So I've been mostly lurking around here for the better part of 20 years, and there seem to be two big debate generators around here- what is a "synthetic" oil, and thick vs. thin.
As I see it, the real issues with the "synthetic" oil question are really threefold.
One, that stupid old marketing definition of "synthetic" (basically anything that performs like a synthetic) is nearly completely at odds with the actual definition of the word, which is basically something not occurring naturally put together from smaller items. The reason that marketing board decided this is that at the time, group III oils performed sufficiently differently to be lumped in with the other "synthetic" oils, even if they weren't "synthetic" strictly speaking. And some pedants around here got prickly about it, and have decided for reasons(?) that only PAO/ester oils (i.e. group IV/V) are the duly anointed "synthetic" oils, and anything else is not.
Two, that marketing board decision was made decades ago, before a lot of more modern stuff came around- GTL, catalytic reformed slack wax, and so on. Some of these oils (GTL in particular) ARE synthetic by the dictionary definition, even if they aren't put in base oil categories IV or V. And most of them perform like "synthetic" oils and all are the result of advanced chemistry, and IMO ought to be considered "synthetic", even if they don't meet the dictionary definition or the Group IV/V test. I mean, if Shell Helix Ultra is good enough for the Italian supercars, we shouldn't be quibbling about whether it's actually synthetic or not because it's made by catalytically reforming slack wax instead of being synthesized from smaller molecules. It **** sure isn't just refined petroleum, that's for sure.
Three, it doesn't matter. Not one bit. This isn't the sort of thing anyone can really measure in the handful of vehicles that they own. It's all butt-dyno and super vague notions of "it sounds better" or "it gets darker slower" or other supremely non-scientific measurements. That's why there are standards- so we can all go to the store and pick up a bottle of oil and know by the standards that it meets, what baseline performance it has to measure up to.
So rather than get sticky about whether oils are "synthetic" or not, maybe we ought to be more concerned with the standards they meet, and whether those are adequate or not?
As I see it, the real issues with the "synthetic" oil question are really threefold.
One, that stupid old marketing definition of "synthetic" (basically anything that performs like a synthetic) is nearly completely at odds with the actual definition of the word, which is basically something not occurring naturally put together from smaller items. The reason that marketing board decided this is that at the time, group III oils performed sufficiently differently to be lumped in with the other "synthetic" oils, even if they weren't "synthetic" strictly speaking. And some pedants around here got prickly about it, and have decided for reasons(?) that only PAO/ester oils (i.e. group IV/V) are the duly anointed "synthetic" oils, and anything else is not.
Two, that marketing board decision was made decades ago, before a lot of more modern stuff came around- GTL, catalytic reformed slack wax, and so on. Some of these oils (GTL in particular) ARE synthetic by the dictionary definition, even if they aren't put in base oil categories IV or V. And most of them perform like "synthetic" oils and all are the result of advanced chemistry, and IMO ought to be considered "synthetic", even if they don't meet the dictionary definition or the Group IV/V test. I mean, if Shell Helix Ultra is good enough for the Italian supercars, we shouldn't be quibbling about whether it's actually synthetic or not because it's made by catalytically reforming slack wax instead of being synthesized from smaller molecules. It **** sure isn't just refined petroleum, that's for sure.
Three, it doesn't matter. Not one bit. This isn't the sort of thing anyone can really measure in the handful of vehicles that they own. It's all butt-dyno and super vague notions of "it sounds better" or "it gets darker slower" or other supremely non-scientific measurements. That's why there are standards- so we can all go to the store and pick up a bottle of oil and know by the standards that it meets, what baseline performance it has to measure up to.
So rather than get sticky about whether oils are "synthetic" or not, maybe we ought to be more concerned with the standards they meet, and whether those are adequate or not?