Synthetics vs Dino wear numbers

[Terry]

Gene no need to explain yourself Bro, you were correct on the data and sharing it. I get tired and write terribly lately. I used to be much more succinct.

Basically the more appropriate the chemistry for the application the better. An engineered clean and appropriate molecule for base oils will function better than a GRP I base oil no matter how refined unless the refining takes the fluid past GRP III.

Add packages are so capable lately that the crossover using lower BASE oils and ball busting add packs makes it difficult to decide where the term syn and conventional is.

Thus my hammering here over and over to stop using the terms. They are marketing, not science.

 

[Gene K]

I dont have access to the cold start testing. However if it was Year 2000 (or before) I suspect they were comparing a GI/GII 15w40 to a 5W-40 GIV. So the question is, was it the PAO or the Winter Rating that resulted in the lower wear? Would the cold start wear not have been even better with a 0w30 Diesel Oil?

Terry no harm! I just happened to think the way I worded my response could have been taken as a "shot" at you and that wasnt what I intended at all.

Considering that I can buy a quality 15w40 a quality GII 15w40 oil for under $1.35 Qt (Bulk) its hard for me to justify the cost of a GIV when I can go 30,000 mi on GII without Bypass Filtration and the Oil is still less than 50% of the CAT Oxidation Limit. If I wasnt such a wuss I could run it a lot longer but given other service considerations it makes more sense to get the trucks in around 25,000 - 30,000 mi and saves a lot of argument with CAT if they have to warranty something in the first 600,000 mi (I get a extra 100,000 mi extension for buying CAT).

Seeing as I remember when the interval was upped from 10,000 mi on GI with Mechanical Engines Its hard to believe the results Im getting (Current GII on Electronic Engines looks way better at 30,000 mi than old GI looked at 10,000 mi on a Mechanical).

Back to gas engines. Its hard for me to justify a GIV oil at $6 QT with a $6 Filter instead of a GII/III Blend for $1.50 Qt with a $3 Filter for 5000 mi OCI. If I new I would not have trouble if Ford had to warranty a camshaft or something I would run the GIV at 15,000 mi OCI.

 

[Cujet]

Terry,

you said: ""Basically the more appropriate the chemistry for the application the better. An engineered clean and appropriate molecule for base oils will function better than a GRP I base oil no matter how refined unless the refining takes the fluid past GRP III.""

I am sorry, but I do not clearly understand your wording. Did you say a Group I base oil processed to a level up to and including Group III will be outperformed by a properly engineered and applied synthetic?

Thanks,

Chris

 

[JHZR2]

Quote:

---

What is the rebuttal to this notion that conventional oils show better wear numbers than synthetics? Does that mean that conventional oil protects better when used for a short OCI?

---

Show me a real, controlled, scientific test to prove this...

There are way too many questions for any test for the most part to be accepted as real, if it was not controlled properly.

One piece of anecdotal evidence that I ave seen is in the MB diesel car community: timing chain stretch (i.e. wear actually) rate was halved with the application of a decent synthetic. This is a decent pieece of evidence, as these engines run well for many hundreds of thousands of miles, not just a hundred thousand miles like your typical passender car, and so you have a decent steady-state window before you get issues.

JMH

 

[Terry]

Chris, change the carbon chain (however you accomplish that) to GRPIII or higher and that fluid will out perform the GRPI if all else is equal. BIO bases are even more exciting like the HOBS discussion because they are grown to perform. I am tired of relying on petroleum based focus, I like thinking and applying out of the box.

A well formulated oil appropriately employed will work better than one you are cutting corners on chemically speaking.

Hope that helps.

 

[SFCP]

Did I start something?

 

[ccs v2.0]

Quote:

---

A well formulated oil appropriately employed will work better than one you are cutting corners on chemically speaking.

Hope that helps.

---

Coupled with the info in your prior post regarding the smaller formulators, yes it does. Thanks. The question begging to be asked is, which of the major companies cuts corners least.

 

[buster]

RLI still uses Group IV/V along with vegetable esters from what I understand. All base oils have a fit and purpose. Some are better at some things than others.

 

[Terry]

I posted very specific ( for a public forum) formulation info about BIOSYN formulas on another thread here.

ccs v2.0; they all formulate to meet the minimum standard and have lower costs. Walmart type pricing that WE the consumers demand drive that.

Support the HIGH QUALITY small companies that are responsive to you and while the up front cost is higher there are other good value oriented reasons to pay the difference up front.

UOA trended is a good way to know what is good in your application and what is marginal.

Terry

 

[buster]

Old article.

http://www.getahelmet.com/jeeps/tech/syntheticoil/

 

[ccs v2.0]

Quote:

---

I posted very specific ( for a public forum) formulation info about BIOSYN formulas on another thread here.

ccs v2.0; they all formulate to meet the minimum standard and have lower costs. Walmart type pricing that WE the consumers demand drive that.

Support the HIGH QUALITY small companies that are responsive to you and while the up front cost is higher there are other good value oriented reasons to pay the difference up front.

UOA trended is a good way to know what is good in your application and what is marginal.

Terry

---

No surprise on the minimum stds.

A very informative post and even more so in that other thread (for a public forum). Thanks.