What will Amsoil's Gen 2 formula look like?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
484
Location
IL
Signature Series has always used BIG calcium numbers....which they at least partly attribute to the extended drain intervals. They now say they've conquered LSPI and surpass Gen 2 with the formula rolling out next week. (Let's assume this is true and not go off on their lack of true certifications.)
So, did they accomplish this by greatly reducing calcium levels...and increasing something else to still be claiming a 25k OCI?
OR...have they been able to control LSPI without reducing their pet Calcium?
 
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!

Interesting. Thanks for the sodium explanation!
I don't know about the ZDDP/SN possibility though. Being their "mainstream" oil, I think they would still want to meet certification specs on paper.
 
Everyone's "All In"
wink.gif


 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!

Not discounting the sodium, but some of the studies I read mentioned calcium, of any formulation, as the culprit, with no mention of sodium. Can you post a link to the sodium study? I think something that would be prudent, right now, would be to go with a lower calcium pack, i.e. most M1, until this is locked down.
 
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!

Not discounting the sodium, but some of the studies I read mentioned calcium, of any formulation, as the culprit, with no mention of sodium. Can you post a link to the sodium study? I think something that would be prudent, right now, would be to go with a lower calcium pack, i.e. most M1, until this is locked down.


Here's a link for an LSPI study mentioning the impact of sodium...

http://www.infineuminsight.com/insight/nov-2016/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition

Great post by wemay that brings up the impact of moly, which I had forgotten about! So a high moly oil might be able to handle more calcium and still be LSPI resistant. I really have no idea how stringent the dexos1 Gen 2 LSPI test is, anyway...

EDIT - interesting that the XOM patent gives magnesium half the weight of calcium as an LSPI accelerant while Infineum says it is LSPI-neutral...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!
The Sodium is interesting because it seems the Valvoline Dexos gen 2 still has sodium unless the spec sheets haven't been updated. I could be wrong though.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!
The Sodium is interesting because it seems the Valvoline Dexos gen 2 still has sodium unless the spec sheets haven't been updated.


Looks like the 9/7 sheets with the Gen 2 licenses don't give sodium info anymore.

https://sharena21.springcm.com/Public/Do...10-ac162d889bd3
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Additive manufacturers have been good about sharing LSPI/oil info and have indicated that sodium is a big LSPI accelerant in the presence of calcium and that ZDDP helps quench it. It might be possible that a good dose of calcium would still be OK for LSPI if there is no sodium present and a bigger dose of ZDDP than SN allows is used, and Amsoil is definitely a company that is OK with putting out non-API oils.
I am definitely very curious about what their new SS 0W30 and 5W30 oils will look like!

Not discounting the sodium, but some of the studies I read mentioned calcium, of any formulation, as the culprit, with no mention of sodium. Can you post a link to the sodium study? I think something that would be prudent, right now, would be to go with a lower calcium pack, i.e. most M1, until this is locked down.


Here's a link for an LSPI study mentioning the impact of sodium...

http://www.infineuminsight.com/insight/nov-2016/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition

Great post by wemay that brings up the impact of moly, which I had forgotten about! So a high moly oil might be able to handle more calcium and still be LSPI resistant. I really have no idea how stringent the dexos1 Gen 2 LSPI test is, anyway...

EDIT - interesting that the XOM patent gives magnesium half the weight of calcium as an LSPI accelerant while Infineum says it is LSPI-neutral...
Thanx! What I really need to do is shell out the $$ for the SAE paper.
This is what Oronite says about calcium, magnesium, and moly:
"Many factors have been demonstrated to impact LSPI, including: engine designs, fuel composition, and lubricant composition. On the lubricant side, the most noticeable impact has been from the detergent chemistry. Oils with higher concentrations of calcium, which is found in many detergent systems, have been shown to increase the frequency of LSPI. The exact chemistry of the detergent is less important to LSPI than the calcium content. Conversely, magnesium-based detergents do not seem to promote LSPI. Although reducing calcium may seem like a solution to control LSPI, there may be other performance tradeoffs to consider. In addition there are other additives that can also help reduce LSPI events. This provides an opportunity to formulate for robust LSPI performance, while maintaining the level of detergency needed to help keep engines clean and neutralize acids generated during combustion.

Aside from the detergent system, there are many other additive and lubricant compositions that can influence LSPI. Molybdenum compounds, for example, not only provide frictional benefits, but also have been shown to decrease LSPI when used at high levels. Base oils also affect LSPI events. Both the quality of the base stock (i.e. Group II versus Group III) and the viscosity can have secondary effects on LSPI. The effect on LSPI from these other lubricant aspects are not as significant as the detergent system, but can shift the LSPI frequency in oils that are more prone to LSPI."


I know why, in the Infineum cited SAE study, that they used the "clean" gasoline that they did, but I wonder if there is any issue with "street" gasoline adding to, or possibly, increasing the LSPI in combination with the lubricant.
 
Last edited:
Another interesting excerpt from the Infineum/SAE piece, and something I have seen alluded to before:

"Three different viscosity grades - SAE 0W-16, 0W-30 and 10W-30 - were tested and although directionally a trend of decreasing LSPI event count with increasing SAE viscosity grade was seen, the differences were not statistically significant. While simplistically it could be assumed that more viscous lubricants may reduce LSPI counts, for the viscosity grade range covered and number of tests performed, viscosity grade here is considered LSPI neutral."
 
Maybe Pablo has heard something he can share about the Gen 2 formula?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top