Is group III a synthetic?

[msparks]

That really is the question. While I'm on the fence with the technical meaning of it an the fact the Groups IV+ is superior to the group II/III process I have to digress to the fact that according some of my reading the Servere hydrotreating may infact be a synthetic product becuase the molecular structer of the base oil is changed.

According to lubrizol the act of Servere Hydro-treating (Known as Hydrocracking) is:

quote:

---

A totally different approach to lube oil manufacture involves an even more severe hydrogen process called hydrocracking. This process changes the structure of many of the molecules in the feedstock. Aromatics are converted into naphthenes, many naphthene rings are broken open, and many paraffinic molecules are rearranged or fragmented. This massive "reforming" of the feedstock produces molecules that have improved viscosity/temperature characteristics and improved thermal and oxidative stability. This process allows a great deal of flexibility relative to crude source for the production of high-quality lube stocks.

---

Any further comment?

 

[Pablo]

To me synthesis means exactly that. Not just reforming, not relinking - either building up or breaking down to form NEW molecules.

synthesis = the production of a substance by the union of chemical elements, groups, or simpler compounds or by the degradation of a complex compound.

So here's MY opinion: SOME Group III base oil molecules ARE synthetic, others are not! THEREFORE: Some group III oils are synthetic others are not - really again depending on the basestock.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Technicly "cracking" and "reforming" the structure of the feedstock is not simply refining or purifying it. It is being violently changed with catalyst, heat, pressure and hydrogen. The equipment is not cheap either, I always associated hydrocrackers with fuel production as they allow refiners to pruduce more fuel out of a barrel of oil than simple vacuum towers and distilation.


So where is the line between highly refined and synthesized oil? To be objective I will use the dictionary.

re·fine
v. re·fined, re·fin·ing, re·fines
v. tr.
To reduce to a pure state; purify.
To remove by purifying.
To free from coarse, unsuitable, or immoral characteristics: refined his manners; refined her speaking style.


syn·the·size v. syn·the·sized, syn·the·siz·ing, syn·the·siz·es
v. tr.
To combine so as to form a new, complex product: “His works synthesize photography, painting and linguistic devices” (Paul Taylor).
To form or produce by chemical synthesis.


So technicly synthetic is built up from simpler components to more complex ones, while refined products are stripped down to useable products or purified from more complex or random components into a usefull product.


If both of these processes create an equal product does it matter the state of the building materials before the process?


I believe "Synthetic" is being used to describe a performance characteristic by some marketers rather than to describe the production process. Improper use of the term but how many people would be attracted to oil labled "cracked"? Perhaps some of us who understand the difference but the genral marketplace is not that well educated so the synthetic label is an over simplification.

[ April 23, 2005, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Bryanccfshr ]

 

[Mamala Bay]

In extended synthetic OCI, I think a GRP3 has it's limits.

If they do perform the same why doesn't Mobil, Amsoil and other full synthetic oil just use GRP3 base and save cost themselves.

 

[JHZR2]

So what if you were to partially oxidize or autothermally reform lube oil, diesel fuel, etc into CO and H, and then use an F-T catalyst or similar to re-turn it into hydrocarbon chains of one's liking. Is that a group III because it didnt start with an ethylene or equivanent stock, from a dedicated holding vessel, or is it a group IV because it started with base constituents of carbon monoxide and hydrogen?

Just throwing one that I wasnt sure of out there...

Thanks

 

[Mamala Bay]

I guess the question should be having a 100% synthetic oil in extended OCI would be a better choice.

By definition a GRP3 can be called a synthetic oil by it's definition because of molecular change and it's end results is similar to POA synthetic.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JHZR2:
So what if you were to partially oxidize or autothermally reform lube oil, diesel fuel, etc into CO and H, and then use an F-T catalyst or similar to re-turn it into hydrocarbon chains of one's liking. Is that a group III because it didnt start with an ethylene or equivanent stock, from a dedicated holding vessel, or is it a group IV because it started with base constituents of carbon monoxide and hydrogen?

Just throwing one that I wasnt sure of out there...

Thanks

---

So is reforming the same as synthesis?

 

[Mamala Bay]

SYNTHESIS:
1. In chemistry, the formation of a compound from simpler compounds or elements. 2. The production of a substance (e.g., as in protein synthesis) by the union of chemical elements, groups, or simpler compounds, or by the degradation (i.e., breaking down) of a complex compound.

The other meaning of chemical synthesis is narrow and restricted to a specific kind of chemical reaction, a direct combination reaction, in which two or more reactants combine to form a single product. The general form of a direct combination reaction is:

A + B ? AB
where A and B are elements or compounds, and AB is a compound consisting of A and B. Examples of combination reactions include:

2Na + Cl2 ? 2 NaCl (formation of table salt)
S + O2 ? SO2 (formation of sulfur dioxide)
4 Fe + 3 O2 ? 2 Fe2O3 (iron rusting)
CO2 + H2O ? H2CO3 (carbon dioxide dissolving into water to form carbonic acid)

 

[Bryanccfshr]

So in essence if the feedstock is stripped to very basic elements then reformed into a compound it is a technicly synthesis since the resulting compound would be "formed from simpler elements"?

With Hydrocracked lubesPAO's and GTL becoming competetive I think we are in very good times with the higher end HC based lubricants no matter what we call them. We should embrace this variety because it will give the formulators more to work with. At the same time performance characteristics need to be better defined for the consumer.

 

[JHZR2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bryanccfshr:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JHZR2:
So what if you were to partially oxidize or autothermally reform lube oil, diesel fuel, etc into CO and H, and then use an F-T catalyst or similar to re-turn it into hydrocarbon chains of one's liking. Is that a group III because it didnt start with an ethylene or equivanent stock, from a dedicated holding vessel, or is it a group IV because it started with base constituents of carbon monoxide and hydrogen?

Just throwing one that I wasnt sure of out there...

Thanks

---

So is reforming the same as synthesis?

---

No, but if I reform it to hydrogen and CO, then selectively re-synthesize the components somehow (FT rxn, for example), then I feel I could look at it one of two ways...

 

[427Z06]

I think one has to also look at the resultant qualities of Grp III and Grp IV base-stocks and what that implies as far as the blenders options to produce a final product. For one, Grp III base-stocks come in limited viscosity ranges and are generally limited to pour points of around -18C, even in a common lighter viscosity. In you use this lighter viscosity range for low temperature performance you'll also have a much higher NOACK value that you'll have to correct for. If you look at a PAO in the same viscosity range, you'll find pour points of around -60C with a much lower NOACK value and thus much less correction will have to be done to produce a final product. So while you may be able to make a final product out of Grp III that performs well, I believe Grp IVs allow you to engineer an even higher level of performance if cost doesn't become an issue.

 

[pbm]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grossomotto:
[QB]

The point is that Castrol (and later others) were charging the same price for gr.3 oils that Mobil was charging

---

What if a Group III with a good add pack performs better than a Group IV with a weak add pack?

I still would have preferred more honesty in advertising from Castrol. Something to the effect of "Same performance as PAO at reduced price".
What Castrol did was increase their profit without letting the customer know that the 'synthetic' they bought was not the same as it used to be.

To MSparks: What I meant was that I can purchase Mobil 7500 for less than 2.50 and it is readily available whereas XL7500 is more expensive and not as available. If they are both good for 7500 miles why would I bother with the Amsoil.

 

[buster]

quote:

---

To MSparks: What I meant was that I can purchase Mobil 7500 for less than 2.50 and it is readily available whereas XL7500 is more expensive and not as available. If they are both good for 7500 miles why would I bother with the Amsoil.

---

If the 7500 oil turns out to be good, then Amsoil's XL oils will really be over priced. I don't care too much about the Group III vs IV debate, as both can be good. However Mobil and Redline have stuck to their word all these years and have continued to use Group IV and V for their full synthetics. Amsoil buckled under pressue and gave into $$.

 

[JohnBrowning]

No!

 

[ericgl]

I'll agree w/Johnbrowning.

First, by your definition, most GPIIs and all GPII+s would be synthetic. So you on a very slippery slope.

Second PAOs are built and the end products are a very small number of different molecules. Group IIIs come from a distilled cut and have a wide array of various sized molecules.

Group III is currently commercially limited to 8 cSt @ 100C.

Smart formulators can make an outstanding product with Group III, I am currently using it (Rotella 5W-40) in my Z. However, it is much cheaper than PAO. It costs like 7 cents a quart more than GPII, and to call it a synthetic is a disservice to the consumer.

 

[Blue99]

The "true" definition of a synthetic lubricant appears to deal more with the molecular structure of the hydrocarbon chain versus the process that generates it.

The hydrocarbon chains in PAO's are more closely related to ethylene plastics - which are commonly defined as a synthetic material - than those found in or refined/reformed from a barrel of crude oil.

GRP III base oils may have synthesized hydrocarbon chains, but still are paraffinic hydrocarbons as derived from crude oil.

And, as Molekule pointed out recently, even though the new GTL's will be derived from natural gas, somewhat similar to PAO's being formed fron ethylene gas, the GTL based lubricants are not considered synthetics.

The GTL feedstocks will be hydrofinished into high VI index GRP III dino's with a paraffinic hydrocarbon structure.

 

[pbm]

Whether or not Gr.3 oils are synthetic or not is not the point with me. The point is that Castrol (and later others) were charging the same price for gr.3 oils that Mobil was charging for a
(more expensive to produce) Gr.4 product. If these companies came out with their products at 1/2 or 2/3 the price of Mobil 1 it wouldn't have
put such a bad taste in my mouth. When all is said and done I'll take PAO over 'hydrotreated' oil at the same price anyday. This is also my reasoning for preferring Mobil 7500 over Amsoil XL.

 

[Grossomotto]

quote:

---

The point is that Castrol (and later others) were charging the same price for gr.3 oils that Mobil was charging

---

What if a Group III with a good add pack performs better than a Group IV with a weak add pack?

 

[msparks]

Hey here's and idea.

Lets take a True full Group III and combine it with a Group IV+ to create a new product.

This product would be less expensive than a full group IV but would prolly hold up great in most applications. Plus I think the solvency of the additive packages would be superior becuase of the nature of the Group III/IV combo.

I think this would be the best of both worlds.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pbm:
This is also my reasoning for preferring Mobil 7500 over Amsoil XL.

---

FYI it's my understanding that only the 15,000 mobil product is full PAO, so I'm not sure where your at on that on.