Walmart Supertech Synthetic High Mileage formula in a turbo car?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Messages
32
Location
Portland, OR
I've got a 91 Mitsubishi eclipse with a turbo charged 4g63 engine in it. There is a leak where the oil cooler seal is on the filter housing. It's too cold to mess with it, so I'm gonna wait till spring.

The engine has been rebuilt I am not sure when, I estimate about 30K or so (does not burn any oil whatsoever).

Because of the leak, i want to use a cheaper oil. But I want the benefits of synthetic, so I am using the Walmart Super Tech Synthetic oil. It says high mileage engine formula on it.

That's the only supertech synthetic they have there.
So what does this high mile engine forumla mean? Is this stuff better then dino for a turbocharged application?
Oh by the way I change it about every 2 months (when the oil looks dirty up to the top uf the dip stick). You know how the oil gradually gets dirty starting at the bottom of the dipstick., Well when I see the dirty looking stuff reach the top, that's when I change it. Since I am currently using the $12 for 5 quarts of oil I might as well change it as early as I feel.
 
From what I understand, super tech syn is actually a synthetic blend that is allowed to be advertised as a full synthetic much like Castrol Syntec. Consider it a premium dino oil. Thats all I have to add. I'm sure someone else will cover the rest.
 
The dirt at the top of the dipstick method is not scientific. I would run it 3K and do a UOA and see what it says.
 
The Synthetic product is a Group III "full" synthetic and not a blend. It's a good product.

In a turbo? IMO, group IV/PAO synths are the preferred synths as they can withstand those ultra-high temps better than any dino-based product is able to.
 
Also, it's not a "high mileage" engine oil like Valvoline or anything.

They just put that on the label because lots of people associate 10w30 with "thicker" for "worn out" engines and older engines spec 10w30.

But it's one of my fav oils.
 
It's full grpIII oil not grp1-2-3 blend, and it should do fine. That car could take dino and be fine as that is what was originally used in it...
Also aren't you basically spending almost as much if you are changing it out early, than to just use what you were using? Unless you are one who changes the expensive synthetic out at 3-5k. Then I guess it doesnt matter.
 
If you fail victim to the USA's Better Business Buearu's decision to allow oil companies (see Castrol) to market dino derived oil with synthetic additives as full synthetic, then yes group III is synthetic. However, if you go by the standards that the rest of the world goes by, you would call it a blend. There is nothing wrong with it, but the definition of "full" would include everything. That would include the base stock. But we're not using logic here, we're listening to advertising propaganda induced by lawyers. I think ST Syn is a good oil for you're application. Just don't be fooled by the advertising crap that some people take as gospel.
 
rolleyes.gif
....and the dead horse continues to get beaten.
 
tamu_man
Member # 10834
posted February 06, 2006 09:43 AM
"... if you go by the standards that the rest of the world goes by, you would call it a blend."

Except the world doesn't call it a blend.
It is grpIII. That's it.
 
I use ST synthetic in my engine now. I asked earlier on BITOG and was told it is a good oil. I like it alot. Once my supply is diminished however, I will be switching to PP.
 
Typically, the big producers of fully hydro-cracked, 130+ VI index, Grp III base oils, (read Chevron & Petro-Canada) will make the argument that the hydro-carbon molecular structure is re-arranged to the extent that it is chemically synthesized.

But Grp III base oils also include the 120-128 VI range product produced by S-Oil & Motiva using the ExxonMobil catalyst.

These base oil plants are producing batches of 118 VI Grp II+ one month and 123 VI Grp III the next, all from the same production train.

Based on this example, I think it's fair to state that only the 130+ VHVI Grp III grades can be included in the synthetic debate and the 120-130 grades are actually closer to dino/conventional base oils.

And off-hand, I'd say the $12 jug of Super Tech synthetic probably contains 125VI Grp III.
smile.gif
 
"And off-hand, I'd say the $12 jug of Super Tech synthetic probably contains 125VI Grp III. "


5W30 has a VI of 150
10W30 has a VI of 140
 
VI improvers are added to the base oils.. the higher the base oil VI the lesser need for VI improvers.
 
They can hydrocrack all they want and call it synthetic. However, when two oils cost $4 per quart, and one contains much more non-additive sulfur and almost infinitely more wax, I believe its a rip off. This debate would not occur if Syntec was $2-3 a quart. One of the greatest benefits of synthetic is extended drain intervals, but group III just can't keep up with IV and V in this respect. I'm not saying group III is bad. I'm saying it's a bad value at $4. The Supertech is a decent price.
 
"yes group III is synthetic"

Lawyers? BBB? Huh? How about the chemical reference manuals that say G-III oils are synthetic? A substance need only to "be changed signifigantly" to be "synthesized". I've read every page of the Mobil v. Castrol pleadings. I suggest you do the same if you wish to discuss it further.
 
I agree with tamu_man. The cost is too high for the "pseudo" synthetics. To me, a synthetic oil is man made, period. This hydrocracking is just a process to change dino oil. The true synth should cost more than the hydrocracked oil. However, I would not mind seeing the prices dropped on the true synth oils.
 
Castrol syntec has to use the 2-3$ premium to sponsor John Force
smile.gif


I agree it is too bad they sell Group 3 and pretend it is as good as a Group 4 or 5.

In regard to Supertech 10w-30 Syn, anyone have any info on its pour point, flash point or TBN??
 
Here you go:

Viscosity Grade .........5W-30 .......10W-30
Gravity, °API ..ASTM D-287 ..34.6......33.8
Spec Grav @ 60°F (15.6 ºC) ..0.85 .....0.86
Viscosity
@ 40ºC, cSt ................56.7 ......63.4
@ 100ºC, cSt ...............10.3 .....10.3
Pour Point, ºC .............-48 .....-45
Viscosity Index ............150 ........140
Low Temperature Viscosity
cP at Temp (ºC), Max.. HT/HS Vis, cP ...............2.92 ...3.12
NOACK Volatility, % off ....<15......<15
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom