Depends. If you not racing your rig or towing motorhomes behind, you should be fine+save some gas.
new valvoline "next gen" 50% recycled oil
- Thread starter chet2
- Start date
- Status
15w40 is specced for -10 and up.
But strength of delo VS nextgen.
Every oil analysis I see for next Gen sure looks pretty good for an oil that should be meager at best.
That sequoia with 260k miles and a fantastic oil analysis kind of throws a gauntlet down for next Gen. But... the fact that local marine mechanics don't even try to break in new motors with delo speaks volumes. They use rotella first fill, then delo forever after.
But strength of delo VS nextgen.
Every oil analysis I see for next Gen sure looks pretty good for an oil that should be meager at best.
That sequoia with 260k miles and a fantastic oil analysis kind of throws a gauntlet down for next Gen. But... the fact that local marine mechanics don't even try to break in new motors with delo speaks volumes. They use rotella first fill, then delo forever after.
Originally Posted By: Drivebelt
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
Originally Posted By: ferrari512
Originally Posted By: Loobed
Ferrari512, what is your purpose for repeatedly bashing re-refined oil? Is there an end goal you are trying to accomplish? We can't change your mind, and you can't change ours. So now what?
U
So those that dont have a opinion can hear both sides of the issue and make their own decision, not biased with marketing hype. That simple.
Oh. But conveying your bias,and a lame reason I must say,that because its re-refined its in some way a lesser product.
The base oil is a carrier to transport the additives in the carrier to the points of contact and other critical components that need whatever is in the oil.
It also then acts as a heat exchanger,and a sponge bath keeping parts cool and clean. The additives break down the carbon by products and they become soluble so they can then be removed by the filter.
So I all honesty the oil itself really can be cleaned and re-additized so it can perform the same functions it just performed.
And truthfully the recycled oil will be more consistent in molecule size since the shorter chains would have vaporized which creates a more stable carrier the second time around.
I for one think its a great idea. If science can take tar sands and turn it into plastics and gasoline then I am confident that same science can take used oil and clean it,and send back a perfectly good base product.
Heck California takes raw sewage and multiple processes later the water is crystal clear and potable fit for human consumption.
To even hold on to the idea that the recycled oil is lesser is equal to holding on to the 3000 mile interval completely ignoring facts that indicate otherwise.
When oil is broken down into its building blocks and impurities are removed we now call that synthetic oil. When valvoline does it with used oil it's somehow inferior.
Lets compare. Crude oil contains a multitude of components that aren't desirable in motor oil. So the refinery starts processing the crude,breaking it down,separating waxes,using solvents to dissolve certain parts of the crude,then evaporating the solvent leaving only the compound originally sought after.
They heat it and trap the evaporative gas,reconstituting it In to liquid. They chill it to help clump up solid mass and waxes they don't want I'm there.
They bubble hydrogen thru to create a chemical reaction and trap the hydrogen,then dispell the hydrogen leaving another component behind.
All the while there are all kinds of decayed animal paste with whatever bacteria lives in it.
Or valvoline.
They take an already refined product. They then evaporate any compounds that can be evaporated,they may or may not catch the evaporative to try to harness its chemicals.
They electromagnetically remove the dissolved metals,they then hear the oil to various temps to force different contaminants to expel.
By my reasoning,and the vague description of the actual process(most of this I made up,but not the point)I read ages ago it actually takes less energy and uses less steps to recycle oil into its pure base form,then it does to break down crude into a pure useable product.
So today's hydrocracked oils are considered synthetics. The valvoline process although not hydrocracking(or perhaps it is)the finished product can be compared to a synthetic because the impurities have been vanquished,leaving a pure product.
Conventional oil doesn't get to this kind of purity yet no one had lost faith in them.
In the end its the formulation. The additive package that does the actual deed in our engines. The oil is merely a carrier that carried additives in,and takes heat and contaminants away to be filtered or in the case of heat do be dissipated around the entire engine.
This post was not meant to be accurate as I'm sure it isn't.
It was written to perhaps get a closed minded member to truly think about the process in both flavours.
Remember it wasn't long ago a 55 gallon drum sat atop old tractors and oil just dropped from the drum to the engines top end then into the dirt.
And not long ago 3000 mile intervals were considered too long,and sludge would form.
Today we have the tech to build nano robots and inject them into humans. We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Originally Posted By: Loobed
Ferrari512, what is your purpose for repeatedly bashing re-refined oil? Is there an end goal you are trying to accomplish? We can't change your mind, and you can't change ours. So now what?
U
So those that dont have a opinion can hear both sides of the issue and make their own decision, not biased with marketing hype. That simple.
Oh. But conveying your bias,and a lame reason I must say,that because its re-refined its in some way a lesser product.
The base oil is a carrier to transport the additives in the carrier to the points of contact and other critical components that need whatever is in the oil.
It also then acts as a heat exchanger,and a sponge bath keeping parts cool and clean. The additives break down the carbon by products and they become soluble so they can then be removed by the filter.
So I all honesty the oil itself really can be cleaned and re-additized so it can perform the same functions it just performed.
And truthfully the recycled oil will be more consistent in molecule size since the shorter chains would have vaporized which creates a more stable carrier the second time around.
I for one think its a great idea. If science can take tar sands and turn it into plastics and gasoline then I am confident that same science can take used oil and clean it,and send back a perfectly good base product.
Heck California takes raw sewage and multiple processes later the water is crystal clear and potable fit for human consumption.
To even hold on to the idea that the recycled oil is lesser is equal to holding on to the 3000 mile interval completely ignoring facts that indicate otherwise.
When oil is broken down into its building blocks and impurities are removed we now call that synthetic oil. When valvoline does it with used oil it's somehow inferior.
Lets compare. Crude oil contains a multitude of components that aren't desirable in motor oil. So the refinery starts processing the crude,breaking it down,separating waxes,using solvents to dissolve certain parts of the crude,then evaporating the solvent leaving only the compound originally sought after.
They heat it and trap the evaporative gas,reconstituting it In to liquid. They chill it to help clump up solid mass and waxes they don't want I'm there.
They bubble hydrogen thru to create a chemical reaction and trap the hydrogen,then dispell the hydrogen leaving another component behind.
All the while there are all kinds of decayed animal paste with whatever bacteria lives in it.
Or valvoline.
They take an already refined product. They then evaporate any compounds that can be evaporated,they may or may not catch the evaporative to try to harness its chemicals.
They electromagnetically remove the dissolved metals,they then hear the oil to various temps to force different contaminants to expel.
By my reasoning,and the vague description of the actual process(most of this I made up,but not the point)I read ages ago it actually takes less energy and uses less steps to recycle oil into its pure base form,then it does to break down crude into a pure useable product.
So today's hydrocracked oils are considered synthetics. The valvoline process although not hydrocracking(or perhaps it is)the finished product can be compared to a synthetic because the impurities have been vanquished,leaving a pure product.
Conventional oil doesn't get to this kind of purity yet no one had lost faith in them.
In the end its the formulation. The additive package that does the actual deed in our engines. The oil is merely a carrier that carried additives in,and takes heat and contaminants away to be filtered or in the case of heat do be dissipated around the entire engine.
This post was not meant to be accurate as I'm sure it isn't.
It was written to perhaps get a closed minded member to truly think about the process in both flavours.
Remember it wasn't long ago a 55 gallon drum sat atop old tractors and oil just dropped from the drum to the engines top end then into the dirt.
And not long ago 3000 mile intervals were considered too long,and sludge would form.
Today we have the tech to build nano robots and inject them into humans. We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Drivebelt
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
I would not take too much from this comment. Ashland would like for everyone to change Synpower at 3K intervals.
As a matter of fact Valvoline states Nextgen is just as good as it's regular conventional and both have the same certifications and API ratings.
Originally Posted By: Drivebelt
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
I would not take too much from this comment. Ashland would like for everyone to change Synpower at 3K intervals.
As a matter of fact Valvoline states Nextgen is just as good as it's regular conventional and both have the same certifications and API ratings.
As a matter of fact Nextgen has the same engine guarantee as its regular conventional.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Oh. But conveying your bias,and a lame reason I must say,that because its re-refined its in some way a lesser product.
The base oil is a carrier to transport the additives in the carrier to the points of contact and other critical components that need whatever is in the oil.
It also then acts as a heat exchanger,and a sponge bath keeping parts cool and clean. The additives break down the carbon by products and they become soluble so they can then be removed by the filter.
So I all honesty the oil itself really can be cleaned and re-additized so it can perform the same functions it just performed.
And truthfully the recycled oil will be more consistent in molecule size since the shorter chains would have vaporized which creates a more stable carrier the second time around.
I for one think its a great idea. If science can take tar sands and turn it into plastics and gasoline then I am confident that same science can take used oil and clean it,and send back a perfectly good base product.
Heck California takes raw sewage and multiple processes later the water is crystal clear and potable fit for human consumption.
To even hold on to the idea that the recycled oil is lesser is equal to holding on to the 3000 mile interval completely ignoring facts that indicate otherwise.
When oil is broken down into its building blocks and impurities are removed we now call that synthetic oil. When valvoline does it with used oil it's somehow inferior.
Lets compare. Crude oil contains a multitude of components that aren't desirable in motor oil. So the refinery starts processing the crude,breaking it down,separating waxes,using solvents to dissolve certain parts of the crude,then evaporating the solvent leaving only the compound originally sought after.
They heat it and trap the evaporative gas,reconstituting it In to liquid. They chill it to help clump up solid mass and waxes they don't want I'm there.
They bubble hydrogen thru to create a chemical reaction and trap the hydrogen,then dispell the hydrogen leaving another component behind.
All the while there are all kinds of decayed animal paste with whatever bacteria lives in it.
Or valvoline.
They take an already refined product. They then evaporate any compounds that can be evaporated,they may or may not catch the evaporative to try to harness its chemicals.
They electromagnetically remove the dissolved metals,they then hear the oil to various temps to force different contaminants to expel.
By my reasoning,and the vague description of the actual process(most of this I made up,but not the point)I read ages ago it actually takes less energy and uses less steps to recycle oil into its pure base form,then it does to break down crude into a pure useable product.
So today's hydrocracked oils are considered synthetics. The valvoline process although not hydrocracking(or perhaps it is)the finished product can be compared to a synthetic because the impurities have been vanquished,leaving a pure product.
Conventional oil doesn't get to this kind of purity yet no one had lost faith in them.
In the end its the formulation. The additive package that does the actual deed in our engines. The oil is merely a carrier that carried additives in,and takes heat and contaminants away to be filtered or in the case of heat do be dissipated around the entire engine.
This post was not meant to be accurate as I'm sure it isn't.
It was written to perhaps get a closed minded member to truly think about the process in both flavours.
Remember it wasn't long ago a 55 gallon drum sat atop old tractors and oil just dropped from the drum to the engines top end then into the dirt.
And not long ago 3000 mile intervals were considered too long,and sludge would form.
Today we have the tech to build nano robots and inject them into humans. We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Whew! What an epistle.
But I really liked the part about the woolly mammoth.
I'd like to see a woolly mammoth.
Oh. But conveying your bias,and a lame reason I must say,that because its re-refined its in some way a lesser product.
The base oil is a carrier to transport the additives in the carrier to the points of contact and other critical components that need whatever is in the oil.
It also then acts as a heat exchanger,and a sponge bath keeping parts cool and clean. The additives break down the carbon by products and they become soluble so they can then be removed by the filter.
So I all honesty the oil itself really can be cleaned and re-additized so it can perform the same functions it just performed.
And truthfully the recycled oil will be more consistent in molecule size since the shorter chains would have vaporized which creates a more stable carrier the second time around.
I for one think its a great idea. If science can take tar sands and turn it into plastics and gasoline then I am confident that same science can take used oil and clean it,and send back a perfectly good base product.
Heck California takes raw sewage and multiple processes later the water is crystal clear and potable fit for human consumption.
To even hold on to the idea that the recycled oil is lesser is equal to holding on to the 3000 mile interval completely ignoring facts that indicate otherwise.
When oil is broken down into its building blocks and impurities are removed we now call that synthetic oil. When valvoline does it with used oil it's somehow inferior.
Lets compare. Crude oil contains a multitude of components that aren't desirable in motor oil. So the refinery starts processing the crude,breaking it down,separating waxes,using solvents to dissolve certain parts of the crude,then evaporating the solvent leaving only the compound originally sought after.
They heat it and trap the evaporative gas,reconstituting it In to liquid. They chill it to help clump up solid mass and waxes they don't want I'm there.
They bubble hydrogen thru to create a chemical reaction and trap the hydrogen,then dispell the hydrogen leaving another component behind.
All the while there are all kinds of decayed animal paste with whatever bacteria lives in it.
Or valvoline.
They take an already refined product. They then evaporate any compounds that can be evaporated,they may or may not catch the evaporative to try to harness its chemicals.
They electromagnetically remove the dissolved metals,they then hear the oil to various temps to force different contaminants to expel.
By my reasoning,and the vague description of the actual process(most of this I made up,but not the point)I read ages ago it actually takes less energy and uses less steps to recycle oil into its pure base form,then it does to break down crude into a pure useable product.
So today's hydrocracked oils are considered synthetics. The valvoline process although not hydrocracking(or perhaps it is)the finished product can be compared to a synthetic because the impurities have been vanquished,leaving a pure product.
Conventional oil doesn't get to this kind of purity yet no one had lost faith in them.
In the end its the formulation. The additive package that does the actual deed in our engines. The oil is merely a carrier that carried additives in,and takes heat and contaminants away to be filtered or in the case of heat do be dissipated around the entire engine.
This post was not meant to be accurate as I'm sure it isn't.
It was written to perhaps get a closed minded member to truly think about the process in both flavours.
Remember it wasn't long ago a 55 gallon drum sat atop old tractors and oil just dropped from the drum to the engines top end then into the dirt.
And not long ago 3000 mile intervals were considered too long,and sludge would form.
Today we have the tech to build nano robots and inject them into humans. We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Whew! What an epistle.
But I really liked the part about the woolly mammoth.
I'd like to see a woolly mammoth.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: Clevy
We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Whew! What an epistle.
But I really liked the part about the woolly mammoth.
I'd like to see a woolly mammoth.
Yes I'd also like to see a Woolly Mammoth or a Mastedon or a Sabre Toothed Cat or any of the large North American fauna that were allegedly hunted into extinction 10,000 years ago by the first humans to NA.
Sorry, forgot for a moment this was a lubrication forum.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
We can and likely will clone a woolly mammoth.
And yes,we can recycle a non tenure able recourse and in the process do it cheaper than the original refining
Whew! What an epistle.
But I really liked the part about the woolly mammoth.
I'd like to see a woolly mammoth.
Yes I'd also like to see a Woolly Mammoth or a Mastedon or a Sabre Toothed Cat or any of the large North American fauna that were allegedly hunted into extinction 10,000 years ago by the first humans to NA.
Sorry, forgot for a moment this was a lubrication forum.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Drivebelt
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
I believe you guys read it wrong. In many FAQs Valvoline tells you to follow the OCI as recommended by the manufacturer OR if you don't know better follow the 3,000 mile OCI. They're just covering their bases legally speaking, as not all engines are equally easy on the motor oil. For example, Valvoline's conventional oils meet Fords specs, so it should be fine to use them up to 7500 mile OCI as Ford recommends (normal duty).
Originally Posted By: Drivebelt
With Valvoline still recommending 3K mile oil changes on their site they don't give me a lot of confidence in their oils. 3K mile oil changes -- fine, but running a OLM out to 7K miles or more -- I don't know. That aromatic content has me a little concerned on how well these recycled motor oils will stand up in a severe service environment.
This comment blew me away. 3k miles? It's not 1995 Valvoline!
I guess I'll watch and wait with regards to recycled oils...
I believe you guys read it wrong. In many FAQs Valvoline tells you to follow the OCI as recommended by the manufacturer OR if you don't know better follow the 3,000 mile OCI. They're just covering their bases legally speaking, as not all engines are equally easy on the motor oil. For example, Valvoline's conventional oils meet Fords specs, so it should be fine to use them up to 7500 mile OCI as Ford recommends (normal duty).
- Status
Similar threads
