Lubro-Moly 5W40 Group 4?

[priler]

Originally Posted By: Tusin
Anyone have any input on the 0w40 version? http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/produktdb.nsf/id/usa_2049.html

I was at my local NAPA and it still says Fully Synthetic on the bottle. I have a Audi 2.0T



if you are referring to the whole "full synthetic" debate,imo,it is a true PAO oil with esters.it also has a small amount of some kind of propietary mineral base carrier oil at about 5%(imo,that 5% is simply not enough to properly balance a PAO oil)

i will be contacting them to ask further questions some time in the future.i believe that liqui-moly synthoil energy 0w-40,is one of the best 0w-40 oils out there.

as to what is the "best" oil for those audi engines,that has been long debated on this site.

 

[330indy]

Did you contact LM? What was the outcome?
Thanks

 

[Falcon_LS]

Synthoil High Tech 5W-40 is a Group IV oil. Synthoil Premium, which is USDM only, is a Group III.

 

[330indy]

anyone know of a good source for the Synthoil High Tech?

 

[Falcon_LS]

I reckon what you find it will be an old batch that wasn't sold, as they no longer sell Synthoil High Tech in the US Market.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted By: Dr. E
Base stock has little to do with performance?? Base stock is a major variable in lubricant performance. Not the only variable, but a very important one. There are "real differences among Group I to Group V oils. Moreover, unlike Group IV an Group V base stocks, Group III base stocks have a good deal of variation among different suppliers and blenders of motor oils. If individuals on this forum have come to believe that base stocks are unimportant in oil formulation, then further examination and study would appear to be necessary.


Well if all of the oils, of the same weight, carry the same OEM approval you're looking for does it really matter whether it's Group III+ or Gr 4, 5?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted By: priler
Originally Posted By: ourfamo4
I believe that any European company has to list the oils correctly on their sites.

Lubro Moly lists "fully synthetic" http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/produktdb.nsf/id/usa_2040.html
& http://www.liqui-moly.de/liquimoly/produktdb.nsf/id/e_1306.html

Pentosin does list the same oils between both DE & US sites - http://www.pentosin.de/shop.php?c=214,230

I believe the oils listed under "Fully Synthetic" are all GRP IV products. But I do not know for sure.


nope,have to disagree.your implying that any european company has to label ONLY those oils that are grp4 and 5 as fully synthetic over here and can not label them as such if they are grp 3.....i think not.

in the pentosin site,you will find the pento high performance 5w-40 under HC-synthetic technologies.both this oil and the performance II(a newer version i believe specifically formulated for international markets,including north america),are discribed as fully synthetic over here....but there are only three oils that are under fully-synthetic technologies on their site.




Pento SP3 is a Group 4 IIRC.

 

[330indy]

Synthoil Premium is labeled as "Synthetic Technology" = same labeling on its noted HC Technology oils. hydrocracked.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Dr. E
Base stock has little to do with performance?? Base stock is a major variable in lubricant performance. Not the only variable, but a very important one. There are "real differences among Group I to Group V oils. Moreover, unlike Group IV an Group V base stocks, Group III base stocks have a good deal of variation among different suppliers and blenders of motor oils. If individuals on this forum have come to believe that base stocks are unimportant in oil formulation, then further examination and study would appear to be necessary.


In your 33 post tenure you have not come to see what the typical characteristic of consumption is. I do not argue that there are substantial chemical differences from group I to V. They certainly do make a difference in product performance. That said, it is the performance of the fully formulated end product that is of consequence here.

lots of people come on here looking for the supposed value proposition wanting only group IV oils in their product. Others coem looking to buy based upon cold viscosity, pour point or something else. The reality is that the base fluid could have all the best specs in the world, but it is the long term performance under first a disciplined test regimen, then in the real world in terms of wear rates, consumption behavior, etc. that really matters.

For the average user there is no notable benefit or difference in using a bottom of the barrel oil or a top of the line syn, if they both meet the correct viscosity and API rating. Sure, there are differences, but for the average user, the differences would never be noted and the add packs can have as much to do with the performance of the oil as the basestock does. For the most part, nobody on here is looking for racing, extreme power runs, etc unless they specifically say so. While some situations may require niche lubes, again, for the average consumer it is mainly peace of mind being purchased going to better lubes (or mfr requirements, which are critical), and most of the benefit will never be used.

Does that make it not worth it? Nope. What it does is make the choice of lube fall along which relevant specs and real-world performances are key to it, and not following some basestock argument for someone trying to get some perceived "value" because of some mismarketing that Castrol did years ago.