Originally Posted By: Popsy
Happy Birthday!
Thanks mate
Happy Birthday!
Thanks mate
Shell Helix Conventional / Semi-Synth Oils
- Thread starter B320i
- Start date
- Status
Please allow my slow brain to come back on these statements:
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
HX7 is very likely based on an old Infineum formulation that has been updated over the years. It's based on Shellvis 261 VII which is a technically efficient polymer but expensive vs OCP VII. All things being equal, it gives you a low polymer loading which enables you to pass the VW TDi test and get stuff like ACEA B4. Shellvis also does well on the TU5 for all the wrong reasons.
HX5 is a newer formulation based on Lubrizol tech which means it's based on Lubrizol's own OCP VII. Traditionally this would be 22 SSI Lz 7077 but I have a sneaking suspicion they went for 35 SSI Lz 7075. OCP traditionally has a problem with the Peugeot TU5 which you need to get ACEA A3. IMO, this is very unfair because the tests is perversely set up in a way to reward thermally unstable VIIs (like Styrene-Isoprenes). The accepted way to get OCP based oil through the TU5 is to lob in great gobs of Group III which I reckon is what Lz did.
So I understand TU5 test is aimed to evaluate ring sticking, piston varnish and viscosity increase ; are the results at this test is in a way related to the NOACK volatility (in sense of less volatile oil will be less prone to thicken and deposit) ? (Funny how it is based on the TU5 engine who was a not so good one back in the day (only tried the carbed versions) (/HT sorry))
Sorry if silly question, but what do you mean by
Quote:
Shellvis also does well on the TU5 for all the wrong reasons
?
Does it apply to GTL based oil, which have very low NOACK numbers ?
And what about Infineum vs Lubrizol add-pack? Many oils like M1, SHU or others seem to be based on Infineum add-pack, and in the past I read something like "this oil is based on Infineum tech and is only as good as your opinion on infineum", does it mean Infineum stuff is good at passing tests but not that good in real life, or am I over interpreting?
Joe_90 is back?
Popsy,
I answer to your questions...
The Peugeot TU5 test is a weird test in many ways.
To start with, it is notionally a test for measuring high temperature deposits. This is A Big Fat Lie! Compared to pistons you might see from a comparable test like the Sequence IIIG, TU5 pistons show very little by way of deposits. The reason is obvious. On the IIIG, oil contaminated blow-by gases are (rightly) routed back to the intake. On the TU5, they are not.
This has implications. Both the IIIG and TU5 are both notionally tests for oxidation related viscosity increase. Both tests run the oil at 150C specifically to promote oxidation. The short 72 hour TU5 is less of an oil oxidation tests and should really be seen as an oil stripping (distillation) test. As such the TU5 cannot be influenced so much by additives (eg antioxidants) as by playing with base oils to get the oil volatility down. Now here's the trick...if you have a VII that is not thermally stable or is prone to the mechanical shear you get in a real engine, then that 'shear' will appear on the TU5 as 'viscosity control'. It gives an unfair advantage to an inferior 'real-life' VII which you might expect to run for longer at lower temperatures.
The final thing you need to know about the TU5 viscosity increase specs are set as absolute limits, not relative limits. On tests like the IIIG (and the IIIF, IIIE, etc before it), you are limited to a PERCENTAGE viscosity increase. This makes the test as fair to a thick 20W50 as it is to a thin 0W20. On the TU5, the A3 limit is set as a fixed number of centistokes increase relative to a reference oil. If the reference oil is a say a 5W30 full synthetic based on SV VII, the limits will 'favour' oils like this and prejudice heavier oils based on OCP. In other words, what looks like a level playing field isn't.
Sorry to be give such a complicated answer but it is unavoidably complex.
Regarding DI's, yes this does impact on things but less than other stuff like base oil and VII.
I answer to your questions...
The Peugeot TU5 test is a weird test in many ways.
To start with, it is notionally a test for measuring high temperature deposits. This is A Big Fat Lie! Compared to pistons you might see from a comparable test like the Sequence IIIG, TU5 pistons show very little by way of deposits. The reason is obvious. On the IIIG, oil contaminated blow-by gases are (rightly) routed back to the intake. On the TU5, they are not.
This has implications. Both the IIIG and TU5 are both notionally tests for oxidation related viscosity increase. Both tests run the oil at 150C specifically to promote oxidation. The short 72 hour TU5 is less of an oil oxidation tests and should really be seen as an oil stripping (distillation) test. As such the TU5 cannot be influenced so much by additives (eg antioxidants) as by playing with base oils to get the oil volatility down. Now here's the trick...if you have a VII that is not thermally stable or is prone to the mechanical shear you get in a real engine, then that 'shear' will appear on the TU5 as 'viscosity control'. It gives an unfair advantage to an inferior 'real-life' VII which you might expect to run for longer at lower temperatures.
The final thing you need to know about the TU5 viscosity increase specs are set as absolute limits, not relative limits. On tests like the IIIG (and the IIIF, IIIE, etc before it), you are limited to a PERCENTAGE viscosity increase. This makes the test as fair to a thick 20W50 as it is to a thin 0W20. On the TU5, the A3 limit is set as a fixed number of centistokes increase relative to a reference oil. If the reference oil is a say a 5W30 full synthetic based on SV VII, the limits will 'favour' oils like this and prejudice heavier oils based on OCP. In other words, what looks like a level playing field isn't.
Sorry to be give such a complicated answer but it is unavoidably complex.
Regarding DI's, yes this does impact on things but less than other stuff like base oil and VII.
Happy Birthday SR5 you [censored], isn't that a positive compliment Down Under? you know that 4 letter word starting with a c
Thank you for your answer. I think I'll have to read it many time before understanding it, though!
Originally Posted By: FordCapriDriver
Happy Birthday SR5
Thanks mate,
if you say it with a "k" you can use the word in polite company.
Happy Birthday SR5
Thanks mate,
if you say it with a "k" you can use the word in polite company.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dirtydannyd
I went to Shell Helix HX7 15w50 high milage. It's API SN with ACEA A3/B4.
I've just put this in. So far, doesn't seem to be any different on cold startups (Melbourne winter, lows of 5C). Haven't been able to really measure fuel or oil consumption yet.
Surprisingly the HX7 has consumed 0.5 litre over the past 800km in cold Melbourne. Must say I'm pretty surprised at this level of conwumption. About the same as when I was running the Shell Ultra 5w40.
I went to Shell Helix HX7 15w50 high milage. It's API SN with ACEA A3/B4.
I've just put this in. So far, doesn't seem to be any different on cold startups (Melbourne winter, lows of 5C). Haven't been able to really measure fuel or oil consumption yet.
Surprisingly the HX7 has consumed 0.5 litre over the past 800km in cold Melbourne. Must say I'm pretty surprised at this level of conwumption. About the same as when I was running the Shell Ultra 5w40.
Sometimes heavy oils are consumed just as fast, if oil control ring could not scrape the cylinder walls, the thicker the oil, the more oil consumed.
Or maybe it just need some time to "adjust". I've never noticed increased oil consumption when switching oil, but my car never actually consumed much oil, so IDK. Many people noticed a change in consumption, then it stops.
Or maybe it just need some time to "adjust". I've never noticed increased oil consumption when switching oil, but my car never actually consumed much oil, so IDK. Many people noticed a change in consumption, then it stops.
Originally Posted By: dirtydannyd
Originally Posted By: dirtydannyd
I went to Shell Helix HX7 15w50 high milage. It's API SN with ACEA A3/B4.
I've just put this in. So far, doesn't seem to be any different on cold startups (Melbourne winter, lows of 5C). Haven't been able to really measure fuel or oil consumption yet.
Surprisingly the HX7 has consumed 0.5 litre over the past 800km in cold Melbourne. Must say I'm pretty surprised at this level of conwumption. About the same as when I was running the Shell Ultra 5w40.
If you can source Valvoline MaxLife 10w40 or 5w40 (but Euro version) try that. It really reduce oil consumption, and it's best high mileage oil by far IMO.
Originally Posted By: dirtydannyd
I went to Shell Helix HX7 15w50 high milage. It's API SN with ACEA A3/B4.
I've just put this in. So far, doesn't seem to be any different on cold startups (Melbourne winter, lows of 5C). Haven't been able to really measure fuel or oil consumption yet.
Surprisingly the HX7 has consumed 0.5 litre over the past 800km in cold Melbourne. Must say I'm pretty surprised at this level of conwumption. About the same as when I was running the Shell Ultra 5w40.
If you can source Valvoline MaxLife 10w40 or 5w40 (but Euro version) try that. It really reduce oil consumption, and it's best high mileage oil by far IMO.
Using the 10W40 HX7 right now and have another bottle spare. Was extremely tempted to buy 5 x 5L when they went on sale recently for $20 (that's the only time I but them anyways).
If you guys here in Australia can wait each year, Supercrap Auto will have a sale at least once a year for $19.99 per 5L. Cheapest Semi Synth I've seen with the best specs also! They have their bullsh1t limit of two per customer but you just buy two then get your wife to buy two, then get your friend to buy two
If you guys here in Australia can wait each year, Supercrap Auto will have a sale at least once a year for $19.99 per 5L. Cheapest Semi Synth I've seen with the best specs also! They have their bullsh1t limit of two per customer but you just buy two then get your wife to buy two, then get your friend to buy two
Originally Posted By: KL31
Using the 10W40 HX7 right now and have another bottle spare. Was extremely tempted to buy 5 x 5L when they went on sale recently for $20 (that's the only time I but them anyways).
If you guys here in Australia can wait each year, Supercrap Auto will have a sale at least once a year for $19.99 per 5L. Cheapest Semi Synth I've seen with the best specs also! They have their bullsh1t limit of two per customer but you just buy two then get your wife to buy two, then get your friend to buy two
I'm with you KL31
If you keep your eyes open and wait for sales, you can find Shell Helix 10W40 semi-syn at $20 for 5L, and it don't get better than that in Oz for an oil that is SN, A3/B4, MB229.3 and VW 502/505
Using the 10W40 HX7 right now and have another bottle spare. Was extremely tempted to buy 5 x 5L when they went on sale recently for $20 (that's the only time I but them anyways).
If you guys here in Australia can wait each year, Supercrap Auto will have a sale at least once a year for $19.99 per 5L. Cheapest Semi Synth I've seen with the best specs also! They have their bullsh1t limit of two per customer but you just buy two then get your wife to buy two, then get your friend to buy two
I'm with you KL31
If you keep your eyes open and wait for sales, you can find Shell Helix 10W40 semi-syn at $20 for 5L, and it don't get better than that in Oz for an oil that is SN, A3/B4, MB229.3 and VW 502/505
What is the difference in quality level between an API SN oil based on Group I + Group III (such as Shell Helix HX7 10W-40) and an API SN oil based on Group III (or Group IV etc.)? At the one hand, a consumer might not muse about the bases of oils pertaining to the same API Service Category. At the other hand, the oxidative stability at high temperature and the other advantages of "synthetic" base oils can't help improving motor oil performance.
Originally Posted By: hplc
What is the difference in quality level between an API SN oil based on Group I + Group III (such as Shell Helix HX7 10W-40) and an API SN oil based on Group III (or Group IV etc.)? At the one hand, a consumer might not muse about the bases of oils pertaining to the same API Service Category. At the other hand, the oxidative stability at high temperature and the other advantages of "synthetic" base oils can't help improving motor oil performance.
Hey welcome to Bitog, your first post?
You're from Russia? Your English is very good if you are.
What is the difference in quality level between an API SN oil based on Group I + Group III (such as Shell Helix HX7 10W-40) and an API SN oil based on Group III (or Group IV etc.)? At the one hand, a consumer might not muse about the bases of oils pertaining to the same API Service Category. At the other hand, the oxidative stability at high temperature and the other advantages of "synthetic" base oils can't help improving motor oil performance.
Hey welcome to Bitog, your first post?
You're from Russia? Your English is very good if you are.
Yes welcome HPIC
I've heard the semi-synthetic has some regional differences, more likely a Group I + Group III mix in Europe, and more likely a Group II + Group III in North America.
A formulator here recently commented that as the Euro ACEA tests become tougher the amount of Group III grows so that it may be the majority now days. Maybe.
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Regarding 10W40s, if ever an oil grade can claim to have truly 'evolved', it's this one.
I wasn't around when the original US 10W40 problems occurred but it's easy to see how it might have happened. Back in the day, oils weren't constrained for Noack or the affects of VII shear. Similarly oil specs weren't that severe, cost was king and to be honest, a lot of test cheating was going on. Under such circumstances, you would maybe make a full Group I 10W40 to say 12.6 cst (just inside the 40 limit) because it's cheap to do so. You might make it with 55 SSI high ethylene OCP VII because again that's the cheapest way to do it. You minimise the amount of DI (and especially Ashless Dispersant) in the oil which has the effect of maximising the amount of VII needed. Put this all together and you very likely have a high Noack oil (I'm guessing around 18-20%) containing a lot of potentially insoluble, highly shearable polymer, whose base oil system solvency power will be quickly compromised once it starts oxidising. Note that with such a high Noack oil, as light base is stripped out of the sump by the action of hot blow-by, the concentration of VII in the remaining oil would increase, pushing everything closer to it's solubility limit. It's no wonder GM balked at using such an oil!
Going back to say the mid 90s, Euro 10W40s were even then far more constrained. Low shear 22 SSI VIIs were absolutely required to meet VWs specs while ACEA's KO30 shear spec tended to keep 10W40 KV100s around the 14.5 cst mark. Likewise Noack was mainly constrained to 13% max and this meant you couldn't physically make an all Group I 10W40; you had to use typically 20% min synthetic just to make 13% (so reducing VII loading). As ACEA specs evolved, you saw tests like the Peugeot TU5 acting as a pseudo-Noack constraint for 10W40 and upping the required level of synthetic to 30% min. The required level of Group III in 10W40 jumped again as oils were required to pass the VW TDI test to ACEA B4 such that today, Euro 10W40s are more synthetic than they are mineral.
I've heard the semi-synthetic has some regional differences, more likely a Group I + Group III mix in Europe, and more likely a Group II + Group III in North America.
A formulator here recently commented that as the Euro ACEA tests become tougher the amount of Group III grows so that it may be the majority now days. Maybe.
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Regarding 10W40s, if ever an oil grade can claim to have truly 'evolved', it's this one.
I wasn't around when the original US 10W40 problems occurred but it's easy to see how it might have happened. Back in the day, oils weren't constrained for Noack or the affects of VII shear. Similarly oil specs weren't that severe, cost was king and to be honest, a lot of test cheating was going on. Under such circumstances, you would maybe make a full Group I 10W40 to say 12.6 cst (just inside the 40 limit) because it's cheap to do so. You might make it with 55 SSI high ethylene OCP VII because again that's the cheapest way to do it. You minimise the amount of DI (and especially Ashless Dispersant) in the oil which has the effect of maximising the amount of VII needed. Put this all together and you very likely have a high Noack oil (I'm guessing around 18-20%) containing a lot of potentially insoluble, highly shearable polymer, whose base oil system solvency power will be quickly compromised once it starts oxidising. Note that with such a high Noack oil, as light base is stripped out of the sump by the action of hot blow-by, the concentration of VII in the remaining oil would increase, pushing everything closer to it's solubility limit. It's no wonder GM balked at using such an oil!
Going back to say the mid 90s, Euro 10W40s were even then far more constrained. Low shear 22 SSI VIIs were absolutely required to meet VWs specs while ACEA's KO30 shear spec tended to keep 10W40 KV100s around the 14.5 cst mark. Likewise Noack was mainly constrained to 13% max and this meant you couldn't physically make an all Group I 10W40; you had to use typically 20% min synthetic just to make 13% (so reducing VII loading). As ACEA specs evolved, you saw tests like the Peugeot TU5 acting as a pseudo-Noack constraint for 10W40 and upping the required level of synthetic to 30% min. The required level of Group III in 10W40 jumped again as oils were required to pass the VW TDI test to ACEA B4 such that today, Euro 10W40s are more synthetic than they are mineral.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Hey welcome to Bitog, your first post? You're from Russia? Your English is very good if you are.
I thank you. Yes, I am really from Russia and that was really my very first post at BITOG
Originally Posted By: SR5
Yes welcome HPIC... A formulator here recently commented that...
Thanks! I see that my question is too general and labour-consuming to be just answered briefly. Physico-chemical parameters reflected in a Tecnical Data Sheet do not allow to value the ability of an oil to resist engine wear. I consider the marketable engine oils to exceed requirements of the common standard (such as an API Service Category), the position of the oil in the product line being somewhat a measure of the grade of the exceeding. But I have no reliable data to compare oils. So I think that practically I just have to consider the car manufacturer's directions choosing the appropriate oil drain intervals regardless of the level of the oil quality. In other words, I should not extend oil drain intervals even using the top-positioned oils.
Hey welcome to Bitog, your first post? You're from Russia? Your English is very good if you are.
I thank you. Yes, I am really from Russia and that was really my very first post at BITOG
Originally Posted By: SR5
Yes welcome HPIC... A formulator here recently commented that...
Thanks! I see that my question is too general and labour-consuming to be just answered briefly. Physico-chemical parameters reflected in a Tecnical Data Sheet do not allow to value the ability of an oil to resist engine wear. I consider the marketable engine oils to exceed requirements of the common standard (such as an API Service Category), the position of the oil in the product line being somewhat a measure of the grade of the exceeding. But I have no reliable data to compare oils. So I think that practically I just have to consider the car manufacturer's directions choosing the appropriate oil drain intervals regardless of the level of the oil quality. In other words, I should not extend oil drain intervals even using the top-positioned oils.
Other than depending on a high cost and long lead time UOA (from States or within Russia) result to assess whether to extend further 'as in' km oil change intervals, you could opt for a free and easy Blotter Spot Tests which I find is convenient and as valid .
Last edited:
I am in italy now. I saw Shell Helix HX8 on sale at ipercoop for 25Eur.
- Status