Is Castrol Syntec really synthetic oil? The jug says full synthetic, but I read on various web sites that it's not a real synthetic. I wouldn't think they could state "full synthetic" if it wasn't. I went with Syntec vs Mobil One since Syntec is what my dealer installs if you request synthetic. Thanks. steve
Castrol Syntec - real synthetic?
- Thread starter cristphoto
- Start date
- Status
Steve, it's a GIII oil AFAIK. No problem with the oil, but with the semantics.
Thanks for the reply. So a GIII means full synthetic? My Acura dealer uses Castrol Syntec so I'm assuming it must be fine (or have the additive package Acura likes) since they have to warranty the vehicle. You still smoke those stogies Groucho?
Legally, a Group III can be called a synthetic. I personally don't believe it is. However, it doesn't mean it can perform as good as one. Their are many very good Group III oils that also have PAO and esters. Syntec could be one of them. A fully PAO/Ester based synthetic generally could go longer drain intervals because they are more stable over long drains in terms of oxidation. Additive package also plays a huge part.
There are many here who can clarify this more accurately than me, so I hope one steps in if this is wrong somehow:
A group III is LEGALLY synthetic in this country because Castrol sued to make it so, over the objections of Mobil. (Or maybe it was Mobil that sued to prevent Castrol from calling GIII "full" synthetic. Either way, Castrol won the case.)
GIII comes from mineral oil, just like II and I, but goes through a process called hydrocracking, which I do not understand at all, which somehow makes the molecules behave more or less like a "true" synthetic.
Syntec is good, as Groucho said, but not as good as the Syntec made in Germany from GIV/V, where GIII is not legally synthetic.
A group III is LEGALLY synthetic in this country because Castrol sued to make it so, over the objections of Mobil. (Or maybe it was Mobil that sued to prevent Castrol from calling GIII "full" synthetic. Either way, Castrol won the case.)
GIII comes from mineral oil, just like II and I, but goes through a process called hydrocracking, which I do not understand at all, which somehow makes the molecules behave more or less like a "true" synthetic.
Syntec is good, as Groucho said, but not as good as the Syntec made in Germany from GIV/V, where GIII is not legally synthetic.
Mobil sued Castrol and lost over the definition of the word "synthetic".
Catrol Syntec is a very capable oil made of Group III and IV.
It will protect your engine as well and possibly better than Mobil 1 thanks to Castrol's traditionally stronger than average additive pack.
Syntec GC (0w30 Syntec) as mentioned above is build of Group IV and V, contains very complex Esters and is very shear stable.
That's why non-GC Syntec is considered to be not as good of a deal in comparison to its German-produced brother.
But I wouldn't hesitate using any Syntec over Mobil 1 since the advantages of the PAO based oils are all in the past.
[ May 29, 2006, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: vad ]
Catrol Syntec is a very capable oil made of Group III and IV.
It will protect your engine as well and possibly better than Mobil 1 thanks to Castrol's traditionally stronger than average additive pack.
Syntec GC (0w30 Syntec) as mentioned above is build of Group IV and V, contains very complex Esters and is very shear stable.
That's why non-GC Syntec is considered to be not as good of a deal in comparison to its German-produced brother.
But I wouldn't hesitate using any Syntec over Mobil 1 since the advantages of the PAO based oils are all in the past.
[ May 29, 2006, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: vad ]
Here is a good description of what has happened as taken from one of the Amsoil numerous websites.
""Late in 1997, Castrol changed the formula of its Syntec "full synthetic motor oil", eliminating the polyalphaolefin (PAO) base stock (that's the "synthetic" part, which makes up about 70% by volume of what's in the bottle) and replacing it with a "hydroisomerized" petroleum base stock.
Mobil Oil Corporation, maker of Mobil 1, "Worlds Leading Synthetic Motor Oil," said no fair and took its complaint to the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. NAD often arbitrates between feuding advertisers on their conflicting claims.
The notion behind synthetic motor oils as we've known them is an elegant one. Instead of relying on the cocktail of hydrocarbons contained in crude oil, why not go into the laboratory and build the perfect base stock from scratch, molecule by molecule, and builds it till it gets 10-carbon molecules, then combines three of those to form PAO. The result is a fluid more stable than the usual base oils derived from crude. It keeps flowing at low temperatures. It's more resistant to boiling off, and more resistant to oxidation, which causes thickening with prolonged exposure to high temperatures.
Still, there's more than one road to the point B of improved stability. Petroleum refiners in recent years have learned how to break apart certain undesirable molecules - wax, for example, which causes thickening of oil at low temperatures- and transform them by chemical reaction into helpful molecules. These new hydroisomerized base oils, in the view of some industry participants provided properties similar to PAO's but only cost half as much," Lubricants World reported.
The argument before NAD tiptoed around the obvious- does the consumer get four bucks' worth of value from each quart of synthetic oil?- and plunged straight into deep semantics. Mobil's experts said "synthetic" traditionally meant big molecules built up from small ones. Castrol's side held out for a looser description, defining "synthetic" as "the product of an intended chemical reaction."
What do unbiased sources say? It turns out that the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) both have technical standards covering motor oils, and both of these organizations in the '90's backed away from their old definitions of "synthetic," leaving lots of room for new interpretations.
In the end, NAD decided that the evidence constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil, said Lubricants World.""
So, with the advances in the basestock technologies the performance gap in between the hydrocracked Group III and PAO based oils has significantly narrowed or even disappered.
Still the Mobil 1 fans are mostly a bunch that won't admit the defeat and continue to hate Castrol for changing the rules of the game even though they are the ones who are benefiting from the situation since there is a greater choise among the high quality oils which also helps keep the prices in check.
""Late in 1997, Castrol changed the formula of its Syntec "full synthetic motor oil", eliminating the polyalphaolefin (PAO) base stock (that's the "synthetic" part, which makes up about 70% by volume of what's in the bottle) and replacing it with a "hydroisomerized" petroleum base stock.
Mobil Oil Corporation, maker of Mobil 1, "Worlds Leading Synthetic Motor Oil," said no fair and took its complaint to the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. NAD often arbitrates between feuding advertisers on their conflicting claims.
The notion behind synthetic motor oils as we've known them is an elegant one. Instead of relying on the cocktail of hydrocarbons contained in crude oil, why not go into the laboratory and build the perfect base stock from scratch, molecule by molecule, and builds it till it gets 10-carbon molecules, then combines three of those to form PAO. The result is a fluid more stable than the usual base oils derived from crude. It keeps flowing at low temperatures. It's more resistant to boiling off, and more resistant to oxidation, which causes thickening with prolonged exposure to high temperatures.
Still, there's more than one road to the point B of improved stability. Petroleum refiners in recent years have learned how to break apart certain undesirable molecules - wax, for example, which causes thickening of oil at low temperatures- and transform them by chemical reaction into helpful molecules. These new hydroisomerized base oils, in the view of some industry participants provided properties similar to PAO's but only cost half as much," Lubricants World reported.
The argument before NAD tiptoed around the obvious- does the consumer get four bucks' worth of value from each quart of synthetic oil?- and plunged straight into deep semantics. Mobil's experts said "synthetic" traditionally meant big molecules built up from small ones. Castrol's side held out for a looser description, defining "synthetic" as "the product of an intended chemical reaction."
What do unbiased sources say? It turns out that the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) both have technical standards covering motor oils, and both of these organizations in the '90's backed away from their old definitions of "synthetic," leaving lots of room for new interpretations.
In the end, NAD decided that the evidence constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil, said Lubricants World.""
So, with the advances in the basestock technologies the performance gap in between the hydrocracked Group III and PAO based oils has significantly narrowed or even disappered.
Still the Mobil 1 fans are mostly a bunch that won't admit the defeat and continue to hate Castrol for changing the rules of the game even though they are the ones who are benefiting from the situation since there is a greater choise among the high quality oils which also helps keep the prices in check.
Hey I call a GPII a syn but what do I know, other than a PAO has only an advantage in lower PP over a GPIII otherwise they are a push in VI, Oxidative stability and the GPIII will have a slightly better solubility to.
In otherwords a GPIII will run as good as long as a PAO based PCMO.
bruce
In otherwords a GPIII will run as good as long as a PAO based PCMO.
bruce
Well, I don't understand what's the big deal about the cost of the raw materials or processes?
We as customers, should only care about the performance of the finished product, shouldn't we?
Pennzoil Platinum is also cheaper than PAO to produce yet it doesn't generate any of the negative feelings as Syntec does.
Anyone want to trade some Mobil 1 0w-30 for Syntec 0w-30?
The problem is there are those who hate Mobil 1 out of principle, and their are those who hate Castrol out of priniple.
I personally believe both oils have their tradoffs.
Also, its painfully obvious that there are those who will go out of their way to bash particular products...you know who you are.
I personally believe both oils have their tradoffs.
Also, its painfully obvious that there are those who will go out of their way to bash particular products...you know who you are.
The Syntec vs Mobil 1 was a very public arguement. Mobil probably did themselves well by loosing the decisioin. They looked like the good guys, and I'll bet that gained some customer, not only converts from Syntec, but those using other products, as well. It was a great marketing move by Mobil.
It looks like those of us who use high quality dino and blends are the real winners. We get hydrocracked group 2 and 2+ or blends with both group 2 and 3 for a much lower price than any 'full synthetic'.
Mobil Oil didn't really lose, folks. In addition to being the major domestic supplier of PAO base oils - a market they virtually controlled at the time - Mobil was also one of the largest purveyors of severly hydrotreated group III base oils. Mobil took its "loss" and cried all the way to the bank. Castrol, a blender only, still had to procure its Group III base oils from somewhere. To this day, Castrol and parent company British Petroleum still have NO domestic base oil refinery capability.
I wish we had more UOA's of Castrol, so we could find out how bad it really is.
- Status
Similar threads
