Are most synthetics "purer" dino oils + additives?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
181
Location
CA
I'm talking the garden variety PP, Valvoline, Castrol, etc.

I'm not up on the distinction between hydrocracked, etc. But I gather that most synthetic oils are not truly "synthetic" as in being created in a lab. My understanding is that most synthetic oils simply have less impurities then their "dino" counterparts.

Am I missing something? Please educate me.
 
Originally Posted By: Steve S
yeah but so?


he he he

well that's good enough for me. I'm not saying I wouldn't use synthetics, I just what to know what I'm getting for my extra money.
 
For your money you are gaining a Higher voscosity index and less aromatics, a nearly inert base plus in most cases a premium additive package where less antioxidants are needed there fore detergency can be made stronger.
 
Originally Posted By: mozart
I'm talking the garden variety PP, Valvoline, Castrol, etc.

I'm not up on the distinction between hydrocracked, etc. But I gather that most synthetic oils are not truly "synthetic" as in being created in a lab. My understanding is that most synthetic oils simply have less impurities then their "dino" counterparts.

Am I missing something? Please educate me.

This is absolutely untrue.

Some modern synthetics are made with base stocks that are derived from crude oil. These are called Group III (traditional made-in-the-lab synthetics are Group IV and Group V). The difference is this: For a dino oil, they basically pick through the crude oil, find the stuff they want, and extract it. For a Group III synthetic, they pick the stuff they want and then process the heck out of it to make what they want. Some people lump them in the same bin because they both come from crude. To me, that's like saying wood boards are the same as paper just because they both come from trees...

Compared to Group IV and V base oils, Group III base oils are better in many ways and not as good in other ways. Companies will mix together whatever base stocks they need to get the product they want; sometimes this involves Group III, sometimes it doesn't (good luck getting any companies to tell you definitively either way). Typically, as Bryanccfshr indicated, Group III base oils are extremely well suited to most regular cars, so you have a greater chance of finding them among the 5w-30 and 10w-30 synthetics on the shelf. Either way, the end product is very different from a dino oil. You'll get what you pay for.
wink.gif
 
When conventional oils are refined, they're boiled and then condesed at different temps in a tower. That's where group 1 and 2 oils come from. Group 3, or "synthetic" oils derived from crude are chemially processed after this thermal processing.

Group 4 and 5 are made from raw materials other than crude, but that doesn't make them "better" than a group 3 oil, necessarily.

For a lot of applications, a group 3 oil has advantages over a group 1/2/2+. Already mentioned are cold weather/cold startup performance, often a better additive package, lower volatility, and less viscosity index improvers (better resistance to shear). IMO, you do get a bit more for not much more money.
 
To add to that ILSAC rated oils are Grp II or higher in aggregate. In other words it is hard to find a modern API ILSAC motor oil that is grp I . Grp II oils are a Huge leap from a Grp I and Grp III is an improvwement ontop of that. There is also treated Slack Wax that formes Shells Grp III+ or XHVI Extra High Viscosity Index base oil.(Such as Rotella 5w40) That stuff could be food grade.
 
Yep.
And most gasoline is just purer dino oil + additives.
Reductio ad absurdum.
 
thanks for the replies everyone, very helpful information
 
I like d00df00d's analogy, but I would go a step further. It is like saying wood and maple syrup are the same since they are both made from trees. You know, even the opposites "apples and oranges" are both made from trees.
 
Hi guys. Cool site here. My first time here so bear with me. I have a question that goes along the lines of this topic (I think). What are group II+ oils? I've been reading that oils like pennzoil yb and cheveron supreme are group II+ and that they are close to semi-synthetics. Also how do you find out what oils are under which group? Is there a list? Thanks
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Group 4 and 5 are made from raw materials other than crude,


Not quite. GroupIV PAO oils are "derived" from crude feedstocks, as are some GroupV's, such as alkylated Naphthalenes or AN's. Some of the alcohols used for esters can also be derived from the crude feedstock as well.

Generally speaking, the GroupIV and V's process takes basic chemicals and develops a complety new molecular structure, designed with predictable properties (such as oxidation resistance, thermal resistance, etc.), and are free and devoid of any sulfurs or other elements from the original crude. In other words, with synthetics, there is no "carryover" of any stuff from the crude's witches brew.

Groups I-III are simply a polishing process or a refinement of the basic crude.

Many of today's conventional oils may have various ratios of GroupII, III, IV, and GroupV base oil mixes with the appropriate additive package for each mix.
 
Here are the API oil group categories taken directly from Chevrons website
gf4_table_faq.gif

Group I+: Still high sulfur and low saturates, but processing conditions have been adjusted to make higher VI. This higher VI, in the range of 100-105, gives better cold cranking and Noack performance, enabling these base oils to be used in 10W-30 engine oils with minimal Group III or Group II+ correction fluids. Examples are special products from Marathon Ashland and Valero. Making these type of oils reduces base oil yield, so they may cost more than standard Group I.

Group II+: Adjusting processing conditions, several refineries can make these oils with 110-120 VI. This enables significantly improved CCS and volatility, making it possible to blend 5W-20 and 5W-30 GF-3 and GF-4 engine oils using these oils without any correction fluids. As with Group I+, the extra quality costs more to produce.

Group III+: Not available yet commercially. These will be available in the second half of this decade made from gas to liquid processes. They will have VI's exceeding 140 and will be used for 0W-XX and 5W-XX engine oils and super-premium transmission fluids.

What are the drivers behind GF-4?
The simple answers are tougher Emissions and Fuel Economy standards mandated by the U. S. Government. Automotive OEM's need better fuel economy to meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) limits. They also need their catalytic converters to provide reduced emissions for 120,000 miles. Higher quality base oils are an important part of the solution to GF-4.

Why does fuel economy affect the base oil blend?
Fuel Economy is measured by an engine test, the Sequence VIB. In order to pass this test, blenders may need to go to lower viscosity base oil blends, but still must meet the volatility limit of less than 15 Noack. In general, this requires a higher VI base oil blend.

Why do emission regulations impact lubricants?
There is no engine test that measures emission system stability, but the OEM's have data showing that sulfur and phosphorus are poisons for catalytic converters and must be limited. Thus, in GF-4 oils sulfur is limited to 0.5%, maximum, in 0W- and 5W- engine oils and 0.7%, maximum in 10W- engine oils. Phosphorus is limited to 0.08%. This restricts the amount of zinc dialkyldithiophosphate, the workhorse anti-oxidant and anti-wear agent, which can be used in engine oils, which in turn, may restrict the amount of Group I oil in GF-4 blends.

Is there enough Group II base oil available to meet the needs of GF-4?
Yes. According to National Petroleum Refiners Association (NPRA) data, in North America, there are over 80,000 barrels per day of capacity to make Group II, Group II+ and Group III base oils.

Why was Group II+ base oil developed?
Chevron produced the first Group II+ base oil commercially in 1998. It is the most cost effective base oil for 5W-20 and 5W-30 passenger car engine oils of GF-3 quality. Group II+ has higher VI, which translates to improved (low-temperature) cold cranking performance and lower volatility. The cold cranking performance of a 5W-XX engine oil is measured at -30°C using a Cold Crank Simulator, and the volatility of the engine oil is measured using the Noack Test, which simulates oil evaporation in an engine-like environment.

At our Richmond, California refinery, we make Chevron 5R, a high-purity Group II+ base oil with optimized viscometric properties and volatility for making 5W-XX engine oils. There are now four producers of Group II+ in North America. Properties of all of our base oils can be found on our website: Group II / II+ Base Oils Typical Properties Table.

What about 10W-30? For GF-4, can it still be made with Group I base oils? What are Correction Fluids?
Most Group I base oils cannot be used for GF-4 10W-30 without some help. Higher VI base oils, called correction fluids, can provide this help. Depending on the properties of the Group I oil used, the final blend might require 10-50% of a correction fluid, such as 5R. If a Group III correction fluid is used, less will be required.

Another problem with Group I oils is that they have higher concentrations of impurities, such as aromatic compounds, and sulfur and nitrogen compounds. These impurities accelerate oxidative degradation. So, in addition to needing help with viscometrics and volatility, Group I oils need help to meeting the requirements of oxidation tests, like the Sequence IIIG engine test. Therefore finished lubricants formulated with Group I base oils formulations require boosted additive packages to achieve similar performance to engine oils blended with Group II.

While it is possible to blend GF-4 10W-30 using mostly Group I base stock meeting spec will require more expensive correction fluids and more expensive additive packages. Factoring in the added cost of correction fluids, additives and increased blending complexity total formulating costs is comparable between Group I and Group II base oils, but the issues, such as tankage and product handling, will make the total formulated costs come out pretty much the same.

What about the new ATF specifications, DEXRON-IIIH?
Transmissions are becoming more complex and more compact as cars become more streamlined, so transmissions are running hotter. By 2004, most service fill ATF will need to meet DEXRON-IIIH specifications.

A good Group II base oil, like Chevron 100R, is the most efficient path for meeting DEXRON-IIIH ATF specifications. Eventually, Service-fill will move completely to synthetic quality.

What about synthetics? Will synthetic base oils be widely available?
Almost all synthetic-quality lubricants can be blended with Group III base oil, a much more cost effective alternative to expensive PAOs. We see steady growth in these premium lubricant markets, especially in automotive lubricants. This growth will take off, when natural-gas-derived base oils become available, towards the end of this decade. These gas-to-liquid (GTL) base oils will be super Group III oils. They are already they are being called Group III+ by many in the industry.

Currently, there is plenty of good-quality Group III available in North America to meet expected demands for the next several years. Among the highest quality Group IIIs available are Chevron 4R and 7R.
 
Last edited:
Years ago I watched a program that explained how they made synthetic oil. A lab extracted the molecules out of the crude that makes the oil lubricate and contains them in higher concentrations to make syn.
 
I would think a process plant would be more effiecient than a labratory environment for mass production. If picturing a giant lube plant as a labratory helps you visualize the process that works too.
 
From Mobil 1`s website:

There Are Four Different Types of Motor Oil Base Stocks


We know that basestock composition has a significant effect on the overall performance of motor oil. There are four different types of base stock used in the motor oil market today.
Group 1 - Conventional - Mineral oil derived from crude oil
Group 2 - Hydroprocessed - Highly refined mineral oil
Group 3 – Severe hydroprocessed - Ultra refined mineral oil
Group 4 – Full synthetics (chemically derived) - Chemically built Polyalphaolefins (PAO).

As it infers Groups 1 – 3 basestocks are derived from crude oil pumped from the ground whereas Group 4 basestocks are chemically derived, most often from ethylene gas, and contain none of the contaminants present in mineral oils. Just as distilled water is pure water derived from gas so Group 4 basestocks are pure oils derived from gas.
 
PAO is petroleum. Just a different refining process. This is a symaantic play when the gas stream is a result of petroleum refining. THe PAO technology takes more energy to produce than a good Group III with little performance differential. The only thing going for its continued commercial use is the need for the infrastructure to produce it for very specialized applications. Olestra Yum.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top