I wanted to get a new TBN baseline, as well as check if anything had changed.
From Blackstone:
[ July 01, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: MNgopher ]
From Blackstone:
[ July 01, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: MNgopher ]
Valvoline Durablend 5w30
- Thread starter MNgopher
- Start date
- Status
Unless Valvoline has got some "secret ingredient" that doesn't show up in these analyses, I don't know how they get away with selling this stuff. Just like the VOA of conventional Valavoline, this analysis shows next to nothing in the way of an additive package. No moly, no boron, and very low zinc and phos. Where's the "beef" when it comes to EP/AW?
I wouldn't use this stuff to oil the chain on a bicycle, much less put it in an engine I owned.
I wouldn't use this stuff to oil the chain on a bicycle, much less put it in an engine I owned.
G-Man II, I agree with your analysis. We had a VOA on All-Climate about a year ago and it posted similar vanilla numbers.
The stuff looks exceptionally unexceptional and it's why I rank Valvoline last among the major brands. It appears like they formulated this stuff (a Group II and NOT a II+) as cheaply as possible to meet specs.
And to think that I once thought this was one of the better brands of oil available. Oh the power of marketing and hype.
Valvoline UOAs on this site have been OK ... but again, nothing exceptional.
--- Bror Jace
The stuff looks exceptionally unexceptional and it's why I rank Valvoline last among the major brands. It appears like they formulated this stuff (a Group II and NOT a II+) as cheaply as possible to meet specs.
And to think that I once thought this was one of the better brands of oil available. Oh the power of marketing and hype.
Valvoline UOAs on this site have been OK ... but again, nothing exceptional.
--- Bror Jace
No takers?
OK, its Chevron Supreme 10w30.
Last I checked this oil was well regarded on this site as perhaps the best dino oil on the market (or at least the best value).
Another oil with nearly the same add pack as seen by analysis is trashed simply by name.
My point: be careful condeming an oil so quickly here in the VOA section.
I'm really beginning to think UOAs and VOAs should be done without the name of the oil first since it seems one name or another has an influence on reactions.
OK, its Chevron Supreme 10w30.
Last I checked this oil was well regarded on this site as perhaps the best dino oil on the market (or at least the best value).
Another oil with nearly the same add pack as seen by analysis is trashed simply by name.
My point: be careful condeming an oil so quickly here in the VOA section.
I'm really beginning to think UOAs and VOAs should be done without the name of the oil first since it seems one name or another has an influence on reactions.
Lets see, Valvoline gets beat up for this add pack. Anyone care to guess which oil I am comparing it to below?
[ July 01, 2003, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: MNgopher ]
[ July 01, 2003, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: MNgopher ]
From an unscientific point of view: Valvoline Durablend makes my Saturns run like crap and consume oil at a high rate (1 qt every 250 miles). My Valvoline Horror Story
Conversely, even if the numbers on paper aren't great, the Chevron Supreme 10w-30 has my Saturn running flawlessly, and no noticeable oil is being burned.
On paper, the Durablend may have an edge over the Chevron, but my frustrating experience with this product has shown otherwise. I'll stick with the Chevron from here on out with my Saturn DOHC. I'm just glad I never put the Durablend in my 1999 Toyota Sienna V6!
Only problem is Durablend is NOT Valvolines synthetic product - Synpower is.
Durablend did not cause your problem, unless you didn't get the oil you actually paid for.
Durablend did not cause your problem, unless you didn't get the oil you actually paid for.
Chevron recently reformulated their add pack. Until about 6 months ago, Chevron Supreme was a no moly, low boron oil, and produced stellar results. That is the version I compared to.
Short story is, I think trying to evaluate an oil based on a VOA alone is not worth the time. The Virgin specs tell very little about how the oil will perform.
I had these done to get a baseline on some other runs, and I wanted the Virgin TBN.
Short story is, I think trying to evaluate an oil based on a VOA alone is not worth the time. The Virgin specs tell very little about how the oil will perform.
I had these done to get a baseline on some other runs, and I wanted the Virgin TBN.
MNGopher, you have a good point. I got bitten by this when I saw a VOA on lubromoly a while back. Looked very plain, very few additives ... then saw a UOA on it a few months later. Great results ... although I saw only that one sample.
I was originally impressed with Chevron's base oils but this early impression was bolstered by UOAs I saw on this site. And, as you pointed out they have recently updated the formula with moly and boron ... regarded by most of us here as "winners."
Valvoline's base oils are of an indifferent quality (Group II and Group III as their "synthetic") and a few of us have noted anecdotal evidence (consumption, noise, etc ...) that their resulting oil is just not that great.
--- Bror Jace
I was originally impressed with Chevron's base oils but this early impression was bolstered by UOAs I saw on this site. And, as you pointed out they have recently updated the formula with moly and boron ... regarded by most of us here as "winners."
Valvoline's base oils are of an indifferent quality (Group II and Group III as their "synthetic") and a few of us have noted anecdotal evidence (consumption, noise, etc ...) that their resulting oil is just not that great.
--- Bror Jace
Dont feel bad gopher, I still like valvoline
Im doing some more testing on mine, my first run on some maxlife turned out great from a wear standpoint... and I've never had an issue with durablend in previous engines. I'll be doing a lot of valvoline testing though, so keep looking at the UOAs
Im doing some more testing on mine, my first run on some maxlife turned out great from a wear standpoint... and I've never had an issue with durablend in previous engines. I'll be doing a lot of valvoline testing though, so keep looking at the UOAs
Oh, believe me, I don't feel any need to defend Valvoline. And even if I did, it would be a tough job around here given the brand reaction that seems to come up a lot around here!
My personal opinion is that these oils have performed fine in my applications given the conditions they have been run in. I still think people who seen some of the analysis of my oil forget that most of them were done in weather where the average temp was around 14 Degrees for much of the interval. Most other oils would have struggled here too!
My personal opinion is that these oils have performed fine in my applications given the conditions they have been run in. I still think people who seen some of the analysis of my oil forget that most of them were done in weather where the average temp was around 14 Degrees for much of the interval. Most other oils would have struggled here too!
MNgopher, I do not know about others but I did not hear anything positive about Chevron Supreme until the recent reformulation. I also have not been hear for 6 month either so that could explain it as well. I do not think I would have gone near Chevron Supreme with out the recent reformulation! Chevron Supreme is the first Dino oil I have used since 1988! SO my first UOA with it will determine if i go back to synthetic.
Valvoline gives their oil away at some insanely low prices a couple times a year. I have always considered them the price leader in many places I lived and as such an inferior product. Growing up is was pretty common to see Valvoline for 1/2 the price of all the other major brands especialy if you bought it by the case! They have slowly raised the price of valvoline to a point that they are seldom a bargin any more other then when on sale.
Valvoline gives their oil away at some insanely low prices a couple times a year. I have always considered them the price leader in many places I lived and as such an inferior product. Growing up is was pretty common to see Valvoline for 1/2 the price of all the other major brands especialy if you bought it by the case! They have slowly raised the price of valvoline to a point that they are seldom a bargin any more other then when on sale.
Dominic, the Max-Life you used was the moly-heavy original formula, right? Yes, that was good stuff. Too bad they took the moly out of it ... at a time when most blenders were adding moly to their oils.
"Oh, believe me, I don't feel any need to defend Valvoline. And even if I did, it would be a tough job around here given the brand reaction that seems to come up a lot around here!"
My anti-Valvoline stance is because they tout themselves as one of the best oils going and that simply isn't true. An indifferent base oil and skimpy additive package screams "mediocre" to me. Also, they lied to me (as well as others) on the phone telling us that Synpower was PAO and Max-Life used a Group III base oil. That sort of thing goes a long way with me ... in the wrong direction.
"My personal opinion is that these oils have performed fine in my applications given the conditions they have been run in. I still think people who seen some of the analysis of my oil forget that most of them were done in weather where the average temp was around 14 Degrees for much of the interval. Most other oils would have struggled here too!"
True, but you'll have a hard time finding a bad SL/GF-3 oil. Any major brand should be able to do as good or better than Valvoline. There simply isn't anything special about it ... 'cept it's heavy sponsorship of racing and the ASE mechanics.
--- Bror Jace
"Oh, believe me, I don't feel any need to defend Valvoline. And even if I did, it would be a tough job around here given the brand reaction that seems to come up a lot around here!"
My anti-Valvoline stance is because they tout themselves as one of the best oils going and that simply isn't true. An indifferent base oil and skimpy additive package screams "mediocre" to me. Also, they lied to me (as well as others) on the phone telling us that Synpower was PAO and Max-Life used a Group III base oil. That sort of thing goes a long way with me ... in the wrong direction.
"My personal opinion is that these oils have performed fine in my applications given the conditions they have been run in. I still think people who seen some of the analysis of my oil forget that most of them were done in weather where the average temp was around 14 Degrees for much of the interval. Most other oils would have struggled here too!"
True, but you'll have a hard time finding a bad SL/GF-3 oil. Any major brand should be able to do as good or better than Valvoline. There simply isn't anything special about it ... 'cept it's heavy sponsorship of racing and the ASE mechanics.
--- Bror Jace
Chevron Supreme has always shown good results, even before the recent reformulation. Pleanty of UOA's to back that up too. I wouldn't bother me to use either formulation.
Valvoline has never been the "cheap" oil around here. That titel has usually been applied to the citgo oils - which still can be had for about 49 cents a quart about every other month...
As far as tech support goes, they are usually the last to know about any product formulation changes. While I wouldn't be happy getting incorrect answers either, I've had it happen with several other oil manufacturers as oil forulations were in flux. Not trying to defend them, just pointing out I've had the same experience with others as we rolled into the SL product rollout. Heck, Mobil 1 has changed their formulation 4 times now since the SL rollout happened without saying boo about it. Wonder what answer tech support would give you..
MNGopher, I hear what you're saying about tech support. If it had just been the PAO/Synpower thing I'd be inclined to agree with you but I got the feeling I was talking to a chemist ... but I can't be sure as it was a couple years ago now and I didn't take copious notes.
As for the Max-Life, Johnny tells me that there was NEVER any group III in Max-Life. So that one seems to have been a pre-planned lie ... one which was told to another oil aficianado buddy of mine at the time.
I can see these folks making honest mistakes, but these incidents just leave me with a queasy feelin'.
--- Bror Jace
As for the Max-Life, Johnny tells me that there was NEVER any group III in Max-Life. So that one seems to have been a pre-planned lie ... one which was told to another oil aficianado buddy of mine at the time.
I can see these folks making honest mistakes, but these incidents just leave me with a queasy feelin'.
--- Bror Jace
I like the idea of VOA without knowing the oil brand/type first. Perceptions cloud reality (thats why advertising works subliminally even though we all insist it doesn't). How about we make this std procedure?
Gopher, I, too, like the anonymous idea. I suspect that we'd get feedback and opinions with less baggage attached.
In the other forum right now, there is a post suggesting or speculating on the death of science, the implication being that the method itself is not understood or that other considerations/desires subvert the process of honest, detached, disinterested evaluation.
Science is dead, when brand loyalty or brand aversion colors one's assessment of an oil analysis. And you know, we see it here all the time.
In the other forum right now, there is a post suggesting or speculating on the death of science, the implication being that the method itself is not understood or that other considerations/desires subvert the process of honest, detached, disinterested evaluation.
Science is dead, when brand loyalty or brand aversion colors one's assessment of an oil analysis. And you know, we see it here all the time.
- Status