Pennzoil Platinum and Ultra- not so great

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a recently joined forum member, I would like to bring up a question at this point.. So, what is so special about PP? say, comparing to Syntec 5W-30 (least regarded in this forum)?
Whenever questions come up regarding Syntec oil, people here answer so easily, with passion sometimes, like Syntec is only a group III oil.. I wouldn't use it GO FOR PP etc etc... Now it appears the PP might not meet some specifications (whatever they are) now people want to believe the product website must be inaccurate? Not meeting the spec doesn't matter because PP is still GOOD ENOUGH? I thought splitting hair for good enough oil is what this forum is all about. (and why A5/B5 approved Syntec oil couldn't even be a good-enough oil for people here? I am confused..) no I don't work for BP
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
Most people wont go to a website and research oil.They will just buy whatever at the store.It is only oil and not a big deal to 95% of the public.
 
You bring up an excellent point but there may be no rational answer to your question. Part of what you note is a wave of brand consciousness on steroids that infects this board. Castrol has never been "in favor" here with the majority, so many discussions on it have to wade through negatoive brand bias before it can get to a debate on the technical merits of the actual product (if it ever reaches the merits).

The "only Gp III" bias is another common one regardless of brand.

PP is on the favored list, so instead of having to wade through a negative tide in an honest technical discussion, you have to wade thru a positive one that regards criticism as sacrilege. You learn to sort thru it all and you can hear both sides of a "meaty" debate if you pay attention. A little independent study is required to develop a "bovine scatology" detector but you often find links here that can aid in all that. Also, lately, I've been seeing a trend towards open-mindedness again so perhaps there is hope for a general move towards more objectivity and less of a hyperfocus on brand names.

Given that humans are involved, this will never be a perfect forum, but I assure you that you can get the answers you want here. You will have to work for it, which only enhances the sweetness, but you can get it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 08sienna
As a recently joined forum member, I would like to bring up a question at this point.. So, what is so special about PP? say, comparing to Syntec 5W-30 (least regarded in this forum)?
Whenever questions come up regarding Syntec oil, people here answer so easily, with passion sometimes, like Syntec is only a group III oil.. I wouldn't use it GO FOR PP etc etc... Now it appears the PP might not meet some specifications (whatever they are) now people want to believe the product website must be inaccurate? Not meeting the spec doesn't matter because PP is still GOOD ENOUGH? I thought splitting hair for good enough oil is what this forum is all about. (and why A5/B5 approved Syntec oil couldn't even be a good-enough oil for people here? I am confused..) no I don't work for BP
smile.gif



I think the biggest reason why Pennzoil products have such a great following here is primarily due to the UOA Results : Price ratio. Syntec is good oil however it's pricing is not justifiable (unless on sale).

I stick with Pennzoil products due to the great UOA's posted here but also because it meets the HTO-06 cert from Honda for our RDX and might as well stock up on it while on sale and use it in my other cars.

I also saw how well it cleaned up the dipstick on the Accord in less then 1 fill up.
 
Like Mau said, I think PP has great following due to so many excellent UOAs (can last long time), price, cleaning anecdotes, and Pennzoil's open communication with us.
 
Originally Posted By: JAG
Like Mau said, I think PP has great following due to so many excellent UOAs (can last long time), price, cleaning anecdotes, and Pennzoil's open communication with us.


+1

Really, who cares if it doesn't meet some spec, unless of course you need that spec. PP & PU are great oils!
 
Originally Posted By: Boss302fan
PP is a very good syn oil and the bottomline is it has great results....


Define great results please.

It holds up well and generally seems to be a good oil, but I'm curious as to what "great results" means in relation to what are achieved using other top-tier synthetics like Mobil 1 or Edge.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


Define great results please.

It holds up well and generally seems to be a good oil, but I'm curious as to what "great results" means in relation to what are achieved using other top-tier synthetics like Mobil 1 or Edge.


The oil has consistently shown low wear metals in use. A single point UOA is certainly not an indicator of how an oil is performing WRT wear, since frankly ALL approved oils work well. That said, there are dozens (if not hundreds) of UOA's using the oil, many including multiple UOA's on the same engine--and overall the trend is towards low wear metals. As I said earlier in this thread, while there are limitations to looking at a single data point and there are limitations to the wear metal numbers as expressed in a UOA, they aren't "worthless", and having a database of thousands of UOA's on this site can provide *some* insight. It just pays to recognize those limitations.

I'll put more stock in the totality of UOA's than meeting or not meeting an engine test spec that has no relevance to gasoline engines.

As far as how it's performed relative to other GIII synthetics, the others you've listed have gotten "great results" as well. As you know, FE numbers seem to be slightly higher with some M1 varieties--and that discussion has been hashed over a million times. Personally, I don't think it's a big deal, but I think it's reasonable that people ask the question (I think it's been answered, and that it's not a big deal, IMO). Just like I think it's reasonable that people ask the question about the ACEA specs. I don't think it's reasonable to keep claiming that the spec is "superior" after looking at the actual engine test....
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
Just like I think it's reasonable that people ask the question about the ACEA specs. I don't think it's reasonable to keep claiming that the spec is "superior" after looking at the actual engine test....


I think the idea behind this thread is great. Can a synthetic that is certified to certain ACEA specifications protect better than a hypothetical synthetic that cannot meet those ACEA specifications?

I think the problem we have, though, is that when we mention PU or PP, we cannot phrase the topic so narrowly. We don't know that PP or PU cannot meet those specifications. Heck, we don't even know if they actually meet them or not or are certified or not. So, until we have a definitive answer about PP, PU and what ACEA specs they meet and in what grades, and what ACEA specs they're actually certified for, we're stuck chasing ghosts.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Boss302fan
PP is a very good syn oil and the bottomline is it has great results....


Define great results please.

It holds up well and generally seems to be a good oil, but I'm curious as to what "great results" means in relation to what are achieved using other top-tier synthetics like Mobil 1 or Edge.


Use Mobil 1, PP, PU, and many other syns and have great results... All are good syn oils. If you want any other info then do your own research.

Great results? Keeping an engine clean and running for many years... I believe all the syns above would do this.Having owned 32 cars plus an additional classic car collection has earned me the right to say what oil works great and in what type of car.
 
I think a lot of you are just over thinking this. It's like having a cookie with 30 chocolate chips in it, when your taste buds can only comprehend the total taste of 10 at one time. Yeah, there's a product out there twice as good, but will your car know the difference? No.

PP is dexos1 approved, and if it's good enough for a vette, it's good enough for my daily driver.
 
I emailed technical support for Redline Oil on their 5W-20 oil.

Here is their reply.

David Granquist [email protected]
3:13 PM (15 minutes ago)

to me
Steven,

Thank you for contacting Red Line Oil, yes the 5W20 would satisfy the ACEA A5/B5-08 as well as the API SN performance requirements.

Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil
 
Originally Posted By: MajorCavalry
I emailed technical support for Redline Oil on their 5W-20 oil.

Here is their reply.

David Granquist [email protected]
3:13 PM (15 minutes ago)

to me
Steven,

Thank you for contacting Red Line Oil, yes the 5W20 would satisfy the ACEA A5/B5-08 as well as the API SN performance requirements.

Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil


"would" or DOES?

Big difference. Without the words DOES you could put in the word "may".

Redline is a excellent product but without the APPROVED rating its their word (which depending on who is saying what changes if something is true or marketing) you are trusting.

I'm not a spec person or overkill type. I use what works and don't get into having to use this brand or that type.

My first priority is what WILL work. Then what is going to do the best for the $$.. IE VALUE.

So much bandwidth is wasted on spec this when your vehicle could care less.

Bill

PS: I do not doubt many oils can meet something, but until they do and I did have something that HAD to have a rating I'll go with whatever HAS the rating.
 
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah

"would" or DOES?

"Would" because it hasn't been officially tested for it. Obtaining a certification costs money.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah

"would" or DOES?

"Would" because it hasn't been officially tested for it. Obtaining a certification costs money.


Understood. But there is a difference. And if someone NEEDS the spec for their vehicle still under warranty I'd (JMO) use something that DOES meet the spec with the approved rating.

JMO.. Bill
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


Define great results please.

It holds up well and generally seems to be a good oil, but I'm curious as to what "great results" means in relation to what are achieved using other top-tier synthetics like Mobil 1 or Edge.


The oil has consistently shown low wear metals in use. A single point UOA is certainly not an indicator of how an oil is performing WRT wear, since frankly ALL approved oils work well. That said, there are dozens (if not hundreds) of UOA's using the oil, many including multiple UOA's on the same engine--and overall the trend is towards low wear metals. As I said earlier in this thread, while there are limitations to looking at a single data point and there are limitations to the wear metal numbers as expressed in a UOA, they aren't "worthless", and having a database of thousands of UOA's on this site can provide *some* insight. It just pays to recognize those limitations.

I'll put more stock in the totality of UOA's than meeting or not meeting an engine test spec that has no relevance to gasoline engines.

As far as how it's performed relative to other GIII synthetics, the others you've listed have gotten "great results" as well. As you know, FE numbers seem to be slightly higher with some M1 varieties--and that discussion has been hashed over a million times. Personally, I don't think it's a big deal, but I think it's reasonable that people ask the question (I think it's been answered, and that it's not a big deal, IMO). Just like I think it's reasonable that people ask the question about the ACEA specs. I don't think it's reasonable to keep claiming that the spec is "superior" after looking at the actual engine test....


JOD:

While I agree with the premise of your post, I think without particle count (which I do admit, we have SOME of) and tear-down data, that a lot of that "conclusion" is simply speculation. If we can agree to accept that for what it is, then the next logical conclusion is that any approved oil in a given application should give predictable and acceptable results that are very close to each other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
CX5 2.5 S 0w20 vs 5W30 Engine Protection
Replies
15
Views
1K
cammyfive79
L
Land Rover Evoque
Replies
2
Views
664
lemmy999
R
Oil choice for Suzuki Vitara 1.6
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Retet
J
Pennzoil Ultra Platinum for 2024 Ford F150 2.7L Ecoboost
Replies
16
Views
3K
MrFixerUpper
BrokenAudiTT
2021 Hyundai Palisade Oil recommendation?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
perkz
Back
Top Bottom