The new Castrol has some new start up waer protection should be good
CASTROL MAGNATEC
- Thread starter David1
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Table F1.3. You have read across for IVA based on DI treat, VM treat and Base oil viscosity. In addition, with level 2 support you could add boosters to a test formulation to creat a final oil. Additionally base oil substitution/interchange allowances Often not many final formulations in engine oils have ran an API test, despite claiming API. Obviously the guidelines are written to ensure the 'worst case' is tested but there can be cases where the opposite happens.
Thank you for clarifying, will go back and read that section. The underlined part above is helpful though. So you are saying basically that sometimes, with an allowed interchange, that the end product may not meet the limits of the test protocols it is by extension "approved for" based on those allowances? That's quite interesting!
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
The limit is more than a 3rd lower than the industry limits
There we go! THANK YOU!
That is in fact VERY useful and makes me wonder what Mobil and SOPUS use for their limits on their own higher tier products like Ultra and Mobil 1 EP, and their high tier stuff like Platinum and Mobil 1. Any ideas?
Also, what about OEM limits and testing protocols that might tie-in here? Obviously our API/GF-xx stuff is the baseline, what challenges do some of the OEM approvals pose above and beyond that? I know the Porsche approval process is extensive, but what about the GM DEXOS stuff and the Ford WSS-xxx specs, the latter of which I know are more rigorous and extensive versions of many of the API protocols?
Table F1.3. You have read across for IVA based on DI treat, VM treat and Base oil viscosity. In addition, with level 2 support you could add boosters to a test formulation to creat a final oil. Additionally base oil substitution/interchange allowances Often not many final formulations in engine oils have ran an API test, despite claiming API. Obviously the guidelines are written to ensure the 'worst case' is tested but there can be cases where the opposite happens.
Thank you for clarifying, will go back and read that section. The underlined part above is helpful though. So you are saying basically that sometimes, with an allowed interchange, that the end product may not meet the limits of the test protocols it is by extension "approved for" based on those allowances? That's quite interesting!
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
The limit is more than a 3rd lower than the industry limits
There we go! THANK YOU!
Also, what about OEM limits and testing protocols that might tie-in here? Obviously our API/GF-xx stuff is the baseline, what challenges do some of the OEM approvals pose above and beyond that? I know the Porsche approval process is extensive, but what about the GM DEXOS stuff and the Ford WSS-xxx specs, the latter of which I know are more rigorous and extensive versions of many of the API protocols?
Originally Posted By: Shannow
All the oil ISN'T down in the pan.
Everything that had oil on it running has oil on it, not as much as straight after shutdown, but after a day or two, or a year, there's still oil on things.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3598827/I've_never_pulled_apart_a_dry_#Post3598827
The Magnatec is supposed to perform at the point when the oil is thinning, and the typically heat activated additives haven't kicked in yet.
Yep, I remember that it is not all down there, but wondered if it could coat it a bit better...giving those extra moments of protection. My thinking is that this oil would do fine in one year OC at about the 4-5k range. Been looking to downgrade oils in this car anyways (run QSUD now) since it truly does not see any of the true benefits of a full synthetic anyways...
Might be between this or Pennzoil's Dexos syn blend....
All the oil ISN'T down in the pan.
Everything that had oil on it running has oil on it, not as much as straight after shutdown, but after a day or two, or a year, there's still oil on things.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3598827/I've_never_pulled_apart_a_dry_#Post3598827
The Magnatec is supposed to perform at the point when the oil is thinning, and the typically heat activated additives haven't kicked in yet.
Yep, I remember that it is not all down there, but wondered if it could coat it a bit better...giving those extra moments of protection. My thinking is that this oil would do fine in one year OC at about the 4-5k range. Been looking to downgrade oils in this car anyways (run QSUD now) since it truly does not see any of the true benefits of a full synthetic anyways...
Might be between this or Pennzoil's Dexos syn blend....
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Also, what about OEM limits and testing protocols that might tie-in here? Obviously our API/GF-xx stuff is the baseline, what challenges do some of the OEM approvals pose above and beyond that? I know the Porsche approval process is extensive, but what about the GM DEXOS stuff and the Ford WSS-xxx specs, the latter of which I know are more rigorous and extensive versions of many of the API protocols?
dexos1 specs go beyond SN/GF-5, obviously. dexos1 adds an ACEA cam wear test TU3M on top. It also requires better anti-foam, less deposits, other. The older Ford WSS- stuff doesn't go as far as dexos1. And its not "DEXOS", its official "dexos", sorry, just GM's rule.
Full qualitative comparison is at https://www.lubrizol.com/apps/relperftool/pc.html
I'm wrong in this respect: Castrol Magnatec A1 5w-30 oil meets WSS-m2c913-d, which is slightly tougher for piston deposits to meet than dexos1, although dexos1 beats it in wear. oops, I guess Ford has been keeping up.
Magnatec meets this m2c913-d
Also, what about OEM limits and testing protocols that might tie-in here? Obviously our API/GF-xx stuff is the baseline, what challenges do some of the OEM approvals pose above and beyond that? I know the Porsche approval process is extensive, but what about the GM DEXOS stuff and the Ford WSS-xxx specs, the latter of which I know are more rigorous and extensive versions of many of the API protocols?
dexos1 specs go beyond SN/GF-5, obviously. dexos1 adds an ACEA cam wear test TU3M on top. It also requires better anti-foam, less deposits, other. The older Ford WSS- stuff doesn't go as far as dexos1. And its not "DEXOS", its official "dexos", sorry, just GM's rule.
Full qualitative comparison is at https://www.lubrizol.com/apps/relperftool/pc.html
I'm wrong in this respect: Castrol Magnatec A1 5w-30 oil meets WSS-m2c913-d, which is slightly tougher for piston deposits to meet than dexos1, although dexos1 beats it in wear. oops, I guess Ford has been keeping up.
Magnatec meets this m2c913-d
Last edited:
I posted some of the following on a different thread. Basically, it dawned on me that this Magnatec advertising sounds a lot like Syntec advertising from 20 years ago.
This link has some info regarding the famous Castrol/Mobil dispute. Most are familiar with it for the issue of whether or not Group III can be considered to be synthetic. However, there's an ester twist to the story as well.
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=144822
Quote:
page of Castrol’s web site states: “ynthetic lubricants are manufactured chemicals … created in the laboratory by combining molecules.” Labeling: A 1998 Syntec package label reads as follows: “UNIQUE MOLECULAR BONDING. Castrol Syntec FULL SYNTHETIC. PROTECTS IN WAYS OTHER OILS CAN’T. SAE 10W-30. FULL SYNTHETIC MOTOR OIL.” Brochures: A 1997 brochure, entitled “Best Protection Available,” contains the following claims: “The synthetic base stock contains exclusive chemical esters that actually bond to engine surfaces, leaving a layer of protection far stronger than conventional and synthetic blend motor oils.” “The Best Protection Available. Together, the bonding and additive technology provide the best protection you can buy.” “Nothing protects better than Castrol SYNTEC FULL SYNTHETIC.” Another 1997 brochure entitled “Engine Wear. How Well Does Your Motor Oil Prevent It?” contains the following claims: “Unique molecular bonding. Castrol Syntec Full Synthetic.” “…synthetic oils can protect your engine in ways conventional oils never could.”
Quote:
Mr. Kabel [Castrol] stated that motor oil manufacturers, including Mobil, regularly make changes in their formulations, both base stocks and additives, without disclosing these changes to consumers, regardless of whether the changes result in an increase or decrease in performance. Mr. Kabel stated that in the case of Syntec, there was no need for Castrol to notify consumers of a change in formulation because the overall integrity of the product remained the same.
Quote:
The challenger [Mobil] asserted that it tested (and had an independent laboratory, Savant, Inc., separately test) samples of the current and former versions of Syntec. Mobil provided test results showing that the current version contains no PAO and either no or only a trace amount of ester, while the former version of Syntec contains 70% PAO and 7% ester.
Quote:
However, NAD determined that the advertiser’s evidence was insufficient to support its superiority claims (“protects in ways other oils can’t,” “Nothing protects better than Castrol Syntec Full Synthetic,” and “Together, the bonding and additive technology provide the best protection you can buy”) as against conventional or synthetic motor oils, or to support the claim that its esters provide “unique molecular bonding.” Consequently, NAD recommends that these claims be modified or discontinued.
This link has some info regarding the famous Castrol/Mobil dispute. Most are familiar with it for the issue of whether or not Group III can be considered to be synthetic. However, there's an ester twist to the story as well.
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=144822
Quote:
page of Castrol’s web site states: “
Quote:
Mr. Kabel [Castrol] stated that motor oil manufacturers, including Mobil, regularly make changes in their formulations, both base stocks and additives, without disclosing these changes to consumers, regardless of whether the changes result in an increase or decrease in performance. Mr. Kabel stated that in the case of Syntec, there was no need for Castrol to notify consumers of a change in formulation because the overall integrity of the product remained the same.
Quote:
The challenger [Mobil] asserted that it tested (and had an independent laboratory, Savant, Inc., separately test) samples of the current and former versions of Syntec. Mobil provided test results showing that the current version contains no PAO and either no or only a trace amount of ester, while the former version of Syntec contains 70% PAO and 7% ester.
Quote:
However, NAD determined that the advertiser’s evidence was insufficient to support its superiority claims (“protects in ways other oils can’t,” “Nothing protects better than Castrol Syntec Full Synthetic,” and “Together, the bonding and additive technology provide the best protection you can buy”) as against conventional or synthetic motor oils, or to support the claim that its esters provide “unique molecular bonding.” Consequently, NAD recommends that these claims be modified or discontinued.
Originally Posted By: Skid
....the current version contains no PAO and either no or only a trace amount of ester, while the former version of Syntec contains 70% PAO and 7% ester.
The performance probably suffered, with less ester, less PAO. Still good enough to meet specs though. Fortunately for us its easy to increase the ester content in our sump using additive bottles to make up for the oil companies reducing their costs of formulation.
....the current version contains no PAO and either no or only a trace amount of ester, while the former version of Syntec contains 70% PAO and 7% ester.
The performance probably suffered, with less ester, less PAO. Still good enough to meet specs though. Fortunately for us its easy to increase the ester content in our sump using additive bottles to make up for the oil companies reducing their costs of formulation.
Esters will have only been in older formulations to give the base oil some polarity and solubilise the additive. All PAO formulation have low polarity which can cause stability issues.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Esters will have only been in older formulations to give the base oil some polarity and solubilise the additive. All PAO formulation have low polarity which can cause stability issues.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
True, explains the improvement in other synthetic oils....
Esters will have only been in older formulations to give the base oil some polarity and solubilise the additive. All PAO formulation have low polarity which can cause stability issues.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
True, explains the improvement in other synthetic oils....
What do your dots mean.
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Esters will have only been in older formulations to give the base oil some polarity and solubilise the additive. All PAO formulation have low polarity which can cause stability issues.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style? And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
Esters will have only been in older formulations to give the base oil some polarity and solubilise the additive. All PAO formulation have low polarity which can cause stability issues.
Also PAO is tough on seal and esters can help here
Don't get confused by thinking it's the formulation being made cheaper, you no longer need PAO for performance due to additive technology improvements.
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style? And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
Originally Posted By: Finn
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
There is a definite value to clinginess. Helps at startup, and its a real thing tribologists speak of regularly to get the oil to have a tougher film for wear control. I know what you mean though, there needs to be some measureable results.
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
There is a definite value to clinginess. Helps at startup, and its a real thing tribologists speak of regularly to get the oil to have a tougher film for wear control. I know what you mean though, there needs to be some measureable results.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: Finn
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
Either use it a few times and conduct a series of UOA or trust the marketing. Also, I'm sure pqia will perform a VOA in time. Many here make decisions based on ingredients.
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
Either use it a few times and conduct a series of UOA or trust the marketing. Also, I'm sure pqia will perform a VOA in time. Many here make decisions based on ingredients.
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style?
There are numerous polar and non-polar molecules in motor oil; some from the base oil(s), some from the additives. You imply that add polarity = better tribofilms; this isn't necessarily a given
(for example, increased polarity can lead to reduce surface wetability/spreadability).
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
You think that an oil company will give away a formulation or ingredient on a public forum? Where do Castrol "claim lots of polarity"? They claim clinging molecules (here's the official line). It is a molecular effect, not a macro oil film effect. Of course being a motor oil it will also do all of the usual oil stuff, like form a hydrodynamic oil film, clean, protect, cool etc as evidenced by the various specifications and approvals.
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style?
There are numerous polar and non-polar molecules in motor oil; some from the base oil(s), some from the additives. You imply that add polarity = better tribofilms; this isn't necessarily a given
(for example, increased polarity can lead to reduce surface wetability/spreadability).
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
You think that an oil company will give away a formulation or ingredient on a public forum? Where do Castrol "claim lots of polarity"? They claim clinging molecules (here's the official line). It is a molecular effect, not a macro oil film effect. Of course being a motor oil it will also do all of the usual oil stuff, like form a hydrodynamic oil film, clean, protect, cool etc as evidenced by the various specifications and approvals.
Originally Posted By: weasley
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style?
There are numerous polar and non-polar molecules in motor oil; some from the base oil(s), some from the additives. You imply that add polarity = better tribofilms; this isn't necessarily a given
(for example, increased polarity can lead to reduce surface wetability/spreadability).
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
You think that an oil company will give away a formulation or ingredient on a public forum? Where do Castrol "claim lots of polarity"? They claim clinging molecules (here's the official line). It is a molecular effect, not a macro oil film effect. Of course being a motor oil it will also do all of the usual oil stuff, like form a hydrodynamic oil film, clean, protect, cool etc as evidenced by the various specifications and approvals.
Of course these oil makers balance metal polarity in their chemicals. Thats a given.
Molecular effect, not macro oil ...? Really. You just said that. Wow.
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
Interesting. What is being done to add polarity for better tribofilms if esters are out of style?
There are numerous polar and non-polar molecules in motor oil; some from the base oil(s), some from the additives. You imply that add polarity = better tribofilms; this isn't necessarily a given
(for example, increased polarity can lead to reduce surface wetability/spreadability).
Originally Posted By: CrawfishTails
And what does Castrol Magnatec do? Castrol claims lots of polarity for that line.
You think that an oil company will give away a formulation or ingredient on a public forum? Where do Castrol "claim lots of polarity"? They claim clinging molecules (here's the official line). It is a molecular effect, not a macro oil film effect. Of course being a motor oil it will also do all of the usual oil stuff, like form a hydrodynamic oil film, clean, protect, cool etc as evidenced by the various specifications and approvals.
Of course these oil makers balance metal polarity in their chemicals. Thats a given.
Molecular effect, not macro oil ...? Really. You just said that. Wow.
When I was at a dinner with one of the chemists on the Magnatec development, he did say that the test regime was
Mobil 1 - flushing oil - magnatec - flushing oil - Mobil 1
He stated that the "effect" of magnatec survived through the flushing oil and into the backstop M1 test.
Mobil 1 - flushing oil - magnatec - flushing oil - Mobil 1
He stated that the "effect" of magnatec survived through the flushing oil and into the backstop M1 test.
Originally Posted By: Finn
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
I don't know of a single Castrol "bad" oil, nor of any from any other major blenders either. But they are clearly not positioning this as an entry level lube so it must be decent.
I'm in. I have had enough positive experiences with Castrol lubes in the past I will be running it in our KIA next OCI. Will continue to do so and will UOA it as well.
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
I don't know of a single Castrol "bad" oil, nor of any from any other major blenders either. But they are clearly not positioning this as an entry level lube so it must be decent.
I'm in. I have had enough positive experiences with Castrol lubes in the past I will be running it in our KIA next OCI. Will continue to do so and will UOA it as well.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: Finn
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
I don't know of a single Castrol "bad" oil, nor of any from any other major blenders either. But they are clearly not positioning this as an entry level lube so it must be decent.
I'm in. I have had enough positive experiences with Castrol lubes in the past I will be running it in our KIA next OCI. Will continue to do so and will UOA it as well.
+1 and then some.
I too have had nothing but great experiences using Castrol products.
Originally Posted By: Finn
Nevermind whether it clinges to surfaces or not:
Is Castrol Magnatec good oil?
I don't know of a single Castrol "bad" oil, nor of any from any other major blenders either. But they are clearly not positioning this as an entry level lube so it must be decent.
I'm in. I have had enough positive experiences with Castrol lubes in the past I will be running it in our KIA next OCI. Will continue to do so and will UOA it as well.
+1 and then some.
I too have had nothing but great experiences using Castrol products.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
...im itching to make this my next fill.
- Status
