Uniform molecule size and viscosity modifiers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019

Yes I agree to that but some synthetics have for example a blend of pao 6 and pao 8 and vm's. So this oil does not have uniformly sized molecules. I got thinking about all this is because I was thinking of taking m1 0w16 a largely pao based oil and adding a small quantity of pyb 20w50 to thicken it a tad bit for summer type temperatures. I think it will be a better viscosity modifier in warmer climates.

Or you could just run a thicker oil in the summer months instead of playing oil formulator? Be mindful that PAO doesn't play well with [all] additives. PAO has more compatibility issues for a formulator to contemplate than say a Grp2 or 3 mineral. The mineral base stock of PYB should be fine but aside from thickening the M1, the pyb may have additives that aren't PAO friendly. (ppd's, VII's, sca's etc)

And here I thought the specd 0/16 was good year round..


The additives will not clash. SN rating. Warm temperature use.
2029 Rav4 hybrid owners manual states higher viscosity can be used for high speeds heavy loads etc. Cross country trips qualify for higher viscosity.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019

Yes I agree to that but some synthetics have for example a blend of pao 6 and pao 8 and vm's. So this oil does not have uniformly sized molecules. I got thinking about all this is because I was thinking of taking m1 0w16 a largely pao based oil and adding a small quantity of pyb 20w50 to thicken it a tad bit for summer type temperatures. I think it will be a better viscosity modifier in warmer climates.

Or you could just run a thicker oil in the summer months instead of playing oil formulator? Be mindful that PAO doesn't play well with [all] additives. PAO has more compatibility issues for a formulator to contemplate than say a Grp2 or 3 mineral. The mineral base stock of PYB should be fine but aside from thickening the M1, the pyb may have additives that aren't PAO friendly. (ppd's, VII's, sca's etc)

And here I thought the specd 0/16 was good year round..


The additives will not clash. SN rating. Warm temperature use.
2029 Rav4 hybrid owners manual states higher viscosity can be used for high speeds heavy loads etc. Cross country trips qualify for higher viscosity.

I don't think you fully grasped what I stated...but you do you. Good luck...ðŸ‘
 
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019

Yes I agree to that but some synthetics have for example a blend of pao 6 and pao 8 and vm's. So this oil does not have uniformly sized molecules. I got thinking about all this is because I was thinking of taking m1 0w16 a largely pao based oil and adding a small quantity of pyb 20w50 to thicken it a tad bit for summer type temperatures. I think it will be a better viscosity modifier in warmer climates.

Or you could just run a thicker oil in the summer months instead of playing oil formulator? Be mindful that PAO doesn't play well with [all] additives. PAO has more compatibility issues for a formulator to contemplate than say a Grp2 or 3 mineral. The mineral base stock of PYB should be fine but aside from thickening the M1, the pyb may have additives that aren't PAO friendly. (ppd's, VII's, sca's etc)

And here I thought the specd 0/16 was good year round..


The additives will not clash. SN rating. Warm temperature use.
2029 Rav4 hybrid owners manual states higher viscosity can be used for high speeds heavy loads etc. Cross country trips qualify for higher viscosity.

I don't think you fully grasped what I stated...but you do you. Good luck...ðŸ‘


Pennzoil is a reputable company. They would not add additives in pyb that are not pao friendly and then say compatible with synthetics.
 
I still don't see how a grp 3 oil can be called "synthetic" when according to what I keep reading here that it's just a "cleaner" mineral oil via catalytic dewaxing. If something is "synthetic",by definition doesn't it have to be "fake" per se,not derived from crude petroleum?

I can see how GTL can be called synthetic since it's an oil made from a natural gas.
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019


Pennzoil is a reputable company. They would not add additives in pyb that are not pao friendly and then say compatible with synthetics.


That's not how it works. Oils are blended to meet performance and price points. Those performance characteristics are a broad lot, including cold temperature performance, high temperature stability, AW...etc. This blend is tested as a whole; as a fully formulated product, which is then submitted/tested for approvals. When you mix different oils, particularly those from different brands with very different additive packages and bases, you have now torpedoed that balance. That doesn't mean that it is going to cause failure or create damage, but it does mean that the resultant blended product will likely perform poorer on some, or even all, of those tests than either of its constituents when tested alone.

The most likely thing to be compromised is cold temperature performance, as PAO has exceptional cold temperature performance and requires very little, if any, PPD's. Group III and other bases require PPD's to prevent the formulation of wax crystals and the resultant blend of bases may have insufficient PPD's and so the W rating is affected. Other possibilities are competing friction modifiers or AW additives. If one brand in the mix uses Moly and another uses Titanium, you end up with a final product with half as much moly as was intended to be in the one and half the Titanium that was intended to be in the other and these two products aren't typically blended together.

So there are a variety of ways for the end product to be negatively affected here. While oils are intended to be miscible, that is in no way meant to be an endorsement for mixing them together intentionally.
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
When a full oil film cannot be maintained the antiwear additives do their job. I get that.
But how about those scenarios where the vm molecule is going from large round molecule to a straightened one. Is that not because it is taking the initial blunt of the load. If the vm molecule was smaller than base oil molecule would it not stay a small round molecule until the oil molecules shears.


The oil film thickness between parts is a function of the oil viscosity, which is dependant on the oil's formulation. Independant molecules don't "take the blunt of the load" unless the MOFT decreases to the point of actual metal to metal contact and those AW molucules do their job.

Even the largest oil additive is magnitudes smaller in size than the normal hydrodynamic MOFT in an operating engine. So bigger molucules in the oil formulation do not "take or pad the load" on an independant basis.
 
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I still don't see how a grp 3 oil can be called "synthetic" when according to what I keep reading here that it's just a "cleaner" mineral oil via catalytic dewaxing. If something is "synthetic",by definition doesn't it have to be "fake" per se,not derived from crude petroleum?

I can see how GTL can be called synthetic since it's an oil made from a natural gas.

Read this👇...it involves more than de-waxing. It's been altered at the molecular level.

Base oil differences

"Group III oils are sometimes advertised as synthetics. There is an understanding that the refining process has severely modified the original hydrocarbon, thus synthesizing the more highly pure product"
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019


Pennzoil is a reputable company. They would not add additives in pyb that are not pao friendly and then say compatible with synthetics.


That's not how it works. Oils are blended to meet performance and price points. Those performance characteristics are a broad lot, including cold temperature performance, high temperature stability, AW...etc. This blend is tested as a whole; as a fully formulated product, which is then submitted/tested for approvals. When you mix different oils, particularly those from different brands with very different additive packages and bases, you have now torpedoed that balance. That doesn't mean that it is going to cause failure or create damage, but it does mean that the resultant blended product will likely perform poorer on some, or even all, of those tests than either of its constituents when tested alone.

The most likely thing to be compromised is cold temperature performance, as PAO has exceptional cold temperature performance and requires very little, if any, PPD's. Group III and other bases require PPD's to prevent the formulation of wax crystals and the resultant blend of bases may have insufficient PPD's and so the W rating is affected. Other possibilities are competing friction modifiers or AW additives. If one brand in the mix uses Moly and another uses Titanium, you end up with a final product with half as much moly as was intended to be in the one and half the Titanium that was intended to be in the other and these two products aren't typically blended together.

So there are a variety of ways for the end product to be negatively affected here. While oils are intended to be miscible, that is in no way meant to be an endorsement for mixing them together intentionally.


I stated use in warmer climates so ppd and winter concerns are irrelevant. Not blending for fuel efficiency but engine protection and wear.
I gave a specific example of m1 and pyb. Not general blending.
Here I am considering blending 4 to 4.25 quarts of m1 0w16. with 1 or 0.75 quart of 20w50 for rav4 hybrid. That engine can take anywhere from 0w16 to 15w40 so it can accommodate a lot of specs.
I have run 50 50 mix of m1 0w16 and pyb 20w50 in other older vehicles with only good observations.

Random blending is not good. If you have some info regarding the above blends in warm climates that would be appreciated.
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019


Pennzoil is a reputable company. They would not add additives in pyb that are not pao friendly and then say compatible with synthetics.


That's not how it works. Oils are blended to meet performance and price points. Those performance characteristics are a broad lot, including cold temperature performance, high temperature stability, AW...etc. This blend is tested as a whole; as a fully formulated product, which is then submitted/tested for approvals. When you mix different oils, particularly those from different brands with very different additive packages and bases, you have now torpedoed that balance. That doesn't mean that it is going to cause failure or create damage, but it does mean that the resultant blended product will likely perform poorer on some, or even all, of those tests than either of its constituents when tested alone.

The most likely thing to be compromised is cold temperature performance, as PAO has exceptional cold temperature performance and requires very little, if any, PPD's. Group III and other bases require PPD's to prevent the formulation of wax crystals and the resultant blend of bases may have insufficient PPD's and so the W rating is affected. Other possibilities are competing friction modifiers or AW additives. If one brand in the mix uses Moly and another uses Titanium, you end up with a final product with half as much moly as was intended to be in the one and half the Titanium that was intended to be in the other and these two products aren't typically blended together.

So there are a variety of ways for the end product to be negatively affected here. While oils are intended to be miscible, that is in no way meant to be an endorsement for mixing them together intentionally.


I stated use in warmer climates so ppd and winter concerns are irrelevant. Not blending for fuel efficiency but engine protection and wear.
I gave a specific example of m1 and pyb. Not general blending.
Here I am considering blending 4 to 4.25 quarts of m1 0w16. with 1 or 0.75 quart of 20w50 for rav4 hybrid. That engine can take anywhere from 0w16 to 15w40 so it can accommodate a lot of specs.
I have run 50 50 mix of m1 0w16 and pyb 20w50 in other older vehicles with only good observations.

Random blending is not good. If you have some info regarding the above blends in warm climates that would be appreciated.


You'd be better served, if you want something a touch heavier, running a fully formulated lubricant that reflects that, like M1 AFE 0w-30 IMHO.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL


You'd be better served, if you want something a touch heavier, running a fully formulated lubricant that reflects that, like M1 AFE 0w-30 IMHO.

That's what I said but OP likes playing formulator.

This is my last post in this thread...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019


Pennzoil is a reputable company. They would not add additives in pyb that are not pao friendly and then say compatible with synthetics.


That's not how it works. Oils are blended to meet performance and price points. Those performance characteristics are a broad lot, including cold temperature performance, high temperature stability, AW...etc. This blend is tested as a whole; as a fully formulated product, which is then submitted/tested for approvals. When you mix different oils, particularly those from different brands with very different additive packages and bases, you have now torpedoed that balance. That doesn't mean that it is going to cause failure or create damage, but it does mean that the resultant blended product will likely perform poorer on some, or even all, of those tests than either of its constituents when tested alone.

The most likely thing to be compromised is cold temperature performance, as PAO has exceptional cold temperature performance and requires very little, if any, PPD's. Group III and other bases require PPD's to prevent the formulation of wax crystals and the resultant blend of bases may have insufficient PPD's and so the W rating is affected. Other possibilities are competing friction modifiers or AW additives. If one brand in the mix uses Moly and another uses Titanium, you end up with a final product with half as much moly as was intended to be in the one and half the Titanium that was intended to be in the other and these two products aren't typically blended together.

So there are a variety of ways for the end product to be negatively affected here. While oils are intended to be miscible, that is in no way meant to be an endorsement for mixing them together intentionally.


I stated use in warmer climates so ppd and winter concerns are irrelevant. Not blending for fuel efficiency but engine protection and wear.
I gave a specific example of m1 and pyb. Not general blending.
Here I am considering blending 4 to 4.25 quarts of m1 0w16. with 1 or 0.75 quart of 20w50 for rav4 hybrid. That engine can take anywhere from 0w16 to 15w40 so it can accommodate a lot of specs.
I have run 50 50 mix of m1 0w16 and pyb 20w50 in other older vehicles with only good observations.

Random blending is not good. If you have some info regarding the above blends in warm climates that would be appreciated.


You'd be better served, if you want something a touch heavier, running a fully formulated lubricant that reflects that, like M1 AFE 0w-30 IMHO.


But I would like to keep the vm''s down as much as I can.
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019


But I would like to keep the vm''s down as much as I can.


Given this product doesn't have a super high VI, I doubt it has a massive dose of VII in it. Given you are in the US, you could also order Ravenol from Blauparts, their 5w-30 probably has next to no VII in it.
 
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Solarent has a good discussion here on VII's:

Viscosity Modifiers

Oh boy, gonna take me a bit to read that. But tx..

Anything to add to the discussion beyond the shared BITOG thread?
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
Sorry I meant operating temperature. What I meant to ask:
So are vm''s providing the padding at operating temp and not the base oil ?

It would serve you well to read up on VM'S. Part 2 of this 3 part "lesson" from Lubrizol addresses your question better than I can.

Lubrizol - VM's


Thanks. I read it. It appears at operating temperature vm''s provide the padding and not base oil ?



What do you mean by "padding?" Are you equating this to "cushioning?"
 
The way I take the OP's comments is that he believes that the comparatively larger VI and other add pack molecules act better to "take the load" or "pad"/"cushion" the parts from contacting.

As mentioned on page 1 of this thread, oil and the additive molecules are 1000s of times smaller (Angstroms vs microns) than the nominal MOFT between engine parts. Therefore, it's the viscosity of the oil as a whole that prevents metal to metal contact between parts. Not the individual size of some of the molecules in the oil. Of course the specific formulation of the total oil package can determine it's viscosity at operating temperature.
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
The way I take the OP's comments is that he believes that the comparatively larger VI and other add pack molecules act better to "take the load" or "pad"/"cushion" the parts from contacting.

As mentioned on page 1 of this thread, oil and the additive molecules are 1000s of times smaller (Angstroms vs microns) than the nominal MOFT between engine parts. Therefore, it's the viscosity of the oil as a whole that prevents metal to metal contact between parts. Not the individual size of some of the molecules in the oil. Of course the specific formulation of the total oil package can determine it's viscosity at operating temperature.


Thanks. That's what I was getting at but you explained it better.

Rav4H2019:

This is my understanding. VM's have tendrils that trap oil in all directions. When the nesting spoon phenomenon occurs the overwhelming force is perpendicular to the surfaces, hence aligning the VM tendrils parallel trapping less oil. This in turn reduces the drag, viscosity, and MOFT much like reducing flaps on an airplane. At that point it's the base oil viscosity that becomes a more important factor in maintaining an adequate hydrodynamic film. I would imagine the VM's would still have a lesser effect but how much I'm not sure.
 
Warm temperatures is the intended application.

Don't need ppd. No need to worry about ccs or mrv.

4 quarts of M1 0w16 and 1 quart of pyb 20w50 after rebates is 17 bucks or so.

So rather than adding viscosity modifiers why not mix heavier base oil ? Would that not result in a better hydrodynamic film ? Heavier base oil will not collapse or curl up like the viscosity modifier. Viscosity modifiers shear permanently for a reason ?
 
Originally Posted by Rav4H2019
... 4 quarts of M1 0w16 and 1 quart of pyb 20w50 after rebates is 17 bucks or so. ...
So is 5 quarts of 5W-20 or 10W-30, either of which would have more predictable properties, and be low in viscosity modifier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

BigTimeTA
Speculations about viscosity I need input on.
Replies
1
Views
553
MolaKule
G
Oobleck fork oil.
Replies
2
Views
289
barryh
Camperguy
3.6 Pentastar viscosity done by clearance and temperature
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
kschachn
B
Mobil 1 success
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
7K
IndyFan
F
I Would Like to Try a 5W30 in my 2022 Pathfinder
2 3
Replies
46
Views
5K
CKN
Back
Top