Recent Topics
New Fave way to remove snow from vehicles
by JC1 - 11/12/19 08:19 PM
Shying Away From Havoline 5w30
by Mr_Luke - 11/12/19 08:00 PM
New Way To Wash A Car
by buster - 11/12/19 07:52 PM
Sealed vs open bearings. What's better?
by motor_oil_madman - 11/12/19 07:51 PM
Wix WL10290XP CUT OPEN GM 22psi
by LotI - 11/12/19 07:04 PM
Do high beams make you angry?
by 1978elcamino - 11/12/19 06:46 PM
VALVOLINE V0-148 CUT OPEN
by 53' Stude - 11/12/19 06:38 PM
VW Jetta oil filter CUT OPEN
by 53' Stude - 11/12/19 06:31 PM
Turtle Wax Seal & Shine On Top of Ice or Vice-Versa ?
by Dwight_Frye - 11/12/19 06:10 PM
Timing Cover Leak in Toyota/Lexus
by Gebo - 11/12/19 05:10 PM
Anyone running only Malwarebytes for security
by Donald - 11/12/19 05:07 PM
104+ Fuel Injector Pro ?
by ChrisD46 - 11/12/19 04:55 PM
Mobil 1 FS 0w40 vs Castrol 0w40
by Ndx - 11/12/19 04:14 PM
How often to drive a second car.
by SouthDakotaDad - 11/12/19 03:48 PM
Manufacturers, Bypasses & Large Sumps
by ad244 - 11/12/19 03:23 PM
Samsung DeX for PC
by dogememe - 11/12/19 03:19 PM
2008 Acura TL Timing Belt/Component Kit
by BAJA_05 - 11/12/19 02:06 PM
Newest Members
Hombre909, DeLong, Scuder, Jasonrmcc, Capacc
69840 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
102 registered members (25ring, 08z06, 92saturnsl2, 2_Tall_Mitchell, alchargo, 87sammy, 12 invisible), 2,180 guests, and 22 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics297,336
Posts5,113,276
Members69,840
Most Online3,589
Nov 2nd, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 42 of 44 1 41 42 43 44
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: OVERKILL] #5051414 03/22/19 08:41 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Does it not strike you as odd that M1 EP 0w-20 would have a 5.5% VII treat rate and its sibling, AP 0w-20, which has the same amount of PAO, is 10%? ... BTW, I noticed you used the KV40 for AP 0w-20 from the MSDS. I'd be hesitant to do that and here's why:

You're absolutely right. I took it from the MSDS and I don't have good data for M1 AP. Also, as you said, there is a lot of roundoff error etc.

Nevertheless, M1 EP and M1 AP are entirely different formulations, despite the 0W-20 grades having similar amounts of PAO -- likely in different ratios for the 4cSt and 6cSt base stocks though. If you look at the 5W-30 grades, not even the PAO ratios are anywhere close.

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
For Pennzoil Gold "blend" 0w-20 BTW, I think your sniffer is working properly. The MSDS shows 70-90% GTL LOL

Ha! We not only think but now we know that Pennzoil Gold 0W-20 is a GTL-based full synthetic! MSDS tells us: "Synthetic base oil and additives. The highly refined mineral oil is only present as additive diluent." And then it goes to say that the synthetic base oil is Fischer - Tropsch (GTL) with CAS # 848301-69-9, same as in Exxon Mobil MSDSs, which must be the Shell Pearl PurePlus GTL.

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
BTW, another thing I find interesting is that for the Gold 0w-20, the Pour Point is -48C. Given it is basically entirely GTL based, that points to a very light base oil and a significant dose of PPD. Even Yubase 4+ only has a PP of -15C:

https://www.repsol.com/imagenes/global/en/base_oils_gii_giii_tcm14-19328.pdf

Would be really nice if we had Noack...

Since pour points are primarily controlled by the PPD, I'm usually not worried about them.

Yes, if we had the Noack, then we could have calculated the BOQI. wink It wouldn't give us any new information though, only confirming that the base oil is very similar or identical to that of PPPP.

However... We can do a reverse BOQI II calculation to estimate the Noack for Pennzoil Gold. If we assume the same BOQI II for both, then we have:

Code
Oil              Noack           CCS             Note

PPPP 0W-20       10.3 or 10.1    5884 or 6068    (2017 or 2015 POIA data, respectively)
PG   0W-20       12.4 - 12.6     4881            (extrapolated using the BOQI II concept from the 2017 or 2015 POIA data, respectively)

So, the idea is simple: for the same base-stock slate, Noack x CCS should be the same for a given HTHSV. If HTHSVs are different, then HTHSV/(Noack x CCS) should be the same.

Therefore, since Pennzoil Gold uses a thinner GTL base oil than Pennzoil Platinum, it has a higher Noack; however, it's still below the 13% maximum for dexos1 Gen 2.


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5051451 03/22/19 09:22 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
O
OVERKILL Online Content
Online Content
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
- Yes, I don't think they are blended the same from an additive perspective, but I'd assume that they'd have similar VII treat-rates and if anything, the higher FP of AP points to a heavier blend which should theoretically result in a lower VII treat rate than EP shrug

- Regardling PPD's, I am sure there's some method to calculate their range of efficacy relative to base oil visc for Group 3 and lower. I know that they push down the crystal formation point, but I believe their ability to do that decreases as visc increases. You look at Super Synthetic for example, and its PP is only -39C. So there's something there I think.

- We are thinking the same thing about Noack, as it's a nice tell for base oil visc.

- So, one would necessarily conclude that the Gold product has more VII than we calculated, if the reverse BOQI calculation is correct. This yielded the higher Noack, pointing to a lighter base oil blend and thus more VII. It likely also explains the lower Pour Point.


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2016 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: OVERKILL] #5051501 03/22/19 10:46 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
- So, one would necessarily conclude that the Gold product has more VII than we calculated, if the reverse BOQI calculation is correct. This yielded the higher Noack, pointing to a lighter base oil blend and thus more VII. It likely also explains the lower Pour Point.

I think the A_Harman index and VII content for the two oils are roughly the same.

The 5 cSt GTL base stock has almost double the CCS of the 4 cSt GTL base stock. So, even if the KV100 of the two GTL base oils aren't that different, the CCS could be very different:

Dewaxing challenging paraffinic feeds in North America

So, it's fairly complicated. shrug


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5051688 03/23/19 07:53 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
O
OVERKILL Online Content
Online Content
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
- So, one would necessarily conclude that the Gold product has more VII than we calculated, if the reverse BOQI calculation is correct. This yielded the higher Noack, pointing to a lighter base oil blend and thus more VII. It likely also explains the lower Pour Point.

I think the A_Harman index and VII content for the two oils are roughly the same.

The 5 cSt GTL base stock has almost double the CCS of the 4 cSt GTL base stock. So, even if the KV100 of the two GTL base oils aren't that different, the CCS could be very different:

Dewaxing challenging paraffinic feeds in North America

So, it's fairly complicated. shrug


Indeed, I'd say it is. And unfortunately with the amount of rounded data we are dealing with, I think approximations are about as close as we are going to get.

Thanks for the link BTW! The data provided is why I think there may be something we aren't accounting for here when comparing say EP to Gold.

Using the two examples you noted, the 4cSt and 5cSt GTL bases, we see typical properties are:
4cSt:
KV100: ~4cSt
CCS @ -30C: 1,000cP
Pour Point: -30C
Noack: 12%
Flash: 215C

5cSt:
KV100: ~5.1cSt
CCS @ -30C: 1,860cP
Pour Point: -24C
Noack: 9%
Flash: 232C

8cSt:
KV100: ~8cSt
CCS @ -30C: 5,300cP
Pour Point: -15C
Noack: 2%
Flash: 240C

The 8cSt version throws CCS out the window, but could be blended with these two.

Contrarily, if we look at the SpectraSyn products in the same visc range:
4cSt:
KV100: 4.1cSt
CCS @ -30C: 910cP
CCS @ -35C: 1,424cP
Pour Point: -66C
Noack: 14%
Flash: 220C

5cSt:
KV100: 5.1cSt
CCS @ -30C: ~1,200cP (not listed)
CCS @ -35C: 2,420cP
Pour Point: -57C
Noack: 6.8%
Flash: 240C

6cSt:
KV100: 5.8cSt
CCS @ -30C: 2,260cP
Pour Point: -57C
Noack: 6.4%
Flash: 246C

8cSt:
Kv100: 8.0cSt
CCS @ -30C: 4,800cP
Pour Point: -48C
Noack: 4.1%
Flash: 260C

It would seem one could, logically, use the heavier PAO bases there and use less VII to achieve our final product here shrug Which seems to be supported by one of the XOM blending guides I'm sure you have on-hand as well, that shows a VII treat rate of just 2.6% for a PAO-based 0w-20, which leverages the 6cSt PAO as the primary base:
[Linked Image]


The 8cSt GTL also likely explains the wickedly low Noack's we saw on the earlier GTL lubes from Shell when Pearl first came online. This is where knowing the Noack's of the lubes in question would prove valuable, even knowing they will be skewed by the additives, it would help. Your 12% figure for the Gold product points to liberal use of the 4cSt base I would think shrug

If we look at AMSOIL's 0w-20, which we can assume is PAO-based, using the SpectraSyn product line:
KV100: 8.8cSt
[email protected] -35C: 5,122cP
Pour Point: -53C
Noack: 8.5%
Flash: 220C

That Noack figure again points to a heavier base oil blend than the Gold product if the 12% figure is correct, meaning a lower VII treat-rate, which runs contrary to the figures that the chart has yielded. This is fun stuff, but I think there's something we aren't accounting for perhaps that's screwing up the results?


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2016 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5051735 03/23/19 08:54 AM
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 11,294
PimTac Offline
Offline
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 11,294
It wasn’t all that long ago that Pennzoil Gold was a bit of a unicorn here. For the price point it is a great value. Then it started to become scarce. There was a theory that Pennzoil was using it mainly for their quick lube outlets. I haven’t seen it for a while a Wally’s.


2017 Mazda CX5
Havoline Pro DS 0w20
Roki OEM filter.
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: PimTac] #5051748 03/23/19 09:17 AM
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 2,045
1
1JZ_E46 Offline
Offline
1
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by PimTac
It wasn’t all that long ago that Pennzoil Gold was a bit of a unicorn here. For the price point it is a great value. Then it started to become scarce. There was a theory that Pennzoil was using it mainly for their quick lube outlets. I haven’t seen it for a while a Wally’s.


Non-existent at WM in store, but can be purchased online with free shipping for $19.64 a jug... at least in my area. For me personally I’d rather spend the extra $3 to get the A5/B5 spec.


2019 Tesla Model 3 SR+
2016 Countryman S: Castrol 0W-40
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: OVERKILL] #5051974 03/23/19 02:56 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
This is fun stuff, but I think there's something we aren't accounting for perhaps that's screwing up the results?

I think what's happening is that there is no linear relation between the KV100 and CCS. For example, when the KV100 for the GTL base stocks doubles, CCS is increasing by a factor of five.

For example, using the 4 cSt and 8 cSt base stocks, for KV100 = 5.0 cSt and 5.5 cSt, you get CCS = 1672 and 2098, Noack = 8.7% and 7.3%, respectively -- 10% and 25% difference in KV100 and CCS, respectively, and 19% difference in Noack -- significant difference in CCS and Noack but similar KV100 and VII treat rate.

Widman viscosity-mixing calculator:

https://www.widman.biz/English/Calculators/Mixtures.html


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5051996 03/23/19 03:30 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Regarding the VII treat rate, 1 - A_Harman index is not really equal to that. It's representing the viscosity temporary shear, which may be larger than the percent weight of the VII. For example, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, 2.6% VII treat rate is increasing the viscosity by about 50%, from about 5.6 to 8.6 cSt.

However, using 0.84 for the oil specific gravity, if I calculate the A_Harman index, I am getting 1.00 (0% shear). It's possible that the HTHSV given in the table is wrong. I would expect the temporary shear to be around 5% or so. shrug


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5052045 03/23/19 04:32 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear).

If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then

VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant,

with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives:

VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67

This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5052054 03/23/19 04:40 PM
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 316
D
Direct_Rejection Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 316
Where the devil did I read that Pennzoil Gold was 50-50.
And what I recall reading is that it is not GTL at all.

But I just looked.
Had to see it for myself.

So Pennzoil Gold 0W20 is indeed 70-90% Fischer-Tropsch.
The Pennzoil chart @ BITOG does list PG as not being Pure Plus.
So the CAS number substantiates this all.

Do I have this right ?

I do hope your scientific calculations are spot on.
I do not want too much plastic in my oil.

Also, I do not wish to besmirch M1 EP.
It is great stuff...just noisier in my truck.

I always thought the business of M1
producing larger amounts of iron by 10 or 20 ppm was a joke.
No big deal.
The oil is stellar.

BTW the gold cap on my jug of PG
is just a great accoutrement.
It is all good.

Beer2


2019 Lexus UX 250h F-Sport
PP 0W16
ILSAC GF-6B
"Fischer-Tropsch all day."
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Direct_Rejection] #5052074 03/23/19 05:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by Direct_Rejection
So Pennzoil Gold 0W20 is indeed 70-90% Fischer-Tropsch.
The Pennzoil chart @ BITOG does list PG as not being Pure Plus.
So the CAS number substantiates this all.

Do I have this right ?

Yup, Pennzoil Gold 0W-20 is a Pearl PurePlus GTL full synthetic -- 70 - 90% GTL and the rest is the add pack and VII.


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5052076 03/23/19 05:13 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
O
OVERKILL Online Content
Online Content
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
Originally Posted by Gokhan
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear).

If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then

VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant,

with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives:

VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67

This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.



thumbsup

That sounds more realistic.


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2016 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5052088 03/23/19 05:23 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
G
Gokhan Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,501
Originally Posted by Gokhan
So, according to the Exxon Mobil blending guide, you're getting a roughly 15% increase in the viscosity for every percent of VII added (not entirely linear).

If 5 - 15% of the VII temporarily shears in the HTHSV test, then

VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)*constant,

with the constant being in the range 0.5 - 1.5, depending on the VII. It's probably around 0.67 for the most commonly used OCP VII, which gives:

VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.67

This would give about a 4% VII treat rate in M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.

To give a better description:

VII treat rate = (1 - A_Harman index)/(VII viscosity-improve rate x VII shear rate)

VII viscosity-improve rate is about 15 in the XOM guide, meaning for every percent of VII added, you get about a 15% increase in viscosity. Shear rates can vary between a few percent and 20% or more, depending on the VII.

Estimating from the XOM guide again (correcting the 0W-20 HTHSV to 2.7 cP first),

VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.7

for the commonly used VII but the constant, taken to be 0.7 in this case, can vary between 0.2 and 2 if not in a wider range.

In fact, perhaps, 0.5 is a better estimate for a typical VII; then, you would get:

VII treat rate ~ (1 - A_Harman index)*0.5

This would give about a 3% VII treat rate for the M1 EP 0W-20 SN PLUS.


2020 Toyota Prius Prime XLE plug-in hybrid, 2ZR-FXE engine, ~ 0,000 mi
TGMO 0W-16 SN/RC Japan
OEM spin-on oil filter Japan
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Gokhan] #5052107 03/23/19 05:58 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,376
S
Shannow Offline
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,376
I made up a spreadsheet some time ago that used the blend guide and the PDS for the base oils to give the base oil viscosities and the base oil HTHS, and reated that to the VII treat rate.

Alas, the laptop failed to undergo the latest Win 10 update, and doesn't even boot anymore, so that's gone.


If it's the truth....it can handle the pressure !!!
Re: Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict [Re: Shannow] #5052123 03/23/19 06:12 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
O
OVERKILL Online Content
Online Content
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,608
Originally Posted by Shannow
I made up a spreadsheet some time ago that used the blend guide and the PDS for the base oils to give the base oil viscosities and the base oil HTHS, and reated that to the VII treat rate.

Alas, the laptop failed to undergo the latest Win 10 update, and doesn't even boot anymore, so that's gone.


Pull the drive, put it in a housing, and recover your data grin


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2016 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Page 42 of 44 1 41 42 43 44
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™