Mobil 1 0W-20

[qqzj]

Let's make a fair comparison, Pennzoil Platinum 0w-20 vs. Pennzoil Platinum 5w-20, is the 0w always better than 5w? I do not know. But judging from the appearance, there is nothing against 0w-20, but at least one thing that is against 5w-20. Any educated explanation will be helpful.

Originally Posted by gpshumway

Outperform them at what? Cold cranking and cold pumpability? Of course they do, that's what having a lower 'W' number means. But for most users, being able to start the car at -35*C is not very important. There are many performance criteria which are much more important to most users in the lower 48. Saying that 0w oils will outperform their 5w and 10w counterparts is an oversimplification and could lead to sub-optimal oil selection in many cases. How about deposit formation? Shear stability? Temporary shear ratio? Volatility (NOACK)?

Pennzoil Platinum 0w20 of course uses better base stocks than Pennzoil Conventional 5w20, but it doesn't use better base stocks than Pennzoil Ultra 5w20. The Ultra 5w20 would be an excellent choice for a N/A 86 used in anger and the Ultra 10w30 (at least the old formula) should be a good starting point for a forced induction car. Both grades have boutique oil performance in the areas I mentioned above while costing half as much and being available at Walmart.

Another example: In the VW/Audi world Mobil 1 ESP Formula 5w30 causes fewer intake deposits and stands up to fuel dilution better in the direct-injection cars than M1 0w40. M1 ESP uses some of Mobil's best base stocks, search "mobil 1 new live" for a presentation indicating such and showing that the latest 0w40 formulation was developed from the ESP Formula.

[bluesubie]

Several years ago, one could easily assume that any 0W-x oil had a good bit of Group V base stocks. After an internal XOM document was discovered, we now know that 0W-x oil can indeed be made from Group III base stocks and most companies are blending different synthetic base stocks. Mobil1 uses Group III (Visom), Group IV, and Group V.

Looking at xW-20's in an FT86, I would take a 5W-20 over a 0W-20 any day since I'm not concerned about cranking viscosity at -30 or -35C or a .5% improvement in fuel economy for the first 10 minutes of driving. Generally speaking, a 5W-20 will have a higher kinematic viscosity, HTHS and better NOACK volatility than a comparable 0W-20. IMO, those data points are better in hard driven cars.

Take Pennzoil Platinum w/Pure Plus:
0W-20
Viscosity @ 100C = 8.3 cSt
NOACK volatility = 10.8
(Unfortunately, Shell doesn't list the HTHS)

5W-20
Vis @ 100C = 8.8 cSt
NOACK = 10.5

And Mobil1:
0W-20
Vis @ 100C = 8.7
HTHS = 2.7

5W-20
Vis @ 100C = 8.9
HTHS = 2.75
(unfortunately no NOACK listing)

For other comparisons of xW-20's, take a look at Amsoil. They offer at least three 0W-20's and three 5W-20's among the same oils (Signature, XL, and OE). All of the 5W-20's have higher kinematic viscosity, HTHS, and better NOACK than their 0W-20's.

Sure, this is all splitting hairs but it's actually difficult to assume that a 0W-20 is better than a 5W-20 or vice versa. In hard driven cars, I would always go with a higher HTHS though.

-Dennis

[gpshumway]

Originally Posted by qqzj

Let's make a fair comparison, Pennzoil Platinum 0w-20 vs. Pennzoil Platinum 5w-20, is the 0w always better than 5w? I do not know. But judging from the appearance, there is nothing against 0w-20, but at least one thing that is against 5w-20. Any educated explanation will be helpful.

How is my comparison not fair? SubieNate is contending that 0w oils are necessarily superior in every way than their 5w and 10w counterparts, which is an oversimplification, as I said. I picked Ultra for good reason, Pennzoil's flagship product didn't even come as a 0w oil until very recently. That product's claim to fame was deposit prevention. Coincidence?

I already mentioned some ways in which oils with higher W numbers are superior to their 0w counterparts. Go look up the specs. Pennzoil Platinum 0w20 has a NOACK of 10.8% while the 5w20 is 8.6%. All 5w20 oils must pass the TEOST 33C turbocharger deposit formation test which is part of ILSAC GF-5, 0w20 oils are not required to pass that test. SOPUS has stated that the type and quantity of viscosity modifiers in oil is a primary contributor to intake valve deposits, so the less, the better for DI cars. A quick look at UOAs will show that high quality synthetic 5w20 oils tend to be more shear stable than their 0w20 counterparts.

W numbers are all about performance in extreme cold, for those of us in cold climates that's important, but usually only for 1/3 of the year. Many here live South of the Mason-Dixon line and are looking for oil that can stand up to high temperatures. Optimal oil selection is about making compromises in the areas of performance which are least important, so for many users the W number is the first place to compromise.

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted by gpshumway

SOPUS has stated that the type and quantity of viscosity modifiers in oil is a primary contributor to intake valve deposits, so the less, the better for DI cars. A quick look at UOAs will show that high quality synthetic 5w20 oils tend to be more shear stable than their 0w20 counterparts.

-Dennis

[qqzj]

Thanks a lot for the explanation. So since in live nearby SF, does it mean that I should go for Pennzoil Ultra 0w-20 during winter months and PU 5w-20 during summer months? I shall probably do this after warranty is over. Thanks a lot.

Originally Posted by gpshumway

How is my comparison not fair? SubieNate is contending that 0w oils are necessarily superior in every way than their 5w and 10w counterparts, which is an oversimplification, as I said. I picked Ultra for good reason, Pennzoil's flagship product didn't even come as a 0w oil until very recently. That product's claim to fame was deposit prevention. Coincidence?

I already mentioned some ways in which oils with higher W numbers are superior to their 0w counterparts. Go look up the specs. Pennzoil Platinum 0w20 has a NOACK of 10.8% while the 5w20 is 8.6%. All 5w20 oils must pass the TEOST 33C turbocharger deposit formation test which is part of ILSAC GF-5, 0w20 oils are not required to pass that test. SOPUS has stated that the type and quantity of viscosity modifiers in oil is a primary contributor to intake valve deposits, so the less, the better for DI cars. A quick look at UOAs will show that high quality synthetic 5w20 oils tend to be more shear stable than their 0w20 counterparts.

W numbers are all about performance in extreme cold, for those of us in cold climates that's important, but usually only for 1/3 of the year. Many here live South of the Mason-Dixon line and are looking for oil that can stand up to high temperatures. Optimal oil selection is about making compromises in the areas of performance which are least important, so for many users the W number is the first place to compromise.

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted by qqzj

Thanks a lot for the explanation. So since in live nearby SF, does it mean that I should go for Pennzoil Ultra 0w-20 during winter months and PU 5w-20 during summer months? I shall probably do this after warranty is over. Thanks a lot.

No need to switch to 0W-20 just for winter, IMO. See gp's earlier reply above:

Originally Posted by gpshumway

Outperform them at what? Cold cranking and cold pumpability? Of course they do, that's what having a lower 'W' number means. But for most users, being able to start the car at -35*C is not very important. There are many performance criteria which are much more important to most users in the lower 48.

A 0W must pass the cold cranking viscosity test at -35C and a 5W must pass it at -30C.

http://www.pqiamerica.com/coldcrank.htm

Now if you're planning a winter trip to Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, you might want to switch to a 0W-20. Otherwise, no worries.


-Dennis

[SubieNate]

The information I read contended that the 0w oils, due to having to use different base stocks to reach the 0w rating, would over time shear down less than the 5w and 10w competition. E.g. after 3000 miles of use, at full operating temp they would still be acting like a 0w30 or 0w20, whereas a 10w30 might start acting like a 10w25 or a 5w20 might start acting like a 5w15.

In the case of the M1 afe 0w20 vs regular M1 5w20, the argument was similar to the difference between US and German Castrol. Better base stocks in the Ow making it perform better even at the 20 end of the spectrum. Regular US spec M1 doesn't seem to be anyone's favorite but the are seems to be well liked, similar to the German/euro spec stuff.

Now. This may have come out before it was revealed that some manufacturers have successfully made 0w oils from the "lower quality" base stocks as mentioned. Or itay be specific to certain lines or brands.

Remember, oil companies are under no obligation to use exactly the same stock mixture or even quality from weight to weight in the same line. They're all about the bottom line, and if they can meet their requirements with a less expensive blend, they will, as 99% of consumers don't know our care to know the difference.

The PP 0w20 has a stellar NOACK score and middle of the road viscosity index. This should indicate a lower level of viscosity modifiers than say the Toyota OEM oil. Per the SOPUS paper on deposits, this should be helpful. Hence my choice to use it.

Thanks for helping to clarify my three sentence generalization.

Cheers
Nathan

[qqzj]

This makes sense as well. If SubieNate is correct 5w20 could be better fresh after oil change. But 0w20 could be better after 5000 miles. This would be consistent with both sides. Waiting for further help/clarification.

Originally Posted by SubieNate

The information I read contended that the 0w oils, due to having to use different base stocks to reach the 0w rating, would over time shear down less than the 5w and 10w competition. E.g. after 3000 miles of use, at full operating temp they would still be acting like a 0w30 or 0w20, whereas a 10w30 might start acting like a 10w25 or a 5w20 might start acting like a 5w15.

In the case of the M1 afe 0w20 vs regular M1 5w20, the argument was similar to the difference between US and German Castrol. Better base stocks in the Ow making it perform better even at the 20 end of the spectrum. Regular US spec M1 doesn't seem to be anyone's favorite but the are seems to be well liked, similar to the German/euro spec stuff.

Now. This may have come out before it was revealed that some manufacturers have successfully made 0w oils from the "lower quality" base stocks as mentioned. Or itay be specific to certain lines or brands.

Remember, oil companies are under no obligation to use exactly the same stock mixture or even quality from weight to weight in the same line. They're all about the bottom line, and if they can meet their requirements with a less expensive blend, they will, as 99% of consumers don't know our care to know the difference.

The PP 0w20 has a stellar NOACK score and middle of the road viscosity index. This should indicate a lower level of viscosity modifiers than say the Toyota OEM oil. Per the SOPUS paper on deposits, this should be helpful. Hence my choice to use it.

Thanks for helping to clarify my three sentence generalization.

Cheers
Nathan

[SirBrass]

Originally Posted by supramkivtt2jz

rumor has it that subaru engines dont like mobil 1... but i have 6 quarts sitting in my closet for my next oil change.

That was back with non-synth mobile 1. Current Mobile 1 does just fine in the EJs (the engines which were notorious with Mobile 1 non-synth oil).

[AZP Installs]

Originally Posted by SirBrass

That was back with non-synth mobile 1. Current Mobile 1 does just fine in the EJs (the engines which were notorious with Mobile 1 non-synth oil).

Interesting, unless they changed it in the past 2 years, it still is consumed for no reason on EJ turbo motors here in the NY/NJ area...

-Mike Paisan


Maintaining, Modifying and Educating TriState Enthusiasts since 2001.
Like us on Facebook! | E-mail: sales@azpinstalls.com | 725 Fairfield Ave | Kenilworth, NJ 07033 | 908.248.AZP1 (2971) |AIM: AZP Installs
"Race Tested, Enthusiast Approved!"

[reardrv]

When I had my 09 WRX I use Mobil 1 5w-30 quite often, that or Penzoil Platinum depending on which was cheaper at the time. Changed every 3,750 miles per the owners manual, with plenty of trips to New England Dragway and daily driven in everything from sub zero NH winters to hot summer traffic jams on Hampton beach. I sold the car with just over 40,000 miles on it and in that time it never used a drop of oil. I check my oil level constantly, including right before doing an oil change, and my oil level was always at the full line.

[gpshumway]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

The information I read contended that the 0w oils, due to having to use different base stocks to reach the 0w rating, would over time shear down less than the 5w and 10w competition. E.g. after 3000 miles of use, at full operating temp they would still be acting like a 0w30 or 0w20, whereas a 10w30 might start acting like a 10w25 or a 5w20 might start acting like a 5w15.

Where did you read that? It's not even close to correct. You seem to be getting caught up in the Group III vs PAO/Ester thinking about the "quality" of base stocks. It's the viscosity modification additives that shear, not the base stock, and generally speaking 0w oils have more than 5w or 10w oils. Take Redline for example, all their oils are PAO/Ester, the 5w30 has no VIIs at all, while the 0w30 needs some to meet the 0w requirements. As a result, the HTHS, shear stability and temporary shear ratio of the 5w30 is substantially better than the 0w30.

In the case of the M1 afe 0w20 vs regular M1 5w20, the argument was similar to the difference between US and German Castrol. Better base stocks in the Ow making it perform better even at the 20 end of the spectrum.

Which German Castrol? The original "green" formula or the later "gold" one? The former was more shear stable than the latter. I saw 10%+ shear with GC in my WRX. UOA history is here.

Regular US spec M1 doesn't seem to be anyone's favorite but the are seems to be well liked, similar to the German/euro spec stuff.

Are you referring to M1 formulations other than the ILSAC grades as well liked? M1 seems to design their ILSAC grades to shear on purpose, why they do this I haven't figured out, but most of their thicker grades are more shear stable today. The old 0w40 was not, however, often coming out of an engine thinner than supposedly thinner GC. The new API SN 0w40 is much more shear stable, and coincidentially made from Group III base stock where the old API SM formula was PAO.

M1 AFE 0w20 actually has quite poor shear stability, often shearing more than 15% in use. I know this from personal experience using it in my R18 powered Civic. The 5w20 is more shear stable. Strangely, AFE 0w30 is also more shear stable than AFE 0w20, at least that's my father's experience in his Subaru Outback 3.6. At least one user had good stability with AFE 0w30 in a Forester XT as well.

My latest UOA with AFE 0w20 is here, with a link to prior thread in the first post. Another UOA for M1 AFE 0w20 in a Civic is here, 6.8 cSt KV100!

Now. This may have come out before it was revealed that some manufacturers have successfully made 0w oils from the "lower quality" base stocks as mentioned. Or itay be specific to certain lines or brands.

Remember, oil companies are under no obligation to use exactly the same stock mixture or even quality from weight to weight in the same line. They're all about the bottom line, and if they can meet their requirements with a less expensive blend, they will, as 99% of consumers don't know our care to know the difference.

The PP 0w20 has a stellar NOACK score and middle of the road viscosity index. This should indicate a lower level of viscosity modifiers than say the Toyota OEM oil. Per the SOPUS paper on deposits, this should be helpful. Hence my choice to use it.

Thanks for helping to clarify my three sentence generalization.

Cheers
Nathan

And here you've hit on it, oil companies are not under any obligation to use their "best" ingredients in every oil, and there's always the bean-counter driven temptation to cut costs and make up for bad quality with good marketing. See Mobil 1 5w30 ILSAC GF-4 for an example. Unfortunately 0w requirements don't stop them from taking the low road. 0w oils have the most stringent requirements, but those requirements are irrelevant to the vast majority of users and can be met with "low quality" base stocks and a big dose of pour-point modifiers and viscosity index improvers. Not a good thing. In the end we simply have to evaluate each oil formulation individually, which means reading the PDS carefully, sifting the marketing speak through a giant BS filter, and filling in the gaps with UOA data. Hardly a perfect process, but its the best we've got.

PP 0w20 has a very good NOACK for a 0w20, but I wouldn't call it stellar at 10.8%. The prior formaula of Pennzoil Ultra 5w20 had a NOACK of 6%. Mobil 1 ESP 5w30 and Redline 5w30 are also in the 6% range.

Originally Posted by qqzj

This makes sense as well. If SubieNate is correct 5w20 could be better fresh after oil change. But 0w20 could be better after 5000 miles. This would be consistent with both sides. Waiting for further help/clarification.

Yea, but SubieNate is not exactly correct. If you were to formulate the cheapest 0w20 oil that would meet the minimum requirements and compared it to the cheapest 5w20 oil it would be hard to tell which was worse. Both would be bad, the least bad choice would depend on the engine and how it was used.

Luckily oil formulators have multiple product lines and the need to differentiate between those lines gives us some confidence in the quality of 5w and 10w grades. If SOPUS were truly cynical they'd re-package Pennzoil Conventional in bottles labeled "Platinum" and "Ultra" and market it at suitably inflated prices, but they're not that cynical. Platinum really is better than PYB and Ultra is a slight step up from Platinum. Same goes for all the formulators.

A quick look at the PDS and UOAs bears this out, PU 10w30 is an excellent oil for high temperature use provided it's the right viscosity and extreme cold starts aren't on the menu.

Originally Posted by SirBrass

That was back with non-synth mobile 1. Current Mobile 1 does just fine in the EJs (the engines which were notorious with Mobile 1 non-synth oil).

1 - What's Mobile 1? I assume you mean Mobil 1.

2 - There's no such thing as non-synthetic Mobil 1. XOM's non-synthetic oil is called Mobil Super, formerly Mobil Clean 5000. I assume you're getting caught up in the Group III vs PAO/Ester nonsense. The general consensus is the ILSAC GF-4 formulation of Mobil 1 5w30 was substandard, but that's not due to the base stock, it's the additive package. Most ILSAC GF-4 5w30 oils turned into 5w20 in turbo Subarus, its just that M1 was the most common choice among those who didn't study the manual and see that thicker grades were required for high temperatures or heavy use. GF-5 oils are better, but still too thin for my comfort in a turbo EJ Subaru engine. That doesn't make them "bad" oils though, just mis-applied. A slightly thicker oil with the same additive package should be great in a turbo EJ, which is the theory I'm testing right now with Mobil 1 ESP formula 5w30 in my WRX.

[qqzj]

Thanks, for folks in warmer areas and other folks in summer, how would you rank the typically oils we can buy at Walmart for BRZ? Is it like this?

M1 5w20 > PU 5w20 > Gastrol 5w20 > PP 5w20 > Valvline 5w20 = Quaker State 5w20, and similar ranking for 0w20's?

I probably will switch to 5w20 after warranty is over and my current stock pile of 0w20 is gone.

Originally Posted by gpshumway

Where did you read that? It's not even close to correct. You seem to be getting caught up in the Group III vs PAO/Ester thinking about the "quality" of base stocks. It's the viscosity modification additives that shear, not the base stock, and generally speaking 0w oils have more than 5w or 10w oils. Take Redline for example, all their oils are PAO/Ester, the 5w30 has no VIIs at all, while the 0w30 needs some to meet the 0w requirements. As a result, the HTHS, shear stability and temporary shear ratio of the 5w30 is substantially better than the 0w30.



Which German Castrol? The original "green" formula or the later "gold" one? The former was more shear stable than the latter. I saw 10%+ shear with GC in my WRX. UOA history is here.

Are you referring to M1 formulations other than the ILSAC grades as well liked? M1 seems to design their ILSAC grades to shear on purpose, why they do this I haven't figured out, but most of their thicker grades are more shear stable today. The old 0w40 was not, however, often coming out of an engine thinner than supposedly thinner GC. The new API SN 0w40 is much more shear stable, and coincidentially made from Group III base stock where the old API SM formula was PAO.

M1 AFE 0w20 actually has quite poor shear stability, often shearing more than 15% in use. I know this from personal experience using it in my R18 powered Civic. The 5w20 is more shear stable. Strangely, AFE 0w30 is also more shear stable than AFE 0w20, at least that's my father's experience in his Subaru Outback 3.6. At least one user had good stability with AFE 0w30 in a Forester XT as well.

My latest UOA with AFE 0w20 is here, with a link to prior thread in the first post. Another UOA for M1 AFE 0w20 in a Civic is here, 6.8 cSt KV100!



And here you've hit on it, oil companies are not under any obligation to use their "best" ingredients in every oil, and there's always the bean-counter driven temptation to cut costs and make up for bad quality with good marketing. See Mobil 1 5w30 ILSAC GF-4 for an example. Unfortunately 0w requirements don't stop them from taking the low road. 0w oils have the most stringent requirements, but those requirements are irrelevant to the vast majority of users and can be met with "low quality" base stocks and a big dose of pour-point modifiers and viscosity index improvers. Not a good thing. In the end we simply have to evaluate each oil formulation individually, which means reading the PDS carefully, sifting the marketing speak through a giant BS filter, and filling in the gaps with UOA data. Hardly a perfect process, but its the best we've got.

PP 0w20 has a very good NOACK for a 0w20, but I wouldn't call it stellar at 10.8%. The prior formaula of Pennzoil Ultra 5w20 had a NOACK of 6%. Mobil 1 ESP 5w30 and Redline 5w30 are also in the 6% range.



Yea, but SubieNate is not exactly correct. If you were to formulate the cheapest 0w20 oil that would meet the minimum requirements and compared it to the cheapest 5w20 oil it would be hard to tell which was worse. Both would be bad, the least bad choice would depend on the engine and how it was used.

Luckily oil formulators have multiple product lines and the need to differentiate between those lines gives us some confidence in the quality of 5w and 10w grades. If SOPUS were truly cynical they'd re-package Pennzoil Conventional in bottles labeled "Platinum" and "Ultra" and market it at suitably inflated prices, but they're not that cynical. Platinum really is better than PYB and Ultra is a slight step up from Platinum. Same goes for all the formulators.

A quick look at the PDS and UOAs bears this out, PU 10w30 is an excellent oil for high temperature use provided it's the right viscosity and extreme cold starts aren't on the menu.



1 - What's Mobile 1? I assume you mean Mobil 1.

2 - There's no such thing as non-synthetic Mobil 1. XOM's non-synthetic oil is called Mobil Super, formerly Mobil Clean 5000. I assume you're getting caught up in the Group III vs PAO/Ester nonsense. The general consensus is the ILSAC GF-4 formulation of Mobil 1 5w30 was substandard, but that's not due to the base stock, it's the additive package. Most ILSAC GF-4 5w30 oils turned into 5w20 in turbo Subarus, its just that M1 was the most common choice among those who didn't study the manual and see that thicker grades were required for high temperatures or heavy use. GF-5 oils are better, but still too thin for my comfort in a turbo EJ Subaru engine. That doesn't make them "bad" oils though, just mis-applied. A slightly thicker oil with the same additive package should be great in a turbo EJ, which is the theory I'm testing right now with Mobil 1 ESP formula 5w30 in my WRX.

[SubieNate]

@gpshumway-I did a ton of reading over at bitog before I bought my first oil change supplies. I'll be the first to admit I'm not a chemist. Just trying to add to the discussion. Probably should fact check a bit more. The NOACK quoted for PP 0w20 was in the 8.x range if I remember right. I did a bit more reading and it was either a typo or they changed the formula, the current value is what you said.