Gokhan
Thread starter
Originally Posted By: HKPolice
I don't trust wear check for their virgin TBN analysis. 6.2 is way too low and other VOAs have revealed the old TGMO formula at around 8 TBN new: http://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/8410-toyota-genuine-0w-20-kanistra-plastik/
The newest TGMO has a virgin TBN of 10 confirmed by both oil club & PQIA: http://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/31986...ka-new-svezhee/ http://pqiadata.org/Toyota_0W20.html
This indicates that Toyota knew that a TBN of 8 was borderline for their 10K mile interval so they increased it to 10. They wouldn't have changed the formula otherwise.
Your UOA on the old Toyota 4A isn't representative of modern engines that run much hotter & leaner for fuel economy reasons, so it's much lighter on oil than a short tripped modern TGDI for example.
A 7.71 TBN in the Nissan oil may hit 10K miles if the car was never short tripped especially in an older less stressful engine. But throw in 50% city traffic short tripping into the mix and things don't look good beyond 5K miles, especially since the add pack is all calcium (magnesium add backs are better at TBN retention).
Oh, we now trust an obscure Russian oil blog that used the Russian test method "GlagolOTC 30050" for TBN for the previous formulation of TGMO?
There are two standard test methods for TBN: ASTM D-2896 and ASTM D-4739. The former is used for virgin oil and the latter is used for used oil. ASTM D-2896 indeed gives a higher value than ASTM D-4739, perhaps higher by about 1. PQIA uses ASTM D-2896. The Russian blog used ASTM-2896 for the new formulation of TGMO and it checked with PQIA. Nevertheless, as someone pointed out, TGMO was again reformulated last year, for which we don't have any test data.
ASTM D-4739: Standard test method for ba...itration (link)
WearCheck is very professional. They normally work only with fleets and industry but I was able to create an account with them. I don't know which of the two ASTM methods they normally use for TBN.
Blackstone got 6.84 on TGMO 0W-20 SN in 2011(link). It was 7.0 for TGMO 0W-20 SM. They use ASTM D-4739.
Do you think we should multiply TBN by 1,000 to convert it into the maximum OCI in miles? Is it supported by any evidence?
What about the virgin-oil TAN?
Keep in mind that when the base-oil quality increases, such as when they use PAO or GTL base oils, TBN requirement decreases, as most acids are caused by base-oil oxidation, in addition to sulfation by fuel (less of a problem in areas with low-sulfur gas such as in California and Europe) and nitration by combustion.
So, is it our conclusion that neither Nissan nor ExxonMobil has no I idea what they're doing? This is the newly introduced GTL-based official OEM oil for Nissan cars and it's supposed to last for at least their normal 10,000-mile OCI.
I don't trust wear check for their virgin TBN analysis. 6.2 is way too low and other VOAs have revealed the old TGMO formula at around 8 TBN new: http://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/8410-toyota-genuine-0w-20-kanistra-plastik/
The newest TGMO has a virgin TBN of 10 confirmed by both oil club & PQIA: http://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/31986...ka-new-svezhee/ http://pqiadata.org/Toyota_0W20.html
This indicates that Toyota knew that a TBN of 8 was borderline for their 10K mile interval so they increased it to 10. They wouldn't have changed the formula otherwise.
Your UOA on the old Toyota 4A isn't representative of modern engines that run much hotter & leaner for fuel economy reasons, so it's much lighter on oil than a short tripped modern TGDI for example.
A 7.71 TBN in the Nissan oil may hit 10K miles if the car was never short tripped especially in an older less stressful engine. But throw in 50% city traffic short tripping into the mix and things don't look good beyond 5K miles, especially since the add pack is all calcium (magnesium add backs are better at TBN retention).
Oh, we now trust an obscure Russian oil blog that used the Russian test method "GlagolOTC 30050" for TBN for the previous formulation of TGMO?
There are two standard test methods for TBN: ASTM D-2896 and ASTM D-4739. The former is used for virgin oil and the latter is used for used oil. ASTM D-2896 indeed gives a higher value than ASTM D-4739, perhaps higher by about 1. PQIA uses ASTM D-2896. The Russian blog used ASTM-2896 for the new formulation of TGMO and it checked with PQIA. Nevertheless, as someone pointed out, TGMO was again reformulated last year, for which we don't have any test data.
ASTM D-4739: Standard test method for ba...itration (link)
WearCheck is very professional. They normally work only with fleets and industry but I was able to create an account with them. I don't know which of the two ASTM methods they normally use for TBN.
Blackstone got 6.84 on TGMO 0W-20 SN in 2011(link). It was 7.0 for TGMO 0W-20 SM. They use ASTM D-4739.
Do you think we should multiply TBN by 1,000 to convert it into the maximum OCI in miles? Is it supported by any evidence?
What about the virgin-oil TAN?
Keep in mind that when the base-oil quality increases, such as when they use PAO or GTL base oils, TBN requirement decreases, as most acids are caused by base-oil oxidation, in addition to sulfation by fuel (less of a problem in areas with low-sulfur gas such as in California and Europe) and nitration by combustion.
So, is it our conclusion that neither Nissan nor ExxonMobil has no I idea what they're doing? This is the newly introduced GTL-based official OEM oil for Nissan cars and it's supposed to last for at least their normal 10,000-mile OCI.