7.7: SN1 or SN2? Predicting the Mechanism

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 234564

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

First of all, it is important to understand that the \(S_N1\) and \(S_N2\) mechanism models are just that: models. While many nucleophilic substitution reactions can be described as proceeding through 'pure' \(S_N1\) or \(S_N2\) pathways, other reactions - in particular some important biochemical reactions we'll see later - lie somewhere in the continuum between the \(S_N1\) and the \(S_N2\) model (more on this later). With that being said, here are some guidelines to help you predict whether a reaction is likely to have more of an \(S_N1\) or \(S_N2\) character.

First, look at the electrophile: as stated above, an \(S_N1\) reaction requires that a relatively stable carbocation intermediate be able to form. An \(S_N2\) reaction requires a relatively unhindered electrophilic center. Therefore, methyl and primary carbon electrophiles will react by the \(S_N2\) pathway, and tertiary carbon electrophiles will react by the \(S_N1\) pathway.

Secondary carbon electrophiles, or primary carbon electrophiles adjacent to a potential carbocation-stabilizing group (double bond or heteroatom) can react by either or both pathways. The reasoning here is that these electrophiles are unhindered (favoring \(S_N2\)), but can also form stabilized carbocation intermediates (favoring \(S_N1\))

Next, look at the nucleophile. More powerful nucleophiles, particularly anionic nucleophiles such as hydroxides, alkoxides or thiolates, favor an \(S_N2\) pathway: picture the powerful nucleophile 'pushing' the leaving group off the electrophile. Weaker, uncharged nucleophiles like water, alcohols, and amines, favor the \(S_N1\) pathway: they are not nucleophilic enough to displace the leaving group, but will readily attack a carbocation intermediate.

Finally look at the solvent in the reaction. As a general rule, water and other protic solvents (for example methanol or ethanol) favor \(S_N1\) pathways, due to the ability of the solvents to stabilize carbocation intermediates, combined with their tendency to weaken the nucleophile by enclosing it in a 'solvent cage'. In laboratory reactions, the presence of a polar aprotic sovent such as acetone or dimethylformamide points to the probability of an \(S_N2\) reaction.

factors favoring the two pathways

Factors favoring the \(S_N1\) pathway:

hindered electrophile
potential for a tertiary, secondary, or resonance-stabilized carbocation intermediate
uncharged nucleophile
protic solvent such as water

Factors favoring the \(S_N2\) pathway:

Unhindered (methyl or primary) electrophile
powerful, anionic nucleophile
polar aprotic solvent

Video tutorial: nucleophilic substitution reactions

Contributors

Organic Chemistry With a Biological Emphasis by Tim Soderberg (University of Minnesota, Morris)