New information on PZ Ultra composition

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM


With the leading German and Japanese car manufacturer's specifying high VI 0W-XX oils what has Pennzoil offered in it's new marketing brand.....nothing. Not a 0W-XX oil in sight.


You have repeated this in many post and what I want to know is how do they come up with this high VI? Do you know? I kind of doubt it as most of the tribologist on this site don't know. I sure don't, but would be willing to bet both the Toyota and Honda 0W oils got there by adding a lot of VII to it and a bunch of pour point additives.

And as for as what Shell has in sight, you don't have a clue about that either.

So to quote a regular on here:

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
If you've got something constructive to say I'm listening.


+1


What I find particularly amusing about the PU marketing or advertising is pushing that it's cleaner than their already clean PP. My first reaction to that is "that's it, that's the best that you can come up with for the launch of a new brand?"
It reminds me of the old Tide detergent advertising slogan "whiter than white".
Furthermore only offering 3 domestic grades, two of which are virtually (technically) obsolete reeks of mediocrity.

Yes you're correct I don't know what Shell is working on but I have no doubt it will include some 0W-XX oils, I just think they missed a timing opportunity not to have included them with the PU launch. With Honda, Acura and Toyota, Lexus planning on going to the 0W-20 grade across the board it would be foolish if Shell didn't have something to offer.
As an aside I know RP is planning on coming out soon with their version of an SM 0W-20 (hybrid targeted) oil.

Oh, and BTW, the high VI's of the Toyota and Honda oils is not what impresses me most, it is their very low 40C vis spec's which translates into their having the lowest start-up viscosities of any SM oils you can buy followed by their very robust ad' pac's which rival the best of the best.
I was also impressed by Toyota's recent announcement
extending the OCI from 5,000 to 10,000 miles.
I'm also impressed that there ISN'T a big marketing push with their new 0W-20 oils, it's 100% engineering based with no flashy advertising or packaging; heck Honda doesn't even label the product as being synthetic, nor does Toyota on their Cdn packaged oil. But then why would they, they're in the business of selling cars and trucks not oil.


I'd give you 5 stars for this post!
I'm off to the local Toyo dealer for a case of 0w20. It's $69 for 12.
Will let ya'll know how I like it in my Scion 2AZFE.
First time I've committed to a 3 OCI batch since my GC days two years back.
 
Yeah they should have at least made a 0w20. They prob will when demand is there.

The Toyota & Honda oils are interesting.

Based on specs though, PU looks impressive.

I'm over the PAO vs Grp III thing.
 
Ive already put 6.6 quarts of Ultra in my neighbors Sequioa, so Im not anti Pennzoil HOWEVER, there just isn't alot of "substance" in this marketing campaign. "Cleanliness" isn't the way to move this product off the shelves, not IMHO, you have already been preaching this sermon with Platinum for a couple years. As far as "substance", Are you really ever going to know if in fact your engine is "factory" clean? Not unless you do a tear down. So you really don't know for sure if this "new detergent" is doing what it says its doing. Put in top of the line base stocks, an ultimate add pack and name the oil "UltraPak" and market it from that foundation and it would sell much better. Just my opinion of course.. The oil maybe in fact be good, HOWEVER Pennzoils marketing campaign with the slogan of "cleanliness" I'll give it a D+.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HARTZSKY
As far as "substance", Are you really ever going to know if in fact your engine is "factory" clean? Not unless you do a tear down. So you really don't know for sure if this "new detergent" is doing what it says its doing. The oil maybe in fact be good, HOWEVER Pennzoils marketing campaign with the slogan of "cleanliness" I'll give it D+.


+1
 
Have to agree here. I mean, who are they marketing this to?
People willing to spend that much on oil most likely have a clean motor already.
I know I do. Mine doesn't need a cleaning. It needs a great oil, and I AM willing to spend more for it.
 
The word sludge is commonly used, and Pennzoil had issues year ago with that. Toyota etc. Everyone does want a clean engine and this oil does use a proprietary detergent system. I agree though, it's overkill and marketing. You can't leave out the impressive specs they are putting out there too though.

It's a [censored] of a lot better than Think with your Dipstick. That was an F. lol
 
Im not so sure people really think "cleanliness" when it comes to oil. If I sent a team of pollsters down to the local automotive store and as customers walked out the door, ask them this simple question "In regards to motor oil for your car, in one word, tell me what is most important to you and your engine?"....I just don't see "cleanliness" at the top of the poll chart.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: PurplePride
Have to agree here. I mean, who are they marketing this to?
People willing to spend that much on oil most likely have a clean motor already.
I know I do. Mine doesn't need a cleaning. It needs a great oil, and I AM willing to spend more for it.


I like this statement alot. And, I agree. Anybody that remotely pays attention to their engine clean is likely to atain a clean engine. For the non-BITOG'ers that use bulk oil at whatever/wherever they couldn't care less about clean or diry.
 
Originally Posted By: HARTZSKY
If I sent a team of pollsters down to the local automotive store and as customers walked out the door, ask them this simple question "In regards to motor oil for your car, in one word, tell me what is most important to you and your engine?"....I just don't see "cleanliness" at the top of the poll chart.


I have to agree with you. The typical synthetic oil buyer, or would be synthetic oil buyer, is looking for something that says this synthetic has superior performance over that synthetic. Not that it is cleaner than our super clean synthetic.
To succeed the public will want to know why it's more expensive than Mobil 1.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: buster
The word sludge is commonly used, and Pennzoil had issues year ago with that. Toyota etc. Everyone does want a clean engine and this oil does use a proprietary detergent system. I agree though, it's overkill and marketing. You can't leave out the impressive specs they are putting out there too though.

It's a [censored] of a lot better than Think with your Dipstick. That was an F. lol


Buster, I'm glade you bring this up. Did Pennzoil really have validated “sludge” issues at some point in time or is this simply one of the many myths that surround motor oils?

I’ve never been a user of Pennzoil nor do I have anything against Pennzoil products, but whenever I talk motor oil with someone, it’s often stated that Pennzoil is very waxy and leads to engine sludge.

So I honestly don’t know if a Pennzoil sludging issue was real or imagined? One thing I do know is that ALL Pennzoil motor oils have aggressive marketing that dispel or diffuse the notion of sludge with statements such as “Active Cleansing Agents”, remove 46% of dirt and deposits in just one oil change, and “Pennzoil motor oil doesn’t just help prevent sludge, Pennzoil actively cleans sludge”.

Seems like very deliberate and pointed attempts at damage control to me?

Am I wrong?

I’d assume this topic has been brought here on BITOG many times before. My apologies for not taking full advantage of the cumbersome search function.
 
Perhaps much like we see the un-official term group II+ used to describe certain group II base oils, perhaps we will now see the term group III+ used to describe the new field of group III synthetics.
 
I know Pennzoil isn't focusing their marketing on the wear protection of Ultra, but rather on how well it keeps your engine clean, however, I do believe they DID improve the wear protection Ultra will provide versus Platinum. Yes, we need to wait for UOA's to get an idea of what is happening, but I think Ultra will provide better wear protection. Why do I think that? I'm basing it on Pennzoil's fine print. Even though Platinum states, ".. no leading full synthetic motor oil provides better wear protection than Pennzoil Platinum." What does the fine print say? "As measured in ASTM Sequence IVA engine test using 5W-50."

5W-50!

Now, the Ultra also says, "No leading synthetic motor oil provides better wear protection." The difference is that Ultra's fine print says, "Based on Sequence IVA test using 5W-30."

Don't get me wrong, Platinum is still a good oil, in fact, Platinum is what our family is/was using in our cars, I think Ultra will be better. We have already installed Ultra in my brother's 1997 Honda Civic. Overkill? Yes, but we like to use good oil. We had Platinum in it previously, before that Amsoil SSO. My brother said that the Honda seems to be enjoying the Ultra. He said the smoothnest of the engine right now is approaching that of SSO. That's a big statement for him to make because he is very picky, and he said SSO caused the Honda to run the smoothnest it has EVER run.

Time will tell us the story...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
"I'm over the PAO vs GP III thing"

+1


"The first is whether or not Pennzoil Ultra is blended with Group III base stocks or PAO (Group IV)? According to Dr. Sutherland, whereas some of the Pennzoil Ultra grades are blended with some PAO, Group III base oil is the primary type used, given their superior solvency for the product's cleansing capabilities as compared to PAO."

Yeah, I want to pay $6 a quart for Grp III basestocks......NOT

I would much rather use RTS or PP for the lower price
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Zedhed
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
"I'm over the PAO vs GP III thing"

+1


"The first is whether or not Pennzoil Ultra is blended with Group III base stocks or PAO (Group IV)? According to Dr. Sutherland, whereas some of the Pennzoil Ultra grades are blended with some PAO, Group III base oil is the primary type used, given their superior solvency for the product's cleansing capabilities as compared to PAO."

Yeah, I want to pay $6 a quart for Grp III basestocks......NOT

I would much rather use RTS or PP for the lower price


Although I haven’t been a member of this site long, from what I’ve gathered so far is the true measure of a motor oil is not the base stock composition alone, it’s the quantities and types of base oils combined together with the right additives which makes for a balanced formulation. And this is based upon the objective of the formulator whether it be a cost effective passenger car formulation or one that is designed with exotic and more costly additives for all out performance.

For example, it’s been reported that PAO formulations are commonly blended with Esters and that this combination together along with other additives completes a motor oil that supports satisfactory abilities in cleansing, seal conditioning, and polar performance to name a few performance goals.

So it could be that not knowing all the various factors involved with any one given motor oil formulation, which only the formulator knows this, nobody can say without reasonable doubt that a primarily Group III formulation is superior or even equal to a primarily Group IV PAO formulation or vice versa.

Yet the marketing machine is well versed when it comes to blurring the lines of reality on this topic.
 
As are endless debates here.
To say it's impossible to make a clear decision is an understatement.
It's enough to drive you nuts. :)
Or go to dino~
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom