Hydrocracking?SemiSynth? I'm confused.....

[kyle morley]

Been reading this group for a while, but got some questions I'm having trouble figuring out the answers too:

Does hydrocracking make just a better dino, or a semi/near synthetic?

Is Chevron supreme conventional dino or hydrocracked?

Which is better (in, let's say, a 5-30) - Chevron or Motorcraft?

Do semi-synthetics/blends have any real benefits over dino? I would think with 70% or so dino they would behave pretty much like dinos in things like sludging.

Oh, it seems to me that the cheapest possible Group III "synthetic" would offer the most bang for the buck - anything wrong with the Walmart house brand?

 

[Dr. T]

Hydrocracking is a process whereby Group III oils are made.

A semi-synth. oil will have either Group III or IV oils mixed with Group II (conventional/dino) up to 18% of the total volume (from recollection).

 

[Ugly3]

kyle morley - Oh, it seems to me that the cheapest possible Group III "synthetic" would offer the most bang for the buck - anything wrong with the Walmart house brand?

This is the question of the century around here. From what I see posted there are a lot of theoretical objections to Group III type synthetics. There are a few folks who swear by them and not enough used oil analysis data to draw a conclusion.

If someone has some good objective data please post it so we all can learn.

 

[HolesInTheHead]

quote:

---

A semi-synth. oil will have either Group III or IV oils mixed with Group II (conventional/dino) up to 18% of the total volume (from recollection). [/QB]

---

The Motocraft synth blend seems to have about 40%, if I read the MSDS correctly.

 

[kyle morley]

Now how about the plain old Motorcraft 5-30 - people seem to be saying it has cracked stocks in it, does that make it a low end semi or a better dino?


[/QUOTE]The Motocraft synth blend seems to have about 40%, if I read the MSDS correctly. [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

[Ken2]

Here's some information
http://www.chevron.com/prodserv/BaseOils/isodewax.shtml
http://www.chevron.com/prodserv/BaseOils/faq_main.shtml
Keep in mind that Chevron has licensed many oil refiners to use this technology. Also, many oil blenders buy base oil from various sources as price and availablity dictate. Motorcraft doesn't blend oil...they buy it from a blender and put the Motorcraft label on it.

Base oil is about 80% of motor oil. The remaining 20% is the additive package of detergents, dispersants, antiwear agents, antioxidants, friction modifiers, corrosion inhibitors, antifoamants, etc.

Group I base oil is the lowest quality and lowest cost. Group II has a higher viscosity index (thins less when hot) and more resistance to oxidation...and costs more. Group III is very highly refined petroleum with the legal right to be called synthetic. It has an even higher viscosity index and even more resistance to oxidation. Group IV is polyalphaolefins, real synthetic, with very high performance including higher film strength. Group V is all base oils not in the other groups.

Finished motor oil can be made from any of these groups singly or in combination. Conventional motor oil is best made from Group II or higher quality II+. It can also be made from Group I plus a costlier additive pack. Or from a mixture of Group I and Group II or II+. It all depends on what quality the oil maker wishes to make and the relative costs of the various ingredients. We'll see more of this when GF-4 oils are introduced and some makers use cheap Group I base oil mixed with Group III as a correction fluid so they don't have to buy expensive Group II or II+ which will be in short supply. They'll advertise these as synthetic blends, but they're nothing special. Both the new GF-4 and the new Dexron-III(H) oils require higher quality base oils, and there isn't enought to go around economically.

There are different quality levels of the Group III "synthetic" base oil. I don't think the lower Group III products are worth what they ask in price. I think the best bang for the buck will be a top conventional oil or a Group IV synthetic run its full life.


Ken

 

[Losiho]

Just extending this question a little, can someone explain the difference between "regular" Group 3 Hydrocracked oil and Shell's XHVI, and which offers better performance ?

I did a search, but I suck and sciences and chemestry, so it's a little confusing

 

[HolesInTheHead]

kyle, the hydrocrack/synthetic blend 5W-30 also looks good.

http://seweb1.phillips66.com/hes/MSDS.nsf/MSDSID/US776108/$file/776108.pdf

Guys, am I reading the msds correctly? 40-42% synthetic base oil?

 

[Bugshu]

Oil as it is refined is cracked or broken into smaller molecules and pieces. To oversimplify the matter, a thin gasoline is worth more to the consumer than a thick sludgy crude oil. As oil is cracked or refined a great deal of hydrogen is lost at the molecular level. Hydrocracking adds the hydrogen back into the picture and helps to maintain the integrity of the carbon molecule. Pollutants such as sulphur are more easily removed and separated from the carbon molecules used in motor oils and gasoline.

Hydrocracking oil is an effective way to improve the integrity and purity of oil that is being broken, cracked, and refined into useful products.

Oil sells in different grades. You have Brent Light Sweet Crude which doesnt have a lot of pollutants down to West Texas Intermediate down to Arabian Sour crude that is truly a sludge monster oil.

Oil companies and refineries these days can take the worst nastiest oils pumped out of the ground and filter them and crack them and make useful products out of them.

To simplify matters greatly, hydrocracked oil is oil with hydrogen added back into the refining process so that oil molecules can maintain integrity when cracked or broken into useful products and pollutants can then afterwards be more easily removed. Its a technique for cleaning oil so that it can be more highly refined and made into higher quality products.

Most refineries filter, crack, or refine oil in some manner to make production easier and there are different terms for their process.

Hydrocracking seems to get good press but other techniques also help. Its unlikely that in most motor oils one would see much sulphur or pollutants that perhaps slipped through the process in decades past.

Still, there does seem to be a difference in the grades of motor oil basestock and hydrocracking is a good technique for purifying oil for its intended use.

I hope this helps.

Happy Motoring All,

Bugshu

 

[kdcdq]

Quote Ken2:
"There are different quality levels of the Group III "synthetic" base oil. I don't think the lower Group III products are worth what they ask in price.".

My $.02 response:

A few weeks ago several Houston-area Wal$mart stores had a clearance sale to get rid of the 5-quart jugs of SuperTech full synthetic oil in both 5W30 and 10W30 viscosities. At one store, I found and bought ten jugs of this oil; each jug was only $10.

Thats right, only $2.00/quart for what is generally considered to be a 'low-end' Group III "synthetic" oil.

The way I see it, I can use an OCI of 3K miles for basicly the same cost as a 6K OCI using M1, and I can sleep well at night knowing that I am not pushing the OCI limit trying to squeeze out more OCI miles in an attempt to justify the cost of more high-end Group III+ synthetics.

Any comments are welcome.

 

[Motorbike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HolesInTheHead:
kyle, the hydrocrack/synthetic blend 5W-30 also looks good.

http://seweb1.phillips66.com/hes/MSDS.nsf/MSDSID/US776108/$file/776108.pdf

Guys, am I reading the msds correctly? 40-42% synthetic base oil?

---

Yep , you read correct but it's the group III type synthetic .

One of the deals with ISLAC GF-4 is to reduce the sulfur content over ISLAC GF-3 standards . For GF-4 this includes only the 5w-30 as they let 10w-30 slide for some reason . Per the Conoco/Phillips news release next spring their 10w-30 will have the same base oils as the 5w-30 . No telling what some of the other companies will do about the 10w-30's they make . Time will tell .

Lower sulfur will equal less group I for the most part not factoring in additives . The 5w-30's across the board will have better base oils . Some brands will even have better than that like the Conoco/Phillips goodies .

You will also see in at least the Conoco /Phillips oils to include Kendall seemingly much reduced amount of moly compared to what we have been seeing in other low cost oils . Fear not

this is a newer moly with less or no sulfur . I'll have to go back and re-read a file I have to find if it contains sulfur or not .

 

[Motorbike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kdcdq:

A few weeks ago several Houston-area Wal$mart stores had a clearance sale to get rid of the 5-quart jugs of SuperTech full synthetic oil in both 5W30 and 10W30 viscosities. At one store, I found and bought ten jugs of this oil; each jug was only $10.

Any comments are welcome.

---

I also saw Walmart was clearancing the the Super Tech Synthetic , even the quarts .

I hope it's replaced with Shells new synthetic base oil

They just gotta be near getting that base oil out to the engines

Tik Tok

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bugshu:
To simplify matters greatly, hydrocracked oil is oil with hydrogen added back into the refining process so that oil molecules can maintain integrity when cracked or broken into useful products and pollutants can then afterwards be more easily removed. Its a technique for cleaning oil so that it can be more highly refined and made into higher quality products.

---

This is oversimplification to the point of inaccuracy. Hydrocracking is not merely a "cleaning technique," a term which implies the removal of impurities, i.e. "filtering." Hydrocracking involves the DESTRUCTION and CONVERSION of impurities through a catalytic process. The greatest benefit of hydrocracking is the conversion to fully saturated hydrocarbon molecules of elements in the VGO which used to have to be removed, or else compensated for with additives in the finished motor oil.

 

[TheFuror]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jimbo:
What gives the best bang-for-the-buck? That is the multi million dollar question that the oil blenders themselves have to ask. In order to get GF-4 performance, straight Group I is out. Which is the better approach, a blend of Group I with some Group III or a little PAO or ester "correction fluid" or a straight Group II+?

---

This really is the question. I suspect the answer is based on whom you ask, and on how often you are willing to change your oil.

The warring camps have clearly drawn their lines, and each will claim their product is best. After looking at this question for a fairly long while, and reading the various spec sheets and hearing anecdotal evidence, I am now convinced that if you choose a high quality, name brand, API certified oil, it doesn't make any difference for the vast majority what oil you use

If you live in an area that is really cold (Alaska, maybe) or really hot (a friend's ex-wife), then a PAO oil might make a difference to you. If you race your car, then one of the racing oils may hlep you out.

I have had 2 different Chevy trucks use straight dino oil (GTX 10w-30). One has 175K miles on it and passed the SMOG II test. The other has 135K miles and runs great as well. My OCI have always been 3K miles.

Blackstone labs says in their website that they do not see any substantial difference between synthetic and regular oil. I am told that Car and Driver tested taxicabs over a 60K mile period and found no real difference bewteen synthetic and regular oil, nor between brands of oil.

So, pick the can which you think looks the greatest. That's ultimately what I probably did....

Bob W. a.k.a., "TheFuror"

 

[TheFuror]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Losiho:
Just extending this question a little, can someone explain the difference between "regular" Group 3 Hydrocracked oil and Shell's XHVI, and which offers better performance ?

I did a search, but I suck and sciences and chemestry, so it's a little confusing

---

Shell's XHVI oil is hydroisomerized slackwax, which is a group III base stock. Some claim this will produce an oil with very similar properties to PAO base stock.

Bob W, a.k.a, "TheFuror"

 

[Jimbo]

What gives the best bang-for-the-buck? That is the multi million dollar question that the oil blenders themselves have to ask. In order to get GF-4 performance, straight Group I is out. Which is the better approach, a blend of Group I with some Group III or a little PAO or ester "correction fluid" or a straight Group II+?