Advantages of Synthetic Base Oils

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: blackman777
$632 for my gasoline + conventional oil + dealer labor charge over 5000 miles
-or-
$640 for my gasoline + synthetic oil + dealer charge
Why the gas numbers being put in? Please don't answer. Don't really care but find it interesting people throw in other factors than the subject matter.


I'm making the point that debating over conventional vs. synthetic cost is not that important, because it is such a small part of total cost running a car 5000 miles. It's just noise compared to the Hundreds blown on burning gasoline. This is why I don't see the extra few candybars spent on synthetic as any big deal.
 
Last edited:
If I had a 22-40K engine, oil cost would not be a consideration.
I'd pay Terry for a UOA and interpretation and use whatever he thought was needed.
For the cars I have, I use readily available oils that don't cost a whole lot.
 
I'm with you on this, blackman.
The extra cost of a synthetic oil is nothing as compared to the overall running costs of the car.
OTOH, the point is often made that if a conventional protects the engine as well as does a synthetic, then any marginal expenditure for a synthetic is pure waste.
UOAs show that synthetics don't seem to provide any better protection than synthetics for most engines in most uses.
 
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Why the gas numbers being put in?


You know the reason, Bill.
wink.gif
An extra $10 for synthetic over conventional isn't a big deal compared to $1000 a year in gas, or a $40000 car, right?

It's rationalization. I have no problem with synthetics, have used them, and will use them again. However, they're not going to make my vehicle last forever. They're not going to double my horsepower. They won't cut my gas bills in half. There are advantages, and a good ROI is possible, but difficult.

If I were as brave or as smart as tig1, I'd be doing exactly what he's doing - 10,000 miles on M1 as per their warranty coverage versus 3,750 miles on PYB per Infiniti's warranty. And I would have adequate ROI, and that's without any UOAs.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Bill in Utah said:
It's rationalization.

Also known as logic. If we're already spending thousands BURNING oil in our cars (gas or diesel), what difference does 6 or 8 extra dollars make to run synthetic in the pan. It's about 1% extra on total operating cost. ----- And we know that it's better than conventional, because it passes tough standards VW507, dexos, Mack EON, MB239.51, Prosche C40, et cetera. The conventionals do not and can not.

BTW I'm kinda curious what you conventional oil-loving guys run if you buy a VW that requires 507 (synthetic) or GM that requires dexos (synthetic or blend). Do you just ignore those specs and run conventional anyway?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: blackman777
BTW I'm kinda curious what you conventional oil-loving guys run if you buy a VW that requires 507 (synthetic) or GM that requires dexos (synthetic or blend). Do you just ignore those specs and run conventional anyway?


Rationalization can be false logic. What difference does $6 or $8 extra to run synthetic? It's an extra $6 or $8, period. Sure, it's 1% of operating costs, and probably even substantially less than that. Big businesses routinely make changes to save 1% of operating costs. Automakers make changes to save less than 1% in fuel consumption. Now, if spending an extra 1% in operating costs gave me some tangible benefit, such as increased resale value, or some guarantee of longer engine life, then I would see no problem with that. If I show a hundred thousand miles worth of service records all with Mobil 1 at 3,000 miles, I'm just as likely to run into an M1 hater as I am into someone who appreciates my "fastidious" maintenance. Alternatively, I'm not likely to keep a vehicle long enough to notice, anyhow. When I have, as in the taxi fleet, conventional at 6,000 mile OCIs brought many engines into many hundreds of thousands of miles each.

Now, if I buy a German car or a GM requiring a proprietary spec, I'd run the specified oil at the specified interval. Incidentally, when I had my old Audi 200 Turbo, I did occasionally run a synthetic 5w-40 or 0w-40. It eliminated the need for seasonal viscosity switch, which is a tangible benefit of a synthetic oil in certain applications.
 
i Don't use synthetics in anything except my moms 2004 mint Mercury Grand Marquis with 49,000 miles on it that gets 5w20 qsud once a year. I use dino in everything else and get very high mileage out of everything. I do believe that most synthetics flow better in the cold but i also believe they are very close to the dino. Most regular syns have the same ratings as the dino.. Years ago before that lawsuit dino and synthetic were different synthetic was made in a lab and dino was from the ground now its different most times.
 
I first tried Synthetic, because it was on special for 1$ more than the VWB or GTX I was using.

Same filter as always, but no more lifter ticking on startup.

I'll save the 10$ extra initial cost somewhere else without guilt.

I certainly do not need M1 0w-40 in my LA-318, but man o man is the engine silky smooth running it, compared to m1 10w-40hm and TDT 5w-40. Been Dino free for 5+ years now, not going back.
 
Blackman777, if it's not such a big deal then why not use $20/qt oil? After all the difference would be 2% instead of 1%.
You’re not going to answer because you know that your logic is flawed and that there is a point where cost will outweigh the benefit. The trick is that this point will be different for everybody.

I don't see any benefit to go to group III synthetics in my current rides just as you don't see any benefit to go to PAO. What's so hard to grasp?

And if I had a VW, or Porsche or BMW or any other car that would require special spec oil (notice it's always a special spec, not synthetic or dino), I would make sure that the oil used meets the spec, regardless what base oil it's made from.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Blackman777, if it's not such a big deal then why not use $20/qt oil? After all the difference would be 2% instead of 1%. You’re not going to answer because you know that your logic is flawed

Most expensive streetcar oil I've seen is Amsoil at $10, and yes I would run that if VW or GM specified it as the "preferred" oil that passes their minimum specifications. It just happens it isn't necessary because the preferred oil is synthetic or synthetic blend, and not that expensive ($5 to $6).

And yes synth has been shown to be better for some engines like Toyota's sludgemonster (1FMZE?) and Honda's Pilot engine (with cylinder deactivation). The conventional oil just doesn't survive.
 
I think this all comes down to perceived value. If I consider my costs for oil changes over the course of 15k miles, it is a wash money wise. If I use MS5K from Walmart I need three jugs and a Fram Ultra at a cost of $50.88. I could alternatively use two jugs of QSUD and a Fram Ultra at a cost of $50.91. That is a three cent difference, I save the time involved in the extra dino oil change, and I consume 1/3 less oil. I doubt there is any significant difference in the performance of either oil at these OCI's, so I consider the QSUD a better value.

The cost difference between more premium oils are $8.03 for PP, $12.03 for CET, and $14.03 for PU. These are based on oil prices at my local Walmart. Since 15K covers me for about a year, I don't consider an annual difference of less than $15.00 to be any big deal.

Of course, if someone else approached the situation with different priorities and concluded dino was the way to go, I really couldn't come up with a good argument against that either.
 
Originally Posted By: blackman777
And yes synth has been shown to be better for some engines like Toyota's sludgemonster (1FMZE?) and Honda's Pilot engine (with cylinder deactivation). The conventional oil just doesn't survive.


That's absolutely true. There are certain application where one would think a conventional is sufficient for the specified OCI, but things don't work out as planned.
 
Why am I not using synthetic when I know it's spec's for my car and it's better than dino?

1. My VW has a no fuss engine that could run on olive oil,
2. It burns a little bit of oil, but the dino I'm using now seems to have solved that,
3. Why pay extra when I'm getting enough already.
 
Though I do most all repairs on my vehicle, and am mechanically inclined, I hate to change the oil; therefore, I don't often change it as needed, and will go 10k on dino, not good. With that in mind (there are a lot of drivers with this same offense) Synthetic & a very good filter are a no brainer!
 
Hi,
in my own case I can provide some facts about the benefits and enhanced economics of using a synthetic engine lubricant over both mineral and semi-synthetic lubricants in an Interstate Trucking operation in Australia

Manufacturer’s Recommended OCI = 15kkms. Annual utilisation = 225kkms (140k miles)

Maximum with a mineral lubricant = 28kkms (condemnation points = increased viscosity, low TBN)

Cost of 40ltr = $80 ($2ltr)
Avg topup rate 1ltr/2kkms = $28
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime = $115
Total at OC = $423
Cost = .015c/km

Annual = $3375

Maximum with semi-synthetic = 38kkms (condemnation point = increased viscosity, low TBN)

Cost of 40ltr = $112 ($2.8ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/3kkms = $34
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime = $115
Total at OC = $461
Cost = .012c/km

Annual = $2700

Maximum with synthetic = 45kkms (main condemnation point = max soot level 3%)
Cost of 40ltr = $200 ($5ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/6kkms = $37
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime + $115
Total at OC = $552
Cost = .012c/km

Annual = $2700

SUMMARY
The semi synthetic lubricant had a maximum average OCI of around 65kkms when viscosity issues took effect and it had a much lower soot loading tolerance (3%)

The ability of the synthetic lubricant to go out to an average 90kkms OCI produced the substantially favourable economics required. One reason was the ability of the synthetic to retain viscosity within allowable limits, retain TBN and to be able to handle much higher soot loadings of 5% with ease.

Average achieved with synthetic = 90kkms (main condemnation points = Fe and soot)
(Filtration enhancements used)
Cost of 40ltr = $200 ($5ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/6kkms = $75
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime + $115
Total at OC = $590
Cost = .006c/km

Annual = $1350

The synthetic lubricant produced a fuel economy benefit too. This was most evident during the substantial (30 minutes) warm up phase and during idling. The savings were estimated at around 0.5%. This translated into around $2000 per truck per annum (around 128k ltrs used per annum)

Economic advantage = $3375-$1350 = Savings of $2025. Add Fuel saving of $2000.

Therefore a total savings of $4025, over say 10 trucks = $40250.

Factor in the lessor downtime from an operational perspective and much less Driver disruption and the savings are very real indeed!

So in this case the Fleet’s economics were well enhanced by using a synthtetic lubricant
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
in my own case I can provide some facts about the benefits and enhanced economics of using a synthetic engine lubricant over both mineral and semi-synthetic lubricants in an Interstate Trucking operation in Australia



Doug,

Looking at the condemnation points in your examples synthetic provides its economic benefit through greater viscosity stability and extended TBN retention. Thus allowing it to remain in service for a longer period of time.
In the case of gasoline powered passenger cars, where would you project their condemnation point to be in relation to a conventional? In other words would the service life of synthetic be 50%, 100%, 150%...etc. greater than conventional?
 
Originally Posted By: gregoron
Why am I not using synthetic when I know it's spec's for my car and it's better than dino?

1. My VW has a no fuss engine that could run on olive oil,
2. It burns a little bit of oil, but the dino I'm using now seems to have solved that,
3. Why pay extra when I'm getting enough already.


I agree. It's like carrying a brick in the back of a 1 ton truck. Overkill in some applications. In others it make fiscal sense such as ..........

quote=Doug Hillary]Hi,
in my own case I can provide some facts about the benefits and enhanced economics of using a synthetic engine lubricant over both mineral and semi-synthetic lubricants in an Interstate Trucking operation in Australia

Manufacturer’s Recommended OCI = 15kkms. Annual utilisation = 225kkms (140k miles)

Maximum with a mineral lubricant = 28kkms (condemnation points = increased viscosity, low TBN)

Cost of 40ltr = $80 ($2ltr)
Avg topup rate 1ltr/2kkms = $28
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime = $115
Total at OC = $423
Cost = .015c/km

Annual = $3375

Maximum with semi-synthetic = 38kkms (condemnation point = increased viscosity, low TBN)

Cost of 40ltr = $112 ($2.8ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/3kkms = $34
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime = $115
Total at OC = $461
Cost = .012c/km

Annual = $2700

Maximum with synthetic = 45kkms (main condemnation point = max soot level 3%)
Cost of 40ltr = $200 ($5ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/6kkms = $37
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime + $115
Total at OC = $552
Cost = .012c/km

Annual = $2700

SUMMARY
The semi synthetic lubricant had a maximum average OCI of around 65kkms when viscosity issues took effect and it had a much lower soot loading tolerance (3%)

The ability of the synthetic lubricant to go out to an average 90kkms OCI produced the substantially favourable economics required. One reason was the ability of the synthetic to retain viscosity within allowable limits, retain TBN and to be able to handle much higher soot loadings of 5% with ease.

Average achieved with synthetic = 90kkms (main condemnation points = Fe and soot)
(Filtration enhancements used)
Cost of 40ltr = $200 ($5ltr)
Avg topup rate = 1ltr/6kkms = $75
Filters = $60
Labour = $140
Downtime + $115
Total at OC = $590
Cost = .006c/km

Annual = $1350

The synthetic lubricant produced a fuel economy benefit too. This was most evident during the substantial (30 minutes) warm up phase and during idling. The savings were estimated at around 0.5%. This translated into around $2000 per truck per annum (around 128k ltrs used per annum)

Economic advantage = $3375-$1350 = Savings of $2025. Add Fuel saving of $2000.

Therefore a total savings of $4025, over say 10 trucks = $40250.

Factor in the lessor downtime from an operational perspective and much less Driver disruption and the savings are very real indeed!

So in this case the Fleet’s economics were well enhanced by using a synthtetic lubricant
[/quote]
 
Ok Ok bought a Subaru Forester 2012. Now the dealer Grand Prix in Hicksville says I need to change the synthetic oil every 5k. Ok but they give you a free oilchange if you do factory maitenance like a cabin filter for a special $89 . What a deal!! The cost of a oil change is or was $70. I got a free oil change because they are free for the first year, but the sheet had oil change 81$ value. 81 dollars for a oil change every 5k??? This does not include dinner. Now with the waranty do I have a choice?? Ofcourse I do but keep in mind I am sure the Subaru can run just as well on dino every 5k. But why did they change????? Do you think it has to do with making even more money then the stealers already do at cabin filters on special $89. I guess it is that expensive because of the labor putting in the cabin filter!!Mongo has trouble putting in filter duh!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top