Syntec (evidence of the international oil conspiracy?)

Messages
948
Location
st. Louis
Was in a local Autozone today and took a quick look at their stock of Castrol Syntec. Some recent posts mentioned German made Castrol in Canada so I was wondering if some 'Red Lables' made it to these parts. Was looking for 'Made in Germany' and 'Meets ACEA A3' Found 'Not for sale outside of North America' Huuuuuugh??? [crushedcar] Does Group III base oil not qualify as synthetic overseas? BTW: It is only rated ACEA A1 with no mention of the coveted BMW Long Life or VW 505 specs.
 
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
I'm sure there are still bottles of the "old" 0w30 with the yellow label floating around. The German 0w30 (red label) has "Made in Germany" and lists all the European specs that it meets on the back. I don't remember seeing the "Not for sale..." disclaimer. As to why Castrol puts that disclaimer on the Group III Syntec, I would suspect it's because they know the synthetics they sell elsewhere are superior and they don't want anyone selling this stuff in those markets and "diluting the brand" when people realize it's crap.
 

mormit

Thread starter
Messages
948
Location
st. Louis
Although I would hesitate to call a Group III oil crap, I don't think it is worth $4.99 a bottle or should be labeled as synthetic. I also wouldn't use it in my car. Not up to the specs of their real syn oils.
 
Messages
2,480
No...apparently Castrol has put this "not for sale outside of N.A." label on ALL their products. I've seen it on GTX and even Dextron III tranny fluid. My guess is that due to MUCH lower oil prices in N.A., they don't want to see the product shipped and sold outside of N.A.. Additionally, a closer inspection of the whole label (found on the box) says "warranty of product is limited to sale and use within N.A. only". Hence, the product is not warrantied outside of N.A. since it is product in N.A. for the sole consumption purposes in N.A. as Castrol products are available in Europe under their European division. As far as Syntec, I'm currently using all of their products in my vehicle and will attest that it stacks up relative to anything else that's out there for the same price.
 
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
quote:
Originally posted by mormit: Although I would hesitate to call a Group III oil crap, I don't think it is worth $4.99 a bottle or should be labeled as synthetic. I also wouldn't use it in my car. Not up to the specs of their real syn oils.
If you look at the specs for Castrol's Group III Syntec (if you can get Castrol to give them to you), you will see that this oil is "crap" when compared to any other synthetic sold in Europe, be it Group III or Group IV/V. There are Group II oils sold in the US that have a lower pour point than Group III Syntec. I wouldn't even be thinking about using Syntec at my next oil change if this German 0w30 wasn't available.
 
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
quote:
Originally posted by tenderloin: Autozone in So Cal red label Syntec 0W-30 made in USA domestic and foreign components, A few bottles of yellow label also...same thing
[Roll Eyes]
 
Messages
658
Location
EU
I sure wish that someone could get a picture of the bottle of the German-made oil and clear up this confusion about what it looks like and what the label states.
 
Messages
96
Location
Mississauga / Ontario
Guys, I don't understand this confusion! The German made Castrol SLX 0W-30 is just that- German made. It MUST say "Made in Germany" on the back of the bottle. If it doesn't, it's not SLX. Period. -Paul
 

Patman

Staff member
Messages
22,017
Location
Guelph, Ontario
quote:
Originally posted by YZF150: I sure wish that someone could get a picture of the bottle of the German-made oil and clear up this confusion about what it looks like and what the label states.
I tried to take a close up digital picture of it, but it wouldn't come out clear enough. If the label would peel off in one piece I could scan it in at work though.
 
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
quote:
Originally posted by Patman:
quote:
Originally posted by YZF150: I sure wish that someone could get a picture of the bottle of the German-made oil and clear up this confusion about what it looks like and what the label states.
I tried to take a close up digital picture of it, but it wouldn't come out clear enough. If the label would peel off in one piece I could scan it in at work though.

I'm going to get some tomorrow for my van so I can get it changed before a little "mini vacation" next week. I'll take a pic of the label and send it to you, since right now I don't have anywhere to upload it for display on here.
 
Messages
4,478
Location
Southern California
quote:
Originally posted by G-Man II: ...There are Group II oils sold in the US that have a lower pour point than Group III Syntec...
And, that may be only because the Group-IIs have more pour point depressants added to them than the Group-III based Syntec. If I'm not mistaken, pour point depressants are used to bind waxes, and Group-IIIs have next to no wax in them in the first place. It might be revealing to have a pour point run on equivalent weight grades of a Group-III based Syntec and a Group-II based oil after 4,000 miles of use and see which had the lower pour point at that stage. Better get used to Group-III and the recently semi-announced unofficial Group-III+ base stocks. They're here to stay. I just wish the refiners'd hurry up and replace Group-IIs entirely. Nor do I see it written in stone that Exxon/Mobil will always use PAOs in Mobil 1. When it's to their "Exxon"-omic advantage, they'll make the hard decision. I remember when Zenith Electronics made a point of advertising all their TVs were hand wired without printed circuit boards. Yeah, that lasted... (and the changeover to PCBs occurred decades before a Korean company took Zenith over) The point is that corporations have been known to, and will continue to, abruptly change course midstream on the vote of the board of directors when they feel it's to their advantage. [ April 29, 2003, 12:25 AM: Message edited by: Ray H ]
 
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
quote:
Originally posted by Ray H: And, that may be only because the Group-IIs have more pour point depressants added to them than the Group-III based Syntec. If I'm not mistaken, pour point depressants are used to bind waxes, and Group-IIIs have next to no wax in them in the first place. It might be revealing to have a pour point run on equivalent weight grades of a Group-III based Syntec and a Group-II based oil after 4,000 miles of use and see which had the lower pour point at that stage. Better get used to Group-III and the recently semi-announced unofficial Group-III+ base stocks. They're here to stay. I just wish the refiners'd hurry up and replace Group-IIs entirely. Nor do I see it written in stone that Exxon/Mobil will always use PAOs in Mobil 1. When it's to their "Exxon"-omic advantage, they'll make the hard decision. I remember when Zenith Electronics made a point of advertising all their TVs were hand wired without printed circuit boards. Yeah, that lasted... (and the changeover to PCBs occurred decades before a Korean company took Zenith over) The point is that corporations have been known to, and will continue to, abruptly change course midstream on the vote of the board of directors when they feel it's to their advantage.
Actually, even an all hydroprocessed Group III (like Chevron's UCBO) will have some residual wax. In that respect, a Group III isn't any better than a Group II. The only distinguishing mark of the Group III is a higher VI. Once you realize this, the fact that Group III Syntec would have a higher pour point than some Group II based oils is very telling. The Group III+ you mention has been around for years in the form of Shell's XHVI base oil, as well as Exxon's ExxSyn. What distiguishes these base oils from other Group IIIs is their higher VI (140+) and the way they are made: they are wax isomerates.
 
Top