4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Might also consider who has the highest R&D budget.
On the other hand, the private labels help keep all other brands reasonably priced.
On the other hand, the private labels help keep all other brands reasonably priced.
Rating lower tiered synthetics?
- Thread starter pbm
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by 4WD
Well, those who like to criticize marketing could check with Wayne on how much we'll have to donate if Pennzoil was not a sponsor with banners on this very site.
What companies investing millions do not market and make "claims" …
They know their competition will buy and test that lubricant …
Remember, if you're not paying, you are the product.
And nobody stated that companies shouldn't make marketing claims. I simply requested that RDY4WAR substantiate his claims.
Cheers!
Well, those who like to criticize marketing could check with Wayne on how much we'll have to donate if Pennzoil was not a sponsor with banners on this very site.
What companies investing millions do not market and make "claims" …
They know their competition will buy and test that lubricant …
Remember, if you're not paying, you are the product.
And nobody stated that companies shouldn't make marketing claims. I simply requested that RDY4WAR substantiate his claims.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Originally Posted by 4WD
Might also consider who has the highest R&D budget.
On the other hand, the private labels help keep all other brands reasonably priced.
Maybe true... However the higher research and development budgets are possibly the additive package suppliers... Especially if based upon percentage per of total outlays for that company.
And though in a indirect way for sure... If one buys a oil from Cam2 Warren Oil etc etc one is still indirectly getting money to Mobil, Shell or Chevron...
Might also consider who has the highest R&D budget.
On the other hand, the private labels help keep all other brands reasonably priced.
Maybe true... However the higher research and development budgets are possibly the additive package suppliers... Especially if based upon percentage per of total outlays for that company.
And though in a indirect way for sure... If one buys a oil from Cam2 Warren Oil etc etc one is still indirectly getting money to Mobil, Shell or Chevron...
If a simple and effective methodology is working, going to a more complex methodology does not normally yield better results.
This is a natural law, it works with blending, cooking, exercise science etc.. the natural law is that complexity beyond the need for complexity sake does not yield better results, more often they get worse.
. When we go against natural law, we lose.
This is a natural law, it works with blending, cooking, exercise science etc.. the natural law is that complexity beyond the need for complexity sake does not yield better results, more often they get worse.
. When we go against natural law, we lose.
Originally Posted by 4WD
If lubes are only different because of marketing … I'd suggest MolaKule remove lots of the white paper stuff he's burning up space with. I'd also suggest German car makers just follow API and not waste time and money. Racers too.
Further, when they are ready to introduce a new OEM standard … just hook up with Warren.
And get an Amsoil bypass kit to run ST for 25k and over 500k like a member here has.
Guys, we get these lubes meet some decent standards and are all one needs in many cases … but they are copy engineered and not the sector leaders being glorified as such. That matters to some.
Spend your money however … but this only difference is marketing is not grounded in reality. The term is claims, BTW.
Warren could not exist without industry stalwarts … and as a long term employee of heavy industries … I'm going to support vital companies … not the Equate of lubrication. (plus I take long flights to work, guess what)
The best thing that has happened for Warren is the majors investing hundreds of millions in advanced GII.
The next best thing is the OLM … and not having to push oil long in TDI engines.
If anything … the OEM's are making fuel diluted engines that have ruined efforts by the majors to make and market long range lubes.
I don't think all of the debate should be over lubes … how about the OEM's deal with design flaws ruining the great oils to the point members are dumping often and cheap now works better.
I'm holding a big stash of M1 AP thinking it's better than ST … but how do I push it longer if only the DI ruins it
(use ST HD30 to spike it halfway ?)
Nicely said. +1.
If lubes are only different because of marketing … I'd suggest MolaKule remove lots of the white paper stuff he's burning up space with. I'd also suggest German car makers just follow API and not waste time and money. Racers too.
Further, when they are ready to introduce a new OEM standard … just hook up with Warren.
And get an Amsoil bypass kit to run ST for 25k and over 500k like a member here has.
Guys, we get these lubes meet some decent standards and are all one needs in many cases … but they are copy engineered and not the sector leaders being glorified as such. That matters to some.
Spend your money however … but this only difference is marketing is not grounded in reality. The term is claims, BTW.
Warren could not exist without industry stalwarts … and as a long term employee of heavy industries … I'm going to support vital companies … not the Equate of lubrication. (plus I take long flights to work, guess what)
The best thing that has happened for Warren is the majors investing hundreds of millions in advanced GII.
The next best thing is the OLM … and not having to push oil long in TDI engines.
If anything … the OEM's are making fuel diluted engines that have ruined efforts by the majors to make and market long range lubes.
I don't think all of the debate should be over lubes … how about the OEM's deal with design flaws ruining the great oils to the point members are dumping often and cheap now works better.
I'm holding a big stash of M1 AP thinking it's better than ST … but how do I push it longer if only the DI ruins it
(use ST HD30 to spike it halfway ?)
Nicely said. +1.
dnewton3
Staff member
Ahhhhhhh ... I see that Subie gets it!
Let the data talk! When I pulled my initial study on the Duratec 2.5L, it was back in 2012. (I owned a 2010 Fusion at the time with the 2.5L). At that time, the Fe avg was 1.6ppm/1k miles. Here it is about 7 years later and the data essentially hasn't changed one bit; 1.4ppm/1k miles by Subie's calculations.
As long as it's a qualified API lube, that 2.5L engine just does not care. If you are running 10k miles or less, you're going to see the same performance overall regardless if you use dino or syn, 5w-20 vs 5w-30, etc. In fact, my data stream goes out to 15k miles, and the same holds true. I would not advocate for 15k mile OFCIs without UOAs, to at least build a case-history on one's personal car. But 10k miles is a total no-brainer.
We now own a 2017 Fusion 2.5L (just bought used last week). I fully intend to run 10k mile OFCIs on that car, and never once do a UOA. The data tells me that it would be a waste of time and money because ALL those engine can easily run 10k miles on just "normal" oil and filters. Heck, even the IOLM in the car is indicating 10k miles would be a typical OFCI.
To the specific topic here, there's no value in "ranking" these syns, because you'll never be able to prove there's any performance disparity (in wear control) between any of them. The most important choice between them would be cost, not the name on the bottle.
Let the data talk! When I pulled my initial study on the Duratec 2.5L, it was back in 2012. (I owned a 2010 Fusion at the time with the 2.5L). At that time, the Fe avg was 1.6ppm/1k miles. Here it is about 7 years later and the data essentially hasn't changed one bit; 1.4ppm/1k miles by Subie's calculations.
As long as it's a qualified API lube, that 2.5L engine just does not care. If you are running 10k miles or less, you're going to see the same performance overall regardless if you use dino or syn, 5w-20 vs 5w-30, etc. In fact, my data stream goes out to 15k miles, and the same holds true. I would not advocate for 15k mile OFCIs without UOAs, to at least build a case-history on one's personal car. But 10k miles is a total no-brainer.
We now own a 2017 Fusion 2.5L (just bought used last week). I fully intend to run 10k mile OFCIs on that car, and never once do a UOA. The data tells me that it would be a waste of time and money because ALL those engine can easily run 10k miles on just "normal" oil and filters. Heck, even the IOLM in the car is indicating 10k miles would be a typical OFCI.
To the specific topic here, there's no value in "ranking" these syns, because you'll never be able to prove there's any performance disparity (in wear control) between any of them. The most important choice between them would be cost, not the name on the bottle.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Have any UOA's on a Ford EcoBoost doing 15k … Or even 10k … that engine seems to be perceived as one of the hardest on lubes, but other than lube properties in decay - I don't recall drastic wear.
(not sure if chain issues are all lubricant … millions of OHC engines around)
(not sure if chain issues are all lubricant … millions of OHC engines around)
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
I would put QSUD 0W20 at #1. Searching through uoa's,it always had virtually zero wear metals.
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I would put QSUD 0W20 at #1. Searching through uoa's,it always had virtually zero wear metals.
..... but would you see zero wear in Minnesota or Michigan? I envy you-Texas residents that get to use the most sheer-stable oils year-round.
Happy New Year
I would put QSUD 0W20 at #1. Searching through uoa's,it always had virtually zero wear metals.
..... but would you see zero wear in Minnesota or Michigan? I envy you-Texas residents that get to use the most sheer-stable oils year-round.
Happy New Year
I thought of another oil left off the list, Havoline Pro DS Smart Change 6qt Box 0w20. Currently showing ~$18 at WM. Certainly an excellent value from a major.
Originally Posted by Imp4
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
You sound like an engineer.
Despite the bleating from unicorn dust fans, any of the oils listed will take his engine well beyond his expected service life. It won't be an oil related issue whether he uses Supertech or Amsoil.
The only difference will be cost and feels.
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
You sound like an engineer.
Despite the bleating from unicorn dust fans, any of the oils listed will take his engine well beyond his expected service life. It won't be an oil related issue whether he uses Supertech or Amsoil.
The only difference will be cost and feels.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I would put QSUD 0W20 at #1. Searching through uoa's,it always had virtually zero wear metals.
..... but would you see zero wear in Minnesota or Michigan? I envy you-Texas residents that get to use the most sheer-stable oils year-round.
Happy New Year
Haha it's so funny when it hits the 70s and people start bundling up in their heavy winter coats!
Happy New Year brother!! Hope you have a wonderful and amazing year
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
I would put QSUD 0W20 at #1. Searching through uoa's,it always had virtually zero wear metals.
..... but would you see zero wear in Minnesota or Michigan? I envy you-Texas residents that get to use the most sheer-stable oils year-round.
Happy New Year
Haha it's so funny when it hits the 70s and people start bundling up in their heavy winter coats!
Happy New Year brother!! Hope you have a wonderful and amazing year
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Between Ford's OCI recommendation, Blackstone's data, and dnewton's experience, I would just about 100% guarantee you can use ANY oil that meets Ford's spec, conventional or synthetic, for 10k miles without ever doing a UOA, and your engine will still outlast the vehicle. If you're interested in the excel file to check out the data, PM me and I'll send it over.
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
Between Ford's OCI recommendation, Blackstone's data, and dnewton's experience, I would just about 100% guarantee you can use ANY oil that meets Ford's spec, conventional or synthetic, for 10k miles without ever doing a UOA, and your engine will still outlast the vehicle. If you're interested in the excel file to check out the data, PM me and I'll send it over.
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by DZello
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
WRT OP's post, it will always apply. And I highly doubt the FULL lifecycle cost of batteries (you know, the mining, and toxic recycling, and the fact that something like 94% of the electricity used to recharge your beloved battery still comes from coal-powered plants) will get to parity with the cost of gasoline anytime in the next two decades. That means a good portion of the board's members will likely be dead and gone before electric cars are all we can buy in a showroom... of course, without government meddling. Until it's no more expensive than what you drive today, it's just another hidden tax to fleece the working people with questionable "benefits".
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
WRT OP's post, it will always apply. And I highly doubt the FULL lifecycle cost of batteries (you know, the mining, and toxic recycling, and the fact that something like 94% of the electricity used to recharge your beloved battery still comes from coal-powered plants) will get to parity with the cost of gasoline anytime in the next two decades. That means a good portion of the board's members will likely be dead and gone before electric cars are all we can buy in a showroom... of course, without government meddling. Until it's no more expensive than what you drive today, it's just another hidden tax to fleece the working people with questionable "benefits".
Originally Posted by DZello
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Between Ford's OCI recommendation, Blackstone's data, and dnewton's experience, I would just about 100% guarantee you can use ANY oil that meets Ford's spec, conventional or synthetic, for 10k miles without ever doing a UOA, and your engine will still outlast the vehicle. If you're interested in the excel file to check out the data, PM me and I'll send it over.
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
Hey DZello, the whole thread is based per OPs stated Ford Escape w/2.5l Duratec.
Let's keep it on topic please.
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Between Ford's OCI recommendation, Blackstone's data, and dnewton's experience, I would just about 100% guarantee you can use ANY oil that meets Ford's spec, conventional or synthetic, for 10k miles without ever doing a UOA, and your engine will still outlast the vehicle. If you're interested in the excel file to check out the data, PM me and I'll send it over.
Not sure that will be the case for new GDI and turbo engines, but they'll get obsolete faster. Batteries are getting cheaper every year.
Hey DZello, the whole thread is based per OPs stated Ford Escape w/2.5l Duratec.
Let's keep it on topic please.
Originally Posted by Imp4
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
Great common sense analogy Imp4 !
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Alright. Let me see what I can say here without disclosing the exact formulas for specific oils.
Pretty much every API SN+ / D1G2 oil is going to generally look like this (plus a margin of error)...
Ca: 1000-1400
Mg: 500-700
P: 700-800
Zn: 800-900
B: 100-250
Mo: 60-80
Amazon Basics API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/AmazonBasics_0W20.html
SuperTech API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/SuperTech_5W20.html
Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
Mobil 1 AP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/Mobil1_5W20.html
STP API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/STP_5W30.html
and so on and so on... A few deviate slightly with a drop of titanium thrown in there (Valvoilne, Royal Purple, Castrol Edge), but for the most part, it's the same cookie cutter recipe. They're all in the same tiny box. There's differences in base oils with SOPUS riding that GTL train, but you aren't going to see any real world benefit from that over anything else. They use it because it's cheaper, and also because they dove head first into it and have to see it through.
Now let's compare those to the likes of Amsoil Signature Series which has a good bit more moly, boron, and detergents,
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4554249/1/Amsoil_SS_5w30_new_formulation
Red Line with loads more moly, ZDDP, and detergent.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4851640/1
High Performance Lubricants BAS where the additive package takes up nearly 30% of the total oil volume.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ance-lubricants-bas-5w-30-racing-oil-voa
These oils are not "cookie cutter" as you can see. They don't follow the boring API recipe.
Ah I think I see what you're after here.
This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
He then asked for the board to rank a set of oils slated for his application.
I responded with a question as to why he was considering them lower tier and whether it was spec related or not.
You then stated:
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I consider them lower teir because they are minimalistic, with a rather cookie cutter recipe, that aims to meet minimum standards and push product. Everything is cheapened as much as possible, so long as it still meets API, in order to be competitive with one another and make a good profit. They are your bare bones basic recipes.
What you have described here is something that is exactly suited to meet every requirement of the job at hand.
It's the proverbial 12-foot ladder for the 10-foot hole.
I subsequently challenged you to as to why these products were minimalistic and you provided some self styled artwork and a treatise on products that are triple or quadruple the cost of the products the OP was asking about. You know, the proverbial 15-foot ladders.
Every product the OP listed will accomplish the goal at hand with not so much as a second thought. As such, they are completely suited for the job and are not 'lower tiered' or 'lower grade' or lower anything else, nor are they minimalistic. They are exactly appropriate, with the added bonus of being some of the least expensive solutions available for the task at hand.
In summary, the key here is establishing the performance goal before selecting possible solutions. In this case, a 2.5l Duratec with a 10k OCI goal. And in this circumstance, Redline or HPL or Amsoil SS will work but they are no better at achieving the stated goal than any of the oils OP listed.
Great common sense analogy Imp4 !
*Feeling good now regarding my $17 investment in QSUD 5W20 for a severe schedule OCI winter fill experiment ... With a 4K mile / 150 hour OCI I should be good at reducing fuel dilution concerns (GDI engine) , excessive soot , dirty oil vapors , etc. Lastly , if I'm not red lining my daily driver GDI Sonata I should be good to go with the oil and OCI (Blackstone will provide the final verdict ) . As a worse case GDI engine oil (no matter the outcome from Blackstone) , 5W30 synthetic D1 / Gen 2 synthetic oil will be my new standard weight as I notice no difference in performance or gas mileage as compared to the current 5W20 fill I am trying for the first time since the factory fill. Safe to say , QSUD in either 5W20 or 5W30 weight is a better oil than expected with a quite decent add pack : Quaker State API SN+
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
http://pqiadata.org/QuakerState_5W20.html
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted by imp4
... This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
I cannot agree more. And I love that analogy and will use it in the future.
I also like making analogies, and this is one I've purported many times here ...
What is better for hunting; the .308Win or .30-06? Both have pros and cons, and the debate will never be settled.
But they are both, in fact, overkill, for hunting squirrels!
We have to keep the task at hand in mind as well as the conditions surrounding that task, and understand what a minimum threshold is for attaining the goals of achieving that task. Once "good enough" is met, making it "better" is only a sense of emotional satisfaction because the nuances of product delineation have melted away.
The flaw in the logic of many BITOGers is that they assume because a difference exists in the bottle, it will automatically manifest into a difference in wear control. But my database of more than 16,000 UOAs shows this just ins't the case. Most any API qualified lube will more than suffice for "normal" applications, and there is ZERO ability to discern one lube from another in terms of wear control without massive, long, expensive trials (which no BITOGer has the time/money for).
If we took UOAs and only posted the wear data (taking away the info of additives which are the give away in most brand products), there would be no one here whom could discern one lube from another. People here base their biases on the additives, despite the fact that the wear data tells us there's no distinction. I have always said, and will continue to say, ignore the inputs and focus on the outputs. I make my living as a statistical quality control process and cost engineer; I am fairly sure that I have a good handle on this. Data does not lie; the 2.5L Duratec simply does not give a hoot what oil is in the crankcase as long as it's an appropriate API lube, and the wear rates will not alter in any tangible manner despite the insistence of the brand/grade faithful. The data from (literally) hundreds of UOAs from this engine series shows an impressively low wear rate on all metals. And, the data shows that brand/grade/base-stock simply don't matter; they all perform about the same if 10k miles is your OFCI limit.
There are no "low tiered" products here; there are only lower-cost qualified lubes, which improve the ROI.
... This is an oft repeated old saw.
Let's use the metaphor of the the 10-foot hole in the ground.
Given said 10-foot hole, is it better to have a 12-foot ladder or a 15-foot ladder to get out of the hole?
The best answer is that either ladder is an equally suited tool to remove oneself from the hole.
Now, let's set up an analogy comparing the two situations.
OP stated that his application was a 2.5 Duratec in a Ford Escape. These engines are notably easy on oil.
I cannot agree more. And I love that analogy and will use it in the future.
I also like making analogies, and this is one I've purported many times here ...
What is better for hunting; the .308Win or .30-06? Both have pros and cons, and the debate will never be settled.
But they are both, in fact, overkill, for hunting squirrels!
We have to keep the task at hand in mind as well as the conditions surrounding that task, and understand what a minimum threshold is for attaining the goals of achieving that task. Once "good enough" is met, making it "better" is only a sense of emotional satisfaction because the nuances of product delineation have melted away.
The flaw in the logic of many BITOGers is that they assume because a difference exists in the bottle, it will automatically manifest into a difference in wear control. But my database of more than 16,000 UOAs shows this just ins't the case. Most any API qualified lube will more than suffice for "normal" applications, and there is ZERO ability to discern one lube from another in terms of wear control without massive, long, expensive trials (which no BITOGer has the time/money for).
If we took UOAs and only posted the wear data (taking away the info of additives which are the give away in most brand products), there would be no one here whom could discern one lube from another. People here base their biases on the additives, despite the fact that the wear data tells us there's no distinction. I have always said, and will continue to say, ignore the inputs and focus on the outputs. I make my living as a statistical quality control process and cost engineer; I am fairly sure that I have a good handle on this. Data does not lie; the 2.5L Duratec simply does not give a hoot what oil is in the crankcase as long as it's an appropriate API lube, and the wear rates will not alter in any tangible manner despite the insistence of the brand/grade faithful. The data from (literally) hundreds of UOAs from this engine series shows an impressively low wear rate on all metals. And, the data shows that brand/grade/base-stock simply don't matter; they all perform about the same if 10k miles is your OFCI limit.
There are no "low tiered" products here; there are only lower-cost qualified lubes, which improve the ROI.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by dnewton3
...We have to keep the task at hand in mind as well as the conditions surrounding that task, and understand what a minimum threshold is for attaining the goals of achieving that task. Once "good enough" is met, making it "better" is only a sense of emotional satisfaction because the nuances of product delineation have melted away.
The flaw in the logic of many BITOGers is that they assume because a difference exists in the bottle, it will automatically manifest into a difference in wear control. But my database of more than 16,000 UOAs shows this just ins't the case. Most any API qualified lube will more than suffice for "normal" applications, and there is ZERO ability to discern one lube from another in terms of wear control without massive, long, expensive trials (which no BITOGer has the time/money for).
If we took UOAs and only posted the wear data (taking away the info of additives which are the give away in most brand products), there would be no one here whom could discern one lube from another. People here base their biases on the additives, despite the fact that the wear data tells us there's no distinction. I have always said, and will continue to say, ignore the inputs and focus on the outputs. I make my living as a statistical quality control process and cost engineer; I am fairly sure that I have a good handle on this. Data does not lie; the 2.5L Duratec simply does not give a hoot what oil is in the crankcase as long as it's an appropriate API lube, and the wear rates will not alter in any tangible manner despite the insistence of the brand/grade faithful. The data from (literally) hundreds of UOAs from this engine series shows an impressively low wear rate on all metals. And, the data shows that brand/grade/base-stock simply don't matter; they all perform about the same if 10k miles is your OFCI limit.
There are no "low tiered" products here; there are only lower-cost qualified lubes, which improve the ROI.
+1 ðŸ‘
...We have to keep the task at hand in mind as well as the conditions surrounding that task, and understand what a minimum threshold is for attaining the goals of achieving that task. Once "good enough" is met, making it "better" is only a sense of emotional satisfaction because the nuances of product delineation have melted away.
The flaw in the logic of many BITOGers is that they assume because a difference exists in the bottle, it will automatically manifest into a difference in wear control. But my database of more than 16,000 UOAs shows this just ins't the case. Most any API qualified lube will more than suffice for "normal" applications, and there is ZERO ability to discern one lube from another in terms of wear control without massive, long, expensive trials (which no BITOGer has the time/money for).
If we took UOAs and only posted the wear data (taking away the info of additives which are the give away in most brand products), there would be no one here whom could discern one lube from another. People here base their biases on the additives, despite the fact that the wear data tells us there's no distinction. I have always said, and will continue to say, ignore the inputs and focus on the outputs. I make my living as a statistical quality control process and cost engineer; I am fairly sure that I have a good handle on this. Data does not lie; the 2.5L Duratec simply does not give a hoot what oil is in the crankcase as long as it's an appropriate API lube, and the wear rates will not alter in any tangible manner despite the insistence of the brand/grade faithful. The data from (literally) hundreds of UOAs from this engine series shows an impressively low wear rate on all metals. And, the data shows that brand/grade/base-stock simply don't matter; they all perform about the same if 10k miles is your OFCI limit.
There are no "low tiered" products here; there are only lower-cost qualified lubes, which improve the ROI.
+1 ðŸ‘
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
