Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
S45~
This invention relates to lubricating oil composi-
2 tions which exhibit marked improvements in fuel economy. More
3 particularly, this invention relates to lubricating oil com-
4 positions which contain very minor proportions of a glycerol
fatty acid ester fuel economy additive in combination with an
6 oil-soluble organic copper compound.
7 It is a current objective of the industry to provide
8 lubricating oil compositions which exhibit improvements in
9 fuel savings in gasoline and diesel engine vehicles. To meet
that current goal, a new category of additives commonly refer-
11 red to as fuel economy additives are being developed which
12 function primarily to increase the miles or kilometers obtained
13 per unit volume of fuel. Since modern day lubricating oil
14 compositions are complex Eormulations, such additives must be
compatible with the other components of such compositions and
16 should not adversely affect the numerous other functions of
17 conventional lubricant additives such as dispersancy, vis-
18 cosity stability, corrosion and oxidation inhibition, and the
19 like.
Illustrative of recent patents reflecting develop-
21 ments in this field are U.S. Patents 4,201,684 and 4,208,293.
22 These patents show the use of fatty acid amides and sulfurized
23 amides as additives which have fuel economy benefits as demon-
24 strated by friction reducing data.
The present invention concerns the use of glycerol
26 fatty acid esters as such fuel economy additives, specifically
27 glycerol es1:ers of C16-C18 fatty acids in combination with oil-
28 soluble copper organic compounds. There is prior art disclosing
29 the use of each of these materials in lubricating oil composi-
tions which is discussed hereinbelow.
31 British Application 2097313A, published November 10,
32 1982, discloses the use of 0.05 to 0. 2 w1:~6 glycerol partial
33 esters Of C16-C18 fatty acids as fuel economy additives. ~he
34 present invention is an improvement over said British applica-
tion.
36 West German Application P-2949940 and P-2949910 of
~.b . .`'i
~5~
1 Chevron Research Company, both published July 3, l9aO, disclose
2 the use of glycerol ~atty esters as ~uel economy additives.
3 These references state that the addition of 0.25 to 2 weight
4 percent, preferably 0.40 to 1.25 weight percent, of a fatty acid
ester will offer a fuel economy credit of 2-3 percent in both
6 gasoline and diesel engines. Glycerol oleic acid esters are
7 preferred. ~est German Application P-2949940 illustrates the
8 preferred embodiment showing the use of the glycerol ester at
9 the same ~reat level in combination with zinc dihydrocarbyl
dithiophosphate additives. Similarly U.S. Patent 4,304,678
11 discloses hydroxyl-containing esters including glycerol ole-
12 ates as being effective friction modifiers only at levels of 1-
13 4 wt% with no benefit observed at levels less than 1~ by wt. in
14 oil.
In contrast to the teachings of these references, the
16 present invention is based upon the discovery that very low
17 levels of glycerol esters; that is, up to about 0.2 percent by
18 weight, in combination with certain amounts of oil-soluble
19 organic copper compounds, provide enhanced performance of
these fuel economy lubricating oils. No benefit is obtainable
21 in using relatively higher amounts and in some cases sub-
22 stantial debits in terms of formulation stability ox adverse
23 performance may occur.
24 Another reference disclosing the use of polyol-
carboxylic acid esters in lubricating oil compositions is U.S.
26 Patent 3,933,659, which shows a multi-component ~unctional
27 Eluid, one component of which can be a polyol ester friction
28 modifier or a fatty acid amide friction modifier. The primary
29 us~ disclosed in that re~erence is for automatic transmission
fluids. U.S. Patent 3,273,981 discloses antiwear additives
31 comprising a mixture of dimer acids and a partial ester of a
32 polyhydric alcohol, the additive being noted as improving
33 lubricity as well as ~unctioning in the anti-wear category.
34 U.S. Patent 3,112,271 discloses glycerol mono-oleate as an
extreme pressure additive as does U.S. 3,112,269 and U.S.
36 3,041,284. U.S. 2,493,483 discloses marine engine lubricants
37 which contain a partial ester of glycerol or other polyol fatty
--3--
1 acid esters in amounts of from 0.05 to 1 percent.
2 Other re~erences disclosing polyol esters of fatty
3 acids are represented by U.SO 2,788,326, which discloses these
4 compounds as being useful in extreme pressure lubricants and
U.S. Patent 2,527,889, which shows the same polyol esters, such
as glycerol monooleate, being useful as anti-corrosion agents
7 in turbine oils and diesel fuels.
8 The use of oil-solu~le copper compounds at levels of
9 about 5 to 500 parts per million (ppm) of copper by weight,
based on the total weight of lubricating oil composition,as a
11 highly effecti~e antioxidant is a relatively recent develop-
12 ment of additive technology and is disclosed in European
13 Published Application No. 0024146, published on February 25,
14 1981.
The present invention is based on the discovery that
16 these copper compounds, when used in an oil in combination with
17 glycerol esters, e.g. oleates, act cooperatively with the
18 glycerol ester in substantially increasing the fuel economy of
19 the formulated oil. The cumulative effect observed would not
be expected by adding the fuel economy credit obtained in oils
21 which contain one or the other of the glycerol ester or copper
~2 compound. Data obtained therefore provide the basis for an
23 unexpected additive effect upon fuel economy due to more
24 effective lubrication of an internal combustion engine oper-
ated using the oils of the present invention.
26 The prior art also recognizes that copper components
27 per se can be favorable friction reducing agents in certain
28 circumstances. German Democratic Republic Patents 145,469 and
29 145,470 disclose the reduction of wear and friction in
iron/iron and iron/bronze friction interfaces using polyol or
31 mineral oil lubricants containing copper compounds such as
32 copper naphthenate, copper octoate, copper stearate and reac-
33 tion products of lubricants themselves with copper, copper
34 oxide and copper salts of inorganic acids. These references
indicate that the friction reduction is achieved by deposition
36 on the substrate being lubricated of a film reaction layer of
37 copper with adequate adhesion properties. It is recommended in
~ Q~
-4-
1 these references that the concentration of the copper compound
2 in the lubricant provide a copper content of 0.001 to 5 volume
3 ~ relative to the lubricant. These references however did not
4 evaluate lubricating oil compositions for internal combustion
engines.
6 In accordance with the present invention, there are
7 provided fuel economy improving lubricating oil compositions
8 for internal combustion engines which comprise an oil of
9 lubricating viscosity and, as the fuel economy additive, a
combination from 0.05 to 0.20 weight percent of a glycerol
11 partial ester of a C16-Clg fatty acid with from 5 to 500 ppm
12 (parts per million) copper present in the form of an oil-soluble
13 copper compound, preferably about 60 to 200 ppm copper being
14 present, based upon the weight of the total composition, the
copper compound also functioning as an antioxidant.
16 The lubricating oil compositions of the present
17 invention comprise both straight grade and multigrade lubri-
18 cating oil formulations for both gasoline and diesel (compres-
19 sion ignition) engines. Thus, in the practice of the present
invention the lubricating oil compositions will contain those
21 additive systems formulated to meet the viscosity requirements
22 or other specifications as required for qualification as a
23 gasoline engine or diesel lubricating oil. A straight grade
24 lubricating oil formulation will normally contain conventional
amounts of an ashless dispersant, a normal or basic metal
26 detergent, an anti-wear additive and an antioxidant and a
27 multi-~rade oil will contain, in addition to the foregcing, a
28 viscosity ind~x improver or viscosity modifier. In addition to
29 these pri~cipal additives, very small proportions of other
special puxpose additive~, such as pour depressants, rust
31 inhibitors, anti-foamants and the like are conventionally
32 blended into lubricating oil compositions.
33 The ester component of the fuel economy additive of
34 the present invention is preferably a glycerol mono- or di~
ester of a saturated or unsaturated C16-C1g fatty acid, such as
36 oleic or linoleic acid. Optimum efficiency has been found to
~2~
1 be at about the 0.1 to 0.2 weight percen~ level and use in the
2 excess of this amount may even be detrimental to the overall
3 performance of the lubricating oil composition.
4 Oil-soluble copper components useful herein include
S both cuprous or cupric compounds which are oil-soluble under
6 normal blending conditions in the oil additive package. Parti-
7 cularly preferred ar~ the copper salts of C10-C22 fatty acids~
8 such as stearic or palmi~ic acid, but copper salts of un-
9 saturated acids, such as oleic acid, linoleic acid, naphthenic
acid of 200-500 molecular weight or synthetic carboxylic acids
11 are preferred. The particularly preferred embodiment is copper
~2 ~cupric) oleate when present in an amount to provide about 100
13 to 150 ppm copper in the lubricating oil composition.
14 Other suitable cop~er compounds include the same as
thos~ disclosed in said European Published Application 0024146
16 and these include copper dithiocarbamates of the formula
17 ~RR'NCSS)nCu where n is 1 or 2 and R and R' are the same or
18 different Cl-Clg hydrocarbyl radicals, preferably C2-C8 alkyl,
19 copper sulphonates, coppex phenates and acetyl acetonates as
well as copper dihydrocarbyl dithiophosphate, the hydrocarbyl
21 being Cl-Clg and preferably C2-Cg alkyl, such as a hexyl or iso-
22 octyl.
23 Crankcase oil formulations to which the present
~4 invention relates are those which contain a major amount of
lubricating oil and effective amounts of conventional ad-
26 ditives in addition to the aforesaid fuel economy additive, the
27 copper compound serving the dual function of being both an
28 antioxidant and, in combination with the glycerol oleate, a
29 fuel economy additive. Percentages of additives as described
herein are by weight based on the total weight of lubricating
31 oil formulation unless otherwise indicated.
3~ These conventional additives comprise ashless dis-
33 persants typically nitrogen-containing dispersan~ additives
34 which are oil-soluble salts, amides, imides and esters made
from high molecular weight mono- or di-carboxylic acids and
~s~
--6--
1 various amines having an amino or heterocyclic nitrogen with at
2 least one amido or hydroxy group capable of salt, amide or ester
3 formation. Preferred are the reaction products of polyolefin
4 (C2-Cs olefin), such as polyisobutenyl, succinic anhydride
with an alkylene polyamine such as tetraethylenepentamine. The
6 polyisobutenyl portion has between 50 and 250 carbon atoms. The
7 alkylene polyamines are those represented by the formula:
8 NH2(cH2)n(NH(cH2)n)m-NH2
9 where n is 2 to 3 and m is a number from 0 to 10. Mixtures of
alkylene polyamines which approximate tetraethylenepentamine
11 are commercially available materials. Dispersants are used
12 generally in amounts of from about 0.1 to 10 wt.%, preferably
13 in the range of about 0.5 to 5 wt %, based on the weight of the
14 lubricating oil composition.
Detergents useful in the formulations include the
16 normal, basic or overbased metal, that is, calcium, magnesium
17 and so forth, salts of petroleum naphthenic acids, petroleum
18 sulfonic acids, alkyl benzene sulfonic acids, alkyl phenols,
19 alkylene-bis-phenol, oil-soluble fatty acids and the like. The
preferred materials are the normal or overbased calcium or
21 magnesium phenates, sulfurized phenates and/or sulfonates, and
22 these metal-containing detergent additives are typically used
23 in amounts of from 1 to 3 wt ~ based on the total weight of
24 lubricatin~ oil compositions.
Suitable pour point depressants, which are usually
26 present in amounts of about 0.01 to 1 wt~, include wax
27 alkylated aromatic hydrocarbons, olefin polymers and copo-
28 lymers, acrylate and methacrylate polymers and copolymers.
29 Anti-wear additives gene~ally are the oil~soluble
zinc dihydrocarbyl dithiophosphates having a least a total of
31 5 carbon atoms, the alkyl group being preferably C2-C8. These
32 are typically present in amounts of from 0.01 to 5 wt. ~,
33 preferably 0.5 to 1.5 wt. %, in the lubricating oil.
34 Suitable conventional viscosity index improvers, or
viscosity modifiers, are the olefin polymers such as poly-
36 butene, ethylene-propylene copolymers, hydrogenated polymers
~L2~5~
--7--
1 and copolymers and terpolymers of styrene with isoprene and/or
2 butadiene, polymers of alkyl acrylates or alkyl methacrylates,
3 copolymers of alkyl methacrylates with N-vinyl pyrrolidone or
4 dimethylaminoalkyl methacrylate, post-grafted polymers of e-
thylene-propylene with an active monomer, such as maleic anhy-
6 dride, which may be further reacted with an alcohol or an
7 alkylene polyamine, styrene-maleic anhydride polymers post-
- 8 reacted with alcohols and amines and the like. These additives
9 are used in amounts of about 1.5% to 15% by wt., depending on
the exact viscosity specifications desired.
11 Conventionally used antioxidants include phenols,
12 hindered phenols, bis-phenols, sulfurized phenols, catechol,
13 alkylated and sulfurized alkylated catechols, diphenylamine,
14 alkylated diphenylamines and phenyl l-naphthylamines, alkyl
and aryl borates, phosphites and phosphates, trialkyl and
16 triaryl dithiophosphates and the like.
17 Suitable hydrocarbon base stocks are those mineral
18 oils of lubricating viscosity as measured by ASTM D-455 of from
19 about 2 to 40, preferably 5 to 20 centistokes at 99C.
These conventional additives are used in amounts
21 noxmally necessary to provide their attendant functions in a
22 formulated crankcase lubricating oil composition. Very small
23 proportions of additional special purpose additives, such as
24 anti-foam agents or rust inhibitors, may also ~e present in a
fully formulated lubricating oil composition.
26 The invention is further illustrated by the follow-
27 ing Examples.
28 EXAMPLE 1
29 The reference oil used in this example was a formula-
ted straight grade 20W30 crankcase mineral lubricating oil
31 (corresponding to ASTM "HR" oil) to which was added 0.2 weight
32 percent of a glycerol monooleate (GMO) fuel economy additive or
33 0.2 weight percent of a fuel economy additive being a mixture
34 (GMO/GDO) of glycerol monooleate and glycerol dioleate in a
weight ratio of 3 parts of GMO to 2 parts of GDO in said mixture.
36 The reference oil contained 2.10 wt ~ dispersant, 1.10 wt. %
~2C)S~S~
antioxidant, 1.00 wt. % basic metal detergent, 1.95 wt. % anti-
2 wear additive, 0.21 wt ~ pour depressant and 0.001 wt. % anti-
3 foam agent. This type of reference oil, which is generally
4 accepted by the industry for establishing fuel economy data,
provides a reproducible baseline against which fuel economy
6 credits may be measured and is considered to provide test
7 results which accurately reflect the effect of a given fuel
8 economy additive.
g Fuel economy was evaluated using the Laboratory
Engine Fuel Economy Test (LEFET) summarized below:
ll The fuel economy test used is a fired engine pro-
12 cedure. The engine is a 5.0 liter, V~8 Chevrolet engine coupled
13 to a water ¢ooled electric dynamometer. The engine is run with
14 a dry sump by the use of external oil pumps. One pump supplies
oil to the oil gallery from an external sump and a second pump
16 scavenges the sump and returns the oil to the external sump.
17 The conditions that the engine runs at are as follows:
18 Condition Speed Load Temperature (C)
l9 (rpm) (in kg.) Coolant Oil
l (idle)a 800 182 80 98
21 2 (48 kph)b1200 205 ~0 98
22 ~ (48 kph)a1200 409 80 98
23 4 (88 kph)h2200 409 80 98
24 a - engine load higher than road load.
b - engine load equivalent to road load.
26 The results are expressed as a percentage fuel e-
27 conomy credit with respect to the referenced oil, as are all
28 fuel economy credit results reported in the Examples. ~esults
~9 at the 0.2 wt. ~ treat level for ~oth GMO and the GMO/GDO mixture
are set fc rth in Table I.
5~S~
g
TABLE I - LEFET RESULT5
2 Fue 1 Economy Credi t, 96
3 Engine Condition GMO GMO/GD0
4 1 4.Q 2.6
2 2.5 3.0
6 3. 1.5 1.8
7 4 0.9 0.5
8 Weighted Average 1.9 1.8
g EXAMPLE 2
~o (a) Compara~ive evaluations utilizing increased a-
11 mounts of the GMO/GDO mixture, that is, at the 0.3 weight
12 percent and 0.5 weight percent levels showed no increase in fuel
13 economy credit for treatment at these levels and in some cases,
14 an adverse effect on fuel economy credits or other lubricating
oil performance criteria, such as increas2d piston deposit
16 formation tendencies or poor results in bearing corrosion
17 tests.
18 (b) Coeffirient of friction (CF) testing using a
19 Roxana Four-ball wear tester in acordance with the procedure
described in ASTM D2266-67 at 110C, 2.5 RPM at both 15 kg and
21 3 kg was carried out with a formulated mineral oil (Base oil)
22 containing conventional amounts of dispersant (2.12 %)~ basic
23 metal sulfonate (1.02~), antioxidant (0.72%), anti-wear ad-
24 ditive (1.96%) and viscosity index improver (only present at
8.7 wt. ~ in test oils 5 and 6 to evaluate compatibility) to
26 which was added varying amounts of the GDO/GMO mixture. The
27 results in Table II below show essentially no additional
28 friction reducing benefit at levels in excess of 0.2 wt. % and,
29 at 0.9 wt. ~ in the test, potential instability or incompa-
tibility was observed since the samples appeared hazy.
~os~s~
--10--
1 TABLE II_- CF RESULTS
2 Test Oil CF (15 kg) CF (3 kg) Compatibility
3 1. Base Oil 0~3 0.19 Clear
4 2. Base Oil + C.18 C;.14 Clear
0.1% GDO/GMO
6 3. Base Oil + 0.11 0.11 Clear
7 0.2% GDO/GMO
8 4. Base Oil ~ 0.11 0.11 Clear
9 0.3% GDO/GMO
10 5.* Base Oil + 0.11 0.11 Clear
11 0.4~ GDO/GMO
12 6.* Base Oil + 0.10 0.10 Hazy
13 0.9% GDO/GMO
14 * 8.7 wt. % of a V.I. improver was present only in formula-
tions 5 and 6 since compatibility was important at these
16 concentrations.
17 EXAMPLE 3
18 (a) The Laboratory Fuel Economy Test of Example 1 was
19 repeated utilizing a 10W40 multigrade mineral oil containing
0.09 wt. ~ of the GMO/GDO mixture as the fuel economy additive.
21 The oil contained about 14~ by wt. of a multifunctional disper~
22 sant viscosity index improver (acryloid 1155), 0.5% disper-
23 sant, 1.85% of basic metal detergent, 0.75 wt.% of anti-wear
24 additive and 0.75% antioxidant.
Table III shows the fuel economy credits over the oil
26 used as the reference in Example 1.
27 TABLE III - MULTI-GRADE OIL-LEFET RESULTS
28Engine Condition Fuel Economy Credit, %
29 1 5.9
30 2 0.5
31 3 0.9
32 4 1.1
33Weighted Average 1.8
34 (b) Utilizing the same oil as Example 3(a) the
~2~S~L
1 Laboratory Fuel Economy results were confirmed in the Proposed
2 ASTM S Car Interim Fuel Economy Procedure which utilized the EPA
3 car certification cycle in 5 automobiles having engine sizes of
4 2.3 liter, 2.8 liter, 3.7 liter, 3.8 liter and 5.0 liter. Five
5 Car average fuel economy credit of 1.64% was obtained in one
6 series of fuel economy tests.
7 Based upon these results one would expect that the
8 fuel economy credits attributed to a glycerol mono-oleate to be
g non-cumulative when the treatment level is increased above the
10 range of about 0.1 wt. % to 0.2 wt. % and the inventors hereof
11 have found this principle is generally true in fuel economy ad-
12 ditives technology, i.e., increasing the amount of friction
13 modifier additive does not result in a concomitant straight
14 line proportional increase in the observed fuel economy. For
15 example, combining the glycerol oleate mixed esters described
16 above with a known fuel economy additive such as a dimerized
17 linoleic acid ester as described in U.S. Patent 4,105,571 has
18 been found to offex no better fuel economy than when either
19 compound is used alone. This will be demonstrated in Example
20 6. Thus~ as a general rule increasing the treat level of the
21 friction modifier itself or increasing the treat level by
22 adding another friction modifier known to have fuel economy
23 benefits has not heretofore been found to offer a fuel economy
24 improvemant. Examples 1-4 and 6 are presented here to il-
25 lustrate these principles.
26 EXAMPLE 4
27 Evaluation of Copper Compounds for Fuel Economy
28 The LEFET test was carried out using an Oil* equiva-
29 lent to the ~R straight grade oil of Example 1 except that 0.3
30 wt. ~ of a 40 wt% solution of copper oleate in mineral oil, which
31 is equivalent to 120 ppm copper was used in place of the anti-
32 oxidant reported in Example 1. The LEFET results for this test
33 are below in Table IV:
~2~
~12-
1 TABLE IV
2 Engine Condition Fuel Economy Credit
3 1 4.9
4 2 2.5
3 1.5
6 4 0.0
7 Weighted Average l.9 %
8 * Oil contained 2.7 wt. ~ dispersant, l.0 w~. %
9 overbased metal detergent additlve, 1.4 wt. ~
antiwear additive and 120 ppm copper as copper
11 oleate formulated to a straight grade 20W30.
12 This example establishes that copper does provide a significant
13 fuel economy credit in addition to i~s antioxidant effective-
14 ness
The foregoing examples, carried out in fired engine
16 tests using a 5.0 liter 8-cylinder engine demonstrate that the
17 oil-soluble organic coppPr compounds offer a beneficial fuel
18 economy credit and that the glycerol ester offers a fuel economy
19 credit which does not increase to any significant degree above
20 the 0.2 wt. % treat level.
21 EXAMPLE 5 - Evaluation of Combination of Copper
22 Compound and Glycerol Ester
23 To determine if oils containing both the oil-
2~ soluble organic copper compound and glycerol ester friction
25 modifier would exhibit any complementary effect, different
26 oils were formulated and tested in Ford 2.3 liter 4-cylinder
27 engine. The purpose of these tests was to evaluate the increase
28 in fuel economy credits when the copper compound and the
29 glycerol ester were combined over the credits obtained with
30 these additives separately in the same engine. Fuel economy
31 credit values will vary among engines of differing sizes. This
3~ is due to the inherent differences in engine design and oper-
33 ating conditions. It is known therefore that the values for a
34 2.3 liter 4-cylinder engine will be lower than fuel economy
35 credit values for a 5 liter 8-cylinder used in these examples.
36 The additive content in weight percent of the oils
37 evaluated is given below, balance is basestock mineral oil.
~s~
-13-
1 Oil _ Oil B o i 1 c Oil D Oil E Oil
2 Dispersant 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5 5 5 5
3 Anti-Wear 1~0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
4 overbased Metal 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4
5 Detergent
6 GMD/GDO* ~ - _ 0.2 _ 0.2
7 Cupric oleate ~ - 0.118 0.118 0.118
8 Cupric Stearate - 0.065
g * Same as Example 1
Fuel economy results for these oils are given in
11 Table V below. Percentage credits are calculated again with
12 respect to the same reference oil used in Example 1.
13 T BLE V_
% F.E. Credit,
14 EngineEngine Weighted
15 O_ Condition 1Condition 4 Average
16 A - 0.25 0.07 0.08
17 B 0.90 0.40 0.63
1~ C 1.4 0.20 0.50
19 D 2.1 0.40 0.90
E 1.0 -0.42 C~.20
21 F 1.1 0.13 0.20
22 Oil D represents the advantage of this invention.
23 Oils B, C, E show the maximum values one can expect to
24 obtain based on the credits due only to the copper compound.
25 Oil D, however, achieves a value of 0.9%. This result is not
~6 expected because it is known, as a general principlet that
27 merely increasing the treatment level of a given fuel economy
28 additive does not increase the credit obtained.
2~ EXAMPLE 6
To demonstrate the principle that fuel economy ad-
31 ditives, when combined together, cannot be expected to have
32 a combined effect. The following oils G, H, I and J were
33 evaluated for fuel economy in the 5.0 L engine using the same
34 LEFET procedure of Example I. Oil G WdS a formulated lubricating
54~i;3L
-14-
1 oil having 4 wt~ dispersant, 1 wt% overbased metal sulfonate,
2 1.5 wt% antioxidant and 2 wt~ anti-weax additive. oil H was the
3 same as Oil G, except for the inclusion of 0.1 wt% dimerized
4 linoleic acid ester of diethylene glycol as disclosed in U.S.
5 Patent 4,105,571. Oil I was the same as Oil G exceplt: 0~2 wt%
6 of the GMO/GDO ester was added. Oil J was the same as Oil G
7 except both 0.1 wt% of the dimerized linoleic acid ester and 0.2
8 wt% of the GMO/GDO were added. Fuel economy results for these
9 four oils are shown below in Table VI.
TABLE VI
11 % Fuel Economy credit, Weighted
12 Oil Average
13 G 1.2%
14 H 2.4%
I 2.2%
16 J 2.4%
17 EXAMPLE 7
18The positive effect on fuel economy attributable
19 to use of the two component fuel economy additive of this
20 invention is further demonstrated by LEFET results in the 5.0
21 L engine and th~se data confirm the results shown above in
22 Example 5. Here Oil K contained 5.5 wt% dispersant, 1 wt%
23 overbased metal sulfonate, 1.4 wt% anti-wear additive and 1 wt~
24 anti-oxidant. Oil L was the same as Oil K with 0.3 wt% of a 40
25 wt% solution of copper oleate (120 ppm copper) included and Oil
26 M was the same as oil L except 0.1 wt% of the GMO/GDO glycerol
27 oleate was included. Fuel economy credits are in Table VII
28 below.
29 TABLE VII
Oil% Fuel Economy Credit, Wei~hted Average
31 K - 0.1
32 L 1.4~
33 M 2.2%
