What makes SuperTech Synthetic "cheap"

[dlundblad]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Rex
Yes SuperTech Synthetic does qualify for the API requirements but can we say it also offers additional added benefits up and beyond the "standard" requirements that other more expensive oils offer?


All I know is my engine runs the smoothest on SuperTech out of all the oils I've tried. It runs so smooth, I am done experimenting.


PYB would be smoother.

 

[Y_K]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
He runs M1 on 10K drains and has done so for years, so I don't think that the claim of 10K drains on M1 is mere fairy dust.

I had a Buick Riviera that I took to 540k on 10k M1 drains. I gave it to a friend, and he till uses that engine in a different body.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
I have no doubt that ST is a serviceable oil.
I've even used it myself a time or two in the far past, when it really was dirt-cheap for a syn, as was Rotella 5W-40 at the time.
It just irks me when people try to pretend that ST is somehow as good as or even better than M1, Edge or PP when that is clearly not the case.
The differences are well known and can be shown objectively.
They are not a matter of advertising and promotion.
Were it not for the basestock and additive suppliers doing the hard work to develop formulations for commercial contract blenders, oils like ST couldn't exist, while oils like M1 and PP would still be around, since both blenders have the basestock and add pack production capability as well as the lab resources to formulate finished motor oils.


All I am reading by the name brand people are how the differences are well known and can be shown objectivily, but in over 7 pages of posts no one has done so.
Its all just oil and they meet the same standards. If any exceed those standards then please post the industry standard test results showing that, everything else is smoke and mirrors, snake oil and very effective marketing.

here are the facts, they all pass

Does this mean I do not think there are some superior oils out there? No, I am sure there are but I think its laughable that someone in these forums using VOAs and UOAs can make that determination.
We buy what makes us feel good and we justify the price because of that companys marketing when many products that do no marketing are just as good, if not better.

 

[fdcg27]

Not true.
If you'd glance at another post I made earlier in the thread, I noted that PQIA's own numbers show M1 5W-30 to offer measured physical characteristics superior to those of ST 5W-30, along with a better add pack.
That isn't marketing, it's reality.
I doubt that PQIA has any interest in making anybody feel good about paying more for an engine oil.
If you don't believe the results of a good VOA done by an unbiased third party, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[bbhero]

I tend to agree with you here.. It would be like saying that Mobil Super Synthetic is just as good or better than Mobil 1 EP. It is not. There is actually PAO in the EP lineup that makes it very capable of long intervals. Now, Mobil Super Synthetic is group 3 synthetic that is just fine for shorter runs. There are clearly tier levels to the products that Mobil 1, Pennzoil, Valvoline, Castrol, and even Amsoil put out for sale.
Having said that.. Supertech is like you clearly stated a good/ serviceable oil. Warren oil who makes the Supertech for my area makes a very good version of it. I would tell anyone who didn't want to buy a big name oil that Supertech is a great way to go.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Not true.
If you'd glance at another post I made earlier in the thread, I noted that PQIA's own numbers show M1 5W-30 to offer measured physical characteristics superior to those of ST 5W-30, along with a better add pack.
That isn't marketing, it's reality.
I doubt that PQIA has any interest in making anybody feel good about paying more for an engine oil.
If you don't believe the results of a good VOA done by an unbiased third party, then I don't know what to tell you.


How can you say its a better more effective add pack?
Only tests can reveal what pack works best. Just because there is more of a compound that we know to reduce wear does not mean that oil will reduce wear better. Its also does not mean that oil will perform over the long term better. Piston deposits etc.
PQIA shows both oils being within the standard. It does not show which is more effective.

It only cost pennies, less then pennies to put more additives in any oil, some of the cheapest metals known to mankind are added, its the total makeup of the oil not a few select components. They are more equal then not.

An example, just an analogy, nothing more because I know some people will be surprised.

SHELL Aero, engine oil made for air cooled piston aircraft, comes in many of the same weights we discuss. Shell aero oils contain no zinc or metal anti wear agents of any kind.
The concern? Piston deposits from metallic anti wear agents do far more damage to light air cooled piston aircraft engines then engine wear. (BTW these oils also get FAA approval)

ANYWAY, I am only saying that there are many ways to formulate oils, as a hobby, we come in here examining oils make ups, VOAs, UOAs and think we are qualified to say which oil is superior. Nothing can be further from the truth and most are jaded by a company marketing campaign... We can however, compare UOAs and some times, one oil will show up as a dog in some engines and we will avoid it.

Those dogs sometimes are boutique oils. Just because an oil is full of compounds that we look at, doesnt mean it will be better, long term for the engine. Lets not forget that one single main ingredient in oil is the best anti wear agent of of all and that is the oil itself! The additives perform functions to further enhance the oil, dry start ups, deposits etc. But to much of it is no good either.

As an example, that full loaded with stuff oil might leave behind a lot of piston deposits that one bought, based on the ad pack ... etc. etc... we only see a slice of what makes up modern oils, not the whole picture..

BTW ... Im just discussing here, it comes down to what makes us feel better, I personally do not in anyway believe in extended drain intervals because a company that wants to sell me his product tells me its ok, Ill listen to the guy who built my engine and Ill use the oil grade he recommends and change when he says too. I did at one time believe in a brand or brands but that was then, this is now, when almost all oils are more equal then not.
Super Tech = Warren Oil, very reputable company, Same goes for Citgo, Shell, Mobile, Valvoline etc.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: Justin251
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: Justin251
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02

XOM recommends 10K drains with M1.
Nobody makes any such recommendations for ST nor for any other store brand syn.
IOW, it isn't me making any claim.
Draw your own conclusions.
Your money, your engines, your worries.
Lots of things that are important are not included in API specs, which is the reason that more stringent maker's certs exist.
OTOH, two of your three Toys have exceeded their design life expectancy by a considerable number of miles.
What oil do you use and how long do you run it?


That's because walmart, autozone, etc Are in the selling oil/products business not extending your oci business.

The extended oci is what is selling these oils for mobil, castrol, and pennzoil. Pricepoint is what is selling the in house Warren oils like supertech.

They don't care about the extended oci because thier intended target doesn't either. They are targeting a consumer group that wants good enough not best there is.

And that goes back to the OP's original question:

Originally Posted By: Rex
So what makes this oil cost lower than the others?

And the answer is: because it is designed to be "good enough" and "not the best there is". fdcg27 is just pointing out that one is better than the other and that there is nothing wrong with saying that. The same goes with many things. Some auto parts are better designed and manufactured than others, which is often reflected in the price. Do I need a new alternator that can last 300,000 miles? I doubt it because my vehicles likely won't last that long, but what is wrong with someone making one and charging more for it?


Nothing wrong at all. I'm just saying that in house oils like supertech shouldn't be compared in the grand scheme because they are aimed at two entirely different demographics with two entirely different price points.

It's cheaper because it's designed to meet a price point that's profitable and still good enough for the average consumer without damaging a vehicle.

Pretty simple. Better or worse is all relative.


Okay, if a house brand Grp III is good enough, then why pay more for ST when Farm & Fleet, Rural King and Meijer often have their Grp III house brands on sale for less coin?
For that matter, if good enough is all you seek, then why not just use the least costly API SN oil?
Finally, when you can load up on M1 or D1 for ten bucks a jug or less by stacking store deals and rebates, why even bother with any store brand syn?

Many parts of the USA do not have Farm & Fleet, Rural King, Meijer ... but everyone has Walmart )
Rural King is also Warren Oil so I wouldnt have a problem with it. But I only have Walmart
But you could go the Orielly's Oil here in SC, great sales sometimes, also made by Warren.

BTW, I have NO problems with National Branded oil. I just have nothing against a big company like Warren and Citgo selling oil through generic labels. Depending on the sale, I will pick up any national brand as well. Quite honestly I like Valvoline oils, dont know why, I look at them like specialists, used to be a Quaker State and Castrol Fan too.
There was a place in time, decades ago, where it was safe to stay with companies like that.

 

[Garak]

Let's put it this way. You both make very valid points. Mobil 1 may have better characteristics than a cheaper competitor. But, we know that won't manifest into better lubricant performance for the vast majority of purchasers. People don't buy Mobil 1 because they all want to go 10,000 miles on their oil changes, for example, which is one concrete thing that differentiates that product. They do it because it makes them feel better.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: Y_K

I had a Buick Riviera that I took to 540k on 10k M1 drains. I gave it to a friend, and he till uses that engine in a different body.


Was it one of the 3800 era Riviera's? I always LOVED those cars!! I'd love to find a mint low mileage one of those or another Toronado Trofeo (I had one of those back in the 90s).

 

[salv]

Bottom line is that oil is cheap. Additives are what bring up the price, but even still, engine oil could still sell much cheaper than it does. AZ charges 5.49/qt for their house brand synthetic. They sell it to our shop for $2.75/qt. I can get a 12 quart case of full synthetic Dexos approved Gulftec for $29.
Most people way overpay for oil.

 

[Justin251]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Let's put it this way. You both make very valid points. Mobil 1 may have better characteristics than a cheaper competitor. But, we know that won't manifest into better lubricant performance for the vast majority of purchasers. People don't buy Mobil 1 because they all want to go 10,000 miles on their oil changes, for example, which is one concrete thing that differentiates that product. They do it because it makes them feel better.

Completely agree.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: BrocLuno

There is so much passion in this thread for reasoned arguments and just plain stabs in the dark, it's awe inspiring. I thought I might actually find out about the make-up of ST here, but only one post really delves into the chemistry...

Welcome to the I-net's #1 oil site...

Myself I'll stick with M1 as I've been known to push them to redline and farther, for me worrying about $5, $6, $7 price difference per change is ridiculous...

 

[Y_K]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Was it one of the 3800 era Riviera's?

Yes, it was. And it saw the country coast to coast, North to South and back. Most of the Canada as well.
One could also make a case that it was a different formulation of oil in 1990s. I have no dog in this fight, just fascinated by the diverse choice of quality oils we have here at low prices. And if you have access to some distributors, you could be surprised by even wider lubricant palette and lower prices. My Worldpac has Pentosin, Motul, LM and Total at unbelievable prices. Not that I need that fancy packaging though..

 

[SirTanon]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy

Its that simple, however some people choose to pay 20 to 700 % more for oil because of unproven marketing they think the oil that is 20 to 700 % more expensive is better. But its only better for the oil company to make massive profits.

Its just marketing that makes people feel better and allows the company to extract more money from the customer's pocket. This is ALL industries, not just oil.

Red Line - Mobil 1 - Lucas - Quaker State - Pennzoil - Valvoline, etc, etc ... where is the proof? Do these companies EVER supply you with any facts and real API tests showing their oil surpasses API specs? Nope


Pennzoil is going pretty far to show what their oil can do - They've even got a test program going here to make it 'real world'

Additionally, the PQIA is doing a pretty great job of showing the nitty-gritty on all the oil brands you listed, so I'd say the info is there.

Is SuperTech a good oil? No question about it.

Is Pennzoil Platinum, Mobil 1, or QSUD 'better'? I'd say yes. Their chemical and physical qualities are apparently superior to your 'average' synthetic.

Are they better for EVERYONE? Probably not. Not everyone needs premium Synthetic in their engine. For your every day daily driver, 5k mile OCI, any SN-rated synthetic is as good as any other, IMHO.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
Mobil knows that the only way to make the price point on M-1 palatable is to extend the OCI. They also know that any wear from dirty/contaminated/delpleted oil will be so small that it will only show up somewhere out around 200K+ miles. And the owner that runs M-1 would not likely keep an original motor that long, so they (Mobil) will never hear about "premature" engine death ...

There is so much passion in this thread for reasoned arguments and just plain stabs in the dark, it's awe inspiring. I thought I might actually find out about the make-up of ST here, but only one post really delves into the chemistry...


Yes, and you contribute to it nicely.

What about the makeup of ST oil would you consider noteworthy even if you knew? And what from the types of analysis we see here would you learn anyway? Are you saying you would be able to meaningfully compare two VOAs and make an informed decision about the ultimate wear to an engine?

 

[Oregoonian]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I wouldn't exactly call it cheap at $17.47 for a 5 quart bottle, but it's less expensive than your name brand oil because you're not paying for a bunch of ridiculous advertising.

+1....I'm sure advertising has a large part on pricing.

 

[fdcg27]

I'm aware of the additive packages that oils intended for light piston aircraft don't have.
I think that the primary reason these oils exist is that these ancient design oils are intended for ancient design engines with generous sump capacities along with what would be considered high oil consumption in any road engine of similar power.
These are always very thick grades, and the recommended OCIs, in hours, would equate to a 3K change in any road vehicle.
It was also not that long ago that no multigrade av oils existed and monogrades remain popular.
XOM did briefly market a synthetic oil intended for piston aircraft. It was also fully approved. It showed very low wear in actual tests. It also destroyed a number of engines, since the Grp IV basestock wasn't much good at scavenging lead salts, and avgas contains a substantial amount of lead.
Those engines that ran 80 octane had no problems given the lower lead content of the fuel. Those engines that actually needed 100 octane had no problems, since they ran hot enough that most of the lead was blown out the exhaust valves. Those engines that were designed for the defunct 90 octane grade had real trouble with this oil on 100LL fuel.
Suffice it to say that XOM (it wasn't XOM at the time) bought a bunch of engines for owners.
I guess that this demonstrates that those who formulate M1 aren't infallible.
If a huge corporation that formulates and sells more synthetic oil than any other is liable to error, then what can be said of the smaller contract blenders?
OTOH, for road engine oils you have commercial suppliers of basestocks as well as add packs along with the recipes needed to formulate an oil meeting any given spec between the two.
This makes lower cost complying oils possible.
I'm not sure why I'm even arguing about this, having run a total of 11K in two drains with Meijer synthetic.
I took a sample from the second run and need to send it off to Polaris. I'm curious what this oil will look like after 5K+ pretty easy, mainly highway, miles. My guess is that it'll show substantial TBN depletion as well as shearing, but we'll see.
The car has M1 in it now, but only because it now lives eighty miles away from me and the M1 was ten bucks for the jug after store sale and MIR.
I do feel more comfortable with M1 on what might be an unintended long drain than I would with a store brand oil.
That it was also cheaper makes for an easy decision.

 

[boxcartommie22]

its a cheap oil= cheap price

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
+1....I'm sure advertising has a large part on pricing.

While we do need to note that Walmart doesn't spend a great deal of money advertising their brand of oil per se, Walmart doesn't exactly skimp on advertising. I can't watch TV or open a newspaper or turn on the radio without seeing or hearing something paid for by them.

 

[userfriendly]

If it costs more it must be better. If it costs less, it must be worse.

https://www.facebook.com/ezraklein/videos/10153775718848410