quote:Yes, and most (if not all) PAO-based synthetics did just that for years. The "100% synthetic" applied to the base oil, not the additive package. I don't think any PAO or ester based synthetics now use mineral oil as the additive carrier. With the solvency provided by the esters, it just isn't necessary.
Originally posted by pscholte: I am learning a lot from you guys about which oils are REALLY synthetic, but one question remains. Can you call yourself "100%," "Full," or "Whole" Synthetic and still use dino oil to carry your additives?
quote:It was an old MSDS, then. Mobil 1 dropped the mineral oil additive carrier when they went to the TriSyn Formula.
Originally posted by sbc350gearhead: According to an MSDS sheet I saw about a year ago......Mobil 1 still uses mineral oil as a "carrier" for their additive package. RP does the same as well.
quote:Actually, the ethylene gas is a byproduct of the refining process. And there's no breaking down of the gas molecules. Those small gas molecules are "built up" (polymerized) into larger ones that form the PAO, a synthesized hydrocarbon.
Originally posted by Kevin Dinwiddie: For the record all PAO's start with a petrolium oil or gas, and then instead of refining it, they chemically break it down and build it back to the PAO base stock that they want.
quote:Group 3 oils are made with dino oil basestocks. Yet they can legally call themselves "full synthetic". Castrol Syntec and Shell Rotella T 5w-40 are two prime examples of Group 3 oils with "full synthetic" right on the label.
Originally posted by pscholte: I am learning a lot from you guys about which oils are REALLY synthetic, but one question remains. Can you call yourself "100%," "Full," or "Whole" Synthetic and still use dino oil to carry your additives?
quote:To qualify that statement, we are assuming the base oil is > = 75% synthetics such as PAO's and esters. The rest of the oil would be additives that may have some mineral oils as carriers.
Thanks, 'Kule...the fact that mineral oil carriers are disappearing completely from sytnthetic formulations actually may be of little significance in the overall performance of the oil, but I like the fact that the claim of 100% synthetic means exactly that. Again...thanks
quote:That statement and definition may be accepted by the bean counters and marketers, but the only chemists who support that definition are the ones on Shell and Chevron's payrolls.
(Never mind that chemists have long been comfortable with the notion that isomerization is a process that re-arranges molecular structure into a desired form - one of the accepted definitions of "synthesis".)