Ah, another troll thread.
I'll take the bait-
10w30 of the synthetic variety is what I like. Conventional 10w30 may really have no use aside from being a cleaner running oil in areas that cold weather is not an issue.
But synthetic 10w30 has real advantages over an equally blended higher spread 30 grade, namely volatility and less polymeric 'adulterants' (VII/PPD) logically resulting in less deposits/varnishing and quite easily less carbon buildup.
To reiterate the bloody horse corpse point of "oh but today's oil technology is much better". Well, sure it is. But the problems are just being worked more and more "outside" of the operating range, however they still exist. One incident of overheating will make this apparent, or consistent overheating of the oil (bulk or localised) will also make this apparently, perhaps only on the next teardown. Most people won't have any apparent issues (as observed by them) with 5w30- but that doesn't make it equal in cleanliness or stay in grade performance. How could one tell a shade darker varnishing over 100K using 5w30 over 10 or 1 more milligram of charred VII crust on their DI intake valve or one more milligram of crust around the ringpack? 99% of people will never notice that.
In Florida or a similar climate, I don't need that risk. I don't need acceptable 5W CCS ranges in exchange for higher dropout/varnish/shear potential over a cleaner, synthetic "base only" 10w30.
Imagining that tossing R&D money into a product makes us believe that we suddenly know the nature of research (we assume their priorities are ours) and that progress as we imagine it is guaranteed to happen once we imagine that enough money is being thrown at it. That's just how we are- we equate spenditures with progress.
What I'd like to point out is that, while R&D is going into producing a VMed product that suffers less and less of the apparent common issues (vis dropout, deposits, permanent shear, varnish) in an economically viable manner for one of the most produced grades of oil, the technology is roughly the same- polymeric VMs remain the cheapest solution, and the solution of choice. VMs are evolving,yes, but still suffer their drawbacks. The technology exists to make an incredible 5w30 that can outperform any 10w30 on the market-- R&D is not trying to create that product, it's trying to create it within a price point. 5w30 is still the lowest grade and widest spread that manufacturers are willing to recommend for their turbo engines to date- many without even specifying mineral or synthetic. Some manufacturers have to MANDATE at least some level of synthetic formulation on their 5w30s- so of course the oil blenders have been scrambling. If 30's all you need for HO engines, and spread gets you more favourable FE during warm up, then why not 0w30? What's that? 0w30 GrIII blends can't perform sufficiently? Stable 0w30 true synthetic formulas cost too much to make on a 5w30 volume scale? well then
tl;dr synthetic 10w30 for me in a hot climate, preferably one made with outstanding base stocks like GTL that have UNMATCHED volatility. I wonder how volatility correlates to the actual molecular composition of the oil...