Actually I have not suggested that the good conventionals are Group I. Agree as another poster suggested that these are really Group II and III blends.
5w20 Synthetics - What Value?
- Thread starter Ron AKA
- Start date
- Status
Actually I have not suggested that the good conventionals are Group I. Agree as another poster suggested that these are really Group II and III blends.
Which are worse than Group I according to your threads! Right?
As per the other post, I can't figure out what your point is. Keep posting all you want, but you make no sense.
Well, my "point" is that you're just beating a dead horse. Since this thread could apply to any synthetic vs. conventional weight, and certainly not just 5W-20. I think the general consensus here is that today's mineral based oils are pretty much the equal to any synthetic incarnations in most every application where both can be used as per manufacturer recommendations.
But I think to answer your thread, a fully synthetic 5W-20 could be used in an extended drain application, whereas I would not do this with any conventional 5W-20.
But I think to answer your thread, a fully synthetic 5W-20 could be used in an extended drain application, whereas I would not do this with any conventional 5W-20.
If you are not going to do extended drains, do you agree that a synthetic 5w20 is a waste of money? ie it does not offer any measureable performance advantage?
Then you missed the point.
I think I've pretty much already found the "answers." People far smarter, and with engineering degrees or equivalent field experiences, have validated what I think. And I've learned much from being here. And I didn't learn it from trolls selectively purveying misinformation on a consistant basis, and validating their preconceived notions via selective quotation and article posting.
I think most people here would. And I also think this would have been a better thread if you articulated this in your first post.
"If you are not into extended oil changes, it seems the main advantages of synthetics is high flash point, better viscosity index, and as a result better cold/cool weather performance. Does that really hold true for the 5w20 grade of oil, now becoming popular?"
Last edited by a moderator:
"5w20 Synthetics - What Value?"
Well Ron, I think the value would be extended OCIs?
But I stand corrected. I think it's your thread titles that need work.
BTW, the U.S. Army stipulates that synthetic 0W-20/5W-20 should be used in its HUMVEEs in cold climates. I think it's even PDFed on the interweb.
Well Ron, I think the value would be extended OCIs?
But I stand corrected. I think it's your thread titles that need work.
BTW, the U.S. Army stipulates that synthetic 0W-20/5W-20 should be used in its HUMVEEs in cold climates. I think it's even PDFed on the interweb.
My reasoning for using synthetics varies from the typical person.
I like all of the benefits of using synthetic, including leaving the inside of the engine sparkling clean for no matter how many miles.
I also like the 'no build-up' of varnish, 8-10,000 mile drains, ability to withstand break-down, and pretty much zero wear between moving parts.
I won't go farther than 5-6,000 miles on conventional, but will run synthetic out to 10k miles or so. Even though I'm only going twice as long, I still think I'm getting a better value out of Synthetic.
I like all of the benefits of using synthetic, including leaving the inside of the engine sparkling clean for no matter how many miles.
I also like the 'no build-up' of varnish, 8-10,000 mile drains, ability to withstand break-down, and pretty much zero wear between moving parts.
I won't go farther than 5-6,000 miles on conventional, but will run synthetic out to 10k miles or so. Even though I'm only going twice as long, I still think I'm getting a better value out of Synthetic.
When Ford and Honda started off this whole 5w20 thing, GF3/SL was the current spec. Any 5w20s that were made then that met the Ford specs (and most did) would more than likely meet the current GF4/SM specs (except for ZDDP levels).
What GF4/SM has done is level the playing field. When 5w20s were introduced, they were much better oils than the then current 5w30s and 10w30s. That isn't the case anymore.
I think where the 5w20's still have a leg up on the 5w30 and 10w30's is in low temperature performance - CCS & MRV. An average conventional 5w20 will be better than most 5w30 synthetics.
When Ford and Honda started off this whole 5w20 thing, GF3/SL was the current spec. Any 5w20s that were made then that met the Ford specs (and most did) would more than likely meet the current GF4/SM specs (except for ZDDP levels).
My 01' Accord specified SJ 5w20. I still have 5 qts. of Havoline 5w20 and 5 qts. of Exxon 5w20 that are SJ (not SL)rated. I'm sure these are excellent oils and I'll be using the Exxon next.
My 01' Accord specified SJ 5w20. I still have 5 qts. of Havoline 5w20 and 5 qts. of Exxon 5w20 that are SJ (not SL)rated. I'm sure these are excellent oils and I'll be using the Exxon next.
That's a very good question. I could only guess that there have been some minor "tweaking," but I doubt there has been a huge improvement since they would all still use a Group II, II+, or II/III blend.
I'm sure there must have been a good deal of R&D into this generation of 5W-20s to begin with, since I'm under the impression that the first incarnations of 5W-20s came out in the late sixties or early seventies, but most were dropped it seems, because perhaps no one could brew a Group I 5W-20 that could stand up to the punishment meted out by older engines. I know Mobil 1 was originally formulated as a 5W-20 in 1974. But this was all before my time, so I can't state it unequivocally...
Cheers
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked