NOAK improvement

[Overfill]

I've been bouncing around the idea of how to improve NOAK by purchasing off-the-shelf products, with and two have come to mind/ can't seem to find answers on here:
1. Is NOAK for monograde oils generally lower than multigrades?
2. [considering STP synthetic oil treatment is in a large part just high viscosity Group III with minor additive additions] could [this] STP gold bottle be added to reduce NOAK?

Both of these are based on the question/idea that base oil is more resistant to burn-off than VII/"plastics" and various other ingredients put into blends, and more so with PAO/GTL/Gr3. Is this wrong?

Also note: I totally understand I could look up NOAK numbers on multigrades, but that's not really what this is about: I want to understand more.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

AFAIK, your only choice is to buy a better oil with a lower NOACK. Q1 is yes, Q2 is no. I know there are other factors, but generally speaking, a higher viscosity index will bring a higher NOACK level from what I have seen. It doesn't always hold true, but as a rule of thumb, oils with a VI in the 140s will have a significantly lower NOACK than oils with 170-200+ VI. I'm not a formulator so I can't give you specifics on why this happens.

 

[SR5]

I assume you mean Noack volatility. But yes, I see your logic.

It's very hard to get Noack figures for monogrades, but you would expect them to be lower. I've been looking hard for these figures.

I finally found Mag-1 it has great data sheets and for their SAE30 mineral oil, lists the Noack = 6.1 % (D6375).

They also have a conventional 10W30 multigrade. The difference in the Noack is enormous, the 10W30 has 14.5 % volatility. That is more than double the SAE 30.

Just google Mag 1 SAE 30 to see for yourself. Their monograde is API SN rated with a modern add pack. I assume the other SN SAE30 monogrades from Pennzoil, Castrol, etc would be similar.

So yes, adding a bit of SAE 30 to your regular oil should lower the Noack, and if you stick to the same brand, the add packs should be very similar. All this assume a mild climate, above freezing would be my line in the sand.

 

[SR5]

Mag-1 SAE 30 API SN
Quote:
SG / Density = 0.877
KV40 = 87.96 cSt
KV100 = 10.94 cSt
VI = 110
Zinc = 850 ppm (0.085 wt%)
SA = 0.92 %
TBN = 7.0 (D2896)
Noack = 6.1 % (D6375)
HTHS = 3.38 cP at 150 C
Boron = 180 ppm
Ca = 1900 ppm (0.19 wt%)
Moly = 40 ppm
FP = 210 C (D92)
PP = -33 C
Sulphur = 0.3 wt%

 

[CT8]

NOACK ?? The crankcase is full of oil splash and vapor with the engine running.. NOACK is how the oil thickens.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
I know there are other factors, but generally speaking, a higher viscosity index will bring a higher NOACK level from what I have seen. It doesn't always hold true, but as a rule of thumb, oils with a VI in the 140s will have a significantly lower NOACK than oils with 170-200+ VI. I'm not a formulator so I can't give you specifics on why this happens.


Not a good correlation between VI and Noack in the 5W-30 full synthetic oils I compared.

 

[andyd]

Go get a snack and a drink.This is just the first draft. I started my 528e with a sump full of dino 10w40 at -17 F . Above 15F, I ran 20w50 for 350 K miles. Generally, there is a trend for 5w** or 0w**.It is way over compensating for cold weather. It is kinda like the new cars coming with a spare in a can. Thin oil has no margins for stuff happening. Hot weather traffic jams, a leaky cooling system, general malaise ,etc. This was proven to me one terrible night in January, of course, When a leaky radiator and a novice behind the wheel over heated to the extent that # 4 piston had been detonated through and the rod was trashed in the process. It had 20w50 Castrol dino in it. This was '81. The engine was 1.6 Datsun used in the 510s and the pickups. I repaired the engine with used parts, a re-done head and a new radiator. the rod shells were perfect, Ran it until it was rusty and the twins came. I always used 20w50 as long as the temp stayed above 15 F.Once th warranty expires on the Camrys, I intend to look into 5w30 or 40. 0w20 is scary stuff, I doan care how great it is.

 

[LEADED]

Or you can shy away from API 5W-30 PCMO period & use an ACEA lube , problem solved .

 

[SuperSalad]

You could lower your evaporative loss percentage with a thick, non-volatile additive, but it isn't going to affect the actual amount of loss through evaporation. The oil will still is volatile by fractions or light vs. heavy and the lighter fraction won't be stopped just because thicker material is mixed in.

Yes, it could slow it down some, but I doubt by any real noticeable amount.

 

[Overfill]

Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
You could lower your evaporative loss percentage with a thick, non-volatile additive, but it isn't going to affect the actual amount of loss through evaporation. The oil will still is volatile by fractions or light vs. heavy and the lighter fraction won't be stopped just because thicker material is mixed in.

Yes, it could slow it down some, but I doubt by any real noticeable amount.


Dang. This is exactly what I was wondering.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: MotoTribologist
You could lower your evaporative loss percentage with a thick, non-volatile additive, but it isn't going to affect the actual amount of loss through evaporation. The oil will still is volatile by fractions or light vs. heavy and the lighter fraction won't be stopped just because thicker material is mixed in.

Yes, it could slow it down some, but I doubt by any real noticeable amount.


Good point !
Yes the light volatile fraction from the PCMO is still there, though the total amount may be reduced if you add a monograde. But it's the volatile part that is the issue and that part is still present.