This looks like a Grp III oil, right? (MSDS snip)
- Thread starter d00df00d
- Start date
- Status
Group II.
Solvent dewaxed=Group I
Hydrotreated=Group II
Severely hydrotreated= Group III
Ed
Solvent dewaxed=Group I
Hydrotreated=Group II
Severely hydrotreated= Group III
Ed
Yikes! Seriously?
This is the oil: https://www.motul.com/us/en-US/products/8100-x-clean-efe-5w30
Motul claims it's "100% synthetic", which I had thought was their way of saying at least Group III. In fact, I've never heard of any context in which a primarily Group II oil would be called "synthetic." I also thought the approvals it carries basically require Group III or better.
Might ping them tomorrow. Could be an interesting conversation...
This is the oil: https://www.motul.com/us/en-US/products/8100-x-clean-efe-5w30
Motul claims it's "100% synthetic", which I had thought was their way of saying at least Group III. In fact, I've never heard of any context in which a primarily Group II oil would be called "synthetic." I also thought the approvals it carries basically require Group III or better.
Might ping them tomorrow. Could be an interesting conversation...
Before we panic, let's at least try to rule out some kind of massive clerical bungle on their part (e.g. this part of the MSDS was carelessly pasted from the MSDS for another oil or something). If I can get a response from them on this, I'll post here.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
edhackett -- forgot to thank you for chiming in. Always appreciate input from a real expert.
This post suggests that the term "hydrotreated" could also be used for Group III components. Is that wrong?
Yes, hydrotreated could include what might be Group III. The definitions for the two oils in the MSDS are fairly vague. The CAS for the primary component does not specify mild or heavy hydrotreating. The minor oil component lists synonyms for both mild and heavy hydrotreated oils.
On further thought, the categories I listed in my first post probably should be thought of more of guidelines rather than gospel. It It seems that it is a convention for "severe" hydrotreating to be used for describing Group III like Mobils' Visom and the like. I've become used to seeing that description for known Group III base stocks, and "hydrotreated" for CAS numbers for known group II oils. Motul may have chosen to use a more generic CAS for their MSDS to obscure their formula or the actual oils may be heavily hydrotreated "generic" Group III. They'll likely not tell.
There's a lot of leeway allowed in MSDS. That's one of the pitfalls of trying to divine an oils formulation from the MSDS. For the purposes of the MSDS, any number of CAS numbers could be used. From a purely practical safety standpoint, it really doesn't matter if the CAS points to Group I, II, III, IV, or likely most Group V oils. They are all close enough from a firefighting, toxicity, exposure, protective equipment, or treatment standpoint, to be treated the same. Some companies fudge more than others.
It will be interesting what they have to say.
Ed
edhackett -- forgot to thank you for chiming in. Always appreciate input from a real expert.
This post suggests that the term "hydrotreated" could also be used for Group III components. Is that wrong?
Yes, hydrotreated could include what might be Group III. The definitions for the two oils in the MSDS are fairly vague. The CAS for the primary component does not specify mild or heavy hydrotreating. The minor oil component lists synonyms for both mild and heavy hydrotreated oils.
On further thought, the categories I listed in my first post probably should be thought of more of guidelines rather than gospel. It It seems that it is a convention for "severe" hydrotreating to be used for describing Group III like Mobils' Visom and the like. I've become used to seeing that description for known Group III base stocks, and "hydrotreated" for CAS numbers for known group II oils. Motul may have chosen to use a more generic CAS for their MSDS to obscure their formula or the actual oils may be heavily hydrotreated "generic" Group III. They'll likely not tell.
There's a lot of leeway allowed in MSDS. That's one of the pitfalls of trying to divine an oils formulation from the MSDS. For the purposes of the MSDS, any number of CAS numbers could be used. From a purely practical safety standpoint, it really doesn't matter if the CAS points to Group I, II, III, IV, or likely most Group V oils. They are all close enough from a firefighting, toxicity, exposure, protective equipment, or treatment standpoint, to be treated the same. Some companies fudge more than others.
It will be interesting what they have to say.
Ed
Originally Posted By: edhackett
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
edhackett -- forgot to thank you for chiming in. Always appreciate input from a real expert.
This post suggests that the term "hydrotreated" could also be used for Group III components. Is that wrong?
Yes, hydrotreated could include what might be Group III. The definitions for the two oils in the MSDS are fairly vague. The CAS for the primary component does not specify mild or heavy hydrotreating. The minor oil component lists synonyms for both mild and heavy hydrotreated oils.
I did a bit more poking around and found this Group III using CAS number 72623-87-1. It would appear that basing the group ID on CAS descriptions isn't as clear as I had first indicated. The Motul is likely Group III based.
https://www.neste.com/fi/en/companies/products/base-oils
Severely hydrotreated = Group III
Hydrotreated = Group II or III
Ed
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
edhackett -- forgot to thank you for chiming in. Always appreciate input from a real expert.
This post suggests that the term "hydrotreated" could also be used for Group III components. Is that wrong?
Yes, hydrotreated could include what might be Group III. The definitions for the two oils in the MSDS are fairly vague. The CAS for the primary component does not specify mild or heavy hydrotreating. The minor oil component lists synonyms for both mild and heavy hydrotreated oils.
I did a bit more poking around and found this Group III using CAS number 72623-87-1. It would appear that basing the group ID on CAS descriptions isn't as clear as I had first indicated. The Motul is likely Group III based.
https://www.neste.com/fi/en/companies/products/base-oils
Severely hydrotreated = Group III
Hydrotreated = Group II or III
Ed
Yes, it's a bit like J300 in that the products are a continuum depending on the exact production, but the "bands" have to be made somewhere.
It's the silly thing that started the labelling (Chevron Isosyn ???) of Group II+ as a differentiator.
Honestly, if the molecular manipulation of GrIII is sufficient to call it synthetic, then GrII is a shade of gray that's not truly misrepresenting things.
It's the silly thing that started the labelling (Chevron Isosyn ???) of Group II+ as a differentiator.
Honestly, if the molecular manipulation of GrIII is sufficient to call it synthetic, then GrII is a shade of gray that's not truly misrepresenting things.
- Status
Similar threads
