Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict

Messages
2,046
Location
Oregon
Originally Posted by PimTac
It wasn't all that long ago that Pennzoil Gold was a bit of a unicorn here. For the price point it is a great value. Then it started to become scarce. There was a theory that Pennzoil was using it mainly for their quick lube outlets. I haven't seen it for a while a Wally's.
Non-existent at WM in store, but can be purchased online with free shipping for $19.64 a jug... at least in my area. For me personally I'd rather spend the extra $3 to get the A5/B5 spec.
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
This is fun stuff, but I think there's something we aren't accounting for perhaps that's screwing up the results?
I think what's happening is that there is no linear relation between the KV100 and CCS. For example, when the KV100 for the GTL base stocks doubles, CCS is increasing by a factor of five. For example, using the 4 cSt and 8 cSt base stocks, for KV100 = 5.0 cSt and 5.5 cSt, you get CCS = 1672 and 2098, Noack = 8.7% and 7.3%, respectively -- 10% and 25% difference in KV100 and CCS, respectively, and 19% difference in Noack -- significant difference in CCS and Noack but similar KV100 and VII treat rate. Widman viscosity-mixing calculator: https://www.widman.biz/English/Calculators/Mixtures.html
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Regarding the VII treat rate, 1 - A_Harman index is not really equal to that. It's representing the viscosity temporary shear, which may be larger than the percent weight of the VII. For example, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, 2.6% VII treat rate is increasing the viscosity by about 50%, from about 5.6 to 8.6 cSt. However, using 0.84 for the oil specific gravity, if I calculate the A_Harman index, I am getting 1.00 (0% shear). It's possible that the HTHSV given in the table is wrong. I would expect the temporary shear to be around 5% or so. shrug
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear). If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant, with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives: VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67 This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.
 
Messages
403
Location
California
Where the devil did I read that Pennzoil Gold was 50-50. And what I recall reading is that it is not GTL at all. But I just looked. Had to see it for myself. So Pennzoil Gold 0W20 is indeed 70-90% Fischer-Tropsch. The Pennzoil chart @ BITOG does list PG as not being Pure Plus. So the CAS number substantiates this all. Do I have this right ? I do hope your scientific calculations are spot on. I do not want too much plastic in my oil. Also, I do not wish to besmirch M1 EP. It is great stuff...just noisier in my truck. I always thought the business of M1 producing larger amounts of iron by 10 or 20 ppm was a joke. No big deal. The oil is stellar. BTW the gold cap on my jug of PG is just a great accoutrement. It is all good. Beer2
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by Direct_Rejection
So Pennzoil Gold 0W20 is indeed 70-90% Fischer-Tropsch. The Pennzoil chart @ BITOG does list PG as not being Pure Plus. So the CAS number substantiates this all. Do I have this right ?
Yup, Pennzoil Gold 0W-20 is a Pearl PurePlus GTL full synthetic -- 70 - 90% GTL and the rest is the add pack and VII.
 
Messages
42,374
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Gokhan
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear). If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant, with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives: VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67 This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.
thumbsup That sounds more realistic.
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by Gokhan
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear). If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant, with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives: VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67 This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.
To give a better description: VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)/(VII viscosity-improve rate x VII shear rate) VII viscosity-improve rate is about 15 in the XOM guide, meaning for every percent of VII added, you get about a 15% increase in viscosity. Shear rates can vary between a few percent and 20% or more, depending on the VII. Estimating from the XOM guide again (correcting the 0W-20 HTHSV to 2.7 cP first), VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.7 for the commonly used VII but the constant, taken to be 0.7 in this case, can vary between 0.2 and 2 if not in a wider range. In fact, perhaps, 0.5 is a better estimate for a typical VII; then, you would get: VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.5 This would give about a 3% VII treat rate for the M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.
 
Messages
43,638
Location
'Stralia
I made up a spreadsheet some time ago that used the blend guide and the PDS for the base oils to give the base oil viscosities and the base oil HTHS, and reated that to the VII treat rate. Alas, the laptop failed to undergo the latest Win 10 update, and doesn't even boot anymore, so that's gone.
 
Messages
42,374
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Shannow
I made up a spreadsheet some time ago that used the blend guide and the PDS for the base oils to give the base oil viscosities and the base oil HTHS, and reated that to the VII treat rate. Alas, the laptop failed to undergo the latest Win 10 update, and doesn't even boot anymore, so that's gone.
Pull the drive, put it in a housing, and recover your data grin
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by Shannow
Alas, the laptop failed to undergo the latest Win 10 update, and doesn't even boot anymore, so that's gone.
Download the latest version of Windows 10 from the Microsoft site. It can either be put on a DVD or USB flash drive. Then, boot from the media you created and do a reinstall (upgrade, not a fresh copy).
 

4WD

Messages
13,061
Location
Texas
Yes … used to run 5w20 PG in our Fusion Hybrid … but no longer at Walmart here … That 2.0L has +/- 110k now … so about to try M1 EP 5w30 to use some stash …
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Are you going to cut open your oil filter after this OCI? Be interesting if the M1 EP frees some particulate like it did with my Expedition.
Do you think the combination of the PAO/ester-based M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS and oversized full-synthetic Fram Ultra XG3600 has been cleaning the carbon-deposit buildup in my engine? The improvement in the way my car drives has been surreal. I think I have found the winning combination of oil and filter. If I had a new car that recommended thinner oil, I would use the same. The UOA performance remains to be seen.
 

4WD

Messages
13,061
Location
Texas
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Are you going to cut open your oil filter after this OCI? Be interesting if the M1 EP frees some particulate like it did with my Expedition.
Do you think the combination of the PAO/ester-based M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS and oversized full-synthetic Fram Ultra XG3600 has been cleaning the carbon-deposit buildup in my engine? The improvement in the way my car drives has been surreal. I think I have found the winning combination of oil and filter. If I had a new car that recommended thinner oil, I would use the same. The UOA performance remains to be seen.
I still wonder if the intent of M1 AP was to draw more attention to (better value) M1 EP … I'm using the same oil as you in two 355H/383T V8's
 
Messages
9,754
Location
Colorado Springs
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Are you going to cut open your oil filter after this OCI? Be interesting if the M1 EP frees some particulate like it did with my Expedition.
Do you think the combination of the PAO/ester-based M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS and oversized full-synthetic Fram Ultra XG3600 has been cleaning the carbon-deposit buildup in my engine? The improvement in the way my car drives has been surreal. I think I have found the winning combination of oil and filter. If I had a new car that recommended thinner oil, I would use the same. The UOA performance remains to be seen.
What is it? 40hp more? 50lb-ft more?
 
Messages
905
Location
Hawaii, USA
Hmmm, old post but hope you still have this car. If it were mine, I would go with 20W-50 since it doesn't need thin oils for the VVTi.
 
Messages
42,374
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Are you going to cut open your oil filter after this OCI? Be interesting if the M1 EP frees some particulate like it did with my Expedition.
Do you think the combination of the PAO/ester-based M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS and oversized full-synthetic Fram Ultra XG3600 has been cleaning the carbon-deposit buildup in my engine? The improvement in the way my car drives has been surreal. I think I have found the winning combination of oil and filter. If I had a new car that recommended thinner oil, I would use the same. The UOA performance remains to be seen.
I don't know, but I've had excellent results with the AFE products in our Expedition (zero consumption) and will run the EP going forward in our new RAM, which is the current fill. Do you intend on cutting your filter open? I'd suggest doing so, as that may answer your question.
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by 4WD
I still wonder if the intent of M1 AP was to draw more attention to (better value) M1 EP … I'm using the same oil as you in two 355H/383T V8's
M1 AP 0W-20 has similar PAO levels as M1 EP 0W-20 but other AP grades have a lot less PAO than both the vanilla M1 and M1 EP. Looking at MSDSs alone, we can't rule out POE esters or alkylated naphthalene (AN) but I wouldn't count on the base-oil quality of M1 AP for grades other than 0W-20. However, various studies have shown that the rate of the antioxidant treatment has an equally large effect on the oil oxidation and OCI length. Therefore, the theory has that the M1 AP has more antioxidant than the M1 EP, which in turn has more antioxidant than the vanilla M1. Here is the table that lists the A_Harman index as well as the PAO and GTL content for selected oils. POE and AN is not shown. For Exxon Mobil oils, if everything is blank, it's mostly Group III or the balance is Group III if the base oil percentages add to less than 70% or so. The VII column is equal to 1 - A_Harman index. Divide it by two to get the rough percentage of the VII treatment rate; however, actual VII treatment rate depends on the type of the VII -- on its ability to increase the viscosity and its resistance to temporary shear. [Linked Image]
 
Messages
5,133
Location
Paramount, California
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
I don't know, but I've had excellent results with the AFE products in our Expedition (zero consumption) and will run the EP going forward in our new RAM, which is the current fill. Do you intend on cutting your filter open? I'd suggest doing so, as that may answer your question.
Is it worth getting my saw dirty? Can you tell if they are the deposits removed by the oil? Do you have pictures?
 
Top