Any Way to Compare Synthetics On Hard Facts

[Fallguy]

I have grown weary on searching that one synthetic is any better than another except in the the case of longer OCI's.

What can one compare that are cold hard signs of a better synthetic vs another one in the same grade.

NOACK
Flashpoint
MRV
CCS
Shearing after use
ACEA Ratings or other (VW)

 

[Steve S]

For what it matters most will never be able to tell the difference during the lifetime of the engine between equal base stocks even then maybe not....Cept [based upon post reading] certain Amsoil users.

I am sure there are better oils in the bunch but would the better be appreciated unless the limits of each are reached or used or even needed.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted By: Steve S
For what it matters most will never be able to tell the difference during the lifetime of the engine between equal base stocks even then maybe not....Cept [based upon post reading] certain Amsoil users.

I am sure there are better oils in the bunch but would the better be appreciated unless the limits of each are reached or used or even needed.


Tiene Bingo!

Like the answer to any question: depends. Car, driving style, OCI.

 

[Ben99GT]

Hard facts that impact real world application will not necessarily be found on the product data sheet. I'm sure the oil companies have some hard facts, but they aren't sharing.

 

[rclint]

Lest not hold this to Amsoil mind you, M1 users or many are just as sentimental about their oil.. as well other synthetic users if their engine calls for a conventional oil, then your in the very same boat as the description you just made based on Amsoil, synthetic is better than conventional offering more protection etc...

The more I read the less I know I reckon.. you don't get any less engine wear unless your engine specifies a certain spec from going to a higher spec.. then your left with the clean engine, which I have not heard of the millions of engines falling apart, or exploding due to being "dirtied by conventional" and then you have the extended drain time.. maybe an average 6K (probably less more like 5k) on this amazing more protection super duper synthetic when their owners manual in all likely hood recommends around 7-10 k on conventional or the OLM will tread out the same distance set to conventional specs...

Now just to show you I'm not one to be above/below anyone else here my current fill is M1 5w-20 EP which my car does not call for anything other than conventional (02 accord I4) yet I will run this out to around 13-15 k.. however it will cost me more money.. a good bit more considering i could get two conventional oil changes around $20 in oil using the same filter busting 20K for $28 or so...

I did purchase this oil on sale so that's a plus.. but still.. as far as one synthetic verses another that's not the point, it's what spec your engine manufacture called out, or requested due to certain engine design parameters, and sometimes even design flaws

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
Fallguy - Your question is IMO impossible to answer with any real conviction

Perhaps the "hard facts" emerge when you see if the lubricant has Approval and is Listed by the Manufacturer. This perhaps is as close as you will get - well unless you do millions of comparative kms, UOAs galore and comparative tear down inspections - but that's another story!!

 

[sangyup81]

Originally Posted By: Fallguy
I have grown weary on searching that one synthetic is any better than another except in the the case of longer OCI's.

What can one compare that are cold hard signs of a better synthetic vs another one in the same grade.

NOACK
Flashpoint
MRV
CCS
Shearing after use
ACEA Ratings or other (VW)

Most of these items are like saying I'd rather pay more for a product because it can run on a Ferrari when the other product works almost identically in my Camry.

The best synthetic oil for most applications is the cheapest one because other than cost, they are equal based on the application it is being used it. Isn't this the current BITOG wisdom going around after all?

 

[FZ1]

Best you can do is just run a few till you find 1 your car seems to like. All I can tell you is my Accord V6 seems to like M1 EP better than PP,M1,or Dealer Fill.

 

[Lethal1ty17]

Originally Posted By: FZ1
Best you can do is just run a few till you find 1 your car seems to like. All I can tell you is my Accord V6 seems to like M1 EP better than PP,M1,or Dealer Fill.


our Accord V6 seems to run smoothest and quietest on M1 too. haven't tried Edge yet...next fill. my money is on the Edge.

 

[ZZman]

The problem is best at what?

Some oils excel at some things and not others.

Depends on your application.

I tend to lean towards a strong add pack myself.

 

[Roscoe10]

I once owned a 99 Toyota camry in which I ran 10K OCI's with Mobil 1 from new 'till it was hit and totaled at 160K. It used about a quart between OCI's for it entire life. I doubt that any synthetic would have been any better or worse. Pick what you like and go with it. You'll never realize any difference.

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: ZZman
I tend to lean towards a strong add pack myself.

More is not better all the time. A lot of people here ooooh and ahhhh about VOA's that show insanely high amounts of detergents, anti wear additives and such but I think a balanced additive package is more important but very hard to quantify what a balanced additive is.

To the OP, the only way I can compare synthetic oils is by knowing the engine first and its nuancies and how it is used, oil change interval, and oil used then tearing it down and examining the components. What I have found is that you do get what you pay for. Some of the best engines with minimal scoring and minimum wear data verified by measurements has been using Red Line, Motul, Royal Purple and Mobil 1.

 

[Artem]

Originally Posted By: Steve S
For what it matters most will never be able to tell the difference during the lifetime of the engine between equal base stocks even then maybe not....


I have to agree with this quote. As different as each brand of oil is, at the end of the day, they're pretty much all the same.

Its like comparing dish soap. Sure some may bubble up like crazy, others smell fruity but at the end of it all, they all are made to do the exact same thing...

 

[Mitch Alsup]

Originally Posted By: Fallguy
I have grown weary on searching that one synthetic is any better than another


And that is because, for the vast majority of common useage models, there is no useful difference.

Now if you have flat tappets, go racing, ignore maintanence, drive exclusively on interstates, there might be an oil that has a minor advantage over some other oils.

 

[Fallguy]

I agree with everything being said so far.

With that in mind what I am trying to find is if any certain areas of superiority exist "on paper" without regard to OCI's and product application.

Would think there should be something factual to compare one to another.

Let me throw one out I suspect could be factual.

A Lower NOAK value is always desirable, and as such a factual comparable number. YES ~ NO ?

NOAK may not mean much when you are only talking a 2-3 point swing but it is a cold hard fact of measurement that is comparable?

If you agree with my NOAK observation what others would you suggest are cold hard facts, regardless of level of importance?

UOA's don't count as varies by application greatly and would need more than just a few samples across the same application etc).

I am seeking to create a list of factual comparables and looking for suggestions. Know even this will be widely debated but think a generl consensus could be come up with.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Fallguy
I agree with everything being said so far.

With that in mind what I am trying to find is if any certain areas of superiority exist "on paper" without regard to OCI's and product application.

Would think there should be something factual to compare one to another.

Let me throw one out I suspect could be factual.

A Lower NOAK value is always desirable, and as such a factual comparable number. YES ~ NO ?



This is a good example--and example of a spec which may not mean much...

I guess it depends on the temperatures which the engines sees. In my car, Pennzoil Platinum showed no measurable consumption over 8K (after the 2nd OCI of using it). I also noticed very little blow-by, and I wipe down the throttle bore/plate right before every oil change. PP has NOACK volatility right at the edge of what's acceptable for its grade, IIRC. So in my case, it doesn't seem to mean much.

To your question, the main specs I look at are 40C viscosity and VI. I figure thinner oil @ 40C results in marginally less wear at start up and until the oil gets up to temp. Does it matter in the long run? Probably not.

 

[SL8R]

Originally Posted By: Fallguy
I agree with everything being said so far.

With that in mind what I am trying to find is if any certain areas of superiority exist "on paper" without regard to OCI's and product application.

Would think there should be something factual to compare one to another.

Let me throw one out I suspect could be factual.

A Lower NOAK value is always desirable, and as such a factual comparable number. YES ~ NO ?

NOAK may not mean much when you are only talking a 2-3 point swing but it is a cold hard fact of measurement that is comparable?

If you agree with my NOAK observation what others would you suggest are cold hard facts, regardless of level of importance?

UOA's don't count as varies by application greatly and would need more than just a few samples across the same application etc).

I am seeking to create a list of factual comparables and looking for suggestions. Know even this will be widely debated but think a generl consensus could be come up with.


It seems to me that all you're asking is whether it is better to have a higher or lower number for each property listed on a product data sheet. Are you then going to formulate some sort of weighting system for each property to try and distill everything down to a single metric? I'm starting to think psychiatrists should be able to diagnose OCD simply by tracking people's posts on this forum.

 

[Fallguy]

Enjoy the forum greatly but just tired of most everything being 90% subjective information.

OCD just means you flip the light switch to off then back on and then back to off to make sure it is substantially off correct?

I don't do that. At least not anymore, or very often if I still do it on occasion but only when I think its warranted to do so.

Regards

Happy Holidays ! ! !

 

[SaberBlaze]

For what it's worth, there is this "motor oil evaluator" which compares tons of different oils with their specs etc. http://members.themotoroilevaluator.com/ You have to sign up to use it, but there's a tutorial video on that page if you just want to see how it looks. For all I know some of the info could be outdated, who knows. He also ranks oils according to some algorithm he came up with. Here's the direct link, I think it works without logging in: http://members.themotoroilevaluator.com/index.php?id=202.

Kind of interesting to look at, but like everyone says, probably any old oil will do.

 

[rclint]

I understand what your seeking Fallguy, but the desirable outcome is what this is all about which is a oil that performs to absolute protection, lube, clean all that good stuff a engine oil supposed to do, and not to go overboard, or underboard.. that's why post are all over the place, some are in love with only one oil for their entire life, others try different oils... It's just such a broad spectrum to try and pick a best oil for everything so to speak, or to establish a "theoretical" instructions sheet to picking a oil...

I think what your seeking is in a strange way very close to what specifications are deemed by the vehicle/engine manufacture...