Prove to me, the perceived benefits of synthetic!

[Thatwouldbegreat]

Quote:

---

Not looking for a fight. Just looking for evidence to prove the unsupported opinions that always circulate this board regarding certain topics.

---

This board has some Synthetic Disciples and some Anti Synthetics members...just like the Formula One forums were divided by whether one liked Ferrari and Michael Shumacher, or whether one was critical of that team and driver [I was ].

Let's turn the question on its head:

Critic, why don't you 'prove' that some oil that is not synthetic is as good or better as synthetic motor oil?

[ You can define synthetic as Group IV / V, as I do... or include many of the hydrocracked, severly hydrocracked, or GTL oils ]

So,

'PROVE' Non Synthetic oils are as good or better than
[ FILL IN THE BLANK ] __________

( Group II+, Group III, or Group IV or V Synthetic oils, or Synthetic Blend oils ).

 

[buster]

Quote:

---

it appears that the historic gap between Conventional and Synth has narrowed significantly recently. Overall, I think that this is good news for everyone, and allows people a broader choice high-quality oils at a lower cost

---

If a Synthetic can be a Group III, then aren't all oils Synthetic these days? So what's all the fighting about?

I still consider a true synthetic to be Group IV and higher, but we know legally you can call a Group III a synthetic. (Ex. Castrol)

I believe some are using Group II+ though. Bottom line is you're comparing oils that are all reletively close in performace. It's not like it used to be where dino oil was Group I and your full synthetics were PAO's.

I don't know why this topic repeatedly comes up?

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

Perhaps the high-heat-stress VW engines will provide some useful data!

---

Those required synthetic oil from day one, it's just that owners and shops failed to use it. No need to prove anything there...

Quote:

---

Critic, why don't you 'prove' that some oil that is not synthetic is as good or better as synthetic motor oil?

---

I don’t disagree that synthetic oils are better than conventional oils, no matter how miniscule some of the benefits may be. It’s just that some of those benefits are over extolled, and those benefits are of little or no value to most drivers on the road today. That was the whole point of this thread: to ask the synthetic oil supporters to provide solid evidence that their preferred product can really live up to its claims, provide those super duper benefits they claim, and have a realized benefit for the average car owner compared to servicing with conventional oil and the OEM recommended interval.

 

[1sttruck]

Maybe the Toyota manual says something different, but it seems that normal driving isn't 'sever service'.

http://www.is-it-a-lemon.com/make/toyota/gel.htm

"For normal driving conditions Toyota recommends changing the engine oil and engine oil filter at a minimum of every 7,500 miles or 6 months, whichever occurs first. This engine oil change interval requires changing your engine oil a minimum of twice a year.

For special operating conditions Toyota recommends changing the engine oil and engine oil filter at a minimum of every 5,000 miles or 4 months, whichever occurs first. This engine oil change interval requires changing your engine oil a minimum of three times a year.

Special Operating Conditions include the following:

Driving on unpaved or dusty roads
Towing a trailer or using a camper or car-top carrier
Repeated short trips of less than five miles in temperatures below freezing
Driving on rough, muddy, or salt-covered roads
Extensive idling or low-speed driving for long distances as in heavy commercial use, such as delivery, taxi, or patrol car "

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

Extensive idling or low-speed driving for long distances as in heavy commercial use, such as delivery, taxi, or patrol car "

---

Just worded differently. Extensive idling or low-speed driving defines most severe service: city driving or urban crawl.

 

[Thatwouldbegreat]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Perhaps the high-heat-stress VW engines will provide some useful data!

---

Those required synthetic oil from day one, it's just that owners and shops failed to use it. No need to prove anything there...

Quote:

---

Critic, why don't you 'prove' that some oil that is not synthetic is as good or better as synthetic motor oil?

---

I don’t disagree that synthetic oils are better than conventional oils, no matter how miniscule some of the benefits may be. It’s just that some of those benefits are over extolled, and those benefits are of little or no value to most drivers on the road today. That was the whole point of this thread: to ask the synthetic oil supporters to provide solid evidence that their preferred product can really live up to its claims, provide those super duper benefits they claim, and have a realized benefit for the average car owner compared to servicing with conventional oil and the OEM recommended interval.

---

This is like the problem people have buying tires or brakes or shocks...


Prove why they need special snow tires, or the best all season tire, or performance brake pads, brake fluid, gas shocks, or better lighting.

Most of the times the differences are small...until you need better snow or ice performance, or more precise control or better stopping power or vision in an emergency.

For the average driver, some of the top Synthetic oils Group IV / V oils may not be that much better than the sometimes less expensive Group II, II+, III, or GTL oils.... but when that driver forgets to check the oil level and it didn't matter since there was low oil consumption, or the driver forgot to change the oil on time, or drove in sub zero or 100+ temps, or towed a heavy load, or drives in moutainous areas, or chips the engine and started driving more enthusiastically...then the top synthetic oils may make a huge difference.

At the very minimum, premium synthetics probably motivate oil companies to innovate and improve their oil lineup in order to stay competitive. Mobil 1 helped show the other oil companies that there was a profitable growth market for premium oils, and that may have helped in the transition away from the old Group I commodity oils.

I believe that Redline, GC, Amsoil, and Mobil 1 give me good value and make maintaining a large fleet of vehicles practical and affordable.

 

[SWS]

Hey Buster, no flame, but you have nearly 11K posts and I have 270, and I visit only 2 or 3 of the forums on BITOG, including humor! Therefore, I don't nearly have the same data, perspective, or expertise as you, even though I have been a member here for 2.5 years.

SO, this Conventional vs Synth topic keeps coming up because:
1) It is important
2) There is a lot of advertising in the oil industry that is confusing to interested, but basically ignorant people
3) There is a lot of historic information that does not apply anymore, and folks are trying to learn the new stuff
4) There are personal biases that people have questions about
5) Some people don't search the site for previous detailed discussions

I have observed in recent months that you experts are increasingly frustrated with basic questions from the rest of us. I understand, I'm an engineer and don't like to answer the same questions repeatedly either! But I ask that you hang in there with us because issues such as this are a key reason that BITOG exists. At this point, about everything on the topic of oil for any engine or transmission has already been discussed on BITOG, so one could validly argue to change this forum into a document that people can simply read, but that's no good! I don't know the answer, but my observation is that BITOG has entered a new state of "maturity" and is perhaps becoming a victim of its own success with so many new members seeking information on "old topics" and the experts are bored and tired of feeding the masses. Please try to remember your 270th post and the kind of questions you had then.

Again, NO flame!! We all really appreciate your insights, Buster. I have learned a lot from you!

 

[buster]

No problem SWS, I understand where you are coming from and the question is a good one. My only problem with it was that there were about 50 different threads on this topic that already asked the same question. Point is, it's been discussed many times before and the same answers mentioned in those threads still apply today. So I didn't see the point of another thread like this, especially when most SM/GF-4 oils contain some/Group III base stocks.

 

[buster]

The wrong question was asked. Synthetics are clearly better than conventional oils, although the gap has closed. The question that should be asked is: Do your driving conditions and engine type call for the use of a fully synthetic oil?

For 99% of us, the answer is probably NO.

Obviously in Alaska, I'd use a Synthetic. In a Turbo a Synthetic. For 10k+ mile drains, a synthetic.... you get the point.

 

[The Critic]

Quote:

---

The wrong question was asked. Synthetics are clearly better than conventional oils, although the gap has closed. The question that should be asked is: Do your driving conditions and engine type call for the use of a fully synthetic oil?

For 99% of us, the answer is probably NO.

Obviously in Alaska, I'd use a Synthetic. In a Turbo a Synthetic. For 10k+ mile drains, a synthetic.... you get the point.

---

Still, why does synthetic oil last longer?

 

[buster]

Faster lubrication at start-up in low temperatures.
Protection at high temperatures. (Turbos)
Resistance to thermal breakdown. (PAO's are more stable)
Engine Cleanliness (Honda confirmed this)
Outstanding protection against harmful deposits.
Cleaner running engines.
Greater resistance to oil oxidation.

 

[Cicero]

Quote:

---

Faster lubrication at start-up in low temperatures.
Protection at high temperatures. (Turbos)
Resistance to thermal breakdown. (PAO's are more stable)
Engine Cleanliness (Honda confirmed this)
Outstanding protection against harmful deposits.
Cleaner running engines.
Greater resistance to oil oxidation.

---

Buster, a few clarifications and questions please.
You said..."For 99% of us, the answer is probably NO." meaning...most people don't need synthetic oil. Right?
Your list seems to imply to me synthetics are BETTER.

We can discuss the degree of better or the cost effectiveness angles later, the only question I want to ask is simple:

.....IF you only used 3K OCI and....
.....IF M1 or REDLINE, etc. cost EXACTLY THE SAME as Havoline or GTX, etc. which would you use in your automobiles and why?

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Simply put
Synthetics are better.
But not significantly better.

 

[buster]

Quote:

---

the only question I want to ask is simple:

.....IF you only used 3K OCI and....
.....IF M1 or REDLINE, etc. cost EXACTLY THE SAME as Havoline or GTX, etc. which would you use in your automobiles and why?

---

It's not as "black and white" as most make it out to be. I don't think in such simple terms.

The answer to your question is that for my car, in the conditions I operate it in, I would use the Havoline/GTX. Now, if I had a Turbo and drove it hard for 3k miles, I'd use the RL/M1 and back it up with oil analysis.

 

[BrianWC]

Funny you say turbo and hard driving. I've gotta go start a new thread....

 

[Hermann]

Something I rarely see mentioned is the ability of synthetics to lower engine operation temps. This alone will increase the life of engine componets and seals, ect. Or has this gap been narrowed, to where the Grp2+ and Grp3 hydrocracked oils offer this benefit as well

?

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Haven't seen the proof of lower temps with synthetics (that goes along with the ole synthetics are more slippery talk), I have seen evidence of temperature differences by viscosity but not by base oil.

 

[buster]

Probably bc it's never cold enough where you live.

Critic has a good point though with the new SM SAP oils only having a TBN of 8. How are they still long drain oils?

 

[1sttruck]

" I have seen evidence of temperature differences by viscosity but not by base oil. "

For diesels 5w40 vs 15w40 is pretty much a synthetic vs dino issue.

 

[1sttruck]

""Extensive idling or low-speed driving for long distances as in heavy commercial use, such as delivery, taxi, or patrol car "

------------------------------------------------------------

Just worded differently. Extensive idling or low-speed driving defines most severe service: city driving or urban crawl."

Commuting is not 'heavy commercial use', where one drives in such conditions all day. If Toyota puts blame on owners for using a recommended 7500 oil change interval because the owners don't engage in 'hevay commercial use' I can see why there is a lot irate owners and probably former owners.

Commuting in a private car is not heavy commercial use; Toyota needs to acknowledge that.