Synthetic Blends, redemption through dexos?

Status
Not open for further replies.

wemay

Site Donor 2023
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
17,173
Location
Kendall, FL
Many BITOGERS (with good reason) have shrugged the acceptance of syn blends, calling them, 'an excuse for oil brands to raise the price of their conventional oils'. With the advent of Dexos, have opinions changed? There now is clear separation based on certifications and approval and not just wording on the jug - synthetic/synthetic blend etc.
 
Last edited:
If i want a syn blend i would just make my own within that brand, that way i know the percentage . I.E. 2 1/2 quarts of pyb and 2 1/2 quarts of pen platinum.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to hear more of what other have to say on this subject as I also have questions myself. Questions pertaining to the syn/blend portion rather than the particular dexos1 certification.

It's been my understanding that most SN/GF-5 dino oils are actually syn/blend oils(how much, we don't know), without having the information stated on the container(bottles or jugs), with the actual syn/blend oils probably have a greater deal more synthetic in the mix.

Though, dexos1 may have a particular deposit control(for DI engines) that other not certified dexos1's DO NOT have!
 
Last edited:
If your vehicle isn't worth the price of a quality synthetic oil then dino would be the choice. Blends don't seem to be a reasonable option.
 
ELF had proved years ago in racing tear downs of HSO engines that a blend is a better overall lube than a full syn. What that final blend was, and its additisation, I dont recall. I do have the white paper if anyone wants me to email it to them. Just know than many and most advertised "fully synthetic oil" product have none to little synthetic base in them, so the argument is moot in the North American market.
 
Last edited:
50/50 blends seem like an exceptional deal IMO. Trop Artic oil seems to be a pretty stout oil as well and can be picked up relatively cheap when on sale.
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
ELF had proved years ago in racing tear downs of HSO engines that a blend is a better overall lube than a full syn. What that final blend was, and its additisation, I dont recall. I do have the white paper if anyone wants me to email it to them. Just know than many and most advertised "fully synthetic oil" product have none to little synthetic base in them, so the argument is moot in the North American market.


Once again you are wrong. Fully synthetic oils like M1 do have a blend of base stocks, including grp 4-5. Even Amsoil has a blended base for higher performance than 4 alone. The only thing that makes blends superior to dino is the percentage of synthetic base stock in their blend. Blends still do not perform to the level of quality synthetic oils.
 
Dexos is a performance spec and has nothing to do with base oil group as long as the oil can meet those performance requirements.
 
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Dexos is a performance spec and has nothing to do with base oil group as long as the oil can meet those performance requirements.


This is exactly my point. Up to now, the oil must at least be synblend to reach the performance requirements for dexos. Some will chime in, 'well we don't know because conv aren't tested...' If not on the bottle/jug, it doesn't qualify.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
ELF had proved years ago in racing tear downs of HSO engines that a blend is a better overall lube than a full syn. What that final blend was, and its additisation, I dont recall. I do have the white paper if anyone wants me to email it to them. Just know than many and most advertised "fully synthetic oil" product have none to little synthetic base in them, so the argument is moot in the North American market.


Once again you are wrong. Fully synthetic oils like M1 do have a blend of base stocks, including grp 4-5. Even Amsoil has a blended base for higher performance than 4 alone. The only thing that makes blends superior to dino is the percentage of synthetic base stock in their blend. Blends still do not perform to the level of quality synthetic oils.
I don't think he is wrong, just aware of what can be called "synthetic" in the US. I would suggest you educate yourself about that.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
There now is clear separation based on certifications and approval and not just wording on the jug - synthetic/synthetic blend etc.


I disagree that there is. dexos1 and dexos2 are performance specifications and not material specifications. Oil blenders are meeting those specifications with products they market as "synthetic blend" and products they market as "fully synthetic". I don't think you can say that they couldn't meet them with products they market as "conventional".

Originally Posted By: wemay
Up to now, the oil must at least be synblend to reach the performance requirements for dexos.


I disagree with this as well. The most we can say is:

"Up to now, the only oils that have been marketed as meeting the dexos1 certification are those labeled as synthetic blend or fully synthetic."

If it doesn't say dexos1 on the bottle, you cannot be assured that it meets the dexos1 performance specifications. However, you also cannot be assured that it doesn't meet them. Oil blenders have positioned their dexos1-certified products at a level above the base-price conventional oils. Could they sell a dexos1-certified oil marketed as "convetional" at $16/jug? I personally believe they could do that, but have chosen to not do that.
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
ELF had proved years ago in racing tear downs of HSO engines that a blend is a better overall lube than a full syn. What that final blend was, and its additisation, I dont recall. I do have the white paper if anyone wants me to email it to them. Just know than many and most advertised "fully synthetic oil" product have none to little synthetic base in them, so the argument is moot in the North American market.


Once again you are wrong. Fully synthetic oils like M1 do have a blend of base stocks, including grp 4-5. Even Amsoil has a blended base for higher performance than 4 alone. The only thing that makes blends superior to dino is the percentage of synthetic base stock in their blend. Blends still do not perform to the level of quality synthetic oils.
I don't think he is wrong, just aware of what can be called "synthetic" in the US. I would suggest you educate yourself about that.


Arcographite doesn't write the requirements for an oil to be called synthetic. Neither does Germany for the US. And yes, he is very wrong about this issue.
 
But that's a belief. The fact is, if it isnt on the product label, it isnt a dexos approved oil. I understand what you're saying but dont wholly agree.
 
Having a dexos logo is about as relevant to oil quality as having a 6 in the UPC code. As stated even modern blends can achieve the spec.

"There now is clear separation based on certifications and approval and not just wording on the jug - synthetic/synthetic blend etc."

I find this the exact opposite with Dexos. There is no clear separation. In fact some companies like Ashland further muddy the water by refusing to pay the royalty.

I would see your point with some of the european specs. Dexos isn't a very high hurdle to clear, so getting it doesn't mean much. The fact a blend meets it is more an indication the spec is easy to meet than the oil is better than others, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: wemay
But that's a belief. The fact is, if it isnt on the product label, it isnt a dexos approved oil. I understand what you're saying but dont wholly agree.


You're talking to yourself...
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
But that's a belief. The fact is, if it isnt on the product label, it isnt a dexos approved oil. I understand what you're saying but dont wholly agree.


If it's not on the label, then it's not certified by General Motors as meeting the performance requirements of dexos1, correct.

But...why is an oil not certified by General Motors? And this is important because it goes back to your original question about prevailing opinions of synthetic blend oils as being truly different from conventionals or just higher-priced products that are similar.

(A) The oil blender either has tried to get it certified and it failed, or they know it won't pass so they haven't tried.

(B) The oil blender has chosen not to market that particular oil to dexos1 users, and instead prefers that they purchase an oil positioned in the mid-range or premium end of their line up.

From your comments, I perceive that you think the reason is (A), and I don't think that you can assume that. Reason (B) is pretty compelling to a for-profit company such as Shell, ExxonMobil, etc.
 
Let me further my post above with a continuing thought. dexos1 has created a new niche in the oil market for a product that is a little bit "better" than prevailing ILSAC and API specifications. But it's not as rigorous, either, as something like ACEA or any of the manufacturer specifications (BMW, VW, Honda HTO-06, etc).

I think the oil blenders, and Shell in particular, saw that as an opportunity to add a fourth major position to their portfolio. They have conventionals (QSGB, PYB, FS). They have high mileage offerings (I include Defy in that). They have "full synthetic" offerings (QSUD, PP, etc). And now this dexos1 thing comes along. They had what I believe to be a very slow-selling Pennzoil Synthetic Blend product on the shelf...competing for space with their better-selling products. Shell probably saw three options here:

(A) Make any adjustments needed to PYB (for example), get it certified, and then market that oil as a dexos1 offering.

(B) Many any adjustments needed to PP (for example), get it certified, and then market that oil as a dexos1 offering.

Neither of those options gain them any shelf space. (A) would probably add a lot of customers to the PYB fold, but it's likely a lower margin oil being price where it typically is. (B) doesn't really set them apart from other "full synthetic" oils, as they'll surely be dexos1-certified as well. I believe (and yes, it's only a belief), that they went with (C).

(C) Rejuvenate/reinvent Pennzoil's Synthetic Blend oil as an offering dedicated to owners of General Motors vehicles (and there are a lot of them!), and price it somewhere between PYB and PP. They'll look good against other "full synthetic" oils like M1 and VSP because they'll have a lower price, they'll (likely) have a bit more margin with a $19/jug oil than a $16/jug oil, and they'll also reclaim that shelf space that the aging old Gold Bottle was taking up.

So I don't see dexos1 as changing my opinion of a product labeled as a "synthetic blend". I'm sure it's a fine product. But I believe that it's a conscious decision by Shell (in this example) to position their products where they felt that they'd sell best. Could they have gotten the certification on PYB? I believe they could have. And I believe that they chose not to, for the reasons stated above.
 
Ashland/Valvoline passing on the Dexos 1 label is a purely financial decision, they don't want to pay the royalty-and Dexos has (somewhat) opened a can of worms in the motor oil certification business. Every company now seems to have exotic oil certifications, such as FIAT's new specs for high performance engines, etc.-wondering if they all cost a royalty as Dexos does?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top