synthetic vs reg oil

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: FoxS


Toyota allow you to go double your oci on synthetic.


Not in Canada, so Toyota is obviously not as confident about synthetic as you are.

Originally Posted By: FoxS
So somewhere between mile 5001 and 10000, synthetic is protecting more.

I would guess that the point where syn protects more is not binary so somewhere before 5000, synthetic is likely protecting more as well. How much may be negligible, but after 5000 it is sufficient to cause a requirement for synthetic.


We both know that this is not the meaning when someone states "synthetic offers better protection than dino", unless they mentioned "for extended OCI's".
Both dino and synthetic offer the same amount of protection for their intended OCI's. It's been stated here probably a thousand times. Nobody questions the ability of synthetic oil to go much longer than dino, but how much longer is always the question. Meantime you can safely, in most cases use dino at 5k mile OCI's under all sorts of conditions.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: FoxS
Now for manufacturers who specify requirements that conventional can meet, these synthetics also meet those requirements but may not present any significant benefit. Thus we would say that synthetic may not be appropriate, but it would be hard to claim that in and of itself the synthetic is not superior.


That was much of my point. If one isn't going to see a benefit, then claims of superiority are meaningless, and there are certain things about synthetics that can be inferior. There are reasons that most synthetics out there don't have only Group IV or V as base stocks. They are inferior from a cost standpoint and a solubility standpoint, as the case may be.

Originally Posted By: FoxS
Too many people on this board seek to tell others they are wrong rather than display a little understanding.


And you've been here long enough to know the problem with a blanket statement like synthetic is superior. You know darned well that there are people out there, and some who come on this board looking for advice, that have the idea that synthetic is "superior" for a 3,000 mile OCI on a normal SN/GF-5 application, and might think that a boutique synthetic is more "superior."

I wouldn't recommend that someone use conventional in an application that calls for synthetic for fear of harming their engine, except under very limited circumstances; nor would I recommend that someone use synthetic for normal OCIs in a conventional application for fear of harming their wallet, except in certain limited circumstances as well. Heck, I know there are sludgers out there and some vehicles that had overly optimistic OCIs. Such an issue can be addressed by synthetics or shortening conventional OCIs.

We have guys here that use their synthetics to extend OCIs. If I tell tig1 he should cut his M1 interval from 10,000 miles to 3,000 or 5,000 miles because he'll get superior protection, he'll laugh at me.

 

[shell_user]

Good point Garak. Some people will just never learn.

 

[Garak]

Don't get me wrong, I think synthetic is a great product. It's just not necessarily the best fit for every application. I have synthetic in my stash. I've used it, and will use it again. CATERHAM has made the point, if I recall correctly, that one may get sufficient fuel savings by using a good synthetic for it to pay for itself even over a shorter OCI; it's just hard to test for, much less notice, swallowed up in the sea of gasoline costs versus the trickle of oil costs. I hope I'm paraphrasing him correctly.

For a 3750 mile OCI under warranty in my G, why should I spend $24 on a PP rollback when a $12 jug of PYB will do just as well? And I can't see me using any synthetic (other than HM blends) in my old F-150. I want higher ZDDP without going to something in the 40 grade, nor do I want to spend the money on GC or RP HPS or VR1 synthetic (if I could even find the latter up here).

However, after warranty, if I decide to extend my OCIs in the G, I would have no problem using synthetic. Or, if I expected a lot of unaided starts in our winters, sure, a 0w-30 might be useful, and that's going to be a synthetic. Or, if I were tracking it. Honestly, though, in G37s, I haven't seen synthetic UOAs doing any better than conventionals. The superiority over a short OCI simply doesn't manifest into results.

Dave Newton's study is always worth a read. I ran taxis to hundreds of thousands of miles, solely on QS conventional, with 6000 mile OCIs. The cars all ran fine when they went to the junkyard. What would the superiority of synthetic have gained me?

I have no problem with people using synthetic for even conservative OCIs, if that's what they prefer. However, it's not going to significantly add to the life of an engine, and that's the important point. A Porsche 911 is no quicker than a Lada in a traffic jam.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: FoxS
Now for manufacturers who specify requirements that conventional can meet, these synthetics also meet those requirements but may not present any significant benefit. Thus we would say that synthetic may not be appropriate, but it would be hard to claim that in and of itself the synthetic is not superior.


That was much of my point. If one isn't going to see a benefit, then claims of superiority are meaningless, and there are certain things about synthetics that can be inferior. There are reasons that most synthetics out there don't have only Group IV or V as base stocks. They are inferior from a cost standpoint and a solubility standpoint, as the case may be.

Originally Posted By: FoxS
Too many people on this board seek to tell others they are wrong rather than display a little understanding.


And you've been here long enough to know the problem with a blanket statement like synthetic is superior. You know darned well that there are people out there, and some who come on this board looking for advice, that have the idea that synthetic is "superior" for a 3,000 mile OCI on a normal SN/GF-5 application, and might think that a boutique synthetic is more "superior."

I wouldn't recommend that someone use conventional in an application that calls for synthetic for fear of harming their engine, except under very limited circumstances; nor would I recommend that someone use synthetic for normal OCIs in a conventional application for fear of harming their wallet, except in certain limited circumstances as well. Heck, I know there are sludgers out there and some vehicles that had overly optimistic OCIs. Such an issue can be addressed by synthetics or shortening conventional OCIs.

We have guys here that use their synthetics to extend OCIs. If I tell tig1 he should cut his M1 interval from 10,000 miles to 3,000 or 5,000 miles because he'll get superior protection, he'll laugh at me.


I would certainly question the logic behind 3-5K OCIs with M1.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: tig1
I would certainly question the logic behind 3-5K OCIs with M1.


And if I had your gumption (and perhaps if I were out of warranty), I'd run M1 to 10,000 miles and I would get my ROI out of synthetic. That being said, I shouldn't worry to much about warranty, since M1 guarantees the product up here much the same as they do down south for you guys. I'll try it one of these days, tig, even if it kills me.

 

[pbm]

IMO, the line between 'synthetic' and 'dino' has been obscured a
lot in recent years. Years ago synthetic meant PAO and dino meant group 1 base stocks. The performance difference was noticeable and so was the price difference.
Today we have QSUD for $21 a jug at WM and it's a very good (allegedly) group 3 synthetic . We have PYB 'dino' which is a group 2 blend (which sometimes uses some group 3 I think). It is also an excellent oil but its $16 (not $12) a jug.

I have decided to use only synthetic in my Cruze 1.4T, not to extend the OCI, but rather to protect the turbo. For $5 an OCI it's cheap insurance. In my other cars (2008 Hyundai Elantra, 2008 Toyota Corolla and a 2005 Saturn Ion) I use either. I usually keep OCI's between 3 and 5K but will sometimes let the synthetics run up to 6 or 7.

Either way will keep the average car running long past when you get tired of it...

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: pbm
Today we have QSUD for $21 a jug at WM and it's a very good (allegedly) group 3 synthetic . We have PYB 'dino' which is a group 2 blend (which sometimes uses some group 3 I think). It is also an excellent oil but its $16 (not $12) a jug.


Agreed. Up here, a good rule of thumb is that synthetic is double the price of dino. The cheapest conventional we get (not counting ST, because we don't get ST synthetic here) goes for about $9.88 on rollback. The cheapest syn I've seen was $19.88 on rollback. Normally, conventional goes for $25 a jug, and synthetic in the $50 neighbourhood, with differences of course with different tiers (i.e. M1, M1 EP).

As for the turbo, that's another reason to use synthetics, within reason of course. The old Audi Turbo I had was equipped with a huge oil cooler, and oil temperatures never exceeded 95 C, and that was running about half an hour with full boost on a very hot evening. Such an oil cooler is probably the exception rather than the norm.

 

[pbm]

Originally Posted By: Maxima97
Synthetic is the best when engine working condition to the extreme: Extreme hot, cold, shear. For typical use, SM/SN dino oil is already proved to be good enough up to manufacturer recommended OCI. For some engine, the design flaw cause to much heat in some spot and not enough cooling. Use of synthetic oil is not recommended but a must. That why you have to google to see if you engine is kind of engine which has oil related problems or not. If not, use dino with 5k/7.5k OCI. Synthetic oil also has its limit, also can be turn into tar like substance if it's over heated.


Well said...in fact I was trying to say something similar in my previous post.

I feel the Cruze's 1.4T is going to be hard on oil so I use synthetic exclusively. (I am not so concerned as to whether it meets dexos1 or not since I realize it's mostly a money grab by GM.) On the other cars (which aren't known to be oil killers) I'm happy with either dino or syn. As I insinuated earlier, todays 'dinos' are a lot closer to
syns than the oils of just a few years ago....

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: tig1
I would certainly question the logic behind 3-5K OCIs with M1.


And if I had your gumption (and perhaps if I were out of warranty), I'd run M1 to 10,000 miles and I would get my ROI out of synthetic. That being said, I shouldn't worry to much about warranty, since M1 guarantees the product up here much the same as they do down south for you guys. I'll try it one of these days, tig, even if it kills me.

Garak,
If you had 35 years of 10K OCIs with M1 as have I, then 10K will seem to be the norm.

 

[ottotheclown]

Tig, where you live fine where I live no way 10k. Simple as that!! After 40+ years I say that with conviction.

.
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: tig1
I would certainly question the logic behind 3-5K OCIs with M1.


And if I had your gumption (and perhaps if I were out of warranty), I'd run M1 to 10,000 miles and I would get my ROI out of synthetic. That being said, I shouldn't worry to much about warranty, since M1 guarantees the product up here much the same as they do down south for you guys. I'll try it one of these days, tig, even if it kills me.

Garak,
If you had 35 years of 10K OCIs with M1 as have I, then 10K will seem to be the norm.

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: pbm
Today we have QSUD for $21 a jug at WM and it's a very good (allegedly) group 3 synthetic . We have PYB 'dino' which is a group 2 blend (which sometimes uses some group 3 I think). It is also an excellent oil but its $16 (not $12) a jug.


Agreed. Up here, a good rule of thumb is that synthetic is double the price of dino. The cheapest conventional we get (not counting ST, because we don't get ST synthetic here) goes for about $9.88 on rollback. The cheapest syn I've seen was $19.88 on rollback. Normally, conventional goes for $25 a jug, and synthetic in the $50 neighbourhood, with differences of course with different tiers (i.e. M1, M1 EP).

As for the turbo, that's another reason to use synthetics, within reason of course. The old Audi Turbo I had was equipped with a huge oil cooler, and oil temperatures never exceeded 95 C, and that was running about half an hour with full boost on a very hot evening. Such an oil cooler is probably the exception rather than the norm.


With synthetics being so cheap in the states vs Canada and most of the world it just seems like a no-brainer to use it here. It costs me more to fill up with gas on a weekly basis than my once a year synthetic oil change. And, for the record, it is cheaper for me to a yearly OCI with synthetic than two OCI's with dino. Plus I get a very slight bump in MPG and slightly better cold starts.

Garak, you mentioned earlier taxis and 6,000 miles OCI with dino. When Consumer Reports did their oil report with NY taxis that dino aficionados like to quote, they conveniently never mention that synthetics showed the exact same wear as dino and yet the synthetics were tested at 12,000 mikes vs 6000 miles!

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: tig1
If you had 35 years of 10K OCIs with M1 as have I, then 10K will seem to be the norm.


And the fact is, I should have no reason to hesitate, having done 6,000 miles on conventional for years. I guess I get a little antsy under warranty, or when I have a sludgy mess to clean up like the old F-150. When I did have the Town Car, I would take it out longer, but it was used almost solely on the highway.

I would definitely like to see a UOA on something like my G after 10,000 on M1, considering my granny driving.

 

[steve20]

The only reason I sue syn in the Honda is when I can purchase it for a ridiculously cheap price,or FAR, and ends up being cheaper than dino. My OCIs are 5-8K miles, so except for cold starts in the winter I do not reap the advantages of syn.
If I had to pay full retail for both, I would run dino exclusively-same OCI

 

[jimbrewer]

Originally Posted By: FoxS
An increasing number of manufacturers write oil specs that can only be met with synthetic oils. So clearly synthetic is superior.

But if your oil requirement does not have to be synthetic why go with synthetic?

Firstly, the syn is likely to meet further, more stringent approvals than a conventional that still meets your requirements. This makes it a better oil that gives you more performance and headroom. Eg better cold starts, better cleaning, ability to safely go 1000 miles beyond your recommended OCI.

Secondly, in the US, synthetic is cheap, not that much more expensive than conventional, certainly at Walmart. And rebates make it as cheap if not cheaper than conventional.

If the pricing / pricing differential of synthetic changes significantly from where it is now, then I would probably consider conventional in applications that allowed it. But the price difference is currently so small that its not something worth even worrying about.


That. This is dumb. It is the cosmetics that take us out of our cars more than anything. That and our own narcissism. Its better and more cost effective to focus on keeping the thing clean, rust free and presentable looking. Look at Zanzibar's recent thread about a trashed VW Golf he is trying to salvage: The thing was so badly neglected that the car died from an oil pump failure, yet the car got 175K before it blew up. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2871123&page=1

 

[FoxS]

Porsche vs Lada in traffic jam.

Actually, in a Mobil presentation I linked to recently, this was one of the use cases that Mobil said was hardest on oil and was a reason to use synthetic.

You're worried about people googling for information and reading blanket statements on this site.

Well good luck policing this site for accuracy and opinions. Maybe you should become a mod?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: steve20
If I had to pay full retail for both, I would run dino exclusively-same OCI

We don't get a lot of rebates up here, but at least our prices are improving.

Originally Posted By: FoxS
Actually, in a Mobil presentation I linked to recently, this was one of the use cases that Mobil said was hardest on oil and was a reason to use synthetic.

I addressed that issue many times in the past over the past couple years. City driving, including bumper to bumper traffic, is not that much of an issue provided that the vehicle's cooling system is adequate and that there isn't excessive fuel dilution. Taxi service, for instance, keeps the oil at operating temperature virtually all the time. Yet, somehow I managed to change oil on them, straight off the road on the hottest days of the year, dumping oil on myself, yet never burning myself. So, it wasn't hot enough to justify synthetic, either.

And no, I don't want to moderate, and the moderators don't police opinions and accuracy.

 

[Kuato]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Kuato
As usual in this discussion:

OP lives in TN. If it were me I would use conventional 5w30 year round. Unless the majority of my trips were short, in which case synthetic might serve better - and UOAs would tell the story.


You say"UOAs would tell the story". How so?


Tig1, a UOA will ALWAYS tell how the oil is doing. With OP's initial post, he asked about syn vs conventional. IF he is mostly highway, conventional should be fine. If however he does lots of city driving, syn might be the best option due to fuel dilution and higher acid content. I put that statement in to cover both options, as OP did not state what kind of driving he did. Perhaps with more information we could all be more specific.