Pennzoil Platinum and Ultra- not so great

[webfors]

Some applications benefit from tougher specs, some don't. Onus is on the owner to know.

I think the moral of the story is, why not buy the highest spec'd oil for your application as 'insurance'. Typically we don't know engines are 'sludgers' or 'hard on oil' until they've been out and tested for several years.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: webfors


I think the moral of the story is, why not buy the highest spec'd oil for your application as 'insurance'.


define "highest" spec? It's a different spec, which also encompasses diesel engines, but I've seen no evidence that it has any relevance to gasoline engines. I really don't need any insurance that a diesel engine is going to suddenly appear in my car...

As I said earlier, I'm open to the idea that it's a superior spec, but so far no one has provided any evidence of it (and the Lubrizol chart isn't an example of evidence, it's just a neat chart--I'm talking about the actual tests conducted on the oil.).

 

[RF Overlord]

Originally Posted By: Capa
I don't know what car CR tested but what if it had been Hondas, which are notoriously easy on oil or the Infinity G35, which are notoriously hard on oil.
I remember that article clearly. The cars used were Chevrolet Impalas (Caprices?) with the 4.3L Vortec V6, an engine which AFAIK is VERY easy on oil...it's a cast-iron 2-valve pushrod motor.

 

[ottotheclown]

http://www.ganoa.org/Motor_oil2.htm

 

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
http://www.ganoa.org/Motor_oil2.htm

Besides the fact that the oils in that article are API SH, I'm not impressed with any taxi test. The cars run all day long so they do not do any short trip driving. My daily 7 mile drive is probably tougher on oil than a taxi test.

-Dennis

 

[ltslimjim]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Buster,
Outside of this board, how many owners are aware of even API specs, much less ACEA or ILSAC standards?
I think we would agree that
this may be a case of a company not bothering to test its product to standards most buyers neither know nor care about.
Also, while Mobil may be very clear about approvals, SOPUS is at least clear about the basestocks it uses.
Ultra and Plat may or may not be "so great".
We have no way of knowing without being aware of the reasons behind SOPUS not claiming certain specs for these oils.
Can't meet?
Maybe.
Don't test to a standard they think none of their users care about?
Equally possible.
Mobil may think that listing ACEA standards is a selling point for buyers.
Who knows?
Beyond that, how relevant are the various test protocols to engines as they are used and maintained in this country.
We don't typically have very high specific output engines in our daily drivers and we don't have too many roads where an engine can really be run hard for very long.
We also don't typically try for extended drains, since oil is cheap here.
We also have no real interest in the "B5" part of the standard, since we live in a land where light diesel passenger vehicles are rare, as opposed to the east side of the pond, where diesels comprise a significant proportion of the new vehicle fleet.
What I'm trying to convey is that an oil meeting the ACEA A5/B5 standard may or may not bring reduced wear relative Ultra, Plat or QSUD.
Assuming that the SOPUS oils can't meet the standard does not automatically mean that they'll yield greater engine wear, although that might appear to be the case based upon the test protocol.
Not questioning you, Buster, just making some random observations.


Solid reasoning.

 

[addyguy]

Pennzoil has gottern really 'sloppy' with their websites, and corresponding documents - see the Pennzoil site being incomplete, the errors Tom pointed out...this isn't new.

I'm thinking this is just an issue of not updated documents.

 

[ltslimjim]

Originally Posted By: addyguy
Pennzoil has gottern really 'sloppy' with their websites, and corresponding documents - see the Pennzoil site being incomplete, the errors Tom pointed out...this isn't new.

I'm thinking this is just an issue of not updated documents.


^I'd tend to agree to something along those lines being the case.

I think the DI related 'cause' as to the suggestion by the long-time GM mechanic seeing problems with extended OCIs and the sort of shearing/fuel dilution issues seen in DI, perhaps go hand-in-hand with the 'engine problems resulting from extending OCIs based on OLM'. It is GM relevant anyway.

Also, since the ACEA spec in question is more for diesel apps/euro related, how many Diesel engines using 0w/5w-20 in NA needing the latest A5/B5 spec anyway???

 

[double vanos]

I guess by using Pennzoil Ultra, I'll have to rebuild in 60k miles, but at least the engine will "factory clean" when I do it. That's a big plus for me!

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: double vanos
I guess by using Pennzoil Ultra, I'll have to rebuild in 60k miles, but at least the engine will "factory clean" when I do it. That's a big plus for me!

But they'll foot the bill for the rebuild if you're signed up for their engine warranty.

 

[double vanos]

I just put that in to help lighten up the conversation!

Now, just where do the Motorcraft oils fit into all this: both their semi synthetic and full synthetic carry no real rating at all except that they are suitable for Ford/ Lincoln-Mercury cars and trucks when the proper viscosity range is used.

Been said many times here that MC makes an excellent oil; OK, where do they fit in this conversation? Ford is very coy about what all specs their oils meet ( certainly not as open as Exxon-Mobil).

 

[oilmaven]

Well doesn't this just get your knickers in a knot. How many here have "made the switch" to PP and Ultra based on the great UOA's that have been published here? Now we're being told that they MAY not be the be all and end all we thought they were. So what are our options? I was once a Mobil 1 user but was turned off by the higher iron readings in the UOA's (hence wear...or so I thought) so I began using PP...and later Ultra. Now I'm considering another switch...but to what? Castrol? Amsoil? Royal Purple? Redline?...maybe consider a switch BACK to Mobil 1 (their SN formulation UOA's look promising). To be honest, I run 5,000 mile intervals...mostly highway driven and rarely over 65 mph. As much as these specs mean, I can't help but wonder if for a lot of us the PP and Ultra specs are sufficient.

 

[Capa]

Of course they are sufficient. Your OCI is short and you could run basically any synthetic and most conventionals.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
Look at the UK or Germany M1 site. There isn't a single gasoline 30wt shared between Europe and North America. The only gasoline oils common to both markets is 0W-20, 0W-40 (for German OEM's) and 5W-50 (SLR, LFA).


That's still more than Pennzoil shares across most borders. Ultra is hard enough to obtain up here, let alone anything in European grades. As I already alluded to, I suggest that SOPUS is likely concentrating their efforts on ACEA approvals for their Rimula line.

I certainly understand your point, but there can be lots of reasons why Platinum and Ultra may not list certifications. For one, they may not have them. Secondly, they may not have bothered to keep certification current even if they are within specifications. Third, it could be a typo. Fourth, they may not meet specifications.

Considering the mess that the SOPUS product data sheet database is in, it wouldn't surprise me if there were some mistake along the way. Aside from that, I don't even use PP or PU, since they are overkill in my applications. ACEA specifications or not, they'd more than do the job.

 

[JAG]

Originally Posted By: Garak
I certainly understand your point, but there can be lots of reasons why Platinum and Ultra may not list certifications. For one, they may not have them. Secondly, they may not have bothered to keep certification current even if they are within specifications. Third, it could be a typo. Fourth, they may not meet specifications.

My thoughts too. I have NO loss of faith in PP and Ultra at this point. It is lame that their website has been screwed up for a while though.

 

[CMMeadAM]

NO ! It's not "lame"....it's PATHETIC !!!

 

[MajorCavalry]

Did a quick search of oils. Seems the only 5w-20 that meets ACEA A5-B5 is Redline. It is still API SM. And the date of the ACEA rating is missing.

 

[Capa]

It's disturbing that their website is so inaccurate.

 

[tsduke]

Originally Posted By: Capa
It's disturbing that their website is so inaccurate.


For a company that makes billions in profits you would think they could spend a few grand for a decent and accurate web site.

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: tsduke


For a company that makes billions in profits you would think they could spend a few grand for a decent and accurate web site.


Exactly. Personally, I rarely buy from companies which websites are tragically inaccurate and confusing---oftentimes it is a reflection of their product.