2016 Chevy M1 vs PP

[irv]

Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Regarding TBN 'retention'...

There's a story that's frequently peddled around the industry, that expensive, over based metallic Salicylate detergents are better on TBN retention than commoner and cheaper over based Sulphonates & Phenates.

This may or may not be true but even if it is, I would dispute the fact that 'TBN retention' is a good thing. The primary purpose of this class of additive is to neutralise acids that build up in the oil and keep that neutralised 'stuff' suspended in the oil. If you have two oils of equal starting TBN and after x miles, under identical conditions, one oil has a lower TBN than the other, then in my book, it has done a BETTER job at zapping acidic species than the other oil.

Think about it! Compare a busy man with an idle, blobby couch-potato. The latter might point to how superior he is in terms of 'shoe leather retention' but it's not the most meaningful of boasts is it?



Very interesting point, and it's something likely not many have even thought about. Do you have any links or other info that talks about this?

 

[JAG]

See my post, 2nd from last in this thread about different detergent types and TBN. Because acid/base chemistry is complicated, the TBN test can mislead some. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1058018

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Regarding TBN 'retention'...

There's a story that's frequently peddled around the industry, that expensive, over based metallic Salicylate detergents are better on TBN retention than commoner and cheaper over based Sulphonates & Phenates.

This may or may not be true but even if it is, I would dispute the fact that 'TBN retention' is a good thing. The primary purpose of this class of additive is to neutralise acids that build up in the oil and keep that neutralised 'stuff' suspended in the oil. If you have two oils of equal starting TBN and after x miles, under identical conditions, one oil has a lower TBN than the other, then in my book, it has done a BETTER job at zapping acidic species than the other oil.

Think about it! Compare a busy man with an idle, blobby couch-potato. The latter might point to how superior he is in terms of 'shoe leather retention' but it's not the most meaningful of boasts is it?



Very good point. Would this not be where TAN comes into play? As long as TAN remains low, and you have remaining TBN to neutralize more acid, the oil remains serviceable. Of course TAN is yet again another separate request from Blackstone

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: JAG
See my post, 2nd from last in this thread about different detergent types and TBN. Because acid/base chemistry is complicated, the TBN test can mislead some. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1058018


Very interesting, Jag, and I see this was talked about/written way back in 2008.

"Abstract
Historically, the characterisation of fresh and used diesel engine lubricants has been based on a limited number of analytical techniques. One of the most important methods of analysis has been total base number (TBN) measurement. Although TBN measurements are informative, easy, and quick, it can be misleading to base the judgement of an oil's performance solely on one criterion.
This paper offers some observations from a field test, showing that some detergent types gave unacceptable performance even though the TBNs were at an acceptable level. It is hypothesised that some detergents do not effectively neutralise all acidic species present in the lubricant, thereby reserving their own base, while in fact the oil may no longer provide sufficient protection against bearing corrosion. This hypothesis is supported by bench and engine test data. It is recommended that, at a minimum, total acid number (TAN) measurements be included in any analysis, and where time and cost permit, wear metals content, oxidation, soot content, and viscosity should also be evaluated."

So basically, at the end of the day, despite all these numbers/info on what ones oil has in it and what remains in it after an oil run, we are no further ahead on what is actually good and what is actually perceived as being good.

I know some don't agree with this, but like I have been saying, an oil that continuously shows better UOAs, UOA after UOA, is basically all we have to go on.
Also, and this is not scientific at all, but maybe the one thing we all like to laugh about, is how it sounds in your engine and how important that is, which, when all is said and done, should not be overlooked or quickly discredited as nonsense.
I know when I switched over to Pennzoil, based on better looking UOAs, I also found my engine ran quieter, which, like I have stated before, is a bonus.

 

[SonofJoe]

Originally Posted By: JAG
See my post, 2nd from last in this thread about different detergent types and TBN. Because acid/base chemistry is complicated, the TBN test can mislead some. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1058018


The people that push the idea that TBN retention is a good thing are the self same people that push the notion that engine oil acid neutralisation is 'complicated' and not something for lesser mortals. They drone on about hard acids & soft acids and the importance of different types of soap all of which absolutely need to be 'optimised' for each 'unique' application. And if you want to 'believe', as some do, that's fine but to me it's complete bollocks!

To understand this properly, you have to know the people and their mentality. When I was formulating, I'd start with the numbers & try and knit these into what ever order made most sense. But not everyone does this. There is such a things as 'formulating by narrative'. This is where you start by constructing a nice story which sounds technically compelling and is a convincing 'fit' to the chemistry you just happen to be pushing. You then religiously fit the design of the oil to match the narrative. It's a modern take on 'tell a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth'. Except in my world, it's not the truth and never was.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: irv


Very interesting, Jag, and I see this was talked about/written way back in 2008.

" This hypothesis is supported by bench and engine test data. It is recommended that, at a minimum, total acid number (TAN) measurements be included in any analysis, and where time and cost permit, wear metals content, oxidation, soot content, and viscosity should also be evaluated."

So basically, at the end of the day, despite all these numbers/info on what ones oil has in it and what remains in it after an oil run, we are no further ahead on what is actually good and what is actually perceived as being good.


That bit is what I touched on above. Generally, when one requests TBN they also request TAN, which gives a more complete picture and is very important in light of the information SOJ has just provided. TBN performance isn't the only metric, one also has to consider contaminant levels and TAN level as well. If your TAN is going up and your TBN is still healthy, the oil is obviously not doing its job.

Toromont CAT, who I usually have my analysis done through will provide both TBN and TAN when you ask, and at no extra cost. An example report from my old Expedition:

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: irv


Very interesting, Jag, and I see this was talked about/written way back in 2008.

" This hypothesis is supported by bench and engine test data. It is recommended that, at a minimum, total acid number (TAN) measurements be included in any analysis, and where time and cost permit, wear metals content, oxidation, soot content, and viscosity should also be evaluated."

So basically, at the end of the day, despite all these numbers/info on what ones oil has in it and what remains in it after an oil run, we are no further ahead on what is actually good and what is actually perceived as being good.


That bit is what I touched on above. Generally, when one requests TBN they also request TAN, which gives a more complete picture and is very important in light of the information SOJ has just provided. TBN performance isn't the only metric, one also has to consider contaminant levels and TAN level as well. If your TAN is going up and your TBN is still healthy, the oil is obviously not doing its job.

Toromont CAT, who I usually have my analysis done through will provide both TBN and TAN when you ask, and at no extra cost. An example report from my old Expedition:

So basically, the TBN numbers don't mean anything unless TAN numbers/info is also provided? Can you explain how both work and their relationship to one another? I don't quite understand all this?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: irv
So basically, the TBN numbers don't mean anything unless TAN numbers/info is also provided? Can you explain how both work and their relationship to one another? I don't quite understand all this?

Certainly

I wouldn't say that TBN doesn't mean "anything" but it is significantly less useful without TAN.

TBN = Total Base Number - it is the amount of base in the oil. This number starts out reasonably high, usually around 8-9 for a PCMO, it can be higher for an HDEO. This represents the oil's ability to neutralize acids. As this takes place, that number decreases, as there is less reserve; less base, left in the oil to perform that function.

TAN = Total Acid Number - This is how much acid is present in the oil. This number starts out extremely low and, as the oil remains in service, being polluted with combustion byproducts, blow-by gasses, which include sulphuric acids and the like, may start to creep up as the base used to neutralize the acids is depleted.

Generally, there was/is an old adage that stated that once TBN and TAN crossed, the oil was no longer serviceable. However, for certain oils with certain base stocks, that may not apply, but generally it is a good rule of thumb.

Now, as per what SOJ touched on, the TBN exists due to the presence of basic compounds which are part of the overall additive package. These products can vary blender-to-blender and also in effectiveness. Certain bases aren't necessarily ideal for neutralizing certain acids, so you can end up with uptick in TAN without the corresponding depletion in TBN, which is what SOJ was saying and why you can't just glance at TBN and always assume "I'm good!". Because you might not be. Now if you have TAN, like I did in my above reports, you can see that TAN is very low in both UOA's where it was provided, and there was a pretty decent difference in TBN between the two runs as well. In either instance the oil was still suitable for use based on those numbers, but the Petro-Canada Duron-E would have required changing sooner than the Mobil product based on what appears to be the trend.

TBN and TAN together, work to establish one of the parameters for an oil's suitability for continued use. They define a set of condemnation points that, if reached, require the oil to be changed. Other parameters are wear-metal uptake, nitration, oxidation...etc. There is a reasonably decent list. This stuff can be extremely useful for expensive heavy use industrial equipment with large sumps where a periodic sample can be shipped off to Toromont or similar and evaluated to provide a snapshot of that machine's health and whether the oil is reaching the end of its serviceability. These are typically trended over the life of the machine and are monitored not only for the health of the lubricant, but also for anomalies that might suggest something amiss in the machine that warrants further investigation.

That help?

 

[irv]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: irv
So basically, the TBN numbers don't mean anything unless TAN numbers/info is also provided? Can you explain how both work and their relationship to one another? I don't quite understand all this?

Certainly

I wouldn't say that TBN doesn't mean "anything" but it is significantly less useful without TAN.

TBN = Total Base Number - it is the amount of base in the oil. This number starts out reasonably high, usually around 8-9 for a PCMO, it can be higher for an HDEO. This represents the oil's ability to neutralize acids. As this takes place, that number decreases, as there is less reserve; less base, left in the oil to perform that function.

TAN = Total Acid Number - This is how much acid is present in the oil. This number starts out extremely low and, as the oil remains in service, being polluted with combustion byproducts, blow-by gasses, which include sulphuric acids and the like, may start to creep up as the base used to neutralize the acids is depleted.

Generally, there was/is an old adage that stated that once TBN and TAN crossed, the oil was no longer serviceable. However, for certain oils with certain base stocks, that may not apply, but generally it is a good rule of thumb.

Now, as per what SOJ touched on, the TBN exists due to the presence of basic compounds which are part of the overall additive package. These products can vary blender-to-blender and also in effectiveness. Certain bases aren't necessarily ideal for neutralizing certain acids, so you can end up with uptick in TAN without the corresponding depletion in TBN, which is what SOJ was saying and why you can't just glance at TBN and always assume "I'm good!". Because you might not be. Now if you have TAN, like I did in my above reports, you can see that TAN is very low in both UOA's where it was provided, and there was a pretty decent difference in TBN between the two runs as well. In either instance the oil was still suitable for use based on those numbers, but the Petro-Canada Duron-E would have required changing sooner than the Mobil product based on what appears to be the trend.

TBN and TAN together, work to establish one of the parameters for an oil's suitability for continued use. They define a set of condemnation points that, if reached, require the oil to be changed. Other parameters are wear-metal uptake, nitration, oxidation...etc. There is a reasonably decent list. This stuff can be extremely useful for expensive heavy use industrial equipment with large sumps where a periodic sample can be shipped off to Toromont or similar and evaluated to provide a snapshot of that machine's health and whether the oil is reaching the end of its serviceability. These are typically trended over the life of the machine and are monitored not only for the health of the lubricant, but also for anomalies that might suggest something amiss in the machine that warrants further investigation.

That help?


That helps a lot!

Thanks.

 

[mbacfp]

Thanks Overkill...I really have enjoyed this thread.

 

[A76]

Thanks for all of your input. Question, would anyone be interested in me running 2 cycles of Pennzoil Ultra Platinum and than running another UOA? As you can see I drive ALOT and I would like to find the “best” oil I can. Although a must admit I don’t know whether it really matters in the long run (Mobil 1 versus Pennzoil). I say this because my wife’s 2002 Tahoe 5.3 has nearly 280,000 miles on it and for the first part if it’s life I ran Mobil 1 until I would say about 100,000 miles at that point I switched over to Valvoline max life for about the next hundred thousand and then for the last nearly 80,000 miles I have ran whatever was on sale at AutoZone and I’ve had zero issues although I have never performed a UOA on it. And my sons truck a 93 C1500 4.3 that my dad purchased new in 92 and has had lord only knows what oil in it until he gifted to my son has 290,000 on it and it runs like a top despite having a tapping lifter for the last 200,000 plus miles.

 

[zuluplus30]

Originally Posted By: mbacfp
Thanks Overkill...I really have enjoyed this thread.


Ditto. Senior members on BITOG are an invaluable resource.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

A76, try some Kreen to quiet that lifter!

 

[OilUzer]

some background info:
I got interested in this thread because i am using M1 0W-20 in one car and PPPP 5W-30 d1g2 in another and
searching through UOA forum led me to this thread ...
i don't have any agenda and/or not trying to pin one oil or one person against the other ...

btw, VERY informative discussion and maybe what i am going to ask has been discussed before but here we go:

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Given that the UOA isn't going to tell you anything important, I'd use the one that held its TBN better, which would be the first run from 2017. The results appear otherwise nary identical, which means you have a normal wearing engine with nothing obviously weird going on.


Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Regarding TBN 'retention'...

There's a story that's frequently peddled around the industry, that expensive, over based metallic Salicylate detergents are better on TBN retention than commoner and cheaper over based Sulphonates & Phenates.

This may or may not be true but even if it is, I would dispute the fact that 'TBN retention' is a good thing. The primary purpose of this class of additive is to neutralise acids that build up in the oil and keep that neutralised 'stuff' suspended in the oil. If you have two oils of equal starting TBN and after x miles, under identical conditions, one oil has a lower TBN than the other, then in my book, it has done a BETTER job at zapping acidic species than the other oil.

Think about it! Compare a busy man with an idle, blobby couch-potato. The latter might point to how superior he is in terms of 'shoe leather retention' but it's not the most meaningful of boasts is it?




based on what i have read on the internet

high TBN is good so OVERKILL first post totally makes sense to me.
then SonofJoe made a point that TBN retention may mean that it didn't neutralize the acids effectively. This also makes sense to me.
I also understand that these are all in the absence of TAN number ...

This made me wonder if it is possible that in the 2nd report, the TBN was high not because it was not effective but because there was less acid produced in this run hence the TBN was retained ... which leads me to my second question below.

my questions:
please let's not focus on OP UOA (and missing TAN numbers). I am also assuming UOAs are technically accurate.

-1-
Based on what i've learned in this thread higher TBN doesn't necessarily mean more acid (TAN) neutralization/effectiveness.
is this an industry undisputed fact?
yes or no is enough for me.

maybe you all are on the same page and i am sure we can all agree to disagree and as i said, i am not trying to pin very knowledgeable members against each other. I am trying to learn and sometimes I get impatient or can't absorb all the details hence my yes/no request. it also ends the discussion and prevents arguments ... lol

-2-
In general, can driving conditions significantly impact the TAN number? For example driving style (Grammy vs. teenage
son), ambient temp (summer vs. winter), load/towing, fuel type (high octane vs low/cheap gas, etc.)

Thank you and I really enjoy the information you all have provided so far!

 

[OilUzer]

Originally Posted By: OilUzer
... if it is possible that in the 2nd report, the TBN was high ...


correction: meant to say in the 1st report

also almost 30K miles between the UOA. how much that would impact TAN generation. older seals, etc.
that more in line with my second question.

... and older car, more TAN, hence lower TBN retention in 2nd UOA.
maybe these 2 oils are performing identical in regards with TBN, I am now pushing my own theory .. well more like a question than theory! lol
only if we had the TAN numbers!