Motorcraft 5-20 semi-synth vs Supertech Synth5W-30

[dave1251]

Quote:

---

I would pick Motorcraft due to the better additive package. I would suspect the base oil is better in the Motorcraft..

---

Primary group III basestock vs Primary Group II/III.

CP inports there group III from Korea. Why it's cheaper for them to do that than hydrocrack it themselves. So how high quailiy is it? For all we know they both have the same add pack right now.

That all being said I will go with the motorcraft for this application.

 

[sxg6]

Where proof that MC has the better additive package? Don't point me to voa's or uoa's which show higher amounts of additives because that doesn't mean anything.

 

[goodvibes]

Well then what does? Are you suggesting ST is using a secret add or expensive antimony? I think not. I think that MC's needs is keeping the bar high on the CP line due to it's most common use in warranty Ford vehicles. I thought that when they added B without otherwise compromising an already great performing blend, it spoke volumes about the product. That said WM synth has always performed well in UOAs but when it comes to adds, MC looks better.

 

[fred0803]

Your car is spec'd out at 5/20. I can't believe this post actually.
The MC 5/20 is a great oil, use it with confidence and don't nickel and dime oil changes.

 

[Mustang_Cougar]

Quote:

---

Your car is spec'd out at 5/20. I can't believe this post actually.
The MC 5/20 is a great oil, use it with confidence and don't nickel and dime oil changes.

---

Um...ST Synthetic is more expensive than all of the CP flavors (with Motorcraft being the most expensive). To "nickel and dime" this oil change would be to use the MC 5w20, not the ST Synthetic.

That said, if the vehicle calls for 5w20, use the MC 5w20.

 

[Ray H]

Quote:

---

I believe there is a FTC ruling of minimum 15% Group III or higher in Synthetic Blend.

---

Baloney, there's no such mandate (not that there shouldn't be...). I did wriggle out of an "engineer" during a phone call to ConocoPhillips a couple of weeks ago, though, that the "synthetic content" of T/A 10W-30 was "well in excess of 25%". She went on to stress that the synthetic content increased further with their 5W-30, and further, yet, with their 5W-20 motor oils. I asked whether CP blended and bottled Motorcraft oils for Ford. After a bit of discussion about that subject being proprietry information, she finally acknowledged that, "they could be". (I thanked her and quit while I was even - I think she told me as much as she could in a round-about manner without getting her rear end in a sling if the call was being monitored...)

 

[LouDawg]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I believe there is a FTC ruling of minimum 15% Group III or higher in Synthetic Blend.

---

Baloney, there's no such mandate (not that there shouldn't be...). I did wriggle out of an "engineer" during a phone call to ConocoPhillips a couple of weeks ago, though, that the "synthetic content" of T/A 10W-30 was "well in excess of 25%". She went on to stress that the synthetic content increased further with their 5W-30, and further, yet, with their 5W-20 motor oils. I asked whether CP blended and bottled Motorcraft oils for Ford. After a bit of discussion about that subject being proprietry information, she finally acknowledged that, "they could be". (I thanked her and quit while I was even - I think she told me as much as she could in a round-about manner without getting her rear end in a sling if the call was being monitored...)

---

That's good info, Ray...thanks for the post. I also didn't think there was a 15% minimum (or any minimum) for syn-blends, but I didn't have the proof to dispute it. (I guess it's hard to prove something that doesn't exist, i.e. "When did you stop beating your wife?")

Having said all that, I feel very, very good about using MC 5W-20 in both my Honda Accord 3.0L V6 and in the Ford Escape 2.3L I4. I'm also glad they both call for 5W-20.

Yay, me!!!!

 

[sxg6]

I still put a lot of faith into what Mannix said about ST Syn, Durablend, and GTX using a very good additive package from Oronite. The recent uoa's from all these oils have been excellent, and we have to remember there is much more to an oil than what we see in a voa or uoa. I wish we could have his input on this subject, but we here at bitog have a tendencey to.. Well I'll just quote him since he said it best.

Quote:

---

JohnBrowning, No doubt the the Chevron products are fine. An engine using their oils will last a long, long time, as would any of the quality lubricants. I am partial to a strategy of using a higher concentration of calcium compounds as the secondary anti wear elements such as GTX, ST synthetic, and Valv. duraBlend to name a few. In my business they have shown better performance. But this is only based on my professional opinion. BTW, I have done alot of rersearch on this site the last few days because I have been on sick leave. There seems to be a history of trashing peoples opinions, banning people when they dont walk the line of the regulars and site sponsors, and putting too much reliance on what some people write, but some of the technical things they have written are copied and pasted word for word from the lubrizol website. I too have in the past been asked to verify my credentials(to which I dont mind)very aggressively. I have seen a fellow banned who worked in the technical dept at Exxon Mobil because he stated that the famed german variety of castrol had base oils refined to GroupIII levels. I have seen a fellow by the name of Russ Knize trashed because he questioned the need for oil analysis and trends with results in the low PPM range as being in the noise floor, which they are. I agree with these folks, so maybe I need to contribute elswhere.

---

 

[Gene K]

Well I know MC seems to hold its TBN very well through 7500 mi. Almost as well as Pennzoil Platinum Synthetic.
I have not seen enough evidence to convince me that ST Syn does as well.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

When someone pops up and starts to make statements as if they are fact he should be very certain that he is correct and his examples hold water. It has been shown time and again on this forum that any statements will be held up to severe scrutiny.
Most of the previous malcontents were wrong in their assertions and either withdrew or had to be handled otherwise by the fine BITOG moderating staff. Mannix lacked the courage to stick around for scrutiny and lost any credibility he gained with me by ducking out. So should we believe someone who did not want to have his Identity revealed or perhaps he said too much that he shouldn't have (which he probably did) and had to stop posting to protect himself. Either way it did not strike me as wise.

If the car specs 5w20 use the MC 5w20.

 

[Throckmorton]

As a newb I'm curious to know what the downside would be to using a 5W-30 oil in a car spec'd for 5W-20 - especially a synthetic 5W-30. I can see how organic 5W-20 > 5W-30, but we're looking at synthetic here. My old Acura CL-S used 5W-30 and I can't believe the Accord's engine is that different.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

There is nothing magic about the term synthetic that makes it automaticaly better. It does magically earn marketers more money for a product. The 5w20 would work much better regardless of if the 5w30 is labeled synthetic or not.

 

[SrDriver]

We use Motorcraft 5W20 in both of our vehicles. Would consider Supertech if they came out with a 5W20 weight at a reasonable price.