PP 0w20 - SP/GF-6 PDS

Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
37,910
Location
NJ
Platinum is still maintaining 50% cleaner pistons compared to industry standard (IIIH) test, which is excellent. What's interesting is the 0w20 has a VI of 182. Quite high.

I'm curious what gives PP the ability to keep the level of cleanliness they claim. They oversell GTL so much (plastered on everything to no end) not much else is known about their oils. And they were never a big on posting Noack based on the Q&A due to poor repeatability of the test itself.

PP 0w20 PDS
 
I use PP with no complaints. But, what does "up to" 50% cleaner mean? If the pistons are 4% cleaner, that would be included in "up to 50%".

Also that claim is "Based on ILSACGF-6A and Sequence III H piston deposit test using SAE5W-30." Their engineers and lawyers must believe that the cleaning components in 5w30 are similar enough to those in 0W20 to make these assertions?

Just asking. It seems similar to oil filter companies making broad claims based on testing of one model of filter.
 
They seem to have thinned the base oil, increased the VII content, and decreased the HTHS by 0.1 cP.

Note: I estimated the HTHS indirectly by relying on some assumptions as the HTHS is not provided in the PDS's. (I adjusted the HTHS until the BO VI is the same for both the SN PLUS and SP versions and points to a GTL base oil, with the caveat that the BO VI cannot be reliably calculated with a simple formula.)

The fuel-economy criteria are a lot stricter in SP/GF-6 than in SN (PLUS)/GF-5, and we are seeing many blenders decreasing the HTHS and increasing the viscosity index (VI) to be able to safely pass the new fuel-economy tests. Hopefully the improved detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) packages in SP/GF-6 are keeping the engine wear low.

Automated calculator for the A_Harman index, VII content, and base-oil viscosity
 
Originally Posted by Gokhan
They seem to have thinned the base oil, increased the VII content, and decreased the HTHS by 0.1 cP.
...
The fuel-economy criteria are a lot stricter in SP/GF-6 than in SN (PLUS)/GF-5, and we are seeing many blenders decreasing the HTHS and increasing the viscosity index (VI) to be able to safely pass the new fuel-economy tests. Hopefully the improved detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) packages in SP/GF-6 are keeping the engine wear low. ...
In other words, following the lead of earlier Japanese-style 0W-XX fuel-economy oils?
 
Quote
Hopefully the improved detergent-dispersant-inhibitor (DDI) packages in SP/GF-6 are keeping the engine wear low.


thumbsup2.gif
 
Gokhan - do you know if we're all going to be forced into SP as gasoline engine only motor oil choice? I mean, I don't get why they're chasing 0.0001% fuel economy increase with engine oil reformulations? Because they can? Have nothing better to do?
 
Originally Posted by LubricatusObsess
Gokhan - do you know if we're all going to be forced into SP as gasoline engine only motor oil choice? I mean, I don't get why they're chasing 0.0001% fuel economy increase with engine oil reformulations? Because they can? Have nothing better to do?

SP has other advantages, too, like more strict deposit control, slower oxidation, etc. Moreover, at least Idemitsu has made its SP oils thicker than their SN versions.
 
They are claiming better timing chain protection … not sure how they got there …
 
Originally Posted by 4WD
They are claiming better timing chain protection … not sure how they got there …

I think It's mainly by better dispersants to keep the abrasive soot particulates produced from direct injection apart so that they don't stick together and grow, inflicting higher wear.

Characterisation of soot in oil from a gasoline direct-injection engine using TEM

"The particle number concentration emitted by GDI engines are generally higher than conventional PFI engines and Diesel engines equipped with Particulate Filter (DPF). Most of the soot produced is expelled from the cylinder with the exhaust gases but a small proportion is transferred from the cylinder to the lubricating oil. Soot is likely to migrate into the oil film early during the expansion stroke [8]; consequently, the morphology, agglomeration and other characteristics of soot-in-oil are likely to be rather different to exhaust soot. Soot-in-oil has not been subject to oxidation processes to the same extent and hence the outer shell structure is more likely to remain intact. Although only a small proportion of the soot formed in the combustion chamber transfers to the engine oil, it contributes to the lubricant degradation. This is certainly a new challenge for the modern GDI engine as soot-in-oil raises concerns upon wear and engine durability. It is well established that oil thickening has a complex dependence on soot [9]. Various investigators [10], [11] have shown that diesel soot build up in oil gives rise to increased engine wear rates; Gautam et al. [12] reported that wear increases with higher soot concentration. Soot reduces the effectiveness of anti-wear additives and its effect on wear depends upon the characteristics of the particles and agglomerates of soot. Abrasive wear occurs and wear scar width closely matches the primary particle size [10]. Oil thickening was found to enhance timing chain elongation due to abrasive action of soot on pins and bushing [13]. Bardasz et al. [14] studied the influence of high number of engine cycles on lubricant oil and that of oil characteristics on engine wear, comparing direct injection and port fuel injection engines and finding increased wear for the first category. There is also a growing interest within the automotive industry to better understand the complex interactions between soot morphology and properties of lubricating oil."

The reason for the soot formation in direct-injection engines is the presence of liquid fuel in the cylinders, but the actual mechanism is fairly complicated and not completely understood,

Soot formation in direct-injection spark-ignition engines under cold-idle operating conditions
 
Originally Posted by Ram02
Ugh PP 0w20 still have a low flash point . People still gonna oil consumption using PP 0w20.


I didn't realize oil consumption was a problem with PP 0w20.
 
Originally Posted by buster
Originally Posted by Ram02
Ugh PP 0w20 still have a low flash point . People still gonna oil consumption using PP 0w20.


I didn't realize oil consumption was a problem with PP 0w20.




I don't think he realizes it either. Also, he mentioned people consuming oil so maybe he is looking at this from a different angle? ...³
 
Originally Posted by buster
Originally Posted by Ram02
Ugh PP 0w20 still have a low flash point . People still gonna oil consumption using PP 0w20.


I didn't realize oil consumption was a problem with PP 0w20.



Ahh yes indeed it is a problem when ever other brand of 0w20 doesn't consume oil but pp0w20 ðŸ™
 
Originally Posted by Ram02
Ugh PP 0w20 still have a low flash point . People still gonna oil consumption using PP 0w20.

The flash point has nothing to do with oil consumption as far as I know. It's more of a safety thing for storing oil.

In a healthy engine under medium loads, oil volatility leads to ~ 30% of the total oil consumption, the rest coming from the liquid transport by the valve-stem oil seals and piston rings (~ 60%) and liquid oil mist in blowby through PCV (~ 10%). Therefore, a lower Noack volatility will somewhat help. However, for light loads the oil consumption is almost entirely through liquid transport. See Figure 29 in the following paper.

The contribution of different oil-consumption sources (PDF link)*
*The contribution of different oil-consumption sources to total oil consumption in a spark-ignition engine
Ertan Yılmaz, Tian Tian, Victor W. Wong, and John B. Heywood
Sloan Automotive Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
 
PP , Other use ASTM D93 which translates to lower reading in C° compared to Mobil 1 reading ASTM D92 . D93 will show around 25 C° lower in a PCMO .
 
Back
Top