Shell tests Rotella 15W40 vs 10W30 vs NEW 10W30

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Bror Jace
They tested three weights of their HDEO oils against each other and found no appreciable difference in wear. Many people (not necessarily BITOGians) associate thinner oils with higher potential for greater wear and/or engine damage. This test suggests otherwise:

http://farmindustrynews.com/farm-equipment/what-s-your-engine-oil-iq#slide-0-field_images-71081


On the side of being a smart-[censored]... Someone should send this to the folks over at Penrite. Or to every Australian who buys into "thicker is better" myth.
That might topple their marketing scheme. LOL

In all seriousness, though, as long as the oil you are using can be moved in volume quickly enough to all the parts of the engine, even very thin oils should be more than good even. Thinner oils just have to be more resistant to shearing, since there is less buffer between the two moving surfaces. The flow would make up for this, somewhat.

Engines are also built to much tighter tolerances now, which means thicker oils may not be as good, even if the pressure meets manufacturer spec.
 
“You can see a little bit of a wear track, but the oil protected the cam lobes so we weren’t moving metal around, which means the oil was doing its job"
confused2.gif


http://farmindustrynews.com/farm-equipment/what-s-your-engine-oil-iq#slide-8-field_images-71081
 
Originally Posted By: B320i
Originally Posted By: Bror Jace
They tested three weights of their HDEO oils against each other and found no appreciable difference in wear. Many people (not necessarily BITOGians) associate thinner oils with higher potential for greater wear and/or engine damage. This test suggests otherwise:

http://farmindustrynews.com/farm-equipment/what-s-your-engine-oil-iq#slide-0-field_images-71081


On the side of being a smart-[censored]... Someone should send this to the folks over at Penrite. Or to every Australian who buys into "thicker is better" myth.
That might topple their marketing scheme. LOL

In all seriousness, though, as long as the oil you are using can be moved in volume quickly enough to all the parts of the engine, even very thin oils should be more than good even. Thinner oils just have to be more resistant to shearing, since there is less buffer between the two moving surfaces. The flow would make up for this, somewhat.

Engines are also built to much tighter tolerances now, which means thicker oils may not be as good, even if the pressure meets manufacturer spec.



Tolerances have little to do with oil grade used in an engine. THE CLEARANCES are what's important and may dictate an appropriate grade.
 
I am pretty sure they are going with something other than staying in the CH, CI, CJ chain of progression. The oil spec is going to be so dramatically different that it will not be backward compatible according to many articles I have read. They don't want to confuse people by going with something like CK or whatever. Who knows what they will settle on. Right now they are just calling it PC-11.

The engine OEM's are totally on board with 30w oils. They are all factory filling with CJ-4 10w30. I think Cummins was the last holdout, but a guy near me just took delivery of a 2015 International Prostar with a Cummins ISX 15L and it was factory filled with 10w30. I know all the others have been doing it for a while.

But old habits die hard and the mere thought of a 30w oil in the heavy diesels causes some to go into a serious brain cramp.
 
One of the main reasons I've always used a 30 grade oil, no compromise in engine wear vs 40 grade. Delo 400 LE 5w30 exclusively now and enjoying the fuel economy benefits.

Thanks for posting
 
Will the PC-11 also have a different additive pack than CJ-4 oil? VW, Benz, and VMotori specify additive packs that have lower ash content than CJ-4.
 
They do, but not sure it is all that major of a deal. CJ-4 spec is less that 1 on ash content. I think the others are .8 or something. Can't see that it really makes that much difference. Just picking over details.
 
Ok right on..
Yeah, diesels used to have fuel dilution by designe, they stepped up to a 40 weight and the oil would dilute down to a 30 weight and still provide protection. This new oil makes sense in the sceme of things.

I take it, the new oil will hold up to sheering, thinning under load and deposit build up better than older group 1 base oils.
 
Last edited:
Older group one is right.
Group 2s have been around for
quite some time now.
Mono-grade group 2s are natural
multi-grades because of their
high VI's.
This is what you can expect from
group 2 mono-grade engine oils
give or take.....

SAE 20 15W20
SAE 30 20W30
SAE 40 25W40

Usually at a given price point, I've
noticed that if you desire a lower
"W" number, you get a lower HTHS
in return.
If you want the best of both, it's
gonna cost ya.
Conversely, if you don't need a low
"W" number, why have it if it compromises
high temperature performance?
 
I think PC-11 is going to yield two different oil specifications: one that is backward compatible with the old C-designations, and one that is fuel conserving. Anything under 3.5 HTHS would be considered fuel conserving.

They can have my 5w40 when they pry it from my cold, dead hands. Well, maybe that's overstating it a bit, but I don't see myself putting anything lower than 3.7 HTHS in my Cummins.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: B320i
Originally Posted By: Bror Jace
They tested three weights of their HDEO oils against each other and found no appreciable difference in wear. Many people (not necessarily BITOGians) associate thinner oils with higher potential for greater wear and/or engine damage. This test suggests otherwise:

http://farmindustrynews.com/farm-equipment/what-s-your-engine-oil-iq#slide-0-field_images-71081


On the side of being a smart-[censored]... Someone should send this to the folks over at Penrite. Or to every Australian who buys into "thicker is better" myth.
That might topple their marketing scheme. LOL

In all seriousness, though, as long as the oil you are using can be moved in volume quickly enough to all the parts of the engine, even very thin oils should be more than good even. Thinner oils just have to be more resistant to shearing, since there is less buffer between the two moving surfaces. The flow would make up for this, somewhat.

Engines are also built to much tighter tolerances now, which means thicker oils may not be as good, even if the pressure meets manufacturer spec.



Tolerances have little to do with oil grade used in an engine. THE CLEARANCES are what's important and may dictate an appropriate grade.

Good point.
 
He mentions at the very end that there is a slight fuel economy benefit with the experimental oil vs Rotella T 15w40, but makes no mention of how it compares to Rotella T5 10w30. If there is no fuel economy benefit vs the current T5, then what is the new oil actually doing for the consumer? I'm sorry, maybe I missed something...
 
All of this is relative to the engine in question anyway. I am not about to move off of the 15w40 syn blend I am using in my 2000 built, factory remanned Detroit 60 12.7. For the newer engines coming out, a 30w is just about the cat's meow and I would jump on it right out of the gate. Besides, all the heavy commercial diesels are being factory filled with a 10w30 right now anyway. The OEM's must be totally on board.
 
The way Ive read it is there will be 2 new specs coming out. One for current emissions engines with the tighter bearing clearances and CAFE requirements. But this will not necessarily be backward compatible with older engines so there will be a variation of the current CJ4. To me, this is going to be a mess. Ive never heard of a current spec not being backward compatible. I thought that was one of the requirements.

As to the 500k mile test, its really not much of a test when a select few oil manufacturers are currently able to run 1,000,000+ miles, tear an engine down and send off the hard parts and bearings and have them inspected and guaranteed by the engine manufacture for reuse for an additional 4 years/unlimited mileage/100% parts and labor guarantee. Yes, even the bearings. With good old 15w40. If they can do this repeatedly with 10w30 someday, maybe I'll be a believer. As it is, I dont see switching to a 30w in any diesel I own that isn't spec'd for it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top