Are the new ConocoPhillips oils really that good?

[preacher]

I must say, I've been intrigued if not down right impressed with the new SM/GF4 synthetic blend oils from ConocoPhillips. The specs on the Cold Cranking Viscosities are especially amazing.
Some questions:
Are these Cold Cranking Viscosities for real or some kind of misprint? How do these Cold Cranking Viscosities compare to Mobil 1? Are the additive packs good? What percentage of this oil is synthetic?

Here's the Product Data Sheets for the ConocoPhillips family of oils:

Conoco Super All Season
http://lubes.conoco.com/NR/rdonlyres/54C17AE1-A0C4-499B-8E4B-F6FDABC27D88/0/Con_SAS_SynBlend_MO.pdf

Phillips 66 Trop Artic
http://www.phillips66lubricants.com...6-7EA69CB96CED/0/66_TropArtic_SynBlend_MO.pdf

76 Super
http://www.76lubricants.com/NR/rdonlyres/3B9FF94B-CB18-4EC7-9B4B-4E492D74B5F9/0/76_Super_Syn_MO.pdf

Kendall GT-1
http://www.kendallmotoroil.com/NR/r...D-4453-9E90-8AB1FD7FA1BF/0/K_GT1_HP_SynMO.pdf

 

[genie47]

Pretty good I must say. I have used the Hydroclear Super All Season 5W30 in 30+ deg C heat in the tropics. Wear alright and the oil didn't shear down and kept at a solid SAE30 at 100 deg C after 9.5k km.

However, this oil has no moly in it but loads of Ca.

 

[Blue99]

Yes, the new line from ConocoPhillips is a winner.

...Just some advice, I'm not the forum cop. Preacher, if you take the registration a little bit more seriously, it will add some credibility to your posts.

Blue99

 

[Johnny]

preacher, what part of Earth are you from? ConocoPhillips does make a good line of products.

 

[Al]

quote:

---

Originally posted by preacher:
I must say, I've been intrigued if not down right impressed with the new SM/GF4 synthetic blend oils from ConocoPhillips. The specs on the Cold Cranking Viscosities are especially amazing.
Some questions:
Are the additive packs good? What percentage of this oil is synthetic?

---

I think the jury is out here. To meeet GF-4/SM Conoco (Motorcraft) has gone the "enhance base oil route" and its additive package doesn't seem that strong. Others (Havoline/Chevron) have gone more with a better additive package) This is anyway my take (which could be wrong). We'll see which does better.

I personally believe that the Havoline product may give better wear numbers especially in severe conditions and the Conoco may do better with longer oil change intervals. We'll see. I'm going with Havoline for now.

 

[Drew99GT]

Preacher, I thought the data sheets, especially for 10w30, had to be a misprint, so I emailed them. It appears these oils are the real deal, at least the published specs. Here's Phillip's response:


-----Original Message-----
From: Perry, Allan
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 11:18 AM
To: RSC:Lubricants
Subject: RE: Trop Artic 10w30 Synthetic Blend Data sheet


Andrew:


For TropArtic Synthetic Blend 10w30 (GF-4), I have CCS numbers ranging from 3000 cP to 3800 cP, and MRV numbers ranging from 11,900 to 14,300 cP. There will be some variability among the different blending terminals and among different laboratories when measuring these values.


These values are low because we use a significant amount of synthetic base oil in our synthetic blend formulations.


AWP

 

[Drew99GT]

Also, I agree whole heartedly with Al regarding the additive packages. The Conoco/Phillips oils are pretty weak as far as additives, but the new Havoline is stout, especially the moly. I just put the new Havoline 10w30 in my Corolla, and it's quieter at idle then ever before. I may stick with Havoline/Chevron for summer and use the 10w30 Trop Artic for winter.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

think the jury is out here. To meeet GF-4/SM Conoco (Motorcraft) has gone the "enhance base oil route" and its additive package doesn't seem that strong.

I agree with Al... compare the Conoco additive packages to others... outside of the 5-20s, they seem a little weak to me too. I prefer the Chevron family of conventional, syn-blend oils when it comes to extended OCIs above 4K.

For shorter, 3-4K OCIs, Conoco oils are usually a good price bargain & will work fine.

 

[Blue99]

In reference to a "weak additive package", keep in mind that the Grp II/II+ formulations with 200-300 ppm of moly are using this level of moly to help out the base oil with oxidation & thickening in the GF-4 Sequence VG test.

The higher VI index of group III base oils withstand heat better and do not require help from additives.

But I'm the first to agree, a key side benefit of the 200-300 ppm of moly in both the Chevron/Havoline and Pennzoil dino's seems to be low engine noise!

 

[Drew99GT]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue99:
In reference to a "weak additive package", keep in mind that the Grp II/II+ formulations with 200-300 ppm of moly are using this level of moly to help out the base oil with oxidation & thickening in the GF-4 Sequence VG test.

The higher VI index of group III base oils withstand heat better and do not require help from additives.

But I'm the first to agree, a key side benefit of the 200-300 ppm of moly in both the Chevron/Havoline and Pennzoil dino's seems to be low engine noise!

---

choices choices

!

 

[Terry]

preach, probably somewhere between the mobil 7500 and M1 Super syn in performance capability. As far as cold weather capability not even a question that the 10w30 on down in weight would suit you fine in the hills of PIT.

I highly recommend analyzing the oil and engine at least annually to get a data grip on whatever you decide.

I tested Conoco's products before hydroclear was well known and the R&D guys there were competent and fine people who I trust.

Phillips has always had a great R&D department that like Conoco has gone through some realignment and some of the players are not known.

Much of the theory of formulation comes from Ken Hope a cutting edge chemist at CP and he does not cut corners and they listen to him at COP.

The Tosco guys from 76 I have lost track of. I have no idea what the kendall formula is except that more than likely is just for marketing the name that many older demographic and racers remember.

While I have not had the chance to test the newer formulas I have recommended at least trying them from this background.

Analysis will yield the truth over time but I am confident that in daily drivers these oils are a good value.

 

[preacher]

Blue 99 & Johnny,
I live in Pittsburgh, PA. While not as cold as some places, it can be in the 5F-15F temperature range in the mornings during winter. This is why I'm interested in these cold cranking specs.

How does this family of oils compare to Mobil 1?

 

[messiah4linux]

Awesome!!!

 

[pmt]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Terry:
preach, probably somewhere between the mobil 7500 and M1 Super syn in performance capability.

---

To Terry:
If I am following this thread's logic correctly, you believe that the performance of the Conoco/Phillips/Motorcraft Group III blend oil might be better than the Mobil 7500? I hope you are right - in my part of the country I can buy Phillips 66 SM/GF-4 oil for $1.12/qt at Walmart, but Mobil 7500 costs about $3/qt at Autozone.
Thanks
pmt