Just want to throw this out, I know this has nearly been beaten to death, but I think it warrants further discourse.
Group III vs. Group IV.
I know this board is a pro- Grp. Iv place, evidenced by the poll. But, I think that this once rational position is being swept up into an emotional movement.
As I understand Grp. III is the product of catalytic reaction and not just severe hydrocracking. So you should be getting a distinctly different 'new' molecule and not a 'saturated' one as with Grp. II, I have no idea what differentiates a Grp. II+. As for Group IV, that's old technology, almost 30 years old now, good 'ole Mobil SHC. I'm no chemist but this is what I've put together from what I've read.
Ultimatly a limit on the price of a product is in place to assure market share, the rest is quality and marketing. Some people are very upset with Castrol and the whole synthetic debate. But, it may be that with a Grp. III based oil a superior add. pack can be afforded. Now Castrol certainly doesn't skimp on the marketing but doesn't making the best oil possible at the price point make sense? Especially when more and more engines require sythetics. It's a matter of approach I think, the one major still using exclusivly Group IV is alone, all the other players in that market are using Group III. Maybe they've seen the light, maybe you can get better oil using Group III with a more sophisticated add pack than you could afford with Group IV oil. Or maybe it's just a better spread. Who knows, maybe one of you?
I just don't understand the almost viscious bias against Group III basestock oils? Certainly there are some good Group III oils? All the majors make them, does anyone use them?
Group III Technology
- Thread starter sub_zero
- Start date
- Status
Calgary Eh?
I understood that group IIs are designated for the iso de-waxed lubes that Chevron devoloped and sold production rights to the likes of Pet-Can.
Group IIIs are bashed by those who profit from selling over-priced PAO products and nobody else.
III+ might just be 3-tech produced from slack wax (cracker bottoms), a Far-East claim to fame.
see YU BASE
I'm more interested in performance than hoopla.
At a price point of course.
quote:I think what gets people upset is the switch was made from PAO to grp III without a drop in price and with advertising it as the same as groupt IV/V synthetics. If it had come out as some newly named class of oil and not with the synthetic misnomer then there would be nothing to complain about and we would be doing group III vs group IV comparisons here in this forum to see how they compared given their same price point.
Originally posted by userfriendly: Calgary Eh? Group IIIs are bashed by those who profit from selling over-priced PAO products and nobody else.
Your right.
Perhaps 3s will come down in price as people become educated about the subject.
If I shop around I can find some 3 products at a very reasonable cost. PAOs, not.
For example..
Pet-Can's 3 Duron Diesel oils are priced quite well. Their PCO 3s are a rip off at almost twice the price.
quote:Actually, the hydrocracking and isodewaxing prcesses (whether the Chevron pattened and licensed technology, or ExxonMobil's version of same) is a catalytic treatment of the VGO whether we're talking about Group II, II+, or III. The primary difference between Group II and III is the time in the reactor and/or reaction temp, which yields more saturates in the Group III than in the Group II and II+. The other method for producing a Group III, which is the hydroisomerization of wax feedstocks, is also a catalytic process—one that yields the Group IIIs with the highest VIs, lowest pour points, and most saturates. As for Group IV (PAO) being "old technology," that's like looking at the Cadillac Sixteen at this year's Detroit auto show and saying it's "old techology" simply because the last Cadillac to have sixteen cylinders was built 75 years ago. Mobil is on the cutting edge of PAO science and the catalysts used, as well as the reactor technology, are several generations beyond what was used to produce the first PAOs. Yes, the basic process is the same, but so is the basic layout of Cadillac's first sixteen cylinder engine and the one in their newest concept car. But would anyone seriously consider the two engines to be the product of the same technology? Hardly.
Originally posted by sub_zero: As I understand Grp. III is the product of catalytic reaction and not just severe hydrocracking. So you should be getting a distinctly different 'new' molecule and not a 'saturated' one as with Grp. II, I have no idea what differentiates a Grp. II+. As for Group IV, that's old technology, almost 30 years old now, good 'ole Mobil SHC. I'm no chemist but this is what I've put together from what I've read.
Is there a simple list anywhere of what oils are in which group?
I've read the name Petro-Canada a few time on this tread.
Thats what I'm using P.C supreme 10w30 in summer and 5 w 30 in winter, and so in a 3.4 and a 3.1 gm engines.
This oil belongs to wich group ?
They say on the can that the oil is "syntetic LIKE performance" or something similar.
What do you think of that oil ? Numbers look good to me but I'm not an oil freak like Patman ![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif)
IMHO, The synthetic Group IV, V advantage is they can (it depends) last much longer under severe conditions. Synthetic base oil is not slicker or lower friction than Group II dino base oil from what I can see. Additive packages determine friction. I would not run a group III any longer than a group II myself. My problem with Group III base oil is the "bang for buck factor" this was very bad at one time. Same dollars as group IV with out the service life. Though it is better now.
It seems to me I read in Japan that Group III base oils were not sythetic.
I would not call gorup III oil for the same price as PAO a deal! If anything the reason so many companys have gone to group III for a so called synthetic is profit margin!!! They get to rape your wallet for an inferior product. Group III's do not pump or crank as low as PAO and Esters. They will not take as much heat as PAO's or Esters. Group III oils will not last as long at operateing temp. as PAO and Ester based oils.
If oil companys called it premium oil or semi-synthetic and sold the group III oils for $1.50-$2.00 dollars a quart we would not be haveing this conversation right now.
Passing a group III oil off as a true synthic is like trying to pass a 3 month old fortified wine off for a nice vintage Rhine wine!
I used Havoline formula 3 synthetic (GIII) in my hard driven vehicles for years, and never experienced a oil related problem. At the time, I didn't know the difference between a G3 and a pao/ester based oil. Once I became aware of the difference, I switched to mobil 1. I must refer to a quote posted here concerning fram filters............"Why pay the same amount of money for an inferior product?"
By the way......I used to use Fram TG filters as well.....LOL
quote:This is my point, why do you claim they are inferior? The basestock does not completely define how well a lube oil will perform. An awful lot of performance comes from the add pack. I speculate that given the economic considerations an oil blended with a Group III base should pay off performance wise because a more expensive and hopefully superior quality additive package can be used and still keep the price at or below a Group IV product. Mobil could be infact be inflating the market price for sythetic oils if there process is more costly and the other majors are just riding their coatails.
Originally posted by sbc350gearhead: I used Havoline formula 3 synthetic (GIII) in my hard driven vehicles for years, and never experienced a oil related problem. At the time, I didn't know the difference between a G3 and a pao/ester based oil. Once I became aware of the difference, I switched to mobil 1. I must refer to a quote posted here concerning fram filters............"Why pay the same amount of money for an inferior product?" By the way......I used to use Fram TG filters as well.....LOL
[/qb][/QUOTE]This is my point, why do you claim they are inferior? The basestock does not completely define how well a lube oil will perform. An awful lot of performance comes from the add pack. I speculate that given the economic considerations an oil blended with a Group III base should pay off performance wise because a more expensive and hopefully superior quality additive package can be used and still keep the price at or below a Group IV product.
Mobil could be infact be inflating the market price for sythetic oils if there process is more costly and the other majors are just riding their coatails. [/QB][/QUOTE]
You could prove us all wrong and do a 14,000 mile UOA test. With your Group III, just like 3 Mad Ponchos did with Mobil 1 and document it every 1000 miles. I would like to see it.
[ August 11, 2003, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: Hirev ]
quote:This is my point, why do you claim they are inferior? The basestock does not completely define how well a lube oil will perform. An awful lot of performance comes from the add pack. I speculate that given the economic considerations an oil blended with a Group III base should pay off performance wise because a more expensive and hopefully superior quality additive package can be used and still keep the price at or below a Group IV product. Mobil could be infact be inflating the market price for sythetic oils if there process is more costly and the other majors are just riding their coatails. [/QB]
Originally posted by sub_zero:quote:
Well....you may have a point, but I believe that the reason for using a g3 base is merely for profits sake. And since no oil company seems to want to announce that they use a G3 base, then I must come to the conclusion that it is inferior and I have no reason to believe that they spend more money for a better additive package. I have seen analysis of pennzoil synthetic, which look no better than the regular pennzoil. But I also admitted earlier that I used a G3 base oil for years with no problems. Due to what I have been told by those much more knowledgeable than I, Pao/ester based oils are superior due to their better resistance to extreme temps, if for no other reason. I will have to believe that the G3 stuff is inferior, until proven otherwise. With that being said, I would love to see more info and analysis on G3 oils to be 100% sure.
Group III base stock can be made into good oil, but not as good as the potential for oil made from Group IV and/or Group V base stock.
I'd have no problem with a good formulation that starts with GR-III base oil, but for longest oil life and best high temp protection, I'd choose Gr-IV/V. I wouldn't pay the same price for a Gr-III oil if a good Gr-IV oil was available.
Ken
Same price? ?
Castrol Syntec is priced $3.65 to $3.97 at Walmart.
Mobil 1 is priced $4.77 to $4.99 at Wal-Mart.
$18.88 jug, well that can be hit or miss. It's there sometimes, but not always.
So not exactly the same price. Maybe not a huge difference either, but I know I don't throw $5 bucks out the window when I get the chance.
Also we have seen some good results from Syntec, and even like my sample showed the only real question is the Viscosity drop.
I agree overall M1 is probably a better extended drain oil, but Syntec isn't as bad of an oil like people portray it to be. If you have aproblem w/ there marketing so be it, but don't knock the oil for what it is, even as a GIII.
Now the person ripping you off may be your Local parts store. They are the ones playing off the word "Synthetic" and pricing the Castrol the same as the M1. Why?? Because they can, and the amount of uneducated oil users is so great that they actually know no difference in the 2, and the parts store is just trying to make a profit. **** they probably know no difference in the oils either.
Just my 0.02 cents
MolaKule
Staff member
"I just don't understand the almost viscious bias against Group III basestock oils? "
I don't know of any viscious bias against Group III oils. I think that with the proper addtive package, they perform slightly better than Group II's.
I think the general "complaint" as others have stated, is the price and the fact many companies attempting to pass this stuff off as a true synthetic, including Amsoil, a company once vitriolically opposed to allowing GIII into the club.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
quote:Whenever I compare motor oil prices at the usual parts stores and places like Wal-Mart and Target, the difference in price between M1 and Syntec is usally less than 25 cents. And more often than not, the Syntec is actually the more expensive one of those two!
Castrol Syntec is priced $3.65 to $3.97 at Walmart. Mobil 1 is priced $4.77 to $4.99 at Wal-Mart.
I think I would be more interested in the performance gap between group II and group III.
That's where the price gap is huge!
quote:You might want to find a copy of Nov. 2000 issue of Car and Driver. it has some good info on what took place. The local parts store was not and is not the problem.
Originally posted by day1si: Now the person ripping you off may be your Local parts store. They are the ones playing off the word "Synthetic" and pricing the Castrol the same as the M1. Why?? Because they can, and the amount of uneducated oil users is so great that they actually know no difference in the 2, and the parts store is just trying to make a profit. **** they probably know no difference in the oils either. Just my 0.02 cents
- Status
