Are There Any "Fully Synthetic" Engine Oils...

@High Performance Lubricants[/USER] where can I find your products for purchase? I would be very interested in trying your motor oil and transmission fluid, I've read a good deal of great things about your products and the UOAs I've seen are very impresive to say the least. Are your engine oils LSPI friendly? Thank you.

Obi,

You can order the oil from Advanced Lubrication Inc at 815-932-3288. In the very near future we will be adding 6 new groups to the online store. In the meantime we can ship you what you want. We are also going to have a 15% discount for BITOG people. We will honor the discount and do it the old fashioned way until we get that done.

David
 
There doesn't exist any "synthetic oil law" in Germany. It's been a court that decided selling oil with less than 70 % or so PAO/POE and write "vollsynthetisch" (fully synthetic) onto the bottle is a hoax. That's all about it. Perhaps another court would decide different.

I don't think it's a hoax, I literally quoted one of the excerpts from one of the German court cases on the subject previously in this thread, as well as linked to the previous thread which has the entire contents.

Now, in North America, there was a BBB dispute between Mobil and Castrol and Mobil dropped it because the BBB deemed Castrol's advertising was appropriate with marketing Group III as synthetic.
 
OK, OK. Looks like I was wrong. The packaging for LiquiMoly Top Tec 4210 sold in the US is labeled "fully synthetic" while the same product sold in Germany does not claim to be fully synthetic.
 
Now, in North America, there was a BBB dispute between Mobil and Castrol and Mobil dropped it because the BBB deemed Castrol's advertising was appropriate with marketing Group III as synthetic.




From that link....

It was only recently, in a decision by the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, that the first basic action and ruling in the United States set a strong precedence for a broader description in the marketing of synthetics. In this first installment of a two-part story, Lubricants World takes a look at the NAD’s ruling and explores the revived debate surrounding the definition of “synthetic.”

The Ruling
In a ruling released April 1999, the NAD addressed complaints filed by Mobil Oil Corp. regarding the truthfulness of Castrol North America Inc.’s claim that its Syntec® provides “superior engine protection” to all other motor oils, both synthetic and conventional, and that Syntec’s esters provide “unique molecular bonding.” Mobil charged that the advertisements inaccurately represented that the current formulation of Syntec is synthetic. The challenge was filed based on statements Castrol made in a series of television commercials, Web site publications, package labels, and brochures.
 
Here is the answer from mobil about 0w-20 EP pour point. seems strange…

—————-


We appreciate your interest in cross checking the technical parameters of the product.



Actually the typical values are -54 Degree Celsius, but the max is -45 Degree Celsius. We would recommend to stick with -45 Degree Celsius.
 
Here is the answer from mobil about 0w-20 EP pour point. seems strange…

—————-


We appreciate your interest in cross checking the technical parameters of the product.



Actually the typical values are -54 Degree Celsius, but the max is -45 Degree Celsius. We would recommend to stick with -45 Degree Celsius.
That whole statement doesn't even make sense, lol.
 
Maybe what they are saying that its typically -54C, but could be as high as -45C. Maybe they like it to be a range in case they reduce amount of PAO in future. Its -54C to -45C range?
 
Maybe what they are saying that its typically -54C, but could be as high as -45C. Maybe they like it to be a range in case they reduce amount of PAO in future. Its -54C to -45C range?

You'd think they'd encourage you to use the "typical" figure, since, well, it's supposed to be "typical" 🤷‍♂️
 
I dont care about -45 or -54, but I think it shows how sloppy the specs. What else is inaccurate?
 
I dont care about -45 or -54, but I think it shows how sloppy the specs. What else is inaccurate?
Again if they were only "specs" rather than typical values. Have you ever worked in a technical environment where you deal with typical values as opposed to actual lot reports?
 
Again if they were only "specs" rather than typical values. Have you ever worked in a technical environment where you deal with typical values as opposed to actual lot reports?

Its not tight, I would expect more precise and controlled measurements for oil specs. Or if they are not sure, they should report ranges.
 
Typical values are generally an average from a representative number of batches. Specifications are an agreement between the supplier and customer with consequences for missing the limit.

Specifications are a range that encompass typical values and are therefore broader in scope. The gap between typical and specification values takes into account test reproducibility between labs, batch-to-batch variations, and an additional margin to avoid liability with the customer.

Test reproducibility alone is often a large part of the gap. The pour point test under ASTM D 97 is not very precise. The reproducibility between labs is 6°C or 11°F. So if one lab gets -54°C and another gets 48°C, the results are considered an acceptable match. Add to that the batch-to-batch variations and some safety margin and it is easy to see why a product with a typical value of -54°C could have a specification limit of -45°C max.

In addition, not every company choses an average to report their typical values. Some can be a bit liberal in their favor, especially in a highly competitive market where such numbers are compared, and some a bit more conservative. Combined with the factors above, this is why using pour point results to guess at an oil's base oil composition is far from accurate. The same is true for many other tests.

From ASTM D97-17b (Pour Point)
"Reproducibility—The difference between two single and independent test results, obtained by different operators working in different laboratories on identical test material, would in the long run, in the normal and correct operation of this test method, exceed 6°C only in one case in twenty. Differences greater than this should be considered suspect."
 
No specification is perfect. From the machine's method to the person operating it and variation from one batch to another, there's always going to be a margin of error. Sometimes it's very small, sometimes quite large. Something like pour point isn't going to have that much of a variation so long as the base materials and blending is consistent. (though you'd be surprised how far off it can be at times) If the typical value is -54*C, (assuming consistent blending) repeating the test several times may give (+/-) 2-3*C variation (typically), not 9*C. Something like TBN can have a rather large margin of error, especially D4739.

What they are probably saying is you don't ideally want to chance it right to the pour point. Give yourself a buffer cause even though the oil may still pour at -54*C, it likely won't pump well.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top