Shell oils with PurePlus technology: any feedback?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
444
Location
Switzerland
Hello everyone,

I guess many of you have seen the advertisement from Shell that it started a revolution on the market of engine oils with it's GTL (gas to liquid) patented technology:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WGbWbFr66w

The Shell Helix Ultra with PurePlus technology oils are on the market since 2014 I think. I am surprised that there are not so many reviews here about these oils. Did anyone tried them? Are these really good in terms of engine cleaning, TBN retention, wear protection, etc? Any difference when compared to previous generation of hydro cracked base oils?

It looks like these oils are categorized as group V by API standards and I am wondering why there is not so much info on them and if it is worth to try them?

In my country the prices for GTL based oils are either the same as for HC/VOLLESYNTHESE or cheaper, for example, for around 7 $ I can buy a liter of Shell Helix Ultra 5W-30 with GTL, and for around 10 $ I can buy Mobil 1 0W-40
smile.gif
 
I've read a lot of stuff about GTL, and it sounds good on paper, but it doesn't seem to offer much, if any, performance benefit.

Helix Ultra or Mobil1 0w-40 are both great oils. I'm currently switching from using Castrol Edge to Mobil1 0w-40, with maybe a small dose (1/12 of a sump) of mobil1 Racing 0w-30 oil added to slightly boost additives.
 
Originally Posted By: volodymyr
The Shell Helix Ultra with PurePlus technology oils are on the market since 2014 I think. I am surprised that there are not so many reviews here about these oils. Did anyone tried them? Are these really good in terms of engine cleaning, TBN retention, wear protection, etc? Any difference when compared to previous generation of hydro cracked base oils?

It looks like these oils are categorized as group V by API standards and I am wondering why there is not so much info on them and if it is worth to try them?


Where did you see that? GTL products are hydrocracked just like any other Group III product.
 
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
I've read a lot of stuff about GTL, and it sounds good on paper, but it doesn't seem to offer much, if any, performance benefit.


That seems absolutely correct. Understand, the only reason Shell built the GTL plant was to utilize the natural gas otherwise being vented.
 
I'm using Ultra 5w40 GTL for 9 months now in wife's Fiat. Don't know what to say, car doesn't consume it much, and there's no strange noises. Also it's by far the cheapest oil with MB 229.5 approval, and only one besides M1 that meets FIAT Z2 specification.
 
Originally Posted By: chrisri
I'm using Ultra 5w40 GTL for 9 months now in wife's Fiat. Don't know what to say, car doesn't consume it much, and there's no strange noises. Also it's by far the cheapest oil with MB 229.5 approval, and only one besides M1 that meets FIAT Z2 specification.


Shell is a quality company. Ultra is good. The fact that its the cheapest 229.5 oil in Croatia is surprising. In the U.S., Mobil1 0w-40 is cheapest, followed closely by Castrol Edge 0w-40 for 229.5 in places called "WalMarts" here.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
I've read a lot of stuff about GTL, and it sounds good on paper, but it doesn't seem to offer much, if any, performance benefit.


That seems absolutely correct. Understand, the only reason Shell built the GTL plant was to utilize the natural gas otherwise being vented.


There has to be some benefit to the purer GTL derived basestocks. I just haven't been able to find any concrete tech data. Just fluffy talk and cool commercial visuals from Pennzoil marketing wonks.
 
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
There has to be some benefit to the purer GTL derived basestocks. I just haven't been able to find any concrete tech data. Just fluffy talk and cool commercial visuals from Pennzoil marketing wonks.


Their literature does say there is a benefit, but Shell is not opaque that the reason for the plant is to utilize otherwise wasted gas. I was surprised when I learned they hydrocracked it though. Somehow I was thinking that wouldn't be necessary.

With ExxonMobil going back to a majority PAO basestock on their flagship products I think the advantage "gap" has narrowed.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
There has to be some benefit to the purer GTL derived basestocks. I just haven't been able to find any concrete tech data. Just fluffy talk and cool commercial visuals from Pennzoil marketing wonks.


Their literature does say there is a benefit, but Shell is not opaque that the reason for the plant is to utilize otherwise wasted gas. I was surprised when I learned they hydrocracked it though. Somehow I was thinking that wouldn't be necessary.

With ExxonMobil going back to a majority PAO basestock on their flagship products I think the advantage "gap" has narrowed.


Is this true, where did you here this and which Flagship products are you referring to?
 
kschachn,

Originally Posted By: kschachn

Where did you see that? GTL products are hydrocracked just like any other Group III product.


This is taken from book "Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants: Chemistry and Technology" https://books.google.es/books?id=9YXRBQA...oup&f=false where they say that all base oils not qualified for group I, II, III and IV are qualified as group 5. Also, in all graphs in this book the GTL is marked as a separate group from group 4 (PAO). I can make a few screenshots and put them here, but the book is available through preview using the link specified above.
 
Last edited:
ExMachina,

Originally Posted By: ExMachina
chrisri said:
Ultra is good. The fact that its the cheapest 229.5 oil in Croatia is surprising.


It's also the cheapest oil with MB 229.5 in Switzerland.
 
GTL is another route to the same destination: a high-quality group III base stock. No, its not Group V, the final step in the synthesis is a hydrofinishing to yield a group III from what I've read on here before. Its a good product, uses a resource that is currently plentiful as a feedstock (natural gas), but the end product is not night-and-day different from, for example, Shell's own older XVHI (slack-wax, isomerized and hydrofinished) base stocks.
 
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
Originally Posted By: chrisri
I'm using Ultra 5w40 GTL for 9 months now in wife's Fiat. Don't know what to say, car doesn't consume it much, and there's no strange noises. Also it's by far the cheapest oil with MB 229.5 approval, and only one besides M1 that meets FIAT Z2 specification.


Shell is a quality company. Ultra is good. The fact that its the cheapest 229.5 oil in Croatia is surprising. In the U.S., Mobil1 0w-40 is cheapest, followed closely by Castrol Edge 0w-40 for 229.5 in places called "WalMarts" here.

Regular price for GYL Ultra is the same as it was for the old version, about €7 which is in the same range as lesser MB229.3 oils of other manufacturers. If you buy online a box of 12 litres it's about 4-5€ per litre.
M1 New Life which is the same as yours M1 euro can't be found under €10, and that's just this last year. Before it was €15 a litre, just like boutique oils of Motul!
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
GTL is another route to the same destination: a high-quality group III base stock. No, its not Group V, the final step in the synthesis is a hydrofinishing to yield a group III from what I've read on here before. Its a good product, uses a resource that is currently plentiful as a feedstock (natural gas), but the end product is not night-and-day different from, for example, Shell's own older XVHI (slack-wax, isomerized and hydrofinished) base stocks.

Did Shell ever had a PAO oils in their range? I really can't remember I ever seen one.
I really like how they are transparent about their base oils, probably because they don't use PAO in any quantity in their formulas.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: volodymyr
kschachn,

Originally Posted By: kschachn

Where did you see that? GTL products are hydrocracked just like any other Group III product.


This is taken from book "Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants: Chemistry and Technology" https://books.google.es/books?id=9YXRBQA...oup&f=false where they say that all base oils not qualified for group I, II, III and IV are qualified as group 5. Also, in all graphs in this book the GTL is marked as a separate group from group 4 (PAO). I can make a few screenshots and put them here, but the book is available through preview using the link specified above.

In general, group assignment is based on the oil's viscosity index. GTL's viscosity index falls in the group III category, but some call it group III+ because it's approaching viscosity index of group IV oils.
 
Originally Posted By: VNTS
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
There has to be some benefit to the purer GTL derived basestocks. I just haven't been able to find any concrete tech data. Just fluffy talk and cool commercial visuals from Pennzoil marketing wonks.


Their literature does say there is a benefit, but Shell is not opaque that the reason for the plant is to utilize otherwise wasted gas. I was surprised when I learned they hydrocracked it though. Somehow I was thinking that wouldn't be necessary.

With ExxonMobil going back to a majority PAO basestock on their flagship products I think the advantage "gap" has narrowed.


Is this true, where did you here this and which Flagship products are you referring to?


I'm curious as well. Is M1 not using the grp 3 Visom base stock anymore?
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I'm curious as well. Is M1 not using the grp 3 Visom base stock anymore?


Well, as you know no one knows for sure since ExxonMobil won't tell. However, as has been shown here the MSDS and other literature (along with reading the tea leaves) does seem to show that at least the 0W-40 product (and maybe the EP) is now a majority PAO. ExxonMobil all along said that Visom was an interim product, only to bridge the gap between PAO and GTL. But ExxonMobil hasn't pursued the GTL unicorn apparently, and likely finds a PAO blend now the cheapest route to performance targets.
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I'm curious as well. Is M1 not using the grp 3 Visom base stock anymore?

M1 uses a combination of multiple oil base groups. It always has. What changes is the proportions, and these can vary over time and also by specific grade.
 
Since you started to talk about the fact that ExxonMobil is trying to use PAO base oils to it's maximum, let's not forget that Shell patented GTL technology, so if ExxonMobil uses it, it has to pay to Shell for every liter of oil produced using GTL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top