Are synthetic worth the money?

[MolaKule]

quote:

---

...Neo Synthetic and Red Line, are not even API licensees.

---

That's a whole "nother" can of worms since API represents minimum standards for lubricants. We cannot discount/discredit the smaller guys/markets simply because they think outside the API box.

quote:

---

On the other hand, it could represent some failure on the part of small companies to take into account the wide variety of applications, gasket and seal materials, and conditions of use when they formulate a motor oil using synthetic base stocks, particularly esters.

---

And they would not last very long if they didn't do some seal or fleet testing. I do agree that innate biases have cropped up in the past when the word "synthetic" is mentioned, especially the die hard dino fans, who do not appreciate the advantages of the newer technologies. [ September 10, 2004, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

 

[nortones2]

Re wax etc. OK its a rubbish statement Molakule! However, to make amends, this nonsense of mine pushed me to enquire a little into what actually sludge consisted of. This seemed an interesting comment and hadn't been made here before SFAIK. "Another cause may surprise you: running the engine low on oil for a prolonged period of time can cause sludge. The detergent and oxidation inhibitors are important components of the additive package that prevent sludge from forming. When an engine is run low on oil, these additives have to work overtime to do their job. There is simply less of the additive package available to do the work of suspending particles and preventing oxidation (thickening) of the oil. Here is the surprise part: running an engine just one quart low on oil for about as long as some technicians work in one week (about 55 hours) can increase the viscosity, or the thickness, of the oil by over 1000%!!! I don't know many technicians, or car owners for that matter, who would like to run 5,000-30,000W oil in their car's engine. If you factor the effects of the increasing use of self-service gas stations into the equation, you can see how the sludge monster can unintentionally be invited to pay a visit to so many engines. " Source: http://yotarepair.com/sludge%20article.html Maybe some truth in this, and it appies to the negigent mainly, but I had heard that some people deliberately run oil level permanently ow to give a few more hp, by reducing drag from churning.

 

[Lubricious]

quote:

---

It is the total cost of the oil change that I am comparing. It wouldn't be a fair cost comparison if I showed a lower cost for oil alone and the total real cost was higher because of the filters. If you like you can reuse the old filter twice to cut costs if you want it to be fair. [/QB]

---

Or, to be fair you could do the same number of filter-only changes on the synthetic oil. I can easily see how you would want to change the filter before the end of an extended drain. The filter cost would be the same then, only the oil price is left. The bottom line of course, would be that synthetic is more expensive.

 

[wulimaster]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lubricious:

quote:

---

It is the total cost of the oil change that I am comparing. It wouldn't be a fair cost comparison if I showed a lower cost for oil alone and the total real cost was higher because of the filters. If you like you can reuse the old filter twice to cut costs if you want it to be fair.

---

Or, to be fair you could do the same number of filter-only changes on the synthetic oil. I can easily see how you would want to change the filter before the end of an extended drain. The filter cost would be the same then, only the oil price is left. The bottom line of course, would be that synthetic is more expensive. [/QB]

---

Why throw out a good filter before its time along with the oil that is in it if both are still good? I choose to use good filters with the good oil. One should use cheap filters with cheap oil to do the opposite comparison. Any modification is not being consistant with either philosophy.

 

[Mickey_M]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MolaKule:

quote:

---

---

That's a whole "nother" can of worms since API represents minimum standards for lubricants. We cannot discount/discredit the smaller guys/markets simply because they think outside the API box.

quote:

---

---

And they would not last very long if they didn't do some seal or fleet testing.

---

That the API standards is a minimum makes it even more perplexing that a company would not certify its motor oil. If you don't meet a minimum standard, if your motor oil jeopardizes a new car warranty, there is not much to discredit or discount. The API box isn't much of a box. Since it's a peformance standard, if your oil can pass the sequence test and doesn't contain more phosphorous than specified, you're in. With the viscosity grade read-across provision, you only have to certify one SAE weight for an entire line. You can use pretty much any base stock you want, from a Group I to soybean oil. If your motor oil not only meets the current API standard but exceeds it, for example it can pass a double or triple API sequence, you can advertise that. It's hard to see why you'd put out the money for fleet testing and advertising but not the $75k or $125k for certification. When you see that some of these non-certified motor oils contain large amounts of lead, sulphur, chlorinated paraffins, or other unusual additives it would sure raise some concerns to me about what is going to happen to my engine on a regular diet of the stuff.

 

[tpi]

I'm using Delo 400 15W40 (conventional) in my 99 PSD with 100K miles. I rarely tow heavy, it isn't subject to extreme cold. I run the oil between 8-10K miles. This is in line with the Navistar recommendation for the similar T444E engine. Mine is in a relatively "light" 6 speed pickup getting 19 MPG and blowing relatively little junk into the 15 quarts of oil. CA. diesel fuel has below average sulfur content. The engine is of robust design and has oil to water intercooler. The engine is very unlikely to be taken down by this oil. I am very careful to watch for injector or combustion problems which will impose a far heavier load on engine parts and will lead to early demise. My passenger car gets synthetics (tiny pan capacity, hotter oil temperatures, higher relative loads, lighter duty design).

 

[Pablo]

quote:

---

The API box isn't much of a box. Since it's a performance standard, if your oil can pass the sequence test and doesn't contain more phosphorous than specified, you're in.

---

Not that easy. After a company "passes" the formula is now in the hands of API. Also, your statement is a contradiction. First you say it's a performance standard and then you say P is controlled. Bottom line: it's very much a minimalist standard for our infamous USA car companies and the API in a tight lockstep. If an oil company wants to make a better oil, they are free to do so and still they can and should exceed the low bar performance requirements. As for P, there is no documented proof that a 1200 ppm P oil will kill a cat faster than a 800 ppm oil in a well running engine.

 

[Mickey_M]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo:

quote:

---

---

Not that easy. After a company "passes" the formula is now in the hands of API. Also, your statement is a contradiction. First you say it's a performance standard and then you say P is controlled.

---

The formula is "in the hands" of any good lab, anyone who reads any patents you hold, and most of your employees. I hope you're not suggesting that the API is nefarious or that some small bottler has developed the motor oil equivalent of the 80 mpg carburetor. There's nothing contradictory in noting that the primary requirement is running an engine through the API sequence with the motor oil to be certified, and then noting that the exception is a limit on phosphorous levels. The phosphorous level is related to pollution control at mileages well beyond any testing that is done. The honest way to deal with non-certification is to provide consumers information. For example, Mobil 1 Racing Formula does not mention the API Service Category anywhere on its label or packaging. It isn't certified and misleading the public into believing it is doesn't do anyone any favors. Each quart contains the legend: "Follow the viscosity grade and API service category recommendations in your vehicle owner's manual." If you ask Mobil why it is not certified, they'll tell you: the phosphorous level is too high. Compare that with this from a non-certified motor oil: "Recommended for: API CF/CE/SJ/SH/SG" That strikes me as purposely misleading. Again, if it's a minimalist standard then there's no excuse for not getting certified.

 

[Pablo]

quote:

---

The formula is "in the hands" of any good lab, anyone who reads any patents you hold, and most of your employees. I hope you're not suggesting that the API is nefarious or that some small bottler has developed the motor oil equivalent of the 80 mpg carburetor.

---

Of course I'm not saying this. What I am saying is that the formula is now controlled by API. Some oil companies like to improve and don't like to wait for the API. The fact is that all of Amsoil's oils pass the performance requirements with ease, and the published statements say they don't want to be burdened with API. BiTOG has beaten this to death in the past. Mobil's approach is good, but there is nothing at all misleading with Amsoil's statements. They use the same words with their products that actually bear API certification as not: http://www.amsoil.com/products/ame.html API isn't a bragging right. Amsoil has the right to say the oil meets and exceeds and can be used in cases where required. It very often is a "better than" substitution. Bottom line, I have no real problem with the API as a minimalist standard, but they should not charge $100,000+ for a minor base oil formula tweak. In the realm of a few thousand dollars should be sufficient.

 

[theoilzone]

Synthetics are worth the extra money when factoring costs not just the price. Synthetics are for people that think....to paraphrase Bill O'Reilly. Synthetics are the next step, technologically speaking, when consumers are looking to optimize their cash outflow and hold their hard earned dollars in their pockets longer. Synthetics are NOT geological accidents. They are chemically engineered sloutions, "sort of like balanced and blueprinted" oils. As you read below I am not talking about the AMERICAN SYNTHETIC INSTITUTE.........just the American Petroleum Institute. The API, as a Certification Organization is on its' way out the door, in terms as an influential player. Unless some large thought process changes occur........... API is like dial-up internet service versus cable modems. ILSAC is the organization that will be the player by the end of this decade. This is true primarily due to the recent mergers betwqeen US and European manufacturers (e.g Ford & Volvo). API can't enforce its' standards due to lack of funding.................. Essentially, the 1990s has shown it functioned as more of a barrier to innovation and progress in the lubrication industry. Tie new specs up in committee and make the Auto manufacturers wait for technology innovations... for years sometimes. This has beared itself out in the marketplace when examining the specs touted by manufacturers such as MACK for diesel engines for example. They got tired of waiting.............. The API EOLCS is simply a way to slow down the introduction of synthetics in large bulk contracts such as state and federal agencies. It also doesn't force a company to properly blend the lubricant to the standards required in an API specification for a given viscosity grade. After the test results are submitted to the API then an oil company can produce practically anything they want..because the API doesn't have the adequate monitoring capabilities to see if the oils are properly labeled and the proper viscosities are in the right containers. Many large fleets don't check, on a regular basis, to determine if the oil meets specs before putting it in their applications. The ILMA organization is struggling with this fact with ..........I suppose unethical companies. See Lubes N Greases on the recent North Carolina debacle regarding this matter. It also effectively allows the US to stay behind the power curve to the more stringent European Standards. The API standards show a lack of innovative flawed engineering thought processes by assuming phosphorous is bad in high levels. The API didn't decide to examine the fact that there is high volatility phosphorous (i.e. cheap) and that there is low volatility phosphorous. The API decided to say it is bad....... without thinking about HOW phosphorous "unzips" and how it contaminates a converter. API = Keep the price down Bubba. In every case the API slows down progress to the consumer by forcing them to accept a standard as a minimum..... sort of like dial-up versus cable. API is not your cable guy. Innovation rarely comes from within an organization. Here is an example........ The Wright Brothers Did Not Have A Pilot's License [ September 12, 2004, 06:57 PM: Message edited by: theoilzone ]

 

[Motorbike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by theoilzone: The API, as a Certification Organization is on its' way out the door, in terms as an influential player. API is like dial-up internet service versus cable modems. ILSAC is the organization that will be the player by the end of this decade. It also effectively allows the US to stay behind the power curve to the more stringent European Standards. Innovation rarely comes from within an organization. Here is an example........ The Wright Brothers Did Not Have A Pilot's License

---

Glad you found this site . Welcome ....again

 

[Mickey_M]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo: [QB]

quote:

---

---

Of course I'm not saying this. What I am saying is that the formula is now controlled by API. Some oil companies like to improve and don't like to wait for the API.

---

The API service category is a floor, not a ceiling. You can make your motor oil out of diester, polyol ester, polyalphaolefin, Group I, Group II, Group III, soybean oil, whale oil, with or without moly, calcium, magnesium, or what have you. It's wide open. The argument that API impedes progress for not certifying your oil, then, doesn't fly. The only limitation that I know of is related to pollution controls. And that's led to innovation, particularly the increased use of moly and calcium.

quote:

---

The fact is that all of Amsoil's oils pass the performance requirements with ease, and the published statements say they don't want to be burdened with API.

---

I believe the Amsoil motor oils that are not certified all have high levels of phosphorous, which means they don't meet the current API service category specifications. That is, they don't pass.

quote:

---

API isn't a bragging right.

---

No, as has been pointed out, it's the minimum standard. Not meeting the minimum standard is not a bragging right.

quote:

---

Bottom line, I have no real problem with the API as a minimalist standard, but they should not charge $100,000+ for a minor base oil formula tweak.

---

They don't. The API has adopted a viscosity grade read-across provision, a basestock interchange, and allowed CMA code of practice substitutions to give even small outfits a fair chance to avoid retesting. The exception for 10W-30 oils in the API implementation of the GF-4 standards is another example of trying to accommodate small companies. The statement you cited, ".... is Recommended for Applications Requiring the Following Specifications: .... API Engine Service CF, CF-2, CG-4, CH-4, CI-4, SH, SJ, SL" is misleading if it is not an API licensed motor oil meeting the requirements of the API SL service category unless it is clearly stated that it is not an "API SL" motor oil.

 

[Mickey_M]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by theoilzone: As you read below I am not talking about the AMERICAN SYNTHETIC INSTITUTE.........just the American Petroleum Institute. The API, as a Certification Organization is on its' way out the door, in terms as an influential player. Unless some large thought process changes occur........... Probably not. I could respond with a string of similarly unsupported conclusions about just about any organization one can think of, but setting a floor under motor oil standards to avoid the infliction of a wide open market on unsuspecting consumers is neither an impediment to progress nor opposed by any large number of oil companies, vehicle manufacturers, or governments.

 

[Pablo]

Just for the record, since this is a diesel forum the Amsoil 15W-30 HDEO is API SL. But, of course, the P limit doesn't apply to SAE 40's.......