Shell Helix 5w40 very close to any 0w40, benefit?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: edyvw

I switched from 0W30

Which 0w-30?

GC!
I was using GC in 1.8T for 6oK+ and then decided to try PU 5W40.
What I immediately noticed is that valvetrain during morning cold start is very noisy for 5sec. That was never the case with GC!

I ran both oils in my 530i and never noticed any difference on startup. Both oils have very similar characteristics at very cold temps, but PU 5w-40 actually flows better than GC because PU has higher VI:

GC_PU_visc_graph.png
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: edyvw

I switched from 0W30

Which 0w-30?

GC!
I was using GC in 1.8T for 6oK+ and then decided to try PU 5W40.
What I immediately noticed is that valvetrain during morning cold start is very noisy for 5sec. That was never the case with GC!

I ran both oils in my 530i and never noticed any difference on startup. Both oils have very similar characteristics at very cold temps, but PU 5w-40 actually flows better than GC because PU has higher VI:

GC_PU_visc_graph.png




I understand charts, however, that is my expirience.
In what car you used it?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Keep in mind Visc calcs are generally not regarded as accurate below 0-degrees Celsius.

Well, in my area cold start means lowest 2-3 degrees celzius. It is south, so it is not big deal having 5W40 or 0W30 or 0W40. However, I notices on my previos car, Passat 1.8T that with PU 5w40, valvtrain produces more noise first 5 seconds.
 
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Vincenzo_f
Originally Posted By: dparm
My opinion is that for the Euro cars wanting HTHS = 3.5, the Shell is a bit more appealing since it isn't too thick. 3.68 vs 3.8 is only about 5% so not a deal-breaker.

I'd use whichever was on sale.


dparm the main question is:
If i'm interested in 0w40 oil...
Why should I buy again a 0w40 when I can have a oil with the same features (thinness, cold starting, ecc..) of a 0w40 but held in a 5W40 (Shell)?

Well only difference then could be whether one is PAO and another Mineral based or Group III oil?
Both oils are good, very good. Now, what I would do is run one oil then switch to another and then just see which one subjectively fits you engine better (noise etc).
Engines do tend to like some oils and dislike another ones.
I bought CC recently and put 0W40 Mobil1. Next time I will put Castrol 0W30 and then decide which one I will run all the time simply based on my subjective opinion.
Bottom line: You will not make mistake with either one of them!


Once upon a time there was Johnny from Pennzoil that could help answer this question about Helix. But Shell did produce Helix with it's slack wax base oil, and from what I have learned this is still the case at least this was the case late last year around the November time frame.

Shell's XHVI base oil, which unlike many other group 3 base oils does not begin with distilled crude oil. XHVI is a wax isomerate, meaning that it is made from the slack wax removed from distilled crude in normal solvent dewaxing. This slack wax is catalytically transformed (isomerized) and hydrofinished into a chemically pure base oil which rivals PAO in virtually every catagory. There are other "synthetic" oils out there based on group 3, but Shell's is unique in that it uses XHVI base oil and if you are discussing a single base oil XHVI'S performance is almost as good as it gets.
 
How does it look like now? I'm willing to try one of them in my Peugeot. Shell has PSA B71 2296 approval, which is a benefit, but at the moment in Poland is much cheaper than M1 0W-40, which is a bit suspicious...
Mobil Super 3000 X1 5W-40 has PSA B71 2296, but I suppose it's inferior to both the 0W-40 and Shell.
 
Attached is the Shell Helix 5w-40 PDF link from the Australian Shell Site.

http://www.epc.shell.com/docs/GPCDOC_GTDS_Shell_Helix_Ultra_5W-40_(SN_CF_A3_B4)_(en)_TDS.pdf

Highlight the link above and then right click go to.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: virginoil
Attached is the Shell Helix 5w-40 PDF link from the Australian Shell Site.

http://www.epc.shell.com/docs/GPCDOC_GTDS_Shell_Helix_Ultra_5W-40_(SN_CF_A3_B4)_(en)_TDS.pdf

Highlight the link above and then right click go to.




Without TBN and NOACK it's not too informative. Although pour point is impressive in those Shell oils.
 
Originally Posted By: Cuore_Sportivo
Originally Posted By: virginoil
Attached is the Shell Helix 5w-40 PDF link from the Australian Shell Site.

http://www.epc.shell.com/docs/GPCDOC_GTDS_Shell_Helix_Ultra_5W-40_(SN_CF_A3_B4)_(en)_TDS.pdf
Highlight the link above and then right click go to.


Without TBN and NOACK it's not too informative. Although pour point is impressive in those Shell oils.


With all of those approvals claimed does it matter ?
Only BITOG Died Hard fans maybe.

Meeting certain approvals requires meeting minimum HTHS and Noack values etc, so by meeting the spec's it provides a reasonable guide to the quality of the oil.

If the OEM can be satisfied in this manner, what about BITOG members ?
Do we have higher standards ?
 
Last edited:
If it was just about reading the label and finding the right approval, I wouldn't join this forum
smile.gif
.
Basically recommended oils are in each owner's handbook so why discuss anything here?
 
Originally Posted By: Cuore_Sportivo
If it was just about reading the label and finding the right approval, I wouldn't join this forum
smile.gif
.
Basically recommended oils are in each owner's handbook so why discuss anything here?


You raise a good point, I see myself doing less posting here.
 
Originally Posted By: virginoil
Originally Posted By: Cuore_Sportivo
Originally Posted By: virginoil
Attached is the Shell Helix 5w-40 PDF link from the Australian Shell Site.

http://www.epc.shell.com/docs/GPCDOC_GTDS_Shell_Helix_Ultra_5W-40_(SN_CF_A3_B4)_(en)_TDS.pdf
Highlight the link above and then right click go to.


Without TBN and NOACK it's not too informative. Although pour point is impressive in those Shell oils.


With all of those approvals claimed does it matter ?
Only BITOG Died Hard fans maybe.

Meeting certain approvals requires meeting minimum HTHS and Noack values etc, so by meeting the spec's it provides a reasonable guide to the quality of the oil.

If the OEM can be satisfied in this manner, what about BITOG members ?
Do we have higher standards ?


Are they meeting the spec, or are they claiming to meet it?

if they are on an approved list, that's another matter.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
Are they meeting the spec, or are they claiming to meet it?

if they are on an approved list, that's another matter.

It is on the approved list. It's the same oil as Pennzoil Platinum Euro 5w-40 here in the US.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: edyvw

I switched from 0W30

Which 0w-30?

GC!
I was using GC in 1.8T for 6oK+ and then decided to try PU 5W40.
What I immediately noticed is that valvetrain during morning cold start is very noisy for 5sec. That was never the case with GC!

I ran both oils in my 530i and never noticed any difference on startup. Both oils have very similar characteristics at very cold temps, but PU 5w-40 actually flows better than GC because PU has higher VI:

GC_PU_visc_graph.png





This chart is flawed and you cannot extrapolate down to low temperatures.

Even making an assumption that cP and cSt are similar:

A 0W will be below 6200 at -35 based on SAE J300 and CCS. A 5W will be below 6600 at -30. At -30C the 0W previously mentioned would be ~3000cP. Half the viscosity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top