are the man!ty for pointing out and explaining whats what short history .so basicly what you meant is :it would be way harder on oil maker if they were required to do hths 100c instead of the 100c we usually see

 

[yvon_la]

last question!does it mean on a straight sae oil the oil maker are required to use hths at all temperature they test?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: yvon_la
Shannow!you are the man!ty for pointing out and explaining whats what short history .so basicly what you meant is :it would be way harder on oil maker if they were required to do hths 100c instead of the 100c we usually see


No, it wouldn't be any harder, it is just another test to yields another set of values and is one that isn't common, which is why you don't see it. The "standard" is to measure it at 150C.

 

[Shannow]

Bumping this because I wanted to correct an error that I made in Cp/Cst.

Cp = Cst x density...water is "1", so for water, Cp = Cst around STP.

It's the "corrector" 0.885 in the Harman Calculation, the density change at 150C.

Found this handy calculator
http://planetcalc.com/2834/

Using it to turn the HTHS 100 and HTHS 150 into Cst.

density at 15C = 853.9 Kg/m^3
KV40 = 64.33 Cst
KV100 = 11.02 Cst
HTHS 100 = 7.26 Cp
HTHS 150 = 3.17 Cp

Using the calculator,
Density at 100C = 791.7 Kg/m^3
Density at 150C = 754.3 Kg/m^3

Using the 100C figures.
KV100 = 11.02 cst, = 8.72 Cp.
The high shear viscosity of 7.26 is 17% lower than the low shear rate viscosity.

Going backwards, to compare Cst of both, the High Shear 100C figure translates into 9.17 Cst, verus the low shear rate KV100 of 11.02.

Using the 150C figures, the HTHS 150 translates to 4.2 Cst (from 3.17Cp).

Lets you grasp what the numbers are in comparable units.

 

[userfriendly]

The translation still does not take into account RPM induced bearing speed, or temporary shear in traditional VII containing multi-grade engine oils.

Unless I'm missing a step, what is the correct way to read HTHS in those engine oils?

The "density connection" I finally get, and sometimes wonder if the old SUS was a better indication of viscosity once the effect of VII's were "all in".

 

[Shannow]

Google Books part of a paper

Has some interesting parts down that rabbit hole.

Interesting that on a 3.8 V-6, the MOFT dropped to essentially contact (boundary) on gearshifts...i.e. surface speed drops markedly, coupled with an increase in load... and the extrapolation of MOFT versus HTHS.

The point that for a given add/basestock package, the variation in HTHS correlates to wear, more VI, more HTHS, less wear...but HTHS in and of itself between add packages doesn't...a bit like that Infieum paper in another thread.