what GROUP an oil is.

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: qship1996
well group 1,2,and 3 are all different levels of refined mineral oil, while group 4 and 5 are chemically composed.....you make your own conclusions

Cars, paper clips, and rebar are all made of metal. Big Macs, filet mignons, and dog food are all made of meat. Cowpox, mushrooms, and human beings all come from DNA.

You make your own conclusions.

The origins of a thing aren't always a good indication of how it works.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: rewote500
Thoughts?

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/533/base-oil-trends

Looks like it needs to be updated a little bit, e.g. the GTL process it describes as forthcoming is already in use. But other than that, it looks like an effective summary of what a lot of people have been trying to say on here for a long time.

 

[qship1996]

there is fish, and there is fish eggs.....Some like filet o fish, others Beluga. Choices.

 

[sangyup81]

As it stands, I do not believe there are any oils that use 100% Group IV. There are some that mix Group III with Group IV and some that mix Group IV with Group V esters and even some that mix Group III, IV, and V.

I heard there were once oils that were almost 100% Group IV but that they didn't work well

All in all, it seems that BITOG has moved on to the approach of comparing product to product since all oils are pretty much brews of many different things. I have to say I agree with this approach

 

[znode]

Originally Posted By: qship1996
Why? As you can see, they got even many of us here fooled, not to mention the average consumer who sees "synthetic" and all the other marketing buzzwords on the bottles and in the advertisements and has no clue as to what they are really purchasing.


Unfortunately, you're the one who's fooled. Fooled by old, outdated XOM marketing at that. There was a time when group IV had some performance benefits in some areas, over III. That time was 30 years ago.

"in modern base oil manufacturing, V.I., pour point, volatility, and oxidation stability can be independently controlled. Modern Group III oils today can be designed and manufactured so that their performance closely matches PAOs in most commercially significant finished lube applications." -- Kramer, D. C., Lok, B. K., Krug, R. R., “The Evolution of Base Oil Technology,” ASTM STP #1407 (2001)

http://www.chevron.com/products/sitelets/baseoils/docs/ebot.pdf
It then goes to compare III and IV performance in pour point, CCS, Noack, and oxidation. Note how there's no difference or negligible difference.

And this is from Chevron, the world's largest producer of Group IV PAO basestock.

 

[Art_Vandelay]

Originally Posted By: znode
Originally Posted By: qship1996
Why? As you can see, they got even many of us here fooled, not to mention the average consumer who sees "synthetic" and all the other marketing buzzwords on the bottles and in the advertisements and has no clue as to what they are really purchasing.


Unfortunately, you're the one who's fooled. Fooled by old, outdated XOM marketing at that. There was a time when group IV had some performance benefits in some areas, over III. That time was 30 years ago.


30 years ago. Wow. I heard Nostradamus predicted that Group III would one day be bigger than U.S. Steel.

When you play Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds backwards, John Lennon can be clearly heard saying, "It's just oil brother...unless you're talking about PAO."

 

[qship1996]

LMAO