Poll: QSGB or MC synblend

[Gene K]

Originally Posted By: jorton
Comparing viscometrics over at PQIA, 5w-20 QS looks like it's more synthetic than MC is.

http://www.pqiamerica.com/Feb2014/consolidated5w20ALL.html

Look at viscosity @ -30c mpas, and volatility.

Plenty of positive testamonials for both!


No way to know that. MC uses a relatively low VI Korean Group III and Group Ii. QS may use a GIi+ and a lesser amount of GIii+ along with reduced VII and increased Pour Point Depressants.

 

[53' Stude]

Triton: I was curious was all and I think we all know that QSGB may be using GTL base stock and it could very well be a "synblend"

 

[Triton_330]

Originally Posted By: car51
Triton: I was curious was all and I think we all know that QSGB may be using GTL base stock and it could very well be a "synblend"

At the same time I could respond saying that there's been alot of talk that in order to meet API SN qualifications, even conventionals need some amount of synthetic (not sure how true or false that is as I didn't read into it but)...

QSGB is a labeled conventional, MC is a labeled semi-syn.

I may be frowned upon for not thinking outside the box, but I tend to bear my faith in believing what the labels qualify the oil as in terms of conv/blend/syn - espicially in regards to well known brands (and obviously, with API certs).

Whether or not QSGB does or doesn't use GTL; whether or not it's an "unlabeled blend"... I'm going to view it as a conventional because it isn't labeled otherwise.

~ Triton

 

[53' Stude]

very true sir