Valvoline dino vs Motorcraft Synthetic Blend

[HaroldCallahan]

Have been using valvoline 5w30 All weather with FL-400S filter and 3000 mile interval in my 1999 Ford Ranger with 3.0. Now has 130,000 miles and runs as good or better than new, with no oil consumption.

Truck is 4x4 with 5-speed manual, 3.73 gears. Driven on interstate for 90 mile round trip commute. Speeds range from 65 to 90 mph. Gas mileage is around 24 mpg. Starts easy in the cold colorado winter mornings.

I would like to keep this truck till 300,000 miles or more. I see no reason why it might not last that long. Heck, it still has the original brake shoes/pads with plenty left. No problems, just fluid changes, serpentine belt, spark plugs at 115,000 miles and just put the third set of tires on it. Cheap and reliable and still looks like new, inside and out.

I am seeing that the Motorcraft synthetic blend is now selling at Walmart and is even a little cheaper than the standard valvoline.

Thinking of changing to the motorcraft, but with the good results of the valvoline I am wondering if I am wise to do this.

Is the Motorcraft oil really better than the valvoline ???

I know it is less expensive. I know that it is synthetic blend, which sounds better. So I dont need to be told these two things.

But specifically, is there any hard evidence, data or factual reasons that the motorcraft will actually be better for the 3.0 engine than the valvoline ???

 

[Starbreaker666]

As a person who lives on the Colorado Eastern Plains AND uses Valvoline I say if it's working for you stay with it. Especially with the new API SM/GF-4 formulations. All these oils look like they are going to be good. The Motorcraft Syn Blend might get ya more miles on a change but if you plan on still changing at 3k it's a toss up. At least IMHO.

 

[brian fix]

Yes the Motercraft oil is better than the Vavoline,, why not try Phillips trop-artic for a bit less,, 1.14 per qt,,5w30 semi,,this is probably the best existing deal on engine lubes right now for the $$$....BL

 

[Mamala Bay]

My vote is the MC 5w-30 as by an opinion a better oil. But it shows with a name brand oil at 3k oci and keeping your engine clean will do it's job.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Your vehicles duty cylce will caryy it along way on either one you choose. I have personally made the switch from Valvoline To MC. But I also plan on trying to stretch the intervals by a bit more than 3K too.

 

[AstroVic]

The Motorcraft is a better oil & it's cheaper, so where's the debate?

 

[DSteven]

The Motorcraft is MUCH MUCH better than the Valvoline All Climate. Check around here, and it is cheaper, too! If you want something equally as good as MC, try the Phillips 66 Trop Artic 5W-30 at only $1.12/qt! Both are much better oils than Valvoline, and they even save money! Good Luck!

 

[haley10]

Lots of opinions here, based on past history and experiences no doubt.

GF-4 changed everything, so I see no hard evidence at this point to recommend one brand over another. Where is the data??

We really can't be sure. Unless you have big stockpiles, past performance of oils is not very relevant.

Voa's aren't telling us much either with some of the new additives that don't show.

Other than personal perceptions and brand loyalty, etc., who can honestly say if Valvoline is better or worse than Motorcraft in GF-4 form?

 

[Blue99]

Haley - I wrote this response about an hour ago & am just now getting back online to post it.
My apologies if I'm duplicating some of your comments!

So far, all we have are a number of statements of personal preference for Motorcraft 5W-30 vs. Valvo All Climate 5W-30.

My comment is paraphrase the old standard “No tickee, No Laundry” with “No Data, No Belivee”.

I’d like to see some VOA/UOA add pack or base oil analysis that backs up this commonly accepted viewpoint that Valvoline is an inferior product. I’m not a Valvoline shill, I just have problems with the “dog” stigma attached to the Valvoline brand, while, as an example, Walmart SuperTech, gathers no negative comments.

From the base oil angle, the majority of GF-4 5w-30’s will be GRP II’s plus additives to boost the base oil, or GRP II/III blends, or low cost GRP III. All of these formulations are passing GF-4 and only time will tell which provides better performance.

Since both Motorcraft & Valvo AC have demonstrated GF-4 requirements for oil thickening, sludge/varnish deposition, oil consumption, and engine wear, by passing the Sequence VII engine test, I really think you have to push these oils out beyond 5000 mi OCI to see a difference.

Or, run either oil in a vehicle with any combination of PCV valve, air filter, fuel injector, coolant leak, previous sludge/deposit or dirty ring pack problems, on a short trip basis, and see which oil posts the better UOA.

My educated guess is that both oils will provide similar performance in a well maintained, newer vehicle. Only a series of UOA’s would allow us to “split the hairs”, and in the end, the results would only be valid for that particular vehicle/engine.

 

[brianl703]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue99:
Since both Motorcraft & Valvo AC have demonstrated GF-4 requirements for oil thickening, sludge/varnish deposition, oil consumption, and engine wear, by passing the Sequence VII engine test, I really think you have to push these oils out beyond 5000 mi OCI to see a difference.

---

Motocraft 5W-30 meets Ford's WSS-M2C929-A specification which has requirements in excess of GF-4.

Does Valvoline 5W-30 meet Ford's WSS-M2C929-A specification? A Google search for "WSS-M2929-A" and "Valvoline" turned up nothing.

More information about WSS-M2C929-A is below:

"SAE 5W-30 with the API Certification Mark displayed is recommended for 2005 MY 4.0L V6 applications only. The Ford Engineering Material Specification for SAE 5W-30 service fill oils is WSS-M2C929-A, which specifies ILSAC GF-4 requirements and the additional specifications beyond ILSAC GF-4 that are the same as SAE 5W-20."

From http://www.ilma.org/resources/fordltr_recommendations.pdf

 

[haley10]

Valvoline web-site spec sheets aren't showing Ford, Honda, and GM specific specs. yet. Everybody is behind on getting their updates out.

No way Valvoline would miss meeting all the relevant Ford, Honda, and GM specs.

 

[Blue99]

Brianl703 - Actually, the Ford spec is a good point to bring up.

View the All Climate product data sheet by clicking on This Link and selecting All Climate from the choices.

Ford WSS-M2C929A is listed for All Climate 5W-30, probably a a good point to bolster the case for Valvoline

 

[Ray H]

I doubt it's a matter of whether Valvoline can meet Ford's newest specs. (Whatever feelings others have expressed over Valvoline's published specs, I don't believe anyone can argue that comapny's, as well as Motorcrat products haven't consistently delivered excellent UOAs.) Both are very good oil formulations and neither should have any trouble delivering 300,000+ miles' engine life (and probably much more). But, given the pricing and the fact that the ConocoPhillips stable of entry level 5W-20 and 5W-30 motor oils are apparently >50% Group III in their base stock content, I'd vote for the Motorcraft (or any of the other ConocoPhillips like-viscosity blends per pricing/availability) in this case for no other reason than the inherently increased oxidation resistance of Group IIIs. That's not to say that Valvoline oil is sludge prone - rather just one less factor to have to rely on an additive to fix.

 

[farrarfan1]

Wow, a thread where Valvoline isn't getting beaten to a pulp. What's going on around here?

 

[BrentB]

Does anyone else recall that when Mobil 1 first came out, it was supposed to last 1 yr, or 20,000 miles between changes? I put in my brand new GMC van back in 1985, changed the oil once a year (12,000 to 15,000) miles, and drove it to the moon (250,000 miles) before using it as trade in 2001. I didn't have any lubrication problems, oil pressure was fine, and it didn't burn or smoke.

I do the same with my current Astro van. Hope it doesn't give too many goose bumps.

 

[mikemc]

The Ford 3.0 is an iron tank. Easily one of the toughest, most reliable American engines in history. Any good 5w30 dino will work fine. If you are comfortable with the Valvoline, stay with it. If you want a very good oil for less money, try Havoline or Motorcraft.

 

[Mystic]

Best Valvoline product I ever found was the Valvoline MaxLife motor oil.

 

[Blue99]

quote:

---

I'd vote for the Motorcraft (or any of the other ConocoPhillips like-viscosity blends per pricing/availability) in this case for no other reason than the inherently increased oxidation resistance of Group IIIs. That's not to say that Valvoline oil is sludge prone - rather just one less factor to have to rely on an additive to fix.

---

I agree 100% with Ray's comments and think that Durablend is the better Valvoline product to compare with Motorcraft.

This brings up the issue of price, as it's $1.42 vs. $2.58 on a single quart basis.

Part of the differential is due to marketing costs such as NASCAR sponsorships, and TV & radio advertising, typical for the manner in which Ashland promotes the Valvoline brand.

 

[Drew99GT]

quote:

---

Originally posted by brianl703:
Motocraft 5W-30 meets Ford's WSS-M2C929-A specification which has requirements in excess of GF-4.

Does Valvoline 5W-30 meet Ford's WSS-M2C929-A specification? A Google search for "WSS-M2929-A" and "Valvoline" turned up nothing.

More information about WSS-M2C929-A is below:

"SAE 5W-30 with the API Certification Mark displayed is recommended for 2005 MY 4.0L V6 applications only. The Ford Engineering Material Specification for SAE 5W-30 service fill oils is WSS-M2C929-A, which specifies ILSAC GF-4 requirements and the additional specifications beyond ILSAC GF-4 that are the same as SAE 5W-20."

From http://www.ilma.org/resources/fordltr_recommendations.pdf

---

Valvoline does meet the new spec, as well as every other GF-4 5w-30. Look at the data sheets. The Ford spec is nothing spectacular (especially if nasty old Valvoline can meet it

) It's not like ACEA A3 or anything like that.