Like the title says > who makes Walmarts 15/40 Super Tech diesel oil???
I've heard rumors it's the same oils as Mobil Delvac-1300
Any feedback?
I've heard rumors it's the same oils as Mobil Delvac-1300
Any feedback?
Super Tech 15/40 Who Makes it?
- Thread starter HammerDown
- Start date
- Status
Warren Distribution
The sample i sent in was very close to delvac in additives.regardless use it with confidence
Last edited:
looks like NAPA is going to keep thier house brand (valvoline) 15W40 at $9.99 a gallon..i dont know which one has better numbers on the NAPA vs Walmart.. but both a good deal at $10/gal.
Thanks for the feedback, I'm located in SE-Pa. Not sure if that has any bearing on who or where the ST 15/40 is made.
With the store-brand oils, I was under the impression, the more costly additive packages were cut down or significantly lessened...no?
So, it's pretty decent diesel oil huh?
With the store-brand oils, I was under the impression, the more costly additive packages were cut down or significantly lessened...no?
So, it's pretty decent diesel oil huh?
dnewton3
Staff member
If you want to see how PCMOs and HDEOs and tranny fluids stack up, relative to brand names and house names, see PQIAs site.
Each brand is going to exhibit a little more of "this" and a little less of "that". It's all different roads to the same destination.
I judge results (outputs=UOAs) more than rhetoric (inputs=VOAs). House brands have been generally every bit as capable for most any normal use. I took a PCMO ST dino to 10k and 15k miles last year and it did stellar. There is no reason to think ST or AAP or AZ or Napa HDEO can't do what the others will in "normal" applications.
Each brand is going to exhibit a little more of "this" and a little less of "that". It's all different roads to the same destination.
I judge results (outputs=UOAs) more than rhetoric (inputs=VOAs). House brands have been generally every bit as capable for most any normal use. I took a PCMO ST dino to 10k and 15k miles last year and it did stellar. There is no reason to think ST or AAP or AZ or Napa HDEO can't do what the others will in "normal" applications.
Last edited:
Again, thanks for the feedback.
Nappa's house brand 15/40 is on sale until the end of this month $9.99 > > > I'll be grabbing a few gallons, for my 7.3 diesel.
Nappa's house brand 15/40 is on sale until the end of this month $9.99 > > > I'll be grabbing a few gallons, for my 7.3 diesel.
dnewton3
Staff member
Look this over:
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO SUMMARYrev2.html
As you can see, there are many roads to the same destination!
Any major brand or good recognizable house brand is on equal footing.
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO SUMMARYrev2.html
As you can see, there are many roads to the same destination!
Any major brand or good recognizable house brand is on equal footing.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Look this over:
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO SUMMARYrev2.html
As you can see, there are many roads to the same destination!
Any major brand or good recognizable house brand is on equal footing.
Thanks for that!
Dello400LE and Nappa showing some decent Zinc (Zn)ppm numbers!
I did purchase a few gallons of Nappa 15/40! I didn't know it but, apparently it goes on sale every couple months.
Look this over:
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/HDEO SUMMARYrev2.html
As you can see, there are many roads to the same destination!
Any major brand or good recognizable house brand is on equal footing.
Thanks for that!
Dello400LE and Nappa showing some decent Zinc (Zn)ppm numbers!
I did purchase a few gallons of Nappa 15/40! I didn't know it but, apparently it goes on sale every couple months.
dnewton3
Staff member
You're welcome.
I want to get this point across to the masses, and not just you.
I am predicating my comments based upon statisically "normal" life here, and all the implications that macro data sets into play.
Looking over all that VOA data shows us that there are both similarities and differences in the approach lube makers and blenders take. But, they all generally have shown great ability to protect equipment and post excellent UOAs. After all, we've all seen great reports from SOPUS, XOM, Conoco, Castrol, Amsoil and all manner of other brands, right? But there are also great reports and success stories from AAP, AZ, ST and other house products.
The point of the PQIA site is to inform us of the API compliance of many brands, and root out the non-compliant products. To that end, they (PQIA) do a great job. And as for the products themselves, they all lube, cool and clean the engine with great aplomb.
But my personal point is that all those different formulation still end up equaling one answer; great overall protection. In a mathematical sense, if we were looking for the answer of "10", we could get there with many different numbers and equations.
2+8
12-2
6+4
15-10+5
5+5
8+2
ect ...
They all are a different road to the same destination.
And so it goes with lubes. Generally, any API licensed (or mimmiced) products are substantial enough to get you the result you desire. Brand loyalty is nice, but unnecessary.
I would agree that there may be some "near perfect" combination that is unique to each situation, but to find such a condition, you'd have to do micro analysis (see my normalcy article for details). That is WAY, WAY more intensive and expensive than any BITOGer has the resources for (typically due to a condition of total lack of patience). And so, using a brand name or quality house brand will get you everything you need to the end goal.
Too many folks (mostly BITOGers) get their undies all wadded up in a padantic frantic mess believing that some magic number of Ca, Mg, Boron, Ti, etc is the only answer. Nothing could be further from the truth.
After looking over and studying well more than 10,000 UOAs in my personal database, and countless thousands more in others, I have come to the conclusion that house brands are every bit as good as any other lube. While there will always be one-off special niches, the VAST majority of folks can be well served by typical products in their "normal" applications. I say this with the knowledge and experience of years of statistical quality control process engineering as my lay trade. While I do not work in the lube industry, I can see the results in macro data sets for what it is and isn't.
So, because equipment protection is essentially assured via license compliance, then you might as well make your wallet happy, because your engine won't know the difference.
I want to get this point across to the masses, and not just you.
I am predicating my comments based upon statisically "normal" life here, and all the implications that macro data sets into play.
Looking over all that VOA data shows us that there are both similarities and differences in the approach lube makers and blenders take. But, they all generally have shown great ability to protect equipment and post excellent UOAs. After all, we've all seen great reports from SOPUS, XOM, Conoco, Castrol, Amsoil and all manner of other brands, right? But there are also great reports and success stories from AAP, AZ, ST and other house products.
The point of the PQIA site is to inform us of the API compliance of many brands, and root out the non-compliant products. To that end, they (PQIA) do a great job. And as for the products themselves, they all lube, cool and clean the engine with great aplomb.
But my personal point is that all those different formulation still end up equaling one answer; great overall protection. In a mathematical sense, if we were looking for the answer of "10", we could get there with many different numbers and equations.
2+8
12-2
6+4
15-10+5
5+5
8+2
ect ...
They all are a different road to the same destination.
And so it goes with lubes. Generally, any API licensed (or mimmiced) products are substantial enough to get you the result you desire. Brand loyalty is nice, but unnecessary.
I would agree that there may be some "near perfect" combination that is unique to each situation, but to find such a condition, you'd have to do micro analysis (see my normalcy article for details). That is WAY, WAY more intensive and expensive than any BITOGer has the resources for (typically due to a condition of total lack of patience). And so, using a brand name or quality house brand will get you everything you need to the end goal.
Too many folks (mostly BITOGers) get their undies all wadded up in a padantic frantic mess believing that some magic number of Ca, Mg, Boron, Ti, etc is the only answer. Nothing could be further from the truth.
After looking over and studying well more than 10,000 UOAs in my personal database, and countless thousands more in others, I have come to the conclusion that house brands are every bit as good as any other lube. While there will always be one-off special niches, the VAST majority of folks can be well served by typical products in their "normal" applications. I say this with the knowledge and experience of years of statistical quality control process engineering as my lay trade. While I do not work in the lube industry, I can see the results in macro data sets for what it is and isn't.
So, because equipment protection is essentially assured via license compliance, then you might as well make your wallet happy, because your engine won't know the difference.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Chris142
The sample i sent in was very close to delvac in additives.regardless use it with confidence
One of the world's big suppliers of lubricant additives is Infineum, jointly owned by Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil. They sell to other oil blenders. It is possible that WPP bought the additive package from Infineum. Each additive maker (Chevron Oronite, Lubrizon, Afton, a few others) sells a limited number of additive packages to meet each API Service Category.
There are ways for the cheaper oil blenders to cut costs. They can ask for bids for base oil that is a cheap as possible and will barely meet the minimum spec. They can try for additive package bids at lower cost each contract cycle. They can do little testing to confirm that the products actually meet spec. Usually it doesn't matter--most folks who change their oil change it before it is exhausted. The few who run their oil until it is black goo will blame anything except themselves. The very few who test and run their oil for its full good life will find the oil that gives the lowest total cost of service including oil change labor, filter cost, engine wear.
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
The sample i sent in was very close to delvac in additives.regardless use it with confidence
One of the world's big suppliers of lubricant additives is Infineum, jointly owned by Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil. They sell to other oil blenders. It is possible that WPP bought the additive package from Infineum. Each additive maker (Chevron Oronite, Lubrizon, Afton, a few others) sells a limited number of additive packages to meet each API Service Category.
There are ways for the cheaper oil blenders to cut costs. They can ask for bids for base oil that is a cheap as possible and will barely meet the minimum spec. They can try for additive package bids at lower cost each contract cycle. They can do little testing to confirm that the products actually meet spec. Usually it doesn't matter--most folks who change their oil change it before it is exhausted. The few who run their oil until it is black goo will blame anything except themselves. The very few who test and run their oil for its full good life will find the oil that gives the lowest total cost of service including oil change labor, filter cost, engine wear.
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
Originally Posted By: Ken2
Originally Posted By: Chris142
The sample i sent in was very close to delvac in additives.regardless use it with confidence
One of the world's big suppliers of lubricant additives is Infineum, jointly owned by Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil. They sell to other oil blenders. It is possible that WPP bought the additive package from Infineum. Each additive maker (Chevron Oronite, Lubrizon, Afton, a few others) sells a limited number of additive packages to meet each API Service Category.
There are ways for the cheaper oil blenders to cut costs. They can ask for bids for base oil that is a cheap as possible and will barely meet the minimum spec. They can try for additive package bids at lower cost each contract cycle. They can do little testing to confirm that the products actually meet spec. Usually it doesn't matter--most folks who change their oil change it before it is exhausted. The few who run their oil until it is black goo will blame anything except themselves. The very few who test and run their oil for its full good life will find the oil that gives the lowest total cost of service including oil change labor, filter cost, engine wear.
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
Well it looks like the only ones who got $ was the lawywers and the state and county.
I do not see people who actually bought the product get any $.
Originally Posted By: Chris142
The sample i sent in was very close to delvac in additives.regardless use it with confidence
One of the world's big suppliers of lubricant additives is Infineum, jointly owned by Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil. They sell to other oil blenders. It is possible that WPP bought the additive package from Infineum. Each additive maker (Chevron Oronite, Lubrizon, Afton, a few others) sells a limited number of additive packages to meet each API Service Category.
There are ways for the cheaper oil blenders to cut costs. They can ask for bids for base oil that is a cheap as possible and will barely meet the minimum spec. They can try for additive package bids at lower cost each contract cycle. They can do little testing to confirm that the products actually meet spec. Usually it doesn't matter--most folks who change their oil change it before it is exhausted. The few who run their oil until it is black goo will blame anything except themselves. The very few who test and run their oil for its full good life will find the oil that gives the lowest total cost of service including oil change labor, filter cost, engine wear.
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
Well it looks like the only ones who got $ was the lawywers and the state and county.
I do not see people who actually bought the product get any $.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Ken2
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
I have seen that information before. We cannot deny the lack of compliance there.
However, there are other examples of fluids not meeting specs, and I'd point to the famous white paper study from Amsoil touting their gear oils. Several brand name products didn't pass muster there, either, in some manner of criteria measurement. I'm not saying all products are bad; I'm just noting that all products occasionally suffer from a quality issue. That Walmart was fined is no more eye-opening than any other failure. It's not that the house brand was at fault; it's that they blender did not supply what was contracted I suspect. Could (and has) happened to name brands as well.
http://wpc.1c96.edgecastcdn.net/001C96/G...ived/index.html
Sometimes the cheapo product does not meet spec. A few years ago Walmart paid a fine in California for gear oil that was below spec. http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article001335088.cfm?x=bf54LFJ,b8kbHC43
I have seen that information before. We cannot deny the lack of compliance there.
However, there are other examples of fluids not meeting specs, and I'd point to the famous white paper study from Amsoil touting their gear oils. Several brand name products didn't pass muster there, either, in some manner of criteria measurement. I'm not saying all products are bad; I'm just noting that all products occasionally suffer from a quality issue. That Walmart was fined is no more eye-opening than any other failure. It's not that the house brand was at fault; it's that they blender did not supply what was contracted I suspect. Could (and has) happened to name brands as well.
http://wpc.1c96.edgecastcdn.net/001C96/G...ived/index.html
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
...... House brands have been generally every bit as capable for most any normal use. I took a PCMO ST dino to 10k and 15k miles last year and it did stellar. There is no reason to think ST or AAP or AZ or Napa HDEO can't do what the others will in "normal" applications.
well or house brand liquor vs "top-shelf" liquors.
Impurities are distilled out of the top-shelf brands and they are smoother and have a richer, fuller taste.
house brands may have a bite and taste a little bitter or burning. They may even cause more of a hang-over.
They are called "well" liquors because they are kept in the speed rack or well. Top Shelf liquors are kept on the, yeah you guessed it, top-shelf.
I've always been "top shelf" and want the same in an oil.
...... House brands have been generally every bit as capable for most any normal use. I took a PCMO ST dino to 10k and 15k miles last year and it did stellar. There is no reason to think ST or AAP or AZ or Napa HDEO can't do what the others will in "normal" applications.
well or house brand liquor vs "top-shelf" liquors.
Impurities are distilled out of the top-shelf brands and they are smoother and have a richer, fuller taste.
house brands may have a bite and taste a little bitter or burning. They may even cause more of a hang-over.
They are called "well" liquors because they are kept in the speed rack or well. Top Shelf liquors are kept on the, yeah you guessed it, top-shelf.
I've always been "top shelf" and want the same in an oil.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
