Rant mode: ON
With the current OEM standardization to API "SL"/ILSAC "GF-3 motor oils and their associated passing of stringent testing, it mystifies me why a rational person would refer to ANY motor oil meeting those qualifications as "turkey" oil. I know, the mantra, "Those are just minimal standards and I want something better in my engine!" is the typical response. Fine. It's your money, so, go for it. But, before anyone extolls the likes of the Mobil 1 hype of engines running 1,000,000 miles on a closed track without exceeding new bearing and ring/cylinder clearances, consider that straight dino juice run in the same conditions - not allowing the engine to cool down, maintaining a set speed, and shutting down or stopping just long enough to allow a driver change and to change the oil at its particular advised change interval, would in all probablilty allow for 1,000,000 miles of operation, too. Whether the dino juice in that scenario would show the same wear rate after 1,000,000 miles is immaterial - realistically how many people actually put 1,000,000 miles on their cars? How many people actually drive their cars under those ideal conditions? (Even the Yahoo who put over 1,000,000 miles on his Volvo was on his third engine at that point, proving routine driving takes its toll.) So, if those "SL"/"GF-3" motor oils are generally good enough for warranty purposose, then, that means they're really, good enough. For specialty premium engines, racing, or other heavy-duty applications that call for hot-shot synthetics, it's obviously a different matter.
Rant mode: OFF