Tell me about Energy Conserving oils

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hirev

Joined
Jan 18, 2003
Messages
1,206
Location
Oregon
According to Chevron "Energy Conserving
Oils displaying this phase are formulated with friction modifiers to improve fuel economy in an industry standard test".

Anyone know anything about friction modifiers on a Energy Conserving oil vs non Energy Conserving oil?

I always thought oil Wt had more to do with Energy Conserving oils than friction modifiers or is it both?
 
I was looking atthe back of a Valvoline VR-1 racing 20w-50, ad the back said it has friction modifiers in it. I thought this was stange because it was a 20w-50.
 
I was under the impression that only motorcycle oils were non-energy conserving because it caused the wet clutch to slip. I don't know if you'd want that in your car though.
 
ILSAC's GF-4 spec requires their Sequence VI-B fuel economy test. The oil is run in a test engine vs. a run with a lab-standard oil. The "Energy Conserving" oil must show a fuel savings of 2.3% with 16 hr. aging in 0W-20 and 5W-20 oils, 1.8% with 0W-30 and 5W-30, and 1.1% with other grades.

Oil viscosity is one very important aspect of fuel economy. Friction modifiers are one way to improve fuel economy for oil of the same viscosity.


Ken
 
Why does GM, for example, insist on having their cars use a "starburst" energy conserving oil?

This insistence leads me to think that energy conserving oils have more advantages than just conserving energy? If a customer selects an otherwise excellent oil than the only consequence should be higher gas consumption. Why should, theoretically speaking, a warranty be compromised if he/she chooses...say GC for example?
 
theoretically... if a 5w20 can save ya 2.3% in fuel economy, then a car averaging around 30mpg, would see a savings of about $400 worth of gas over 200,000 miles as compared to using a "typical" non-conserving oil(considering an average of $2.50/ga). In my opinion.. if one found an oil that returned better UOAs than the energy conserving oil, then he may save that $400 later on down the road on repairs anyways.

hehe, just food for thought
 
quote:
Why does GM, for example, insist on having their cars use a "starburst" energy conserving oil?

This insistence leads me to think that energy conserving oils have more advantages than just conserving energy? If a customer selects an otherwise excellent oil than the only consequence should be higher gas consumption.
Click to expand...
These oils were used during the EPA fuel mileage testing, so these oil must be recommended (required?) in the owner's manual.


Ken
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hirev:
According to Chevron "Energy Conserving
Oils displaying this phase are formulated with friction modifiers to improve fuel economy in an industry standard test".

Anyone know anything about friction modifiers on a Energy Conserving oil vs non Energy Conserving oil?

I always thought oil Wt had more to do with Energy Conserving oils than friction modifiers or is it both?
Click to expand...
As a rule energy conserving oils will besides correct vis grade have a FM added at 3-5%. Non energy conserving oils will not have a FM added since this adds cost and why include it and not "advertise the fact"
bruce
 
Another thing. You won't see any 10w40 listed as Energy Conserving because it is too thick to meet the specific criteria for Energy Conserving. Likewise some high mileage oils can't meet Energy Conserving because they are thicker (or maybe the oil company doesn't want to bother paying for the testing since the HM market generally doesn't care about Energy Conserving oil).
 
I saw the Quaker State 10w-40 synthetic blend 4x4 on the back had the energy conserving. But it did not have the api starburst though. It is SM rated. So is that a label error or is it really energy conserving.
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boxgrover:
Why does GM, for example, insist on having their cars use a "starburst" energy conserving oil?

This insistence leads me to think that energy conserving oils have more advantages than just conserving energy? If a customer selects an otherwise excellent oil than the only consequence should be higher gas consumption. Why should, theoretically speaking, a warranty be compromised if he/she chooses...say GC for example?
Click to expand...
From reading BITOG's article on oil shearing (Which is excellent) i believe the starburst means more than just energy conserving, it also means the oil passes certain test. Among them, SL/SM, which saw a removal of certain additives meaning MORE engine wear but BETTER for the catalytic (sp?) converter.

Thats why the "high mileage" oils with more friction reducers and other additives do not have the starburst.

Maybe i'm missing something or dont have a full understanding of it all, but it almost seems as though we could ALL benefit from using the high mileage formulations even on low mileage autos.
 
quote:
Originally posted by lpcmidst128:
I saw the Quaker State 10w-40 synthetic blend 4x4 on the back had the energy conserving. But it did not have the api starburst though. It is SM rated. So is that a label error or is it really energy conserving.
Click to expand...
If i remember correctly, 10w-40 used to be energy conserving, but that was before the starburst days of new. I'm wondering if you just happened across an old bottle?

I guess the definition of just what energy conserving means has changed over the years.
 
You would think that "high mileage" oils would have less catalytic converter harming addatives since "high mileage" cars will be more likely to burn oil.
 
quote:
From reading BITOG's article on oil shearing (Which is excellent) i believe the starburst means more than just energy conserving, it also means the oil passes certain test. Among them, SL/SM, which saw a removal of certain additives meaning MORE engine wear but BETTER for the catalytic (sp?) converter.

Thats why the "high mileage" oils with more friction reducers and other additives do not have the starburst.

Maybe i'm missing something or dont have a full understanding of it all, but it almost seems as though we could ALL benefit from using the high mileage formulations even on low mileage autos.
Click to expand...
Let us not confuse Friction Modifiers (FM) with Anti-Wear (AW) additives, since they are two different animals, as per the white papers.

A reduction is conventional anti-wear additives such as ZDDP (the "zinc-phosphorous-sulfur) compound is being offset with new AW additives, many of them which are organic and do NOT show up in low-cost VOA/UOA's.

For the most part, specialized fatty acids and esters

http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=21;t=000027

and

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000089#000000

are used as Friction reducers.

The confusion arises because some additives are multi-functional and can act as EP/AW/and FM additives, depending on temperature and level of additive.
 
Ok MolaKule, call me stupid, but how can organic compounds last in the high stress environment of the internal combustion engine, and not be transformed into lesser compounds due to the temperatures?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
Napa Proformer Oil Filter and M1 5w20
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Nesterenko
S
Another oil from Valvoline…
9 10 11
Replies
217
Views
44K
Ronin73
J
Theoretical Justification to Use Traveller 15w-40 in my Wet Clutch MC's
Replies
19
Views
2K
Jim Rogers
Y
ACEA A3/B4 oils still relevant in 2024 for Turbo GDI 'High performance' Engines? - Hyundai ElantraN
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
edyvw
C
Subaru Brand Oil
2
Replies
34
Views
7K
Fishstyx
Back
Top