I have been searching and unable to find, just wondering if we have HTHS for the new Pennzoil platinum and ultra platinum in 5w30 and 10w30, not sure why they make something like this so top secret.
ppp and pup HTHS
- Thread starter Dupree
- Start date
- Status
Patman
Staff member
Originally Posted by CT8
The HTHS will be similar as any other oil with the same specs
True, it'll most likely be in the 3.0 to 3.1 range for 5w30 and 10w30 Platinum and Ultra Platinum. I'd be shocked if it were higher or lower than that range.
The HTHS will be similar as any other oil with the same specs
True, it'll most likely be in the 3.0 to 3.1 range for 5w30 and 10w30 Platinum and Ultra Platinum. I'd be shocked if it were higher or lower than that range.
I think all the SN/GF5 5W30s for which I have seen HTHS values have been in the 2.9-3.2 range.
SOPUS used to share HTHS for PU and PUP before d1G2, too bad that they don't now.
If PU 5W30 has an HTHS of 3.0-3.1, one could argue that it is has an advantage over, say, M1 5W30 in providing a similar level of high temp protection while being a bit thinner at a typical operating temp of 100C (9.8 vs. 11 cSt) to give a small gas mileage boost.
It would be a minor effect, but many of us like to dig into the minutiae when we pick oils... ;^)
SOPUS used to share HTHS for PU and PUP before d1G2, too bad that they don't now.
If PU 5W30 has an HTHS of 3.0-3.1, one could argue that it is has an advantage over, say, M1 5W30 in providing a similar level of high temp protection while being a bit thinner at a typical operating temp of 100C (9.8 vs. 11 cSt) to give a small gas mileage boost.
It would be a minor effect, but many of us like to dig into the minutiae when we pick oils... ;^)
I tried getting the HTHS and NOACK from them a few weeks ago. I was told that information is "proprietary", but he assured me that it "meets or exceeds industry standards."
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
Last edited:
Patman
Staff member
I hate it when companies say that info is proprietary when some of their competitors post that info on their website. It makes me wonder if they are ashamed of the results they've gotten....
Originally Posted by Patman
I hate it when companies say that info is proprietary when some of their competitors post that info on their website. It makes me wonder if they are ashamed of the results they've gotten....
In todays world with all of the patent protection etc. the proprietary BS line is just part of a unethical marketing department.
I hate it when companies say that info is proprietary when some of their competitors post that info on their website. It makes me wonder if they are ashamed of the results they've gotten....
In todays world with all of the patent protection etc. the proprietary BS line is just part of a unethical marketing department.
If a company won't publish HTHS I won't buy it. It's one of my main criteria.
What about the SAE J3000 spec of 2.9 for 30 grade?
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2019/05/full-1725-32381-sae_j3000.jpg "[Linked Image]")
my guess is its on the low end like 2.9, but what the heck is the secret about it everyone else is so forthcoming, hths isn't some secret mix why such a big deal on disclosure, was hoping someone had gotten a real answer other then its in the j spec chart range or it exceeds standards bull crap.
Patman
Staff member
Originally Posted by PimTac
Would anyone be able to tell the difference between 2.9, 3.0, or 3.1 HTHS in their engine? I suspect that answer is no.
I agree. Even when I went from regular Mobil 1 5w30 (with a 3.1 HTHS) to Mobil 1 ESP Formula 5w30 (with a 3.58 HTHS) in my Corvette I can't tell the difference in terms of feel. But I do believe that extra HTHS is going to be a big benefit to me in the long run.
But anyone choosing an oil with a 3.1 HTHS over one with a 2.9, the difference there is going to be negligible.
Would anyone be able to tell the difference between 2.9, 3.0, or 3.1 HTHS in their engine? I suspect that answer is no.
I agree. Even when I went from regular Mobil 1 5w30 (with a 3.1 HTHS) to Mobil 1 ESP Formula 5w30 (with a 3.58 HTHS) in my Corvette I can't tell the difference in terms of feel. But I do believe that extra HTHS is going to be a big benefit to me in the long run.
But anyone choosing an oil with a 3.1 HTHS over one with a 2.9, the difference there is going to be negligible.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Would anyone be able to tell the difference between 2.9, 3.0, or 3.1 HTHS in their engine? I suspect that answer is no.
LOL no and neither would your car even in 7500 miles.
Would anyone be able to tell the difference between 2.9, 3.0, or 3.1 HTHS in their engine? I suspect that answer is no.
LOL no and neither would your car even in 7500 miles.
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
HTHS is the most significant measure of viscosity they have with the atsm's. There is nothing that gauges a base oil better then that as the high temp test weeds out vii's. Now, from either perspective one of metal protection, or someone with gas mileage concerns, this is what you should be looking at imo. Especially with GtL since this is the biggest question about their formula, it is very disapointing they do not provide this imo.
Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
True indeed ^^^^^^^^
We had a member on here and speak with someone at Chevron who told them the HTHS of Havoline high mileage 5w30 was 3.4. And that person was not a routine desk jockey...
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
True indeed ^^^^^^^^
We had a member on here and speak with someone at Chevron who told them the HTHS of Havoline high mileage 5w30 was 3.4. And that person was not a routine desk jockey...
with all due respect, if no one notices a small spread on hths or it "doesn't matter" why are we even spending time on this forum? If the minute nuances about oil and learning more and trying to find the best whether its best performing for our specific parameters and things we want to accomplish, or to find the cheapest oil that will function to our standards... Then why are we even on here? Turn off the computer buy the cheapest oil on sale and go drink a beer. It matters to us because its a hobby maybe it doesn't matter significantly. But the fact is I still posted looking if someone had that spec whether a 2.9 or 3.2 will make a significant difference isn't the answer I seek.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
I agree they are answering questions off a chart and to anything not on that chart they have generic responses, I had hoped somehow someone had obtained that apparently unobtainium knowledge on any sopus hths data.... starting to get old why they are so obtuse about it, and other parameters of their oil. These aren't pieces of proprietary data like a formulation seems to be a cop out and is starting to turn me off their products.
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
They won't have my business as long as that's their stance. I hate the word "proprietary", and I hate blanket responses. It's a good way to send me out the door to the competition.
The problem is that you're talking to people who don't know any better. The people answering telephones and emails have, as their top credential, the ability to answer and email and pick up a telephone.
If you asked any engineer or chemist on staff at any major oil company and asked them if HTHS of an ILSAC 30 is proprietary, he'd probably laugh at you or look at you wondering why you're confused.
I agree they are answering questions off a chart and to anything not on that chart they have generic responses, I had hoped somehow someone had obtained that apparently unobtainium knowledge on any sopus hths data.... starting to get old why they are so obtuse about it, and other parameters of their oil. These aren't pieces of proprietary data like a formulation seems to be a cop out and is starting to turn me off their products.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by burla
HTHS is the most significant measure of viscosity they have with the atsm's. There is nothing that gauges a base oil better then that as the high temp test weeds out vii's. Now, from either perspective one of metal protection, or someone with gas mileage concerns, this is what you should be looking at imo. Especially with GtL since this is the biggest question about their formula, it is very disapointing they do not provide this imo.
Very on the mark here, and exactly why I want this data, there is so much speculation on the new GTL formulas complaints of it being watered down inferior too light blah blah well defend it Shell, show us. Give some hard numbers
HTHS is the most significant measure of viscosity they have with the atsm's. There is nothing that gauges a base oil better then that as the high temp test weeds out vii's. Now, from either perspective one of metal protection, or someone with gas mileage concerns, this is what you should be looking at imo. Especially with GtL since this is the biggest question about their formula, it is very disapointing they do not provide this imo.
Very on the mark here, and exactly why I want this data, there is so much speculation on the new GTL formulas complaints of it being watered down inferior too light blah blah well defend it Shell, show us. Give some hard numbers
- Status
Similar threads
