Castrol Syntec
- Thread starter grbr95
- Start date
- Status
It's safe to extend drain intervals on most dino's to 4-5K...
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Yes!
I'll take a name-band synthetic over a name brand dino any day of the year.
SL / SM , GF3 / GF4 , ACEA ratings and factory approvals result in oils that have to meet higher performance standards and use quality basestocks[ like Group II+, III, III+ or higher].
Since the basestocks of most oils are adequate, I think the additive pack plays a large role in determining whether an oil can be used for an extended drain interval.
The issue is whether the price you pay for a quart of oil is reasonable in terms of the cost of the ingredients.
Inexpensive oils, like Troparctic, Havoline, Motorcraft, Delo 400 etc., with good basestocks and additives are good value.
Premium oils with expensive fully synthetic basestocks like Mobil 1, Castrol Syntec 0w30 from Germany, Redline, Motul, Amsoil etc. are also good value despite the high price , as long as the performance and service life is needed.
'High Mileage' oils also seem to be decent value, since they often have very robust additive packs and good basestocks for a small increase in price.
Where I find it gets tricky is when the oil is a 'synthetic blend' or a 'synthetic oil' made with the Group III basestocks.
These oils might be excellent value or they might be overpriced.... and there is no easy way to tell. Each oil has to be judged on its own merits.
Example A: Does the brand x $2.50/ qt 'synthetic blend' have any performance or ingredient advantage over $1.34/ qt Motorcraft?
Example B: Does a group III based brand y 'synthetic oil' really stand up as good value at $4.00 /qt compared to the $4.50/ qt to $7.00 /qt true synthetics?
In general, I think the oils described in example A or B are normally not good value.
Since the basestocks of most oils are adequate, I think the additive pack plays a large role in determining whether an oil can be used for an extended drain interval.
The issue is whether the price you pay for a quart of oil is reasonable in terms of the cost of the ingredients.
Inexpensive oils, like Troparctic, Havoline, Motorcraft, Delo 400 etc., with good basestocks and additives are good value.
Premium oils with expensive fully synthetic basestocks like Mobil 1, Castrol Syntec 0w30 from Germany, Redline, Motul, Amsoil etc. are also good value despite the high price , as long as the performance and service life is needed.
'High Mileage' oils also seem to be decent value, since they often have very robust additive packs and good basestocks for a small increase in price.
Where I find it gets tricky is when the oil is a 'synthetic blend' or a 'synthetic oil' made with the Group III basestocks.
These oils might be excellent value or they might be overpriced.... and there is no easy way to tell. Each oil has to be judged on its own merits.
Example A: Does the brand x $2.50/ qt 'synthetic blend' have any performance or ingredient advantage over $1.34/ qt Motorcraft?
Example B: Does a group III based brand y 'synthetic oil' really stand up as good value at $4.00 /qt compared to the $4.50/ qt to $7.00 /qt true synthetics?
In general, I think the oils described in example A or B are normally not good value.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Some folks here don't put a dollar "value" figure on heat protection, extended oil changes or engine cleanliness.
Compare the add-packs of Castrol syn-blend & Motorcraft. That might tell you why they are $1 difference in price.
Compare the add-packs of Castrol syn-blend & Motorcraft. That might tell you why they are $1 difference in price.
All the Motorcraft we sell is a syn blend now, IIRC. Like 2.20 or so a quart, pretty good deal. But I don't know how the blend Motorcraft stacks up to other blends. Wait, what were we talking about again? 4-5K on US Syntec? Piece of cake, you can do that on GTX.
Some of this oil marketing is like the bottle of orange juice that reads "100% orange juice" in big bold letters, and below continues with small letters, "from concentrate with other ingredients". With many oil packages the answer, is it synthetic, and how much synthetic in the blend, are not important to the marketing. The message 'outperforms other oils' is what you are lead to read. What does out perform mean, and which other oils? As far as we know, Castrol Syntec (not GC) is a group III with mystry additives added and under stress outperforms maple syrup. And to prove Syntec is as good as real synthetic, they charge the same price. So now, you know it's better... tv ads and the price, what more do you need? But I'll bet it does not taste as good on pancakes.
"Extended drains...4-5k" lol
Even the stuff made in America?
I think some of you may still be using old information. A few years back Mobil wasn't happy that Castrol was labeling its synthetic blend as fully synthetic, so they kicked up a big stink about it. Castrol had to relabel its product to Synthetic Blend which you can still buy in any store. And eventually they came out with a fully synthetic product which now says Full Synthetic. I e-mailed Castrol USA for an explanation about the labeling controversy, and if they think their product is superior to Mobil 1, or Amsoil. While they don't comment on competitors product they sent me this:
Castrol Syntec is a 100% fully-synthetic motor oil.
Castrol SYNTEC is not made with petroleum base stock. Synthetic motor oil starts with synthetic base oil. There are many different chemical processes available to make synthetic base oil due to advances in the technology of synthetics. These chemical processes are different than the simple refining techniques used to make conventional base oils.
For conventional base oils the process is simply a separation and subtraction process. Once the base oil is separated, the subtraction process cleans and removes impurities and undesirable compounds, such as wax and sulfur.
Synthetic processing uses select crude components that are chemically converted to create molecules that are different from the starting material. Synthetic processing rearranges, builds up and breaks apart molecules.
This chemical processing produces synthetic base oils that are engineered to provide consistent and predictable superior performance over conventional base oil counterparts. Synthetic base oils exhibit superior performance at both extreme hot and cold temperatures.
Synthetic base oils are then mixed with specialized additive systems that can be engineered to meet more demanding performance specifications than what is achievable from conventional motor oils. The combination of synthetic base oils and choice additive systems offers many benefits for your engine.
P.S. I recently aquired oil torture test results from Amsoil, according to them Castrol Syntec outperformed Mobil 1 Super Syn in Stability (NOACK Volatility Test: weight loss due to high temperature)
Castrol Syntec is a 100% fully-synthetic motor oil.
Castrol SYNTEC is not made with petroleum base stock. Synthetic motor oil starts with synthetic base oil. There are many different chemical processes available to make synthetic base oil due to advances in the technology of synthetics. These chemical processes are different than the simple refining techniques used to make conventional base oils.
For conventional base oils the process is simply a separation and subtraction process. Once the base oil is separated, the subtraction process cleans and removes impurities and undesirable compounds, such as wax and sulfur.
Synthetic processing uses select crude components that are chemically converted to create molecules that are different from the starting material. Synthetic processing rearranges, builds up and breaks apart molecules.
This chemical processing produces synthetic base oils that are engineered to provide consistent and predictable superior performance over conventional base oil counterparts. Synthetic base oils exhibit superior performance at both extreme hot and cold temperatures.
Synthetic base oils are then mixed with specialized additive systems that can be engineered to meet more demanding performance specifications than what is achievable from conventional motor oils. The combination of synthetic base oils and choice additive systems offers many benefits for your engine.
P.S. I recently aquired oil torture test results from Amsoil, according to them Castrol Syntec outperformed Mobil 1 Super Syn in Stability (NOACK Volatility Test: weight loss due to high temperature)
That said, respectfully, you have much to learn. It's all here, by the way, just dig around for a while.
The Syntec line, with the exception of the German-made 0w-30, is a Group-III based product. It starts as petroleum, and goes through various chemical processes, well beyond simple refining, before the base oil is "complete". Group IV and V oils are synthesized from other materials, such as for example, ethylene gas. Castrol syn blend is a different animal, and not involved in the Castrol-Mobil spat. Syntec has been G-III since the switch, and has not been rebadged a "blend".
The Castrol Mobil thing (an arbitration, by the way, not a lawsuit as its commonly portrayed) arose because until Castrol changed their Syntec line from a PAO (traditional synthetic) to a Group-III base oil, and kept calling it "synthetic", which no one had done before. So while Syntec had started out as a PAO based oil (Group IV) just like Mobil-1, when Castrol had supply problems, and learned that a G-III product could be made cheaper, they made the switch. And, by the way, Castrol won the arbitration, and as I said, they are still sellinig the G-III oil as Syntec.
The problem is that the term "synthetic" has become almost as meaningless as the term "good" or "premium" when applied to motor oil. If you believe that the processing Castrol uses to convert crude oil into Syntec base oil counts as "synthesis", then it's synthetic. If you take a more traditional view of how the word is used with respect to oil, then it most definitely is not. Additionally, the "warring" that has gone on over this has little to do with blends, ironically, though, since many modern SM oils that are thought of as "petroleum" are now actually blends, as they require a synthetic mixed in to meet the demands of the new standards.
So if Castrol Syntec (GC excepted) is Group III, does that include BC, 5W-40?
"If you believe that the processing Castrol uses to convert crude oil into Syntec base oil counts as "synthesis", then it's synthetic. If you take a more traditional view of how the word is used with respect to oil, then it most definitely is not."
The commonplace term, synthesis comes from Latin base, suntithenai. Sun [to put] and tithenai [together]. This would lead the lay person to assume that a sumthesized substance is built up from lesser componets. However, the definition from chemical handbooks allow for synthesis to simply mean a substance that is "signifigantly changed" to be call "synthetic". The arbitration board got it right. It's about time we did too.
The commonplace term, synthesis comes from Latin base, suntithenai. Sun [to put] and tithenai [together]. This would lead the lay person to assume that a sumthesized substance is built up from lesser componets. However, the definition from chemical handbooks allow for synthesis to simply mean a substance that is "signifigantly changed" to be call "synthetic". The arbitration board got it right. It's about time we did too.
BC 5w40 is still sort of a "mystery oil". Some say it's Group III, while others have hinted that it may contain some PAO.
There is just not much talk on here about that oil, because IMO, most BITOGers feel that it is over-priced & they don't bother with it.
From G-Man II:
Look at the context of the post, please. I was not striving for scientific precision, no, I was deliberately trying to be very general. I would respectfully challenge you to devise a two line description of the Group-III class of oils that's sufficiently accurate. And if Group III, or any of the classifications for that matter, can't be described with reasonable ease and clarity, then perhaps there's a problem with with the definition of the Group in the first place. OK G-Man, your two-liner, please.
Look at the context of the post, please. I was not striving for scientific precision, no, I was deliberately trying to be very general. I would respectfully challenge you to devise a two line description of the Group-III class of oils that's sufficiently accurate. And if Group III, or any of the classifications for that matter, can't be described with reasonable ease and clarity, then perhaps there's a problem with with the definition of the Group in the first place. OK G-Man, your two-liner, please.
- Status
Similar threads
