when is fully synthetic is NOT a fully synthetic!

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

The performance of the finished lubricant is what really matters, and Group 3 base oils perform well enough in their finished form that the industry is allowing them to be labeled as "fully synthetic." I have mixed feelings about this. Feelings aside, the point is this: if you are running super long OCIs and/or are really torturing the oil, then you probably should insist on Group 4 or 5 synthetics which are in fact real synthetics and will hold up to these extreme conditions. But in normal vehicles with reasonable OCIs not being wrung out every day, it doesn't matter all that much and Group 3 oils will work just fine. Just be sure it meets the spec required by the manufacturer.

Not just Group 3, but Group 3+ supposedly (is) very highly refined.

 

[kschachn]

There is no Group III+ and it's not "highly refined". Severe hydrocracking is a decomposition and synthesis process unlike traditional refining.

 

[930.engineering]

There's no official 'group 3+'. It's group 3. Most people using the term
'group 3+' are actually talking about GTL (gas to liquid > Fischer-Tropsch)
derived base oils.
Come on, let's not repeat for the 1000th time what we all know for decades.
So yes, the finished products and its performance is what matters, however
performance isn't the same. PAO, AN and esters have their merits. You won't
get around that.
Some people seem to love hearing what they already believe. That's not a
proper way to learn.

EDIT: kschachn was quicker; I'll pass on editing the above

 

[Tifosi]

Both ExxonMobil and Castrol were selling Group III based synthetics world-wide for many years prior to the NAD decision here in the US. Because of this, had the dispute progressed any further ExxonMobil knew they would lose. Your argument has no merit in reality.

Source of this statement?

 

[Trav]

Sorry I believe you are not correct. I could look it up again but I don't see the any point, the difference does not as much difference today as it once did in most applications.

Outside of Germany, partial Synthetic Motor Oils can be labelled as Fully Synthetic Motor Oils. This is not allowed in BIZOL because according to German Law we need to clearly label Fully Synthetic and Partial Synthetic motor oils. In essence, BIZOL’s Synthetic Motor Oils have the highest German quality standards with 100% consumer transparency and protection.

Synthetic Oil

Definition of what is synthetic oil. When you should use synthetic oil. Difference between Synthetic Oil and Conventional Oil.

www.bizol.com

 

[doublebase]

I think in a perfect world we’d all just pay the high price for a PAO and be happy about it. But at the cost of them it’s not worth it for most of us. So, instead we want the “best oil” at the best price, and we want it to be PAO...or have PAO in it, or hope the GTL is as good as a group lV...or that group lll’s are as good as group lV’s with a special additive formula put out by so and so’s newest blend made by so and so. We want the best. We want to know that are decisions are the best. We want to think that we are doing the best for our engine/vehicle and we are helping it. That WE are doing that.

We all know what “real” synthetic oils are. We know what “full synthetic” oils are. We know what we’re putting in our engine probably doesn’t matter all that much, but we still want to think that if we can get a group lll to perform like a PAO, and protect and mast like a PAO...while buying a group lll. We are winning. And I think there’s nothing wrong with that. Welcome to life. For more motivational speaking, join me at my website drinkingpao’s.com

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

Not just Group 3, but Group 3+ supposedly (is) very highly refined.

There is no Group III+ and it's not "highly refined". Severe hydrocracking is a decomposition and synthesis process unlike traditional refining.

There's no official 'group 3+'. It's group 3. Most people using the term
'group 3+' are actually talking about GTL (gas to liquid > Fischer-Tropsch)
derived base oils.
Come on, let's not repeat for the 1000th time what we all know for decades.
So yes, the finished products and its performance is what matters, however
performance isn't the same. PAO, AN and esters have their merits. You won't
get around that.
Some people seem to love hearing what they already believe. That's not a
proper way to learn.

EDIT: kschachn was quicker; I'll pass on editing the above

Thank you.

Conclusion here appears to be that Group 4 and 5 do in fact appear to be better than Group 3; Group 3 includes GTL (now I know this means Gas To Liquid. Did not know that previous. Excellent,) Group 4 is PAO, Group 5 includes Esters.

And I should know this from my visit to High Performance Laboratories but. AN is.. ?
*edit: Appears under the umbrella of Group 5, which is not specifically just esters.

Cover Story

www.stle.org

 

[Tom NJ]

I think in a perfect world we’d all just pay the high price for a PAO and be happy about it. But at the cost of them it’s not worth it for most of us. So, instead we want the “best oil” at the best price, and we want it to be PAO...or have PAO in it, or hope the GTL is as good as a group lV...or that group lll’s are as good as group lV’s with a special additive formula put out by so and so’s newest blend made by so and so. We want the best. We want to know that are decisions are the best. We want to think that we are doing the best for our engine/vehicle and we are helping it. That WE are doing that.

We all know what “real” synthetic oils are. We know what “full synthetic” oils are. We know what we’re putting in our engine probably doesn’t matter all that much, but we still want to think that if we can get a group lll to perform like a PAO, and protect and mast like a PAO...while buying a group lll. We are winning. And I think there’s nothing wrong with that. Welcome to life. For more motivational speaking, join me at my website drinkingpao’s.com

Oil performance beyond what your engine needs to deliver the life and service you want is irrelevant. Nevertheless, I agree that once we know such higher performance exists we tend to want it anyhow. Human nature (or at least BITOG nature).

 

[Pablo]

Oil performance beyond what your engine needs to deliver the life and service you want is irrelevant. Nevertheless, I agree that once we know such higher performance exists we tend to want it anyhow. Human nature (or at least BITOG nature).

This is true.

I enjoy what most all of us do as well - use both sides of this dichotomy.

 

[kschachn]

Source of this statement?

It was noted by Castrol in their testimony and the NAD agreed in their ruling.

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

Oil performance beyond what your engine needs to deliver the life and service you want is irrelevant. Nevertheless, I agree that once we know such higher performance exists we tend to want it anyhow. Human nature (or at least BITOG nature).

Tom, I was trying to find the post to which you which you clicked Like, talking about yield stress in an oil pump - to which, if there is any, could create to taking in air and not oil. I couldn't find it, as I'm working myself, but the topic does sometimes come up about a Positive Displacement oil pump, to which I asked (at my visit to High Performance Lubricants) if there was, then, such thing as a Negative Displacement pump, and the only thing I could think of is if it is already sitting in oil, maybe it's only moving something already inside of it, as opposed to pumping it. If that makes sense, please forgive me if I'm missing something or if a Negative Displacement pump does not exist.

I would then also have a thought to if a Group 4 or Group 5 - or whatever blend of Group 3 and 4, as per Mobil 1 and really many oils, I am sure, all perhaps partially blended.. would have resilience or superiority in such a scenario, of if one performs better or not, or if it is only that either there is yield stress at the oil pump, or there is not.

I would also agree, once you know there is something better, whatever you have isn't good enough. Unless you make peace with it and live your life. How you treat your oil pump matters, that was a lol statement, this last sentence..

 

[Tifosi]

It was noted by Castrol in their testimony and the NAD agreed in their ruling.

Any actual published literature that is open to the public to back this up.

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

I guess what it comes down to is this analogy. If you go to a bakery and order a cake that you pay top dollar for, you expect real whipped cream, not Dream Whip.

But are your expectations lessened if you buy a less expensive cake? Don't many folks here look for less expensive oils, or at least want to pay less for the oil they purchase? Maybe not Dream Whip, put perhaps Reddi Whip.

View attachment 83426

I'll agree with you on that one, Shel_B .. The debate would then be, do the ingredients matter if the finished taste is the same.

The performance of the finished lubricant is what really matters, and Group 3 base oils perform well enough in their finished form that the industry is allowing them to be labeled as "fully synthetic." I have mixed feelings about this. Feelings aside, the point is this: if you are running super long OCIs and/or are really torturing the oil, then you probably should insist on Group 4 or 5 synthetics which are in fact real synthetics and will hold up to these extreme conditions. But in normal vehicles with reasonable OCIs not being wrung out every day, it doesn't matter all that much and Group 3 oils will work just fine. Just be sure it meets the spec required by the manufacturer.

 

[wpod]

Well if x oil and z oil both met the requirements of the manufacturer and let you drive you car to the wrecking yards with equal engine performance why would it matter what the base oil blend is?

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

Well if x oil and z oil both met the requirements of the manufacturer and let you drive you car to the wrecking yards with equal engine performance why would it matter what the base oil blend is?

My High Performance Lubricants EC product testing is answering that question.

High Performance Lubricants Engine Cleaner

That's what is stopping me from pulling the trigger on the engine cleaner, and why I've been holding off. I'm also not sure if I want to mix in a straight 30 grade oil during the winter months, even if it's just a quart. It sounds like a great product though. The viscosity of this product...

bobistheoilguy.com

 

[kschachn]

Any actual published literature that is open to the public to back this up.

I'm confident that you're able to find it as I did many years ago. I no longer have a copy that I can find, perhaps ask the NAD for one? It came about the same time the SAE removed of any reference to "synthetic" in the API EOLCS. This removal didn't happen in a vacuum.

Also if you really wish to disparage someone for their behavior it would be easier to do so IRT the dispute with Pennzoil. That's a whole lot scummier than the one with Mobil from 1999.

 

[MolaKule]

Any actual published literature that is open to the public to back this up.

This is from a technical Journal, Page 1129, but there are more references to be had from a proper google search:

Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants

Highlighting the major economic and industrial changes in the lubrication industry since the first edition, Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants: Chemistry and Technology, Third Edition highlights the major economic and industrial changes in the lubrication industry and outlines...

books.google.com

;

see also, A Defining Moment For Synthetics, By Katherine Bui, published October 1999 Lubricants World .

 

[Jetronic]

Thank you.

Conclusion here appears to be that Group 4 and 5 do in fact appear to be better than Group 3; Group 3 includes GTL (now I know this means Gas To Liquid. Did not know that previous. Excellent,) Group 4 is PAO, Group 5 includes Esters.

And I should know this from my visit to High Performance Laboratories but. AN is.. ?
*edit: Appears under the umbrella of Group 5, which is not specifically just esters.

Cover Story

www.stle.org

Alkylated Naphtalenes

 

[Tifosi]

I'm confident that you're able to find it as I did many years ago. I no longer have a copy that I can find, perhaps ask the NAD for one? It came about the same time the SAE removed of any reference to "synthetic" in the API EOLCS. This removal didn't happen in a vacuum.

Also if you really wish to disparage someone for their behavior it would be easier to do so IRT the dispute with Pennzoil. That's a whole lot scummier than the one with Mobil from 1999.

This is from a technical Journal, Page 1129, but there are more references to be had from a proper google search:

Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants

Highlighting the major economic and industrial changes in the lubrication industry since the first edition, Synthetics, Mineral Oils, and Bio-Based Lubricants: Chemistry and Technology, Third Edition highlights the major economic and industrial changes in the lubrication industry and outlines...

books.google.com

;

see also, A Defining Moment For Synthetics, By Katherine Bui, published October 1999 Lubricants World .

From the journal, page 1129:

"Mobil objected (despite ALLEGEDLY having itself marketed hydroisomerized based stock as "synthetic" in Europe and elsewhere) that Castrol's hyroprocessed Syntec was not synthetic."

We know that back in 1999, that Castrol Syntec IS Group III. With the people here on BITOG being so knowledgeable, resourceful and with an unwavering attention to detail down to the molecular level, are there no data sheet to conclusively identify this to be true or not?

 

[kschachn]

Well I’d say that the subsequent acceptance of that allegation by the NAD is one thing, along with no objection by Mobil and no appeal to the ruling.

But you’re free to continue your objections down to the molecular level if you so desire. From what I was able to find is that the ruling number is 3526 but I was unable to locate it online.