The best and I believe the most understandable answer to your question is located here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
Fully Synthetic Question
- Thread starter Gebo
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
Thanks for the correction. I fixed my earlier post.
Synthetic oil can be one of many different formulations.
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
Thanks for the correction. I fixed my earlier post.
Synthetic oil can be one of many different formulations.
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
Synthetic oil can be one of many different formulations.
It does mean something however. Majority Group I and Group II oils are not labeled as synthetic.
Synthetic oil can be one of many different formulations.
It does mean something however. Majority Group I and Group II oils are not labeled as synthetic.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
I'm sorry you are so upset about something to do with motor oil.
This is what makes BITOG a unique forum. Questions about the intricacies of motor oil-most care nothing about, or don't have the knowledge to understand, or won't make a difference no matter what the make up of the oil is as long as it meets the specs called for by the manufacturer.
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
I'm looking for a thread like-What Label Pennzoil should I use-in my Crown Vic-that rolls on Michelin tires.
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
I'm sorry you are so upset about something to do with motor oil.
This is what makes BITOG a unique forum. Questions about the intricacies of motor oil-most care nothing about, or don't have the knowledge to understand, or won't make a difference no matter what the make up of the oil is as long as it meets the specs called for by the manufacturer.
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
I'm looking for a thread like-What Label Pennzoil should I use-in my Crown Vic-that rolls on Michelin tires.
Last edited:
Looking at the MSDS, the Havoline Pro DS is almost certainly a group III and there is nothing wrong with that. By US market standards it is a fully synthetic oil.
Amsoil Signature MSDS shows a blend of Group III and Group IV (PAO) but it also has a huge additive pack that makes it a long life formula. Their XL and OE formulas are Group III just like the Havoline.
I'd run the Havoline in my vehicles without question, nothing wrong with that oil
Amsoil Signature MSDS shows a blend of Group III and Group IV (PAO) but it also has a huge additive pack that makes it a long life formula. Their XL and OE formulas are Group III just like the Havoline.
I'd run the Havoline in my vehicles without question, nothing wrong with that oil
Originally Posted By: BikeWhisperer
Amsoil Signature MSDS shows a blend of Group III and Group IV (PAO)
Do you have a link to this MSDS?
Amsoil Signature MSDS shows a blend of Group III and Group IV (PAO)
Do you have a link to this MSDS?
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
I'm sorry you are so upset about something to do with motor oil.
This is what makes BITOG a unique forum. Questions about the intricacies of motor oil-most care nothing about, or don't have the knowledge to understand, or won't make a difference no matter what the make up of the oil is as long as it meets the specs called for by the manufacturer.
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
I'm looking for a thread like-What Label Pennzoil should I use-in my Crown Vic-that rolls on Michelin tires.
You forgot the E0 Top-Tier fuel
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
I'm sorry you are so upset about something to do with motor oil.
This is what makes BITOG a unique forum. Questions about the intricacies of motor oil-most care nothing about, or don't have the knowledge to understand, or won't make a difference no matter what the make up of the oil is as long as it meets the specs called for by the manufacturer.
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
I'm looking for a thread like-What Label Pennzoil should I use-in my Crown Vic-that rolls on Michelin tires.
You forgot the E0 Top-Tier fuel
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: CKN
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
Haha I will say that I hate Pennzoil's new labeling system. When I went to get a jug of Platinum 5W20,I'd first grabbed a jug of pyb 5W20 and didn't realize it till I was pushing the basket across the store
Maybe we should start another thread on the new Pennzoil labels-that was a great one!
Haha I will say that I hate Pennzoil's new labeling system. When I went to get a jug of Platinum 5W20,I'd first grabbed a jug of pyb 5W20 and didn't realize it till I was pushing the basket across the store
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
No kidding. Why are so many guys here giving this OP a hard time when all he is trying to do is understand more about the definition of "Synthetic".
He is not asking if its OK to use this oil or how many mile OCIs he should get...he is asking for someone to explain how he should interpret the term "Synthetic".
I am really disappointed to see my favorite BITOG member not willing to help out a newbie with anything more than an emoticon...or two.
Is BITOG a site where experts lend support and share wisdom with fellow enthusiasts who want to learn or is it a place where "Knowledge is power" and senior members don't want to share so they can remain special ?
BTW, a thanks to Linctex for lending a helping hand with an informative post.
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
No kidding. Why are so many guys here giving this OP a hard time when all he is trying to do is understand more about the definition of "Synthetic".
He is not asking if its OK to use this oil or how many mile OCIs he should get...he is asking for someone to explain how he should interpret the term "Synthetic".
I am really disappointed to see my favorite BITOG member not willing to help out a newbie with anything more than an emoticon...or two.
Is BITOG a site where experts lend support and share wisdom with fellow enthusiasts who want to learn or is it a place where "Knowledge is power" and senior members don't want to share so they can remain special ?
BTW, a thanks to Linctex for lending a helping hand with an informative post.
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
Yes, and the paper showed that Visom was superior to PAO in certain aspects (especially in a PAO/Visom blend). ExxonMobil stated that the reason for Visom development was because of projected shortages of PAO world-wide.
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
Yes, and the paper showed that Visom was superior to PAO in certain aspects (especially in a PAO/Visom blend). ExxonMobil stated that the reason for Visom development was because of projected shortages of PAO world-wide.
Originally Posted By: ArcticDriver
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
No kidding. Why are so many guys here giving this OP a hard time when all he is trying to do is understand more about the definition of "Synthetic".
He is not asking if its OK to use this oil or how many mile OCIs he should get...he is asking for someone to explain how he should interpret the term "Synthetic".
I am really disappointed to see my favorite BITOG member not willing to help out a newbie with anything more than an emoticon...or two.
Is BITOG a site where experts lend support and share wisdom with fellow enthusiasts who want to learn or is it a place where "Knowledge is power" and senior members don't want to share so they can remain special ?
BTW, a thanks to Linctex for lending a helping hand with an informative post.
Thank you! In Molakule's defense, he has helped me many many times when I PM'd him. Based on our years of PMs, he assumed I would be a little quicker on the uptake. He is one guy I always PM if I want to get to the truth without being embarrassed on the forum. I have tremendous respect for him.
Originally Posted By: Gebo
Originally Posted By: VetteElite
Can I ask why you care? The performance of an oil should mean much more than the processes done on the base stock used to make the oil. And in the case of oils marketed as full synthetic, they do outperform classic conventional oil. I don't really put much effort into looking up the PAO % in the oil I use. I use a quality full synthetic from a large blender (includes store brand oil made by big name blenders) and call it a day.
Sure you can ask. I want an answer to my question. What I don't care about is a response like yours. I don't like being lectured about what I already know, duh...
No kidding. Why are so many guys here giving this OP a hard time when all he is trying to do is understand more about the definition of "Synthetic".
He is not asking if its OK to use this oil or how many mile OCIs he should get...he is asking for someone to explain how he should interpret the term "Synthetic".
I am really disappointed to see my favorite BITOG member not willing to help out a newbie with anything more than an emoticon...or two.
Is BITOG a site where experts lend support and share wisdom with fellow enthusiasts who want to learn or is it a place where "Knowledge is power" and senior members don't want to share so they can remain special ?
BTW, a thanks to Linctex for lending a helping hand with an informative post.
Thank you! In Molakule's defense, he has helped me many many times when I PM'd him. Based on our years of PMs, he assumed I would be a little quicker on the uptake. He is one guy I always PM if I want to get to the truth without being embarrassed on the forum. I have tremendous respect for him.
Originally Posted By: Linctex
What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
The reason it was a disaster was because people were using an oil that did not carry the specifications required by the manufacturer. Apparently they were ignorant of what specification their owner's manual required, and how to read a label to determine if the oil they purchased was correct. If there were oils at the time that were Group III and carried the required specification then there's no evidence that those oils would have caused the problems you note.
You can blame it on the word "synthetic" if you like, but I'm not so sure the word "oil" wasn't just as much to blame.
What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
The reason it was a disaster was because people were using an oil that did not carry the specifications required by the manufacturer. Apparently they were ignorant of what specification their owner's manual required, and how to read a label to determine if the oil they purchased was correct. If there were oils at the time that were Group III and carried the required specification then there's no evidence that those oils would have caused the problems you note.
You can blame it on the word "synthetic" if you like, but I'm not so sure the word "oil" wasn't just as much to blame.
The gap between conventional oil and synthetic gets narrower every year, mostly because many conventional oils are really a semi-syn - it's a necessity to keep up with ever increasing performance demands. Grab whatever you like and sleep well at night.
I'm using Edge 0w40 and Magnetec 5w30 in both my 3.5L Ecoboost vehicles, one under warranty, the other not.
Cheers!
I'm using Edge 0w40 and Magnetec 5w30 in both my 3.5L Ecoboost vehicles, one under warranty, the other not.
Cheers!
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
All M1 oils are a blend of base stocks of grp 3+, PAO, and esters, and maybe other goodies. Anyway their oils certainly perform very well over the long haul. And has been said, it's performance that counts.
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger
There have been lawsuits over the meaning of synthetic oil. Now synthetic can mean anything, it seems.
No, there haven't been.
There was this:
http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com/Press%...0in%20court.pdf
" The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus
serves as the dispute resolution mechanism for U.S. advertisers. Disputes often
break out over advertising — or rather truth in advertising — so NAD’s function
is to review factual claims made in national advertisements and where necessary,
resolve disputes between the parties. In such cases, NAD typically reaches a conclusion
within 90 days of a filing. Lest you think this is an easy way to complain about
an ad that you don’t like, you’ll find there are some basic requirements which
include pretty hefty filing fees: $5,000 andup, depending on company size. (Companies
with revenues over $1 billion will pay four times that.) Compliance with NAD’s findings
is voluntary, and its decisions can be appealed (after paying another fee).
The court determined that Pennzoil was wrong and was required to remove the
advertising from both television and print media. At this point, I guess you
could say that the two companies were even.
In March 1999, NAD came to one of its most far-reaching decisions ever. Castrol
was challenged by Mobil Oil Corp. (now ExxonMobil) over statements that Castrol
Syntec Engine Oil was both superior and synthetic. Previously, Castrol had used
polyalphaolefin base stock in Syntec, but of late it had switched to hydroisomerized
mineral base stocks. These, Castrol’s experts argued, could be labeled
synthetic because hydroisomerization changes the oil’s linear paraffin into a
branched-chain one, through the use of an intended chemical process and a solid catalyst.
To Mobil’s dismay, NAD found this persuasive. While NAD rejected Castrol’s claims of
“superiority” for Syntec, it concluded that the oil marketer had a reasonable
basis for asserting that hydroisomerized base stocks are synthetics.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=950311
"One thing people forget is that after the ruling that Castrol was not out of bounds calling Group III base oils "synthetic" every major oil company switched their base stock to the more profitable Group III. That is except for Mobil 1. Maybe Mobil refused to accept the ruling. No matter. What followed was a disaster for the average consumer especially those driving German cars still under warranty. Here's why:
People driving Germain cars, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, were required to use certain spec oils to remain under the manufacturer's warranty. These same owners noticed the name "Castrol Synthetic" on the expensive oil the Dealer was installing and many decided to save money and have Castrol Syntec installed at a local lube center or maybe did it themselves at home. What was worse, some of these cars had extended oil drain intervals up to 20,000 miles. What followed was a lot of sludging and engine damage with a lot of people being told their warranty was voided. The reason there was so much confusion is the motor oil sold at the Dealership service department were European Group IV synthetics that had been certified by the manufacturer for use in those engines. Castrol Syntec not only is Group III, but not certified for use in those engines.
I hate to say it, but the use of Group III "synthetics" needs to be rated differently somehow. Not only are these motor oils petroleum, but being petroleum they must employ lots of VI additives for for the "W" or winter grade specs."
What's so ironic about Mobil doing this to Castrol,Mobil themselves went to a group 3 oil. There's a "secret" paper floating around on the net somewhere where ExxonMobil says something to the effect of changing from a pao base to a group 3 base aka Visom behind the public's back,but that paper got leaked out somehow haha.
All M1 oils are a blend of base stocks of grp 3+, PAO, and esters, and maybe other goodies. Anyway their oils certainly perform very well over the long haul. And has been said, it's performance that counts.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: tig1
All M1 oils are a blend of base stocks of grp 3+, PAO, and esters, and maybe other goodies. Anyway their oils certainly perform very well over the long haul. And has been said, it's performance that counts.
Absolutely!
I remember MJ of ExxonMobil years back telling me that silver cap M1 15W50 (which is my all time favorite oil in the right apps) was a group 4,5 combo base stock. But yeah,I guess I was just pointing out how silly the "oil base stock" wars are M1 is one of my favorite oils,and what I'd buy next on the list to Pennzoil Platinum.
All M1 oils are a blend of base stocks of grp 3+, PAO, and esters, and maybe other goodies. Anyway their oils certainly perform very well over the long haul. And has been said, it's performance that counts.
Absolutely!
M1 is one of my favorite oils,and what I'd buy next on the list to Pennzoil Platinum.- Status