Synthetic Oil

Ha ha just messing with indept and the rest of you fellas [emoji16][emoji16]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

U&A said:

My engine noise was put into perspective today when we all went outside early to start a vehicles about five minutes before the day was over. I was parked next to a buddy with his Chrysler 300. it has the 3.6 in it. His engine was noisier than my 6.4.

I hope my redline wear numbers are as equally impressive.

Click to expand...

Are you running just straight 0/40? I remember when you said you were gonna change to redline but don't remember 0/40, 5/40, or any extra additives.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Ramnewbie said:

Are you running just straight 0/40? I remember when you said you were gonna change to redline but don't remember 0/40, 5/40, or any extra additives.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

My own concoction of redline. I only did it for the additives in the oil. Originally was going to go with straight 0W 40 but I’m leery of the 0W weights because of the VVI’s. The additive levels in 0W 40 are excellent though.

Than I was thinking maybe I’ll try 5W 40 but once I found a VOA I was just a little disappointed in the level of zinc, phosphorus and moly. Zinc and phosphorus were both right at or slightly under 1000 PPM. If I remember correctly Molly was right around 400 somthing which is fairly low in terms of redline oil but it’s still a significant amount.

I really wanted to try a redline that had Molly in the 600 ppm and zinc and phosphorus at or above 1200.

I got that by mixing 0W 40 and 10W-40 and basically made a 7W 40. Those two weights had high numbers of the additives i was looking for. Was it necessary to mix. Probobly not. But that’s what I did for the first time.

I’m on the fence about what my next oil change is going to be reguarding weights. Being I will change it for a summer run next I have been considering straight 10 W 40. I may bite the bullet and do 5W 40 next winter but I have time to decide. I really don’t want to mix. It just kinda happened. I was in a hurry for my oil change because of my start up tic. Wasn’t planning on changing it for another 4000 miles or so but when the tic started I had to get the redline in.

Forgot to mention.... No additives. I wont ever use them with redline.

If I ever use anything else (oil choice i mean) I might use them just for testing purposes as far as wear numbers and engine sound goes. But I don’t ever see that happening.

I wouldn't assume Redline uses VII's, PAO's can be made in many viscosities as sure as Esters as well. Dave has said they don't use VII's, I would email him and see what he says today. VII's have use in motor oil, I take responsibility for them primary thought of as negative products, it was not my intent. You can't have multi grade group 3 oils w/o them. The industry has an acceptable amount they add to oils, some boutique oils don't have the same unwritten rules as the industry, some may use more then others and ignore the negative attributes in order to appear like they have a better base oil.

In fact some day we all may be adding a cup of VII's every 1,000 miles in order to benefit from the branch chain polymerization and not have the negative effects of when the VII's loose their chain. It is bad in the ghetto to loose your chain, it is worse in oil to loose your VII's chain. Millions are being spent to develop a self healing VII, when that happens it will make oil near bullet proof. It will likely be the new evolution in engine oils. In most applications when the branch chains fail, there are no issues in that engine. There are enough oil molecules to lubricate.

Burla said:

I wouldn't assume Redline uses VII's, PAO's can be made in many viscosities as sure as Esters as well. Dave has said they don't use VII's, I would email him and see what he says today. VII's have use in motor oil, I take responsibility for them primary thought of as negative products, it was not my intent. You can't have multi grade group 3 oils w/o them. The industry has an acceptable amount they add to oils, some boutique oils don't have the same unwritten rules as the industry, some may use more then others and ignore the negative attributes in order to appear like they have a better base oil.

In fact some day we all may be adding a cup of VII's every 1,000 miles in order to benefit from the branch chain polymerization and not have the negative effects of when the VII's loose their chain. It is bad in the ghetto to loose your chain, it is worse in oil to loose your VII's chain. Millions are being spent to develop a self healing VII, when that happens it will make oil near bullet proof. It will likely be the new evolution in engine oils. In most applications when the branch chains fail, there are no issues in that engine. There are enough oil molecules to lubricate.

Click to expand...

Is there a way to tell if VII's and the amount are being used?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Well if it is group 3, they are being used, only in theory if you have a group 4 or 5 base would they possibly not be used. HTHS is a hint if they are being used, but the atsm's don't have deep enough tests to tell. A voa and then a uoa on a long run would be a good look if there is VII's. Also, anything testing fresh oils seizure rate or when an oils siezes can be a good look at well. Just like VII's are branch chain, so is Prolong engine treatment, when the chain is locked, it is very hard to make the metal seize. However, in that case it is actually chlorinated, so widely accepted that is dangerous to an engines in real terms of risk, VII's not as much. Chlorinated Paraffins can be made in many types of branched chain, from short to long, VII's can also be made with different characteristics.

Oil is not polar and has no chains branched or other. The base oil lubricates by density. Esters are loosely polar and very dense, and thus why they lubricate so much more effectively. But they also are not branch chained in the same sense, the bond is weak in those terms, so in a sense if they find a way to make a branch chain that self heals, they will likely be better then esters but only if we are talking about the same exact viscosity.

Burla said:

Well if it is group 3, they are being used, only in theory if you have a group 4 or 5 base would they possibly not be used. HTHS is a hint if they are being used, but the atsm's don't have deep enough tests to tell. A voa and then a uoa on a long run would be a good look if there is VII's. Also, anything testing fresh oils seizure rate or when an oils siezes can be a good look at well. Just like VII's are branch chain, so is Prolong engine treatment, when the chain is locked, it is very hard to make the metal seize. However, in that case it is actually chlorinated, so widely accepted that is dangerous to an engines in real terms of risk, VII's not as much. Chlorinated Paraffins can be made in many types of branched chain, from short to long, VII's can also be made with different characteristics.

Oil is not polar and has no chains branched or other. The base oil lubricates by density. Esters are loosely polar and very dense, and thus why they lubricate so much more effectively. But they also are not branch chained in the same sense, the bond is weak in those terms, so in a sense if they find a way to make a branch chain that self heals, they will likely be better then esters but only if we are talking about the same exact viscosity.

Click to expand...

Ok, bare with me here, you're starting to get over my head. So you can have an outstanding base with no VII, or you could have a good base with VII's to make it look like the outstanding base. VOA,s on both would look similar. So for the normal lay person the only way to tell the difference would be a UOA on both to see if they are both staying in grade?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Burla.,

I will contact him again for the sake of this but the last time i talked to him he said they do use them in their 0W’s. Maybe I misunderstood somthing he said thou as it was a long conversation with lots of questions and answers.

Side note: redline actually gives you an answer as opposed to others that avoid the question or dont tell you a damb thing.

U&A said:

Burla.,

I will contact him again for the sake of this but the last time i talked to him he said they do use them in their 0W’s. Maybe I misunderstood somthing he said thou as it was a long conversation with lots of questions and answers.

Side note: redline actually gives you an answer as opposed to others that avoid the question or dont tell you a damb thing.

Click to expand...

That would make sense. I'm treading on the edge of what I understand about all this but 0 wt's across the board are more volital than others. Is this because of the VII's breaking down?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

UOA w/o a VOA would not show the difference in Viscosity, you would need to verify the staring visc. That wasn't over your head, I specifically was brief and clear, what part did you not get?

U&A said:

Burla.,

I will contact him again for the sake of this but the last time i talked to him he said they do use them in their 0W’s. Maybe I misunderstood somthing he said thou as it was a long conversation with lots of questions and answers.

Side note: redline actually gives you an answer as opposed to others that avoid the question or dont tell you a damb thing.

Click to expand...

Cool, if he said they use them in the zero weights, then they do. Makes sense, also makes sense more would be in 0w40 then 0w20 as well.

From Aston on VII's, newbie read that, it should answer your question.

From Link... (they thicken when hot = NOACK)

When viscosity index improvers are added to low-viscosity oils, they effectively thicken the oil as temperature increases. This means the lubricating effect of mineral oils can be extended across a wider temperature range.

This sounds good, and is good, until the branch chains break apart under engine usage. It still isn't the end of the world when the branch chains break down, there still is dense base oil protecting metal, but obviously the metal is more susceptible to shear the more VII's that are used. I'm kinda done on this point, unless someone doesn't understand it, PM me.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/1327/viscosity-index-improvers

From Link..

As the additive is repeatedly sheared, it loses its ability to act as a more viscous fluid at higher temperatures. Higher molecular weight polymers make better thickeners but tend to have less resistance to mechanical shear. Lower molecular weight polymers are more shear-resistant, but do not improve viscosity as effectively at higher temperatures and, therefore, must be used in larger quantities.

You can add these to get a great NOACK, but you see the potential cost to the metal?

Redline 5w20 vs PUP 5w20
Finally finished the Pennzoil UOA program
Oil Filter: Royal Purple
8,000 mile OCI
Also removed catch can for entire test



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

PUP has proved & is still proving to be a Outstanding Oil!
Your filter selection is top notch as well!

8K miles on the oil & still come back with 5.1 TBN—-> That is Ridiculous!
Shell hit a home run with the GTL process.

That is some of the lowest wear numbers in a hemi by both oils. PUP always has better wear numbers then Redline, or any oil for that matter.

Burla said:

UOA w/o a VOA would not show the difference in Viscosity, you would need to verify the staring visc. That wasn't over your head, I specifically was brief and clear, what part did you not get?

Click to expand...

I'm learning, so far it's all making sense. You should have been my chemistry teacher, I would have probably gotten a better grade.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

About shearing and loosing viscosity... that the reason im truly not interested in a 0W anything. Im still going to call him tomorrow for 100% clarification. This really puts me in a tight spot for winter oil choice.

I've always heard that the bigger the spread between the numbers the more susceptible it is for shearing. Which makes me wander we just got some 10/60 Castrol in the store that has a BMW spec on it. European cars usually have a high OCI so is Castrol blowing smoke or is it really some good stuff? I guess the beemer guys can worry about that.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Squidbilly,

Thank you sir for taking the time to post your EXCELLENT uoa. Even the redline numbers are great. It makes me want to try PUP again.

Edit: (for clarification) when i say “it makes me want to try PUP again” what im really saying is “since iv gone redline ill probably never use anything else, so i only said that to give PUP a pat on the back”. LOL

U&A said:

Squidbilly,

Thank you sir for taking the time to post your EXCELLENT uoa. Evev the redline numbers are great. It makes me want to try PUP again.

Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, but is Pennzoil gonna stay that way since it's got the doughnut? At least with redline not having the doughnut it might stay high in Zddp and moly.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
You might ask that guy if they're gonna leave their blue label alone since they came out with the new line for the LSPI issue. If they're gonna leave blue label like it is I think i'd opt for it over the Pennzoil.

Squidbilly said:

Redline 5w20 vs PUP 5w20
Finally finished the Pennzoil UOA program
Oil Filter: Royal Purple
8,000 mile OCI
Also removed catch can for entire test



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Pup!!!!!!