Skip to main content

Read our primer articles on High Mileage Oil, Synthetic Oil and Kinematic Viscosity

I have been wondering what will be " for lack of better " a benchmark trend of sorts for the new GF-5 oils .

Since lowering corrosive wear is one of the list items for GF-5 , what other newer additive package technology might we see and what older additives will be shoved out the door ?

Esters to enhance friction coefficients of low cost shelve oils ?

EDIT - modified topic
Last edited {1}
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I don't doubt Valvolines claim of better anti-wear and think it about has to be something along the lines of being developed towards
the GF-5 and wanting to lower copper corrosion even further .

Another thought for GF-5 dino's,overbased magnesium replacing some of the higher ash calcium could trend into the lower cost pcmo'c just like they have the euro synthetics and CJ-4 lubes. Perhaps we will see increased usage of barium sulphonate as well along with a ester to help modify the friction coefficients . Something akin to some of the aftermarket ATF additives possibly in terms of an ester"s" .
Max sulfur for GF-4 was 0.5 for the 0w- and 5w-30 and the 10w-30 was 0.7 sulfur "total mass"

For GF-5 the 0w and 5w remains same as GF-4 but the 10w has been lowered to 0.5 .

Dispersancy will be upped to aid the new deposit limits and since the nitrogen containing dispersants get to the engine seals, parameters have been modified . Big difference in max alowable oil pick-up screen blockage as well .

So ,there's alot going on with GF-5 . Some of the problems were tackled with GF-4 in that lower zddp levels brought around increased use of passivators to aid in protecting against pb/cu corrosion as needed with use of organic FM's in a few of the formulations. The FM's that could otherwise be agressive towards lead .

That new phosphorus retention and some testing showing long chain zddp had over 95% retention while short chain had a little under 80% retention so it might force all add packs to use at least some moly ,dithiocarbamates, sulfur compounds and boron for extra anti-wear where some GF-4 formulations were without moly ,ect.

Just typing but who knows . Low cost analysis never did tell the whole story about a formula and it sure won't with GF-5 .
The phosphorus min max for GF-4 was .06 - .08

For GF-5 the minimum is .06 and maximum is .07 . A narrow window huh ?

JAMA was concerned about timing chain wear and elongation from soot . It appears they settled on this simply because of engines that use timing chains . It was going to be a .05 maximum phosphorus limit from what i can decipher .
Looks like XOM, among others, think the wear prevention of GF4 is very good and not in need of a change for GF5.

OEM's have made great improvements in engine durability.

The only significant improvement I see with GF5 is deposit prevention for turbos. Mobil 1 is exceptional in that area already. As are many other high end synthetics.
Increased resistance to oxidation is also targeted along with lower deposits .

In regards to one of the newer soluable Titanium additives when a formulated oil was "topped" with it two TEOST results came down in deposits from right at 40mg to 20mg and 29mg . That was by topping with 80 & 200ppm of the Ti respectively .

Key thing there was if they formulated the oil with different key components that work synergisticly better with the Ti then no MoDTC would be needed . Only the GMO .

Evidently the Ti additive reduced wear scar by 50% in a bench test as well . Unless a bunch of hype .

So Smile, i want an oil with 200ppm of Ti and not a drop of MoDTC, salycilate detergent used in it , SL levels of ZDDP and most of all it needs to mildly burn the nose like an acid when popping the cap on the container - then all will be good to go , even with a group III base oil if it's just gotta be that way Razz
Only a guess but if the oil has only 20-30ppm Na it's coming from an additional "topper" added to the regular D/D package .

As you know , a company that is not restrained by corporate policy can pick and choose from the additive pack suppliers and use mixtures of what X and Y companies offer.

Can't forget the base oils and even the additive pack carrier oil role as being an important building block for oils like 4178 and others needing that low amount of deposits.I believe all around for additive carriers and other dual role uses ,there will be increased usage of various esters for GF-5 . I see some in current formulations .
As much about tomorrows engine standards as well. GTL's and solvency needs,decreasing the interaction of zddp with the dispersants at the increased levels that will be needed while reducing phos, even reducing Fe wear in the Sequence IVA test from aprox 60ppm in a 5w-30 group III reference oil to right at 10ppm which shows the reduced friction coefficient of ester fluids and or ester type add pack components .

Just a matter of time Cool
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×