Castrol has introduced 3 new technologies ???

[Izb]

Castrol has introduced 3 new technologies:

Please explain me difference in 3 new Castrols’ technologies:

1) FST (fluid strength technology): http://castroledge.com/tested-to-perform/fluid-strength-technology
What does it mean? Some PAO oil in HC base oil? (like Magnatec?)

2) Titanium FST : http://www.castrol.com/castrol/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9036296&contentId=7067053
( and http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/EDGE_Titanium_PDS_april2011.pdf )
What does it mean? Some titanium instead of Molyl?

3) Syntec power technology: http://www.castrol.com/castrol/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9036295&contentId=7067038
(and http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/EDGE_Titanium_PDS_april2011.pdfhttp://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/Edge_BLACK_PDS_Sept_2011.pdf )

Bunch of movies, pictures and nice words, but there is no useful scientist information.
Due to what made these "achievements"?
As far as they are new at all?
Why they are not compatible at the same time and are present only in different oils?
Which of these three technologies to choose the user?

 

[Smokefan1977]

marketing, marketing and lastly marketing. Think with your dipstick Jimmy

Some PAO means it's a blend

Ti is an additive to replace part of the Zinc I do believe

 

[Izb]

Why they are not compatible at the same time and are present only in different oils?
Which of these three technologies to choose the user?

 

[Pablo]

If Amsoil rolled out something like that it would be called marketing. Or worse!

Example - click here

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
If Amsoil rolled out something like that it would be called marketing. Or worse!

Example - click here



Oh you suck. >_>

 

[Tom NJ]

It's not a technology, it's an art - the art of marketing!

Castrol's specialty!

Tom NJ

 

[Solarent]

Any time an oil company starts talking about fluid strength it gets my ears up a little....

FST/Titatium FST is most likely referring to an additive package that builds up the "film strength of the oil"-Aka EP/AW/FM's. oxygen-, nitrogen-, sulphur-, phosphorus, boron, molybdenum-containing organic compounds as well as our favorite ZDDP are all used in the process of surface film formulation. In other words these components of the additive package react with the surface chemistry of engine components to create a microscopic protective layer that keeps the metal-to-metal contact to a minimum (to use marketing terms). Titanium DiOxide has been used in various grease and metalworking fluids in the past and some variation of this is what I suspect that Castrol is using in their new EDGE products. Based on a cursory reading of the links you provided, it appears as though Castrol is toting a premium additive package that does not violate the phosphorus restrictions (therefore less ZDDP) and yet still produces wear protection (to the extreme - their words not mine).

They also have developed a "test" that examines an oil's ability to perform under extreme pressure - sounds to me like the old Reichert tests (some variations of which appear at the hands of the old snake-oil guys) and no surprise the new Castrol formula is much better than everyone else. The way these surface additives work is that if they are removed from the surface, new active molecules quickly take their place and redevelop the protective film.

The reason why these additives may not be compatible with others is because sometimes they compete for the same surface, they may react dangerously with each other as "free radicals" and there can also be dangerous bi-products as a result high temperature environments. They are also temperature sensitive (different ones best at different temperatures) which is why they talk about the temperature component in the video.

Titanium in additive packages is a new marketing trend and it appears a new additive trend too. (I have heard similar things about Tungsten Carbide) and IMO the verdict is out on whether or not it will gain traction to be the replacement for ZDDP/Moly.

To be clear I am neither recommending nor trying to take away from anything Castrol is doing with these new oils. I think it would be good to get some tested (VOA or see specifics on their test results) Based on the PDS you linked us to they seem about comparable with other name brand oils. Most of this information they are giving is good info, but with a marketing twist that is designed to get your attention - mission accomplished.

If you like Castrol, use it - and then give us some feedback about what you think.

@Pablo - thanks for the song - I forgot it had even existed until now.

 

[Solarent]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
It's not a technology, it's an art - the art of marketing!

Castrol's specialty!

Tom NJ
+1

 

[chevrofreak]

Originally Posted By: Smokefan1977
marketing, marketing and lastly marketing. Think with your dipstick Jimmy

Some PAO means it's a blend

Ti is an additive to replace part of the Zinc I do believe


What do you mean "it's a blend"?

 

[OldCowboy]

This kind of hooey is one of the reasons I don't use Castrol.

 

[JCM35]

Every single oil company has this type of "HOOEY" in their marketing. Not sure why castrol gets beat up because of this.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: JCM35
Every single oil company has this type of "HOOEY" in their marketing. Not sure why castrol gets beat up because of this.


Actually I wasn't picking on Castrol. Amsoil and Royal Purple just GET POUNDED for their "hooey" as well. Mobil, Pennzoil, Redline seem to get a pass on BITOG for their "hooey".

 

[Clevy]

Great post. Thank you

 

[Bayman]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: JCM35
Every single oil company has this type of "HOOEY" in their marketing. Not sure why castrol gets beat up because of this.


Actually I wasn't picking on Castrol. Amsoil and Royal Purple just GET POUNDED for their "hooey" as well. Mobil, Pennzoil, Redline seem to get a pass on BITOG for their "hooey".


Mobil, Pennzoil, and Redline do not post 4-Ball Wear Tests.

It seems that Amsoil puts up tests that show there oil is superior too other oil's, yet we have seen UOA's from other oil's that are just as good as the UOA's from Amsoil users.

Other Oil Companies seem too have a better Marketing Strategy than Amsoil.

Amsoil owns an Oil Analysis Lab that is less than a mile away from Amsoil Headquarters, so I feel that all of Amsoil's tests that they post on there Website is pure MARKETING.

Amsoil sure is not going too post anything on there Website that shows that another oil did better than ther oil.

Its too bad that Amsoil cannot let there oil stand on it's own, you do not see other oil companies posting tests of there oil's against Amsoil.

Something too think about.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: Bayman


Mobil, Pennzoil, and Redline do not post 4-Ball Wear Tests.

It seems that Amsoil puts up tests that show there oil is superior too other oil's, yet we have seen UOA's from other oil's that are just as good as the UOA's from Amsoil users.

Other Oil Companies seem too have a better Marketing Strategy than Amsoil.

Amsoil owns an Oil Analysis Lab that is less than a mile away from Amsoil Headquarters, so I feel that all of Amsoil's tests that they post on there Website is pure MARKETING.

Amsoil sure is not going too post anything on there Website that shows that another oil did better than ther oil.

Its too bad that Amsoil cannot let there oil stand on it's own, you do not see other oil companies posting tests of there oil's against Amsoil.

Something too think about.


Thanks for making my point.

1) 4-Ball wear test is an ASTM test, now I will agree it's not generally used for a completed motor oils, but it remains a narrow, but usable test. Claims about sludge dumping from overhead are not ASTM, afaik.

2) Comparing UOA's at 20-25K miles, there are not many to compare with Amsoil. Comparing UOA's at 10K or less doesn't seem to prove anything. Especially when comparing across platforms in very different usages. UOA's actually are not all that great of a way to compare motor oils. Way oversimplified on BITOG.

3) "Other Oil Companies seem too have a better Marketing Strategy" - how are you judging this? I really want to know.

4) Amsoil owns a testing lab? Oh my gawd man - RUN!!!

We have one guy claiming bias from Polaris because Amsoil contracts with them. We have another claiming Amsoil falsifies tests - because - why? Because they happen to own a lab. Wowser. I'll have you know Amsoil also has tests run by SWRC. I suppose they favor Amsoil?

5) Yeah I'm waiting for other oil companies to post results on their sites that show other oils doing better than their own.

6) What do you mean "too bad that Amsoil cannot let there oil stand on it's own" ? It's all by itself all the time. 24/7. Amsoil holds it's own just fine. Thanks.

 

[Solarent]

This is why I like Pablo. He makes no bones about people who like to use other oils (although I am sure he secretly would LOVE it if we all bought Amsoil through him). He is always willing to stand up for Amsoil when someone's bias says something that isn't true or a fair view of how Amsoil is as a company. He sponsors the site and isn't here touting his wares behind an anonymous user name that isn't honest with their fellow BITOGers. And unlike some Amsoil reps I have met actually can speak to some of the reasons why Amsoil can work well for given circumstances (the 25k mile OCI for example).

I personally do think that Amsoil as company plays the comparison game really well (the schoolyard: my oil is better than your oil -neener neener!); but I don't think it is a reflection on the quality of their product nor is this thread necessarily the place for the discussion of their particular marketing strategy.

 

[Bayman]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: Bayman


Mobil, Pennzoil, and Redline do not post 4-Ball Wear Tests.

It seems that Amsoil puts up tests that show there oil is superior too other oil's, yet we have seen UOA's from other oil's that are just as good as the UOA's from Amsoil users.

Other Oil Companies seem too have a better Marketing Strategy than Amsoil.

Amsoil owns an Oil Analysis Lab that is less than a mile away from Amsoil Headquarters, so I feel that all of Amsoil's tests that they post on there Website is pure MARKETING.

Amsoil sure is not going too post anything on there Website that shows that another oil did better than ther oil.

Its too bad that Amsoil cannot let there oil stand on it's own, you do not see other oil companies posting tests of there oil's against Amsoil.

Something too think about.


Thanks for making my point.

1) 4-Ball wear test is an ASTM test, now I will agree it's not generally used for a completed motor oils, but it remains a narrow, but usable test. Claims about sludge dumping from overhead are not ASTM, afaik.

2) Comparing UOA's at 20-25K miles, there are not many to compare with Amsoil. Comparing UOA's at 10K or less doesn't seem to prove anything. Especially when comparing across platforms in very different usages. UOA's actually are not all that great of a way to compare motor oils. Way oversimplified on BITOG.

3) "Other Oil Companies seem too have a better Marketing Strategy" - how are you judging this? I really want to know.

4) Amsoil owns a testing lab? Oh my gawd man - RUN!!!

We have one guy claiming bias from Polaris because Amsoil contracts with them. We have another claiming Amsoil falsifies tests - because - why? Because they happen to own a lab. Wowser. I'll have you know Amsoil also has tests run by SWRC. I suppose they favor Amsoil?

5) Yeah I'm waiting for other oil companies to post results on their sites that show other oils doing better than their own.

6) What do you mean "too bad that Amsoil cannot let there oil stand on it's own" ? It's all by itself all the time. 24/7. Amsoil holds it's own just fine. Thanks.


1) 4-Ball Wear Test just does not seem too fly here on BITOG, most will agree that it is a pure Marketing Ploy.

2) When there is a great UOA from an Amsoil user, it seems the Amsoil Fans are touting how great Amsoil is, but when there is a bad UOA from an Amsoil user, then the Amsoil Fans make excuses. How many members on this board are doing 20-25K OCI's.

I thought Amsoil backed off recommending Extended Drains for certain vehicles, extended drains are not for everyone.

3) I do not like Amsoil's Marketing Strategy because they make there oil's out too be the best with tests that are meaningless, even Mobil 1 has stated that Amsoil uses tests too make there oil's look better when in reality that is not the case. I do have a Link from Mobil 1 that I can PM too you.

4) I did not say that Amsoil FALSIFIES TESTS, those are your words, what I meant is that anyone can run a test until they get the results that they want.

5) I am waiting for other oil companies to copy Amsoil's Marketing Strategy, I cannot see that happening anytime soon.

6) It's all by itself all the time. 24/7. Amsoil holds it's own just fine.
This sounds like a Sales Pitch.

I thought this Thread was about Castrol, it sure is turning into another Amsoil Thread.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Bayman
2) When there is a great UOA from an Amsoil user, it seems the Amsoil Fans are touting how great Amsoil is, but when there is a bad UOA from an Amsoil user, then the Amsoil Fans make excuses. How many members on this board are doing 20-25K OCI's.


That is where Amsoil shines. For the record, I'm not an Amsoil user, but would consider it if I were to extend OCIs to that extent. Amsoil, its reps, and users tend to realize that long OCIs aren't for everyone. As for bad UOAs, it really doesn't matter what the oil is, assuming it's a "suitable" oil. If the UOA isn't going well, there's something with the engine or the OCI chosen for the application. I wouldn't run 25,000 mile OCIs on my old F-150 with Amsoil. I know it wouldn't work.

As for Castrol, sure, they have some gimmicky marketing. All the companies do. The only exception, really, is probably Walmart with their Supertech. They put it on the shelves and keep their yaps shut.

I have no issues with any of Castrol's products. Their conventionals are always cheap up here. Their synthetics are expensive. That applies to all the big names, though, too.

 

[08_SHELBY]

If there is one thing I have learned from being on this forum it is that No Oil Does Everything The Best. Just pick the one you like and sleep well. I love the conversations though! Cheers!