06 ltr 450 fuel in oil

[reconranger]

One more post, and I am done with this topic!

Red Line Synthetic Oil - Motor Oil for Racing

For comparison, Redline polyol ester "straight weight" oils. These oils have no VII's and low levels of detergent. So the VI's listed are the "natural" ones, without the interference caused by VII. Note that even without VII's, they have naturally high VI's and multi-viscosity properties!

For comparison: cST @ 40 degrees C VI

20 wt (=5W20)....42 139

30 wt (=10W30)....72 131

40 wt (=15W40)....98 143

50 wt (=15W50)....116 158


VI:

20 wt (=5W20)....139

30 wt (=10W30)....131

40 wt (=15W40)....143

50 wt (=15W50)....158

These values seem very comparable to multi-vis oils of inferior chemistry, that require VII's to make bank!

[duster]

It reads like 3 posts of back-peddling to me brother.

You stated...

Originally Posted by reconranger

comparing the Vis @ 40 will tell you which of the different oils out there will have the lower viscosity when cold.

And that simply is not true PERIOD.

That is PROVEN by viscosity of SAE 30 at 40 C.
Just as thin as the rest @ 40 C, but NOT EVEN SAFE for WINTER use.

Viscosity at 40 C has nothing to do with viscosity in FREEZING temps.
Obviously anyone can conclude that from the SAE 30 example.


In FREEZING temps, a 10w is a 10w...
For if it was thinner viscosity it would be a 5w...
And if it were thicker viscosity it would be a 15w...

And it is just as simple as that.
Again, proven by the following example... Redline 10w30 and 10w40...

API Service Class: SM/SL/SG/CF
Viscosity Grade: SAE 10W30
Vis @ 100°C, cSt: 10.7
Vis @ 40°C, cSt: 70
Viscosity Index: 164
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C: 65@-25
HTHS Vis, cP @150°C
ASTM D4741: 3.8
Pour Point, °C: -45
Pour Point: °F: -49
Flash Point, °C: 250
Flash Point, °F: 478
NOACK Evaporation Loss,
1hr @ 482°F (250°C), %: 6



API Service Class: SM/SL/SG/CF
Viscosity Grade: SAE 10W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt: 14.6
Vis @ 40°C, cSt: 93
Viscosity Index: 164
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C: 65@-25
HTHS Vis, cP @150°C
ASTM D4741: 4.7
Pour Point, °C: -45
Pour Point: °F: -49
Flash Point, °C: 248
Flash Point, °F: 478
NOACK Evaporation Loss,
1hr @ 482°F (250°C), %: 6



Facts are facts, and you cannot get around the fact that your oil favorites there have DIFFERENT viscosity @ 40 C but the SAME viscosity @ -25.

Side-stepping into other related issues gets you nowhere.
I honestly think it has you confused.
As you are very correct about much of it.

However, it does not change the fact that your logic of lower viscosity @ 40 C = lower viscosity at freezing temps.


It's just flawed logic... But you can't seem to admit that.

[duster]

Originally Posted by reconranger

Another petroleum vs synthetic example:

Redline 20W50 (polyol ester)....138

Maxima Premium 20W50 (petroleum)....162.91


Dude...are you so blind that you cannot see the trends there???? Do you need a 3rd grader to point them out???

While some of the points you make are technically correct...this is how these numbers can be used in a practical sense by the average guy who is comparing oils. Look past the trees, and you may very well discover the forest!

And here is another one of your choice also.... two Redline oils...

API Service Class SM/SL/SG/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 20W50
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 19.8
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 148
Viscosity Index 155
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 50@-15
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 255
Flash Point, °F 491
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP @150°C, ASTM D4741 6.1


API Service Class SJ/SG/SH JASO MB
Viscosity Grade SAE 20W50
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 18.6
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 138
Viscosity Index 152
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 254
Flash Point, °F 490
Zinc, %wt 0.25
Phosphorous, %wt 0.21
Molybdenum, %wt 0.05
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 5
% Viscosity Loss, 30 Pass ASTM D6278 0


Although the latter is JASO and does not have the CCS Viscosity info, you can see the pour points are the same... and if the data were available it would read 50 @-15. If you can accept that, call Redline and ask them.


I know you brought up Maxima, but they don't publish CCS to compare.

Now if you wanted to split hairs here, you could say those above are "thinner" 20w's if you want to. They are because 95 @ -15 is max... but not near thin as a 15w... so, splitting hairs again...

Neither you or your engine could tell the difference between that and the cheapest dino 20w50 you could find, spec'n 95 @ -15 as far as cold viscosity.

[sprayedgt]

I'm sure the OP has found his ANSWER somewhere else by now.

[reconranger]

Lots of "obfuscation" going on!