Another oil thread

[OnTheReel]

39 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

Depending on where in the world you are, the Mitsubishi 3A90/92 engine calls out anywhere from 0W20 to 20W50 

Slight digression but are you still looking at buying one of those?

[Grumpy Bear]

1 hour ago, OnTheReel said:

Slight digression but are you still looking at buying one of those?

 

I had the money saved. The tax man took it. I saved it up again. Dizzy the Destroyer took that. Got started again. Pepper needs new shoes. So, want, yea. Can I do it. Not likely. 

 

Did you watch that last video on viscosity? 

Edited July 11, 2024 by Grumpy Bear

[OnTheReel]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

I had the money saved. The tax man took it. I saved it up again. Dizzy the Destroyer took that. Got started again. Pepper needs new shoes. So, want, yea. Can I do it. Not likely. 

 

Did you watch that last video on viscosity? 

I did. I thought it was super cool inducing shear and then comparing the performance of the different VIIs. It was also neat seeing some of the inner workings of HPL and putting a face to the David I’ve chatted with a few times!

[Grumpy Bear]

50 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

I did. I thought it was super cool inducing shear and then comparing the performance of the different VIIs. It was also neat seeing some of the inner workings of HPL and putting a face to the David I’ve chatted with a few times!

 

Now, if you took a few screen shots of the data sets do you think you could make an educated guess as to both the base oil and the VM type used in a blend based on the PDS, MSDS and your UOA's/VOA's? Extra credit for this one.

 

Yes, this is "teach a man to fish" 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2024 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

11 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

You’re missing the point, probably on purpose. Europe and the US both have conditions that can vary from tropical to polar. Don’t you think it’s a little odd that the manual for the US implies that anything heavier than 0w16 is unacceptable while the same engine in Europe allows for anything up to 10w30. What’s the difference here besides impossible CAFE standards to achieve? It sure looks to me that viscosity is being selected based on efficiency, not wear protection.

 

He is and knows better. Wear and economy run in opposite directions. That said, there is a point where more (viscosity) isn't doing anything but adding friction, yes internal viscosity driven friction. Everything is to extremes with this guy. 

 

Since that point can be detected by an increase in 'sensible heat' you have a tool to decide if you have a means to measure bulk oil temperature. This tool is as old as the hills and just as reliable. IF an increase in viscosity DECREASES bulk temperature, then parts were touching parts, and it was the right decision. IF it does not affect temperature AND the virgin HTHS was below 3.5 cP, then you gained wear protection (up to 3.7). IF the temperature increased then you passed up the point of improvement. (There is a reason for Porsche/Audi/VW/MB/BMW pegging a minimum HTHS to an SAE grade whose more mainstream value is much lower). But even if you do pass it by a grade, you only loose some fuel economy. It doesn't damage your motor. 

 

But you do have to do this under the same operating conditions. For example, you may have enough for your daily driving and yet benefit from an increase while towing or racing. Yea, it's a temperature thing. (Hersey number). What? GM is okay with a viscosity increase on track days? D'oh! There is a reason 500 CID 1,400 HP NHRA Prostock motors do just fine on SAE-5 weight oils. Oil never gets to a road motors normal operating temperature. 

 

And this is IMPORTANT. There are lower SAE grade oils with higher HTHS values than higher SAE grade oils of a different chemistry. For example, Red Line HP, HPL, MPT30K, Ravenol and Torco all have 5W30 oils with as much or more HTHS than shelf oil 15W40 or SAE40 oils. Red Line HP has a *W20 with enough to EXCEED the minimum for a SAE30. Buy a bunch. 

 

Rings and cams, HTHS, journal bearings, SAE vis standards. I repeat, there is more than one part to your motor, and they are all DYNAMIC (changing in need). Lubricate for your worst case or be willing to change for situational conditions. 

 

Try this. Plug into your OBDII port something like a ScanGauge3 and plug on down the highway for at least an hour at 60 mph and note the steady state oil temperature. Actual not Estimated. Now repeat that in 5th gear (six speed) or whatever gear increases your rpm past 3K. You won't have to wait an hour. Imagine after doing this pulling your nameplate weight, even on the flat. Then ask yourself why you have 0W20 with a 2.9 cP HTHS in that sump. 

[Grumpy Bear]

15 hours ago, VicFirth said:

Something I've noticed with HPL.  Virgin oxidation to used oil sample oxidation.  With HPL we see it start around 23 and often jump up +20.  Sometimes it will go up a grade, sometimes it won't like in this case below.  Oxidation value is now 51 but it's still a 30 grade.  So is it not oxidizing?  

 

11,759 on oil - HPL PCMO 5w30

21 Chevy 1500 5.3L

130k miles on unit
Fram endurance FE10575 was used for the entire run.
Both oil and filter were changed using the exact same.

 

 

 

 I had to read this a few times to understand the question and the conditions. Sorry, not ignoring you. I didn't read customboss's replies. I read about 1 in 50 and am always sorry I do. 

 

Okay, you have on oil with almost 12K miles on it. The increase in oxidation is a result of....oxidation. HPL has pinned an increase of 25 ABS units to the VOA value as a warning. Generous. To me, that is a condemn value. And you're going to ask, "How can this be with an 8.7 TBN" The answer is in the test method HPL used. ASTM2896 uses a much stronger acid and gives larger values. Only lab I've seen use this test on a UAO. That's noteworthy.  It's also deceitful. IMHO unless they brought this to your attention. Did they? 

 

You're asking why it didn't change viscosity? We can't say that. Normally, viscosity drops a bit as the VM's and Dispersants shear down. But at some point as solids build it comes back up and can eventually exceed the original value. You would have to test vis incrementally to know. Besides, as you will see later in an attachment a rise or fall isn't automatic.  

 

Interesting read. I picked because of the visual aid AND the stated TBN method (ASTM 4739) is on the report for your comparison: 

 

HowLongCanIExtendMyOilDrain.pdf (oaitesting.com)

 

I strongly disagree with the condemnation target of 1 unit TBN. Well under the acid value and I don't have to test that to know it. 

 

Optimizing Drain Intervals Using TBN vs. TAN (machinerylubrication.com)

 

Note the unpredictable nature of the acid value v base value. 

 

Lastly, just note the iron in the graph presented in this article when compared to the TAN/TBN crossover. 

 

This sharp increase is FINE with the EPA and the oil companies are flocking to this new religion. It is NOT fine with me. 

 

What do Acid Number (AN / TAN) and Base Number (BN / TBN) mean on a lube oil sample analysis report? - LEARN OIL ANALYSIS

 

Tell me if I missed something you wanted to explore. 

 

Edited July 11, 2024 by Grumpy Bear

[customboss]

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

He is and knows better. Wear and economy run in opposite directions. That said, there is a point where more (viscosity) isn't doing anything but adding friction, yes internal viscosity driven friction. Everything is to extremes with this guy. 

 

Since that point can be detected by an increase in 'sensible heat' you have a tool to decide if you have a means to measure bulk oil temperature. This tool is as old as the hills and just as reliable. IF an increase in viscosity DECREASES bulk temperature, then parts were touching parts, and it was the right decision. IF it does not affect temperature AND the virgin HTHS was below 3.5 cP, then you gained wear protection (up to 3.7). IF the temperature increased then you passed up the point of improvement. (There is a reason for Porsche/Audi/VW/MB/BMW pegging a minimum HTHS to an SAE grade whose more mainstream value is much lower). But even if you do pass it by a grade, you only loose some fuel economy. It doesn't damage your motor. 

 

But you do have to do this under the same operating conditions. For example, you may have enough for your daily driving and yet benefit from an increase while towing or racing. Yea, it's a temperature thing. (Hersey number). What? GM is okay with a viscosity increase on track days? D'oh! There is a reason 500 CID 1,400 HP NHRA Prostock motors do just fine on SAE-5 weight oils. Oil never gets to a road motors normal operating temperature. 

 

And this is IMPORTANT. There are lower SAE grade oils with higher HTHS values than higher SAE grade oils of a different chemistry. For example, Red Line HP, HPL, MPT30K, Ravenol and Torco all have 5W30 oils with as much or more HTHS than shelf oil 15W40 or SAE40 oils. Red Line HP has a *W20 with enough to EXCEED the minimum for a SAE30. Buy a bunch. 

 

Rings and cams, HTHS, journal bearings, SAE vis standards. I repeat, there is more than one part to your motor, and they are all DYNAMIC (changing in need). Lubricate for your worst case or be willing to change for situational conditions. 

 

Try this. Plug into your OBDII port something like a ScanGauge3 and plug on down the highway for at least an hour at 60 mph and note the steady state oil temperature. Actual not Estimated. Now repeat that in 5th gear (six speed) or whatever gear increases your rpm past 3K. You won't have to wait an hour. Imagine after doing this pulling your nameplate weight, even on the flat. Then ask yourself why you have 0W20 with a 2.9 cP HTHS in that sump. 

My purpose? You are truly an internet wanker. 

[customboss]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I didn't read customboss's replies. I read about 1 in 50 and am always sorry I do. 

 

Again wanker x2. 

[customboss]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

. But at some point as solids build it comes back up and can eventually exceed the original value

That is TOTALLY false. “Solids”???? Thicken the oil??
If you read me at all reply to this.

 

Remember dear readers here eating that this guy is a keyboard warrior. His knowledge is from Google search and while he makes funny comments mixed with biblical messages he is pretty much ignorant of actual science of materials. oh he does post cute pics and graphs too. 
 

OnTheReel you are on the hook believing Grumpy the master fisherman. 
 

Again oils viscosity don’t thicken from “solids”. 

[customboss]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

Tell me if I missed something you wanted to explore.

I’m telling you Grumpy Cat Fisher 

[customboss]

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Wear and economy run in opposite directions.

Absolute lie. If an engine was designed to run ideally on X viscosity lubricant why would you, dear Internet troll change it arbitrarily? 
 

Even Toyota states that they prefer 0W20 in markets overseas where you can get it for the engine OnTheReel referenced. 
 

There are some markets you can’t get certain oils. 

[VicFirth]

5 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

 I had to read this a few times to understand the question and the conditions. Sorry, not ignoring you. I didn't read customboss's replies. I read about 1 in 50 and am always sorry I do. 

 

Okay, you have on oil with almost 12K miles on it. The increase in oxidation is a result of....oxidation. HPL has pinned an increase of 25 ABS units to the VOA value as a warning. Generous. To me, that is a condemn value. And you're going to ask, "How can this be with an 8.7 TBN" The answer is in the test method HPL used. ASTM2896 uses a much stronger acid and gives larger values. Only lab I've seen use this test on a UAO. That's noteworthy.  It's also deceitful. IMHO unless they brought this to your attention. Did they? 

 

You're asking why it didn't change viscosity? We can't say that. Normally, viscosity drops a bit as the VM's and Dispersants shear down. But at some point as solids build it comes back up and can eventually exceed the original value. You would have to test vis incrementally to know. Besides, as you will see later in an attachment a rise or fall isn't automatic.  

 

Interesting read. I picked because of the visual aid AND the stated TBN method (ASTM 4739) is on the report for your comparison: 

 

HowLongCanIExtendMyOilDrain.pdf (oaitesting.com)

 

I strongly disagree with the condemnation target of 1 unit TBN. Well under the acid value and I don't have to test that to know it. 

 

Optimizing Drain Intervals Using TBN vs. TAN (machinerylubrication.com)

 

Note the unpredictable nature of the acid value v base value. 

 

Lastly, just note the iron in the graph presented in this article when compared to the TAN/TBN crossover. 

 

This sharp increase is FINE with the EPA and the oil companies are flocking to this new religion. It is NOT fine with me. 

 

What do Acid Number (AN / TAN) and Base Number (BN / TBN) mean on a lube oil sample analysis report? - LEARN OIL ANALYSIS

 

Tell me if I missed something you wanted to explore. 

 

I can't get an accurate baseline oxidation value for HPL but from what I've seen so far from half a dozen VOA's it looks to be around 23 or so.  I've heard some say 30.  So it jumped a solid 20-25 or so.  

 

here is a question for you guys - if the oil is thickening/oxidizing, will the polar POE and AN base oils prevent deposits from forming due to the solvency?  In other words, can oils built like this that use polar V base oils handle oxidation longer without resulting in piston deposits?  

 

HPL uses a ton of metallic additives.  In one of their grades they use 1,990ppm of Mg.  And that's in addition to Ca. 

[OnTheReel]

17 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

Now, if you took a few screen shots of the data sets do you think you could make an educated guess as to both the base oil and the VM type used in a blend based on the PDS, MSDS and your UOA's/VOA's? Extra credit for this one.

 

Yes, this is "teach a man to fish" 

 

 

 

 

I think I could. Based on his data I’m gonna guess Pennzoil Ultra (Group III+) is also using the Infinium star VII since it shears about the same as the M1 in his test. If that. OCP wouldn’t surprise me either given the poor performance and cheap nature of that stuff.
 

I’ll withhold a guess on the HPL Super Car until I have another sample looked at. It didn’t hold up very well the last time, nowhere near Red Line.

[Grumpy Bear]

5 hours ago, VicFirth said:

I can't get an accurate baseline oxidation value for HPL but from what I've seen so far from half a dozen VOA's it looks to be around 23 or so.  I've heard some say 30.  So it jumped a solid 20-25 or so.  

 

here is a question for you guys - if the oil is thickening/oxidizing, will the polar POE and AN base oils prevent deposits from forming due to the solvency?  In other words, can oils built like this that use polar V base oils handle oxidation longer without resulting in piston deposits?  

 

HPL uses a ton of metallic additives.  In one of their grades they use 1,990ppm of Mg.  And that's in addition to Ca. 

 

Kind of like asking how much dirt will mop water hold before it starts laying down more dirt than it picks up. The crossover is an indicator of 'saturation'. Believe it, don't believe it. I don't try to walk as close to the edge of the cliff as I can. I use the crossover when I have that data and 50% TBN reduction when I don't. I do what I do. Others run it into the dirt, then run it some more.

 

We use rules of thumb because every case is different. Not the oil, the circumstances. It's why some sampling and patients learning how to read it works better than some random mileage of time value.  

 

I've used Pro's. They stink for that reason. Actually, cause more damage than they prevent. They have an agenda and a method and all they see are the test results, not the inside of the motor. They don't live with it. Hear it. Smell it. See it. An no matter how smart they think they are they can tell you if the bite of pie will taste good to YOU and what color you poop will be. 

 

Don't make me start uploading audio files and emails. Change the HPFP should have been the first move, not the last AFTER damage done.  Reading teat leaves in nitration numbers.  It has to be plugs, boots, coils and on and on and one. Trust me he says, I'm an expert.  

Edited July 11, 2024 by Grumpy Bear

[OnTheReel]

8 hours ago, customboss said:

That is TOTALLY false. “Solids”???? Thicken the oil??
If you read me at all reply to this.

 

Remember dear readers here eating that this guy is a keyboard warrior. His knowledge is from Google search and while he makes funny comments mixed with biblical messages he is pretty much ignorant of actual science of materials. oh he does post cute pics and graphs too. 
 

OnTheReel you are on the hook believing Grumpy the master fisherman. 
 

Again oils viscosity don’t thicken from “solids”. 

I go where logic leads me. Fuel economy drives everything these days. Engineering and longevity is in the back seat. When the recommendation for the same engine goes from 5w30, to 5w20, to 0w20 in the course of 15 years while CAFE standards increase AND the oil change interval increases…that tells me everything I need to know. People still can’t figure out why their engine eats a cam every 75k. Really?