Which synthetic "blend" has the most synthetic?

[otis24]

Which synthetic blend has the most "synthetic"? Is there a comparison chart that shows how much each "blend" has?

 

[Gilitar]

The blend that you make yourself. Honestly don't bother with synthetic blends. You get more for your money by mixing synthetic and dino yourself.

 

[Ray H]

When I called ConocoPhillips consumer hotline shortly after their various brands' synthetic blends were introduced in November, '04 and asked that question, the female voice at the other end said the exact numbers were proprietary but hinted strongly that the synthetic content percentage (assuredly Group III) varied from the low 40s to just under 50 depending on viscosity grade. Keep two things in mind: 1> no way to know whether Miss Information was holding a broom handle in her other hand, or, 2> whether ConocoPhillips has since reformulated the oil. That <i>caveat</i> stated, I still scarfed up all the TropArtic Synthetic Blend I could lay my hands on at Dollar Tree last August. I'm finishing up my first 3,000 mile run with the stuff in my '03 Hyundai 2.7L V6. The engine's at least as quiet as with the older Chevron Supreme SL 10W-30 I had been running and the fuel consumption is at least as good, too. I plan to submit a sample of the 2nd run of T/A, but with my limited driving, that probably won't be until January, 07 at the earliest.

 

[JohnnyO]

Max Life.

 

[surfstar]

Castrol Syntec - all Group III (non 0w30)

 

[Gilitar]

quote:

---

Originally posted by surfstar: Castrol Syntec - all Group III (non 0w30)

---

 

[Blue99]

quote:

---

The blend that you make yourself. Honestly don't bother with synthetic blends. You get more for your money by mixing synthetic and dino yourself.

---

Sure, sure, but what have you really accomplished by mixing two dis-similar additive packages? More than likely, the performance of a friction modifier, viscosity improver, dispersant etc, will be compromised & the additive function won't be at the level found in either of the original formulations. I acknowledge that this "mix your own blend" advice is commonly trotted out, but I've never seen anything that validates the practice.

 

[thooks]

I'm running 2 Honda Accords on 2 qts M1 5W30 and 3 qts of Havoline Dino right now. Neither have blowed up. Yet.

 

[blupupher]

Well, from what I have read here, those that have looked at the MSDS (and know what they are looking at) say anywhere from 15-30% depending on the brand and weight. There is not an industry standard or requirement as to what a blend is, so I guess a maker could have 3 drops of a Grp III per qt and it could be called a blend. As far as making your own, why not. I have a home made brew in my wife's van right now ( 3 qts Mobil 5000 5w-20, 1 qt Mobil 1 0w-20, and 1 qt Penzoil Platinum 5w-20). I may do a UOA on it just to see if it "destroyed" my engine by having such dis-similar additive pacakges.

quote:

---

I acknowledge that this "mix your own blend" advice is commonly trotted out, but I've never seen anything that validates the practice.

---

Ever seen any proof that invalidates it? Oils are made by design to be compatable with any other oil (ever read the back of an oil container?). I highly doubt that by mixing a syn and a dino there would be any adverse effects. Probably tens or hundreds of thousands of drivers do this mixing (intentionaly or not) and vehicles run just fine. Now is there really any benifit to doing it? I really don't know. I did it because it is what I had handy.

 

[Blue99]

quote:

---

I'm running 2 Honda Accords on 2 qts M1 5W30 and 3 qts of Havoline Dino right now.

---

Well, here's a good example. What is the 100C viscosity of your home brew? The viscosity improvers in the 3 qts of Havoline dino have been diluted by the M1 5W-30. And the balanced blend of 4-8-10 cSt PAO base oils, to reach the 100C viscosity target, have been upset by the mostly 5 cSt base oils in the Havoline. And what happens to the performance of the 300+ parts of moly in Havoline, now that it is diluted?

 

[Blue99]

Blupupher - If you re-read my post, nothing was mentioned about destroying or blowing up an engine. Yes, the base oils are fully compatible - are the additives still functioning at the same level? My statement is still the same - "Are you gaining anything?" Anyone familar with my posts over the last 3 years understands that I'm not anti-mixing. However, I've learned enough about oil formulations that I have trouble with the idea of blindly mixing a dino & a full synthetic and claiming that the performance will be better than the conventional oil.

 

[JohnnyO]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue99: However, I've learned enough about oil formulations that I have trouble with the idea of blindly mixing a dino & a full synthetic and claiming that the performance will be better than the conventional oil.

---

He could just run Havoline on a 5000 mile OCI and fugheddaboutit.

 

[LarryL]

Can the price indicate the percentage, except for Castrol products, GIV prices for GIII oil.

 

[LouDawg]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ray H: When I called ConocoPhillips consumer hotline shortly after their various brands' synthetic blends were introduced in November, '04 and asked that question, the female voice at the other end said the exact numbers were proprietary but hinted strongly that the synthetic content percentage (assuredly Group III) varied from the low 40s to just under 50 depending on viscosity grade. Keep two things in mind: 1> no way to know whether Miss Information was holding a broom handle in her other hand, or, 2> whether ConocoPhillips has since reformulated the oil. That caveat stated, I still scarfed up all the TropArtic Synthetic Blend I could lay my hands on at Dollar Tree last August. I'm finishing up my first 3,000 mile run with the stuff in my '03 Hyundai 2.7L V6. The engine's at least as quiet as with the older Chevron Supreme SL 10W-30 I had been running and the fuel consumption is at least as good, too. I plan to submit a sample of the 2nd run of T/A, but with my limited driving, that probably won't be until January, 07 at the earliest.

---

Same here...TropArtic is a good SynBlend and is my ooc for now. Contrary to Gilitar's comment, it is certainly not a waste of time, probably has a fairly high synthetic (perhaps even as much as 50%, GIII?) content, and has good overall numbers...I'm happy so far, but my UOA in a few weeks will hopefully confirm my beliefs. It makes much more sense, to me, to use this syn blend which has already been engineered and formulated with the appropriate additive packs (by people who know about these things) than the witches' brew you might mix up in your garage. Your own mix may be great, but how do you know for sure unless you do some UOA's or even VOA's after the mix? (No disrespect intended to all you mixers out there, who I'm sure have had great success.) But it would be hard to do it for $1.48/quart! Terry had an earlier post that suggested perhaps that TA may even have some good PAO/Ester content, but I don't know that this has been validated...

 

[JAG]

I never the saw the point in synthetic blends from the consumers' standpoint. If you are cheap, get a dino oil. If you aren't cheap, get a full synthetic. It seems to me that there shouldn't be a fine enough distinction in cheapness for there to be such thing as a "semi-cheap oil buyer". I'm sure that the history of this is that some genius in the marketing dept of an oil company decided to diversify their product line by adding a "sort of synthetic oil" in the hopes of making more overall sales. Then his co-worker, who is better with wording than he, suggested the term "semi-synthetic" in place of "sort of synthetic".

 

[blupupher]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue99: Blupupher - If you re-read my post, nothing was mentioned about destroying or blowing up an engine. ...

---

That was not refering to you particularly, I know you did not say it would destroy my engine, but others here have taken that approach. Only the stuff after your quote was really aimed at you.

quote:

---

My statement is still the same - "Are you gaining anything?" ...

---

I kinda agree (and basicaly said so in my last sentence). Nothing personal.

 

[jeepman]

I've done some blending in the past, but I always felt more comfortable with staying within the same manufacturer when mixing. An example would be using a 50/50 mix of ST Full Synth and Traveller dino, both made by Warren Performance. I have also done a 50/50 of Pennzoil dino and Platinum. The only reason I did it was to bring down the overally cost of the oil change, and to insure that I was getting a good percentage of Synth in there. The ST/Traveller mix was about $9.50 per car versus $12.50 for straight Synth, and the Pennzoil was about $13.50 versus $19 for a full synth change. I always felt that if I stayed within brands, I would get chemically similar oils mixing to minimize the possiblity of bad reaction between adder packs. I only use Full Synth in those cars now, so the experiment is done for me. Didn't really see any benefit other than lower cost, and I have convinced myself to spend the extra few bucks and keep it simple.

 

[vad]

quote:

---

Originally posted by otis24: Which synthetic blend has the most "synthetic"? Is there a comparison chart that shows how much each "blend" has?

---

Wouldn't it be more of a concern to know which oil performs better on a whole, not just some useless speculation about the blends formula?

 

[vad]

quote:

---

Originally posted by surfstar: Castrol Syntec - all Group III (non 0w30)

---

Wrong. In addition to Group III, it's got group IV and probably some Group V in it.

 

[LouDawg]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JAG: I never the saw the point in synthetic blends from the consumers' standpoint. If you are cheap, get a dino oil. If you aren't cheap, get a full synthetic. It seems to me that there shouldn't be a fine enough distinction in cheapness for there to be such thing as a "semi-cheap oil buyer". I'm sure that the history of this is that some genius in the marketing dept of an oil company decided to diversify their product line by adding a "sort of synthetic oil" in the hopes of making more overall sales. Then his co-worker, who is better with wording than he, suggested the term "semi-synthetic" in place of "sort of synthetic".

---

Wow, that's quite a story...do you write children's books on the side? Labeling people as "cheap" or "semi-cheap" or "not cheap" is silly and simply an attempt to pigeonhole those who disagree with one's ideas. I can afford any synthetic oil I want and change it as often as I'd like. But if I can buy excellent performing (by all accounts I've read and my own experience) synthetic blends like TropArtic or MotorCraft and usually pay less money ($1.48 for TropArtic, $1.90 for MotorCraft), why is that a bad thing? Those are less expensive than *most* of the brand name and/or good dino oils, and not much more than SuperTech dino. Let me lay it out for you: 1. It's less expensive than most dinos 2. It performs better than most dinos 3. It easily surpasses all manufacturer recommendations 4. I can safely use it for OCI's of 5k-7.5K It's not a matter of "cheapness", it's a matter of getting a good oil for a good price...I believe we call that "value". This isn't really that difficult.