Pennzoil Platinum Plus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
133
Location
North Carolina, USA
Has anyone used this synthetic for a period of time long enough to have some pros and cons on it?
I use Mobil-1, but thought of giving this stuff a try. Normally, I have not been a fan of Pennzoil, but I try to remain open about such things.
 
honesty for the money and the amount of times platinum goes on sale you can't get a better value.Try it out you won't be disappointed
 
platinum.jpg

LOL.gif
 
I think the only negative thing so far about it is that some people have noticed large increases in consuption with it and it does not appear to be that great for doing extended oil changes with! It does produce nice low wear numbers and is cheaper then M1 usualy!
 
1. Pennzoil/Shell has never said it was a long OCI oil, but we have all seen excellent UOA with it going 10-12K. That's long enough. It goes as far as Mobil 1 does.

2. Most of the cars that are consuming it, are high mileage cars. They would probably have consumption with any synthetic and may have had consumption before they started using it.

I'm running two Honda Elements on it doing 10K changes and I have absolutely no consumption.

So, as for as I'm concerned, there is no negative.
 
Originally Posted By: dkryan
I gotta second Johnny's comments #1 and #2.
Me too. After all, it's my UOA he referenced to in comment #1.
banana2.gif
 
Well I was not saying that PP recomended it for Extended drains. I was makeing a point about it not haveing very good TBN retension since some oils inspite of the lack of an extended drain endorsement seem to fair better then others! To date the only oil that my SearsCraftsman lawn tractor has consumed is PP. I have tried just about ever viscosity of M1 and Rotella and BP oil and have not had any consuption at all until the PP. When I got rid of the PP and put some M1 0W40 in it stoped useing oil imediately.

I have noticed quite a few people have commented on some slight oil consuption in vechiles that previously had not used any oil that could be diseraned by reading the dipstick.In vechiles that already have some issues with consumption it appears to rise drasticly.

Now while not deal breakers at all when one considers most of us bought out PP on sale buy one get one free from AAP!!! I do think that those two factors though are significant especialy when people want to compare it against M1. Long before M1EP was out people where routinely doing extended drains with it. In fact I woud say that the pre-sm pre-M1EP plain jane M1 did better then the current M1Ep at extended drains! I also have not seen where PP has drasticly bettered M1 in reguards to iron levels in UOA either at least not universaly across the board. People are praiseing it and it is a great value I just do not think the product is any better then M1 in any way! I would say it is almost as good as M1 not better.
 
Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning

People are praising it and it is a great value I just do not think the product is any better then M1 in any way! I would say it is almost as good as M1 not better.


Well, I never said it was better than Mobil 1. But the above comment is all the endorsement I would need. Let's see, a known Group III synthetic Vs the KING of synthetics that is mostly PAO, that is ALMOST as good as. Not bad.
 
I have not seen any extra consumption in two different Honda's over the course of a couple years. The Civic uses about a quart over the 10k run, and the CR-V uses about a thimblefull over 5k. Before PP, both cars used the exact same amounts on multiple different oils.
 
I'm not an expert, but what about the wear issue with Mobil 1? I've been reading online that as good as Mobil 1 claims to be, it's engine wear numbers are generally higher than PP, so why spend the extra money for M1? M1 was the first synth I had in my car, but when I learned about its extra wear, I dumped it out at only about 4 months and 2,800 miles, and replaced it with PP.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom