Latest on QS Defy SN?

[buck91]

Picked up 2x 5qt jugs of QS Defy 5w30 API SN on sale at Meijers a while back for use in the Mustang. Pretty nasty RMS leak but no other issues... Anyways noticed that they are still claiming decreased wear from high zinc and also that its synthetic blend. The price was right so I'm not worried too much just curious what the thoughts are about the synthetic blend, does it mean anything in this case? Does it actually offer any anti-wear benefit or is it just marketing?

 

[alarmguy]

My thoughts are pure synthetics are more marketing then fact when it comes to wear. Conventional oil actually has some good antiwear properties that are "fracked" out when refined into synthetic.

Im not saying synthetics are inferior to conventional, I am saying there are some good properties in conventional that synthetic doesnt have. There are also some manufacturers that spec semi syn oil.

Synthetics are more stable if you are running an oil for long intervals 7000+ miles. For me, I change sooner, rather then later so doesnt matter to me if syn or conventional and actually believe when I do use conventional my engine is better off for it.

Bottom line, change when you are supposed to and no concerns what oil you use because with modern oils, most people just buy a product based on how effective that companies marketing is and there is good and bad oils in both syn and conventional. Just because an oil is labeled synthetic doesnt mean your engine will see less wear.

There is a reason Ford specs a semi for some of its engines, a reason why some motorcycle makers spec a semi for their bikes, a reason that the owners manual for my 08 Dodge Durango V-8 specs a conventional with the option of using a synthetic but NOT for the purpose of extending drain intervals.

 

[AirgunSavant]

I have been reading a guys blog that I see listed as a member here.
He has done a bunch of research and he claims that full synthetics
have no advantage with heat over conventional oil. That said I have not done the testing myself and thus I can not verify that. However conventional oil is not the same as it used to be either.

However today both oil types are only a few dollars apart and if you shop wisely it maybe cheaper in the long run to use synthetics along with a double OCI filter like Fram U or Mobil 1 etc.

 

[92saturnsl2]

Marketing basically. Any oil that meets GF-5 and SN specs could likely be labeled a semi-synthetic, because even the modern conventionals are refined and processed so well that under the legal definition of synthetic, they can be labeled as at least a partial synthetic.

That said, manufactures need to keep their products and price points aligned. Pennzoil, for example, would never advertise their yellow bottle as a part syn (even though it might qualify as one), because it would eat into the market share of their more expensive synthetic (or semi-syn) labeled oils.

Rest assured, I think you're getting a better product buying Defy, but what benefit that will yield is debatable. My guess is the cost/performance ratio goes down the further you reach up into the ultra-synthetic ladder, as there is far less market share there, more money spent in advertising/overhead/research per product volume purchased.

 

[AirgunSavant]

Agreed- well said!
Great point. I market some very high end parts and I will take the same expensive materials and use them in my economy parts. I look at it this way. It's cheaper for me to use one material then several and I just make very little profit. I bring in other customers and its a win- win.
Sometimes though the cheap price scares people into the higher end product. Just the way it is.

Quote:
That said, manufactures need to keep their products and price points aligned. Pennzoil, for example, would never advertise their yellow bottle as a part syn (even though it might qualify as one), because it would eat into the market share of their more expensive synthetic (or semi-syn) labeled oils.

 

[buck91]

Pretty much what I was thinking. I guess about the Defy I just wonder (probably hard to really prove) if, with the SN labeling, it actually provides more zddp (or similar) anti wear levels- not an issue on my roller follower car, just curious... If it actually providers significantly better seal conditioning compared to SN spec... And if the syn-blend really means anything. General consensus I've read on this site since I joined has be that syn-blend doesn't really mean a dang thing. Especially now with the SN specs, like you guys are talking about.

 

[SR5]

Big thread here on how QS Defy is now SN / GF-5 and therefore no longer a high Zinc (ZDDP) SL oil like the old Defy

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3779241/1

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: 92saturnsl2
Marketing basically. Any oil that meets GF-5 and SN specs could likely be labeled a semi-synthetic, because even the modern conventionals are refined and processed so well that under the legal definition of synthetic, they can be labeled as at least a partial synthetic.

That said, manufactures need to keep their products and price points aligned. Pennzoil, for example, would never advertise their yellow bottle as a part syn (even though it might qualify as one), because it would eat into the market share of their more expensive synthetic (or semi-syn) labeled oils.

...


I agree too, well said ...

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: buck91
Pretty much what I was thinking. I guess about the Defy I just wonder (probably hard to really prove) if, with the SN labeling, it actually provides more zddp (or similar) anti wear levels- not an issue on my roller follower car, just curious... If it actually providers significantly better seal conditioning compared to SN spec... And if the syn-blend really means anything. General consensus I've read on this site since I joined has be that syn-blend doesn't really mean a dang thing. Especially now with the SN specs, like you guys are talking about.


Manufacturers are limited by the amount of ZDDP they can put in a SN oil. So all 5/30s and below will be about the same. Another words (bear with me, its early*L*) You cant have a high ZDDP SN oil in the 5/30 weight.
You can have a high ZDDP oil in a 10/40 or 20/50.

Honestly, ZDDP is becoming another overrated term in the new oil formulations. Yes, it has its place, but choosing an oil based on ZDDP alone can be the wrong thing to do. Refiners have many alternative compounds to prevent wear, we dont know what they are and they do not show up in UOAs or VOAs, heck any UOA or VOA only looks for a fraction of the compounds in new oils.

Lets not forget, oil is the best lubricant of all of them. The others sacrificial metals.
Piston Engine Aviation oils in the same weights from Shell no longer even contain ZDDP as engine deposits are a far greater concern...

Not that any of this early morning post makes any sense except to not get to hung up on the make up of modern oils because we dont know what the makeup is in any of them.

Its kind of, sort of, back to the API SN and European classifications. Chances are any of the oils out there that meet them, would be darn close to or at the point they could be called full synthetics and I personally like the idea of some good old conventional oil in the mix of a synthetic ... but even me, realizes if it meets whatever classification the engine requires its most likely good, if not boring... *L*

 

[dlundblad]

If you want high zinc combined with a HM formulation, look now further than M1 HM. The 5w20 as well as others is API SL.

As far as wear between the two, who knows.

 

[Garak]

This is where we get kind of stuck up here, for those that want higher zinc. We don't get M1 HM. VR1 isn't ideal for winter. But, we do get Mobil Delvac Elite 222 0w-30.

I'm sure Defy is still fine, but they sure [censored] all over what brung them to the dance in the first place.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: Garak

I'm sure Defy is still fine, but they sure [censored] all over what brung them to the dance in the first place.


Yup, it's now just another ILSAC / SN synthetic blend offering.

 

[Garak]

Yep, and there is such a huge shortage of those, especially from Shell.

If I bought one litre of every SOPUS 5w-30 SN/GF-5 and threw it into a pail, I'd probably have enough for at least two OCIs. Heck, Quaker State 5w-30 SN/GF-5 examples on their own would be at least 3/5 of an oil change.

 

[Bamaro]

If QS wanted to, couldn't they have just left Defy alone, kept the SL certification and put on a disclaimer saying that it should not be used on vehicles that require SN?
I liked it and used it for my Camaro. I will now look elsewhere or use an additive like Zddplus or Zddp Maxx.

 

[KCJeep]

Was a real good choice for the old Jeep 4.0 too, lots of additives and slightly higher zddp as well. UOAs were stellar. Now I believe Pennzoil HM better fits the bill.

 

[jorton]

This is one reason why higher levels of ZDDP are not needed:

"Those antioxidants used in lubricating oils are desirable in practical terms as antioxidants to be used in the present invention, and examples include amine- series antioxidants, sulphur-series antioxidants, phenol- series antioxidants and phosphorus-series antioxidants. These antioxidants may be used individually or as combinations of several types."

The fourth example is the antioxidant property in ZDDP.

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Bamaro
If QS wanted to, couldn't they have just left Defy alone, kept the SL certification and put on a disclaimer saying that it should not be used on vehicles that require SN?
I liked it and used it for my Camaro. I will now look elsewhere or use an additive like Zddplus or Zddp Maxx.


Yes, I don't see why they couldn't do that to create a sort of niche market. Penrite do that here in Australia.
Take their Vantage 5W-30 synthetic, they say:

API SL *
ACEA A1/B1, A5/B5
Renault RN 0700
Ford M2C913-B/C/D

*Passes all engine test performance requirements of API SN and SM but although using the same base chemistry, cannot claim API SM or SN due to the full zinc content.

It's very clear, you know where you stand, choice is yours. How hard is that?

 

[Garak]

Yep, that's the problem. Royal Purple fills that niche with at least two of their products, but QS gave their position away. And, they're obviously a lot cheaper.

Does Shell pay for API licensing, or does the API give Shell a kickback for every Starburst they print?

 

[KCJeep]

Originally Posted By: Garak


Does Shell pay for API licensing, or does the API give Shell a kickback for every Starburst they print?

 

[Garak]

Well, remember when the SN stuff came out and they had all the extra SM labels they were working through? Now, they're converting everything to GF-5 that they possibly can.