Consistency of weight ratings of dino oil

[avu3]

I met a fellow who claims to have worked in the industry and speaks poorly of traditional "dino" oils. He said that they vary insanely from their rated weights, and that they only tested one in 100,000 gallons or something. He said the real value in synthetic wasn't necessarily that it was synthetic, but that it was more consistent about weight because the base was consistent. I paid him no heed and still run 5w30 dino, but since I found this place searching for oil recommendations on my '06 Toyota I thought to ask here. Thanks, Scott

 

[bruce381]

musta worked at a lousy blend plant. testing of 1 gallon in 100,000 could be if you blend 100,000 gallon in 1 batch then all you need is <1 gallon to test. ANY oil vis will vary and run a range + or - and STILL be on spec that is why most all data sheets say TYPICAL that is what it is. bruce

 

[dave1251]

avu3 You heard it from bruce his is a well respected oil blender here so you heard it from the horses mouth. Just use the maufactor's recommend visocity and OCI and your engine "unless there is some freaky damage" will last many years down the road.

 

[MC5W20]

I think there is some truth here which is veiled in some misconceptions. I will specifically address your testing comment. In a high volume manufacturing environment they would run a large batch but only test a small portion. So out of a thousand gallons a one gallon sample would be hauled of to the lab and then tested. If that gallon passes it is considered representative of the other thousand so it is released for use. I think the more important concept to understand is this - is every batch tested? If not then I would see a gap in the quality control. If they were to test one batch and then say well the next ten batches should be good then that would be irresponsible. The best way to do it would be to test a batch and then release it if it passes and then send another sample to an independant lab to verify your results. Sometimes lab equipment can go out of calibration due to poor procedures. This would be an important insurance check to keep things on the up and up.

 

[bruce381]

""I think the more important concept to understand is this - is every batch tested? If not then I would see a gap in the quality control. If they were to test one batch and then say well the next ten batches should be good then that would be irresponsible"" you are correct BUT I do not skip batches and know of no one that will. bad press and problems with liability are important. And lab calibration is a routine thing with known standards at least for me it is. bruce

 

[avu3]

That all sounds logical. I didn't think about it that way. It leads me to a series of follow up questions. How signifigant is the variance? Is it enough that I should be concerned about it? Are any brands better than others? Common sense leads me to think the house brands are probably not as good as name brands like Valvoline, Castrol, Mobil, Ford, etc. Scott

 

[eljefino]

There is a brand that's worse than the rest.. Worse because they managed to get caught. Coastal oil sold 10w30 bottled as 5w30, and a state's bureau of weights and measures (south carolina?) caught 'em. 10w30 is cheaper to make as you can dump more group I in. Now Coastal could claim it was a mistake, but they got caught, so they have to live with it now. I would not worry about accidentally getting 20w50 in your 5w20, that sounds like the scaremongering you get about generic prescriptions or anything else.

 

[bruce381]

I figue shoot for mid range vis and most other specs + - 10% bruce