Syntec VS. GC Syntec
- Thread starter ewetho
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,202
Castrol could say that their oils exceed all warranty requirements for Jet Aircraft, orbital rocket engines, space alien hover devices, etc,, as long as they throw the phrase "where API SL/SM/CF is required." The fact that none of those machines (except possibly the space alien hover device) require those specifications is purely garbled unnecessary information that the consumer need not concern themselves with.
You roll the dice, you take your chances...
You roll the dice, you take your chances...
I don't have any idea if it's fine. I went back a year in the UOA section and couldn't find where anyone had used it. I may have missed it though.quote:
Originally posted by Dominic:
It's liquid engineering! Come on folksLaughter aside I think normal US Syntec is fine, but isn't as polished a product as GC... I think we can agree on that one.
The question is, would you pay $5.50 a quart for an oil that might not be any better than Supertech for 1/2 as much cash? Or would you look for the real deal for that $5.50.
I know what I would do...
Here we go.
Here at BITOG we don't really care that the oil performs pretty good as compared to its differently formulated competitors, especially considering the average OCI's the most folks are comfortable with.
We labeled it "overpriced" cause we're still believing in the old myths of PAO's superiority.
I'm being sarcastic here, of course.
You don't see too many group III UOA's cause of this constant condemnation of the non-GC Syntec by the majority of this board members.
Even though, Castrol made the situation even more confusing by selling outstanding GC at exactly the same prices as the rest of the Syntec line.
Naturally, the most folks would and did opt for GC, green or gold.
In the GC-less world I would still use Syntec or PP with 10-12K intervals of mostly freeway driving.
Mobil 1 is a fine oil, I just don't believe that it is any better than the modern Group III based oils.
Castrol is a fine blender. The quality of the oil is not based on the basestock alone.
It's a combo of the basestock(s) and of the additive pack is what makes or brakes an oil. Mobil 1 can claim whatever they want.
They use an expensive basestock which is not a cuttng edge anymore as far as the engine protection is concerned.
So they have to cut on the add packs or raise prices to stay competitive with the likes of Castrol or PP.
That's an interesting set of UOAs. The difference in iron levels was significant and Syntec had a longer OCI. I won't try to state with certainty which one has the better additive package from looking at a UOA but I will comment on what the UOA does show for the add pack. Moly levels are ~same. M1 had slightly more boron. Syntec had more calcium (which does also act as an extreme pressure anti-wear additive in addition to detergent/TBN duties), M1 had more ZDDP. So it's hard to say even just looking on the face of it. There's more to add packs than UOAs can show because the molecules can be different but all we see in UOAs are the elements. But API SL version M1 uses alkylated napthalenes for additive solubility while Syntec uses esters, so who knows how that affects wear but I'd go for esters anyday over alkylated napthalenes. The add pack in SM M1 is very different now than it was in the SL versions. I guess it's too soon to conclude if things are worse or better now for SM M1 UOA iron wear levels.
ekpolk, I know you don't think that an oil with Group 3 is likely to pass the grueling Euro automaker specs that GC does. I didn't either in the past. But look at Lubromoly High Tech 5W-30. "Hc technology" means hydrocracked...I don't know how much of it is Group 3 and what else is in it.
http://www.liquimoly.de/web/lmhomeus.nsf/pages/index_produkte
Meets: API SL/CF; ACEA A3-02/ B4-02; BMW Longlife-01; MB 229.3 und MB 229.5; VW 502 00 und 505 00.
I saw this oil at my Advanced Auto Parts store but am using Lubromoly 5W-40 instead since it better suits my VW engine.
Winston, nickel is an ingredient in many high-grade steels, so it's probably coming from some of the highly stressed parts of an engine like connecting rods, pins, etc.
glxpassat, that's true about that oil not meeting VW 503.01 I don't have the details of that test like I do on the 502 and 505 tests. Do you have detailed info on it? All I recall about it is that it's a really long drain spec and has a minimum 3.5 HTHS requirement and is used in certain engines. I'd like info on deposit and wear limits, and possible viscosity grades, like we've seen on the VW 502 and 505 specs in other threads. It might be that all oils meeting 503.01 must be a 0W-XX oil and that automatically would bar this Lubromoly oil from meeting it. For some reason, info on 503.01 spec has been hard to come by.
glxpassat, that's true about that oil not meeting VW 503.01 I don't have the details of that test like I do on the 502 and 505 tests. Do you have detailed info on it? All I recall about it is that it's a really long drain spec and has a minimum 3.5 HTHS requirement and is used in certain engines. I'd like info on deposit and wear limits, and possible viscosity grades, like we've seen on the VW 502 and 505 specs in other threads. It might be that all oils meeting 503.01 must be a 0W-XX oil and that automatically would bar this Lubromoly oil from meeting it. For some reason, info on 503.01 spec has been hard to come by.
Jag, I don't recall any specifics on deposit and wear limits. I do know that it is an Audi long drain spec for high horsepower turbo motors like what's in the TT, A4 and A6 2.7T, so it has to hold up to high heat for a long time.
Thanks glxpassat. It remains mostly shadowed in mystery to us both then. But speaking of the need for high heat tolerance, a few weeks ago I spent the day with a German guy from Ingolstadt who drives the Autobahn routinely. I asked how fast he normally drives. He said between 100 to 120 mph. 100 mph isn't so fast but 120 mph is geting up there in terms of air drag (~V^2). Imagine a little turbo engine like the VW 1.8T engine driving at 120 mph for hours on end. The shearing from high rpms and heating from the boost & HP needed would put a heck of a beating on it. And this oil has to last for well over 10k miles between oil changes. I think it is the common abuse like this in parts of Europe that caused Euro automakers to set such high standards for their motor oils. If they didn't crap would hit the fan.
While the autobahn only exists in Germany, I think other countries drive the crop out of their cars too. A couple anecdotes;
When I went to Germany I remember getting picked up from the airport in a little VW Golf taxi. When the guy got on the highway he just floored it and let the car go as fast as it could (around 100mph).
A friend from south Africa laughs at how people in the US buy such big trucks to pull boats and trailers. His Dad used a Ford Escort type vehicle to pull a large fishing boat.
People in other countries are not afraid to use all of the hp of their cars. In this country it is more like "how fast will the car accelerate when I push the accelerator half way down."
When I went to Germany I remember getting picked up from the airport in a little VW Golf taxi. When the guy got on the highway he just floored it and let the car go as fast as it could (around 100mph).
A friend from south Africa laughs at how people in the US buy such big trucks to pull boats and trailers. His Dad used a Ford Escort type vehicle to pull a large fishing boat.
People in other countries are not afraid to use all of the hp of their cars. In this country it is more like "how fast will the car accelerate when I push the accelerator half way down."
Yeah, thats very different. I know I do my best to keep the RPMs below 3,000 and try to get the best MPG. Very different in Europe (nope, never been over there). No wonder they have high requirements for oil...
The grueling test for VW is the 503.01 spec.
Thanks for the comments on the UOA. I thought it would be fun to compare M1 and Castrol Syntec (so I did) and NO ONE commented on the differences in wear. (No one cares about ME!
I wish we had more Castrol Syntec data. I have a sneaky suspicion that it is a better oil (for wear) than M1, and better TBN retention than regular M1.
Is it ethical for me to sell you 1 ounce of crappy 12k Gold and sell it to you at the market rate of 1oz of pure .999 Gold Bullion?
Furthermore is it ethical for me to market definition 12k gold as it was .999 Gold bullion?
Castrol has done the same thing albiet with vastly cheaper hydrocarbons.
Comparing GrpIII Domestic Castrol Shamtec to imported Grp4/5 German stuff is an apples to oranges comparison. Even Pennzoil Platinum vs Domestic Castrol is an apples to oranges comparo.
Furthermore is it ethical for me to market definition 12k gold as it was .999 Gold bullion?
Castrol has done the same thing albiet with vastly cheaper hydrocarbons.
Comparing GrpIII Domestic Castrol Shamtec to imported Grp4/5 German stuff is an apples to oranges comparison. Even Pennzoil Platinum vs Domestic Castrol is an apples to oranges comparo.
Now playing (playing)... left field (field).... outrun (outrun)
As far as meeting Euro specs w/ G-III oils, even lesser oils can meet A3-specs. DuraBlend 10w-40 carried A3 as well as Delo. Syntec 10w-40 meets it too. Time to inset the pic of Mori's Audi V6 after 122k of 10k intervals on Syntec 5w-50. It was spotless. I'll add a pic later.
I don't have a problem with GIII base oils and Castrol using them in the non GC Syntec oils.
Years ago, when Castrol first switched to GIII base oils for the Syntec oil line I am sure that GIII oils left a lot to be desired. That was then, let's talk about now. Nowadays, most GIII base oils are the result of severe hydrocracking that yields a base oil that is light years ahead of Castrol's first hydrocracked oils. And Castrol is a major blender of oils sold throughout the world so let's at least give them their due. As far as the cost factor between M1 and Castrol's Syntec you must remember that it is not cheap to process GIII oils - it is as difficult as producing PAO's from what I have found while sifting the internet. And when you get right down to it PAO's are built up from components that are derived from crude oil too so this GIII / PAO argument may soon be a wash. I have the feeling that Castrol may put an unknown % of G V oils in some of the Syntec line to add stability to the oil but if they are they seem to be keeping quiet about it. I quit using M1 oils when they went to the SM rating - I don't know what changed at that point but all of a sudden my engines got noisy with their oil in my cars. So I changed oil manufacturers and started using Castrol: my 4.3 simply gushed over the GC - my BMW did too. Our family truckster, a '02 Tahoe seems to prefer Castrol 10w30 over M1 10w30 and gave up its cold start piston slap on the first oil change. I am currently using Syntec 5w20 in my wifes' '05 Miata and it hushed up its engine noise mui pronto. When the Miata was on the M1 5w20 I'd look in at the cam under the oil cap and you could see that the M1 had drained completely off and the cold starts were NOISY. Now, with the Syntec, a look under the oil cap reveals a cam with a healthy film of oil on it and quiet cold starts. This is what makes me wonder if there is a little G V is in there. The Miata runs fine on the Syntec. Naturally, I am keeping a close watch on the Castrol products I am using (hey I'm a BITOGer here)- been using Castrol stuff for right at a year now and so far things look good. If things turn bad, you can bet your booties I'll get back right here and tell all!! Cheers chaps! (sorry for the long post)
Years ago, when Castrol first switched to GIII base oils for the Syntec oil line I am sure that GIII oils left a lot to be desired. That was then, let's talk about now. Nowadays, most GIII base oils are the result of severe hydrocracking that yields a base oil that is light years ahead of Castrol's first hydrocracked oils. And Castrol is a major blender of oils sold throughout the world so let's at least give them their due. As far as the cost factor between M1 and Castrol's Syntec you must remember that it is not cheap to process GIII oils - it is as difficult as producing PAO's from what I have found while sifting the internet. And when you get right down to it PAO's are built up from components that are derived from crude oil too so this GIII / PAO argument may soon be a wash. I have the feeling that Castrol may put an unknown % of G V oils in some of the Syntec line to add stability to the oil but if they are they seem to be keeping quiet about it. I quit using M1 oils when they went to the SM rating - I don't know what changed at that point but all of a sudden my engines got noisy with their oil in my cars. So I changed oil manufacturers and started using Castrol: my 4.3 simply gushed over the GC - my BMW did too. Our family truckster, a '02 Tahoe seems to prefer Castrol 10w30 over M1 10w30 and gave up its cold start piston slap on the first oil change. I am currently using Syntec 5w20 in my wifes' '05 Miata and it hushed up its engine noise mui pronto. When the Miata was on the M1 5w20 I'd look in at the cam under the oil cap and you could see that the M1 had drained completely off and the cold starts were NOISY. Now, with the Syntec, a look under the oil cap reveals a cam with a healthy film of oil on it and quiet cold starts. This is what makes me wonder if there is a little G V is in there. The Miata runs fine on the Syntec. Naturally, I am keeping a close watch on the Castrol products I am using (hey I'm a BITOGer here)- been using Castrol stuff for right at a year now and so far things look good. If things turn bad, you can bet your booties I'll get back right here and tell all!! Cheers chaps! (sorry for the long post)
As far as I can tell:
ACEA A3 not too hard to meet. MB 229.5 more difficult. VW 503.01 extremely difficult. But yeah, Group 3 can do a lot. I haven't yet seen a primarily Group 3 oil that meets VW 503.01, but I have seen one that meets MB 229.5 (Lubromoly 5W-30).
ACEA A3 not too hard to meet. MB 229.5 more difficult. VW 503.01 extremely difficult. But yeah, Group 3 can do a lot. I haven't yet seen a primarily Group 3 oil that meets VW 503.01, but I have seen one that meets MB 229.5 (Lubromoly 5W-30).
Petro-canada’s handbook says …
The HTHS spec for A3 is > 3.5. There aren’t too many 5w-30 synthetics made here in North America that are “thick” enough to meet this spec. It’s not that they aren’t excellent oils, it’s that they’re just not blended with a higher viscosity for the 30wt range because they want to meet the API Starburst fuel economy requirements -- this likely limits an oil to around ~ 10.7cST (which would probably be ~ 3.1 HTHS).
Some of the 0w-30’s which push up around 12.0cST can meet the A3 and many of the 5w-30’s in Europe are blended at a higher viscosity (12.0cST) to meet A3 too, because that on the label is more important than the Starburst symbol.
It’s to bad ACEA never put ranges for the various weigh oils in A3 for HTHS so the lighter viscosity fuel-efficient oils could meet the spec. A3 is really almost a “high-HTHS rating” long-life category. The A5 spec is the same type of category as A3 but for thinner oils -- high performance and/or extended drain with a HTHS 2.9-3.5. So I guess ACEA covered that with another spec.
I suspect that for many of the European Auto spec’s like BMW’s LL-01, VW’s and MB spec’s, that because of the cost of submitting an oil for testing the oil companies here don’t bother because it’s just not worth it from a market perspective.
Now, maybe that is a play on words, but it appears Duron 15w-40 can meet A3/B3, and it is a Grp II oil.
The HTHS spec for A3 is > 3.5. There aren’t too many 5w-30 synthetics made here in North America that are “thick” enough to meet this spec. It’s not that they aren’t excellent oils, it’s that they’re just not blended with a higher viscosity for the 30wt range because they want to meet the API Starburst fuel economy requirements -- this likely limits an oil to around ~ 10.7cST (which would probably be ~ 3.1 HTHS).
Some of the 0w-30’s which push up around 12.0cST can meet the A3 and many of the 5w-30’s in Europe are blended at a higher viscosity (12.0cST) to meet A3 too, because that on the label is more important than the Starburst symbol.
It’s to bad ACEA never put ranges for the various weigh oils in A3 for HTHS so the lighter viscosity fuel-efficient oils could meet the spec. A3 is really almost a “high-HTHS rating” long-life category. The A5 spec is the same type of category as A3 but for thinner oils -- high performance and/or extended drain with a HTHS 2.9-3.5. So I guess ACEA covered that with another spec.
I suspect that for many of the European Auto spec’s like BMW’s LL-01, VW’s and MB spec’s, that because of the cost of submitting an oil for testing the oil companies here don’t bother because it’s just not worth it from a market perspective.
Comparing GIII and GIV in light of extended OCI, I would notice the fact that actually in Europe the number of oils designed for extended OCI and using a pure GIII or its mixture with other groups (including GII+) considerably exceeds the number of oils based on GIV. This also concerns ACEA A5/B5 oils except, probably, oils meeting VW 503.00/506.00/506.01.
Seems there is something behind this besides a cost. When reading general comparison tests (made by car magazines) I noticed that some GIV oils usually start with a higher TBN than GIII or those with GII+/PAO or GIII/PAO, but finish with a lower number. And this may evoke an idea that additives are depleted quicker in GIV.
Seems there is something behind this besides a cost. When reading general comparison tests (made by car magazines) I noticed that some GIV oils usually start with a higher TBN than GIII or those with GII+/PAO or GIII/PAO, but finish with a lower number. And this may evoke an idea that additives are depleted quicker in GIV.
Given that the degradation product of an ester can be an acid, do you think that the TBN is slowly being depleted by the base oil some Group IV blends?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
