Valvoline synpower Low quality like Napa syn?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I bought up a stash of 0w20 and 5w30 Napa synthetic during their sale late last year and will run the OCIs out as far as I have been with M1, PP, QSUD or any of the other synthetics I've used in the past...and I'll sleep well at night doing so. :-)

FWIW, I plan to run the 0W20 to 10K miles (recommended OCI in my 2012 Toyota Highlander). I'll run the 5W30 out to 7500 miles in my 2002 Tacoma, which is what I've done with every other synthetic oil since I bought the truck new.

If it isn't *identical* to Valvoline, it is close enough for me.
 
Originally Posted By: mrdctaylor

If it isn't *identical* to Valvoline, it is close enough for me.


thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: mooferz
Data sheets updated in 2015 show they are still pretty similar. Synpower's heavier on the Calcium, but I wouldn't say Napa is low quality.

x9CpHC5.png


WG72EJb.png





Where'd I get the 23%? It's pretty obvious from this earlier post by Mooferz using the Ca wt %....2015 spec sheets.

162/211 = 76.777%.....or.....a 23.23% reduction with the NAPA. It looks like an official Valvoline produced spec sheet. I'm not going to question it. So if those can vary by 23% at some point in the not too distance past....why not 23% tomorrow? Yes, I do see the other spec sheets posted showing a difference under 1-5%. I commented on the mfg spec sheets that was posted. While it's not low quality...it's certainly lower quality vs. the other spec sheet of Synpower.

Nic1994's PQIA sheets from above are dated 2013.
 
...and if you go a step beyond just blindly quoting someone: "It is not what is currently being sold at NAPA, at least not the 5w30, so this product data sheet is wrong. The calcium and sodium levels are comparable to Synpower, and not Valvoline conventional."

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4279083/Re:_SN/GF-5_Napa_Synthetic_PDS#Post4279083
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
...and if you go a step beyond just blindly quoting someone: "It is not what is currently being sold at NAPA, at least not the 5w30, so this product data sheet is wrong. The calcium and sodium levels are comparable to Synpower, and not Valvoline conventional."

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4279083/Re:_SN/GF-5_Napa_Synthetic_PDS#Post4279083


Since when is "blindly quoting someone".....in reality THE mfg/distributor themselves incorrect? That sheet is right from NAPA, and effective in May 2015. Seems you need to take that up with NAPA themselves if you have a problem with it. What other PDS from leading mfg/distributors will you be discounting next? Like I said, as of at least May 2015 this NAPA syn was a lower quality (lower detergent) synthetic SN oil. I see nothing to tell me not to expect something similar, at any time, down the road. And if you read through that thread you linked, a number of people felt it was a lower quality SN despite that VOA. Fwiw, some of the numbers in that VOA were suspect as mentioned by other members. Not all SN oils are of the highest quality, or even high quality....they're just "SN."

Remember that PYB analyzed by PQIA in 2013? It was off the charts good. As good or better than the PP. As it turns out, that probably wasn't your standard PYB sample based on follow on results. Don't bet the farm on a single VOA. Anything could end up in any particular bottle. How about some recent UOA's on the NAPA syn?
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
For 5W30, the NAPA has a 25% higher CCS viscosity and claims a flashpoint 17C higher than Synpower...pretty big differences to my mind.


PQIA 2013

Like you said, the last time these were all tested, there's sizable differences in CCS, MRV, Noack, TBN, etc. among the sodium add pack oils. Enough to make you wonder how repeatable the PQIA tests really are IF the bulk of them came from Valvoline stocks. The sodium is used because it's cheaper than magnesium/moly/boron. You'd think if the sodium add pack w/o boron and moly was indeed superior, they'd all flock to that formula since it was cheaper to boot. Still suggests lower quality to me. Doesn't really matter since during the year you can find almost any quality synthetic including synpower, cheaper than NAPA syn at $2.99 on sale.
 
But what I've always wondered,why is there a Napa 15W50 while there is a Synpower 20W50 and not vise versa? Or why not simply 15W50 or 20W50 in both?
 
Originally Posted By: dave1251
To me it is nothing more than Synpower. Other Valvoline blended "store brands" all have near identical additive, NOACK, and CCS numbers. This includes Synpower, NAPA, and Auto Extra.

I believe them when they say it's different, but as far as I'm concerned, they're close enough to be indistinguishable, especially with something like a VOA. They have similar additive packages, close enough base stocks, are formulated by the same people, and meet the same approvals. It's not like Ashland reverse engineered Titan Fuchs phosphorus free motor oil and packaged that as NAPA's oil.
wink.gif


If Ashland wants to distinguish its product from NAPA, throw another specification on there, instead of half of a claim. Make their 5w30 truly A5/B5, instead of saying it's A5/B5 but not for diesels.
 
Originally Posted By: salcuta88
Someone around here stated that Napa FS is made by Valvoline, but has a weaker additive package compared to Valvoline. That doesn't make it low quality thought.


NO that's what Ashland claims and why wouldn't they. If you research and look up every VOA and UOA you will find that Napa Syn and Synpower have EXACTLY the same amount of additive regardless what their PDS says. If Ashland stated that is was the same as Synpower, they would lose sales now wouldn't they.

So are they the same oil, the answer is yes........and no. Synpower uses a hint of group IV to get the viscosity down at -30 while Napa is likely all group III. So in essense Synpower is slightly better only due to the base oil they are using, otherwise you get the same protection. I use both and never could tell a difference between the two. When napa runs deals on 3$ a quart, I jump on it every time because I know whats in the bottle. Too much misinformation on this board, again, research VOA and UOAs of both oils, make your own judgement. If you can take synpower to 10K miles, you can take NAPA the same distance. I normally don't go that long on any oil, 6-7 is my change interval and it suits those oils well.
 
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Here's some screenshots I took for a post in December.

Pretty close to the same.

20u21dd.png


28s8nj9.png

[/quote]

Bingo. Only difference between the two is the 5% or so group IV synpower is using the get the cold viscosity down more.
 
Originally Posted By: jaynissan12

Bingo. Only difference between the two is the 5% or so group IV synpower is using the get the cold viscosity down more.


Does that explain why the flashpoint for the NAPA is 17C higher?
 
Originally Posted By: jaynissan12

NO that's what Ashland claims and why wouldn't they. If you research and look up every VOA and UOA you will find that Napa Syn and Synpower have EXACTLY the same amount of additive regardless what their PDS says. If Ashland stated that is was the same as Synpower, they would lose sales now wouldn't they.


You are exactly right! I don't know why so many here can't figure this out! Ashland would not admit they were the same even if they were perfectly identical. Legal and marketing issues abound.

In "real world" circumstances for you and I they ARE perfectly identical. IMO.
 
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
Originally Posted By: jaynissan12

NO that's what Ashland claims and why wouldn't they. If you research and look up every VOA and UOA you will find that Napa Syn and Synpower have EXACTLY the same amount of additive regardless what their PDS says. If Ashland stated that is was the same as Synpower, they would lose sales now wouldn't they.


You are exactly right! I don't know why so many here can't figure this out! Ashland would not admit they were the same even if they were perfectly identical. Legal and marketing issues abound.

In "real world" circumstances for you and I they ARE perfectly identical. IMO.


01.gif
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Looking at the cold viscosities of both,maybe the biggest difference is Synpower has some pao whereas Napa is a pure grp III? Maybe that's why the difference in price point.


I agree....the Synpower performs better in cold weather than NAPA syn. so I assume the base oil is different....(some PAO like you surmised)...

Can Napa syn. do 10K OCIs?...I wonder?
 
My take on the stuff still hasn't changed. It's similar, but not identical.

Would I run it because it's similar to Synpower? No.

Would I buy it if it's on sale? Yes. ($3 per quart. Screaming price on 0w20.)

Do I wish they made a Euro A3/B4 version? Yes.
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted By: jaynissan12

Bingo. Only difference between the two is the 5% or so group IV synpower is using the get the cold viscosity down more.


Does that explain why the flashpoint for the NAPA is 17C higher?


Likely, Valvoline does claim "at least" 5% PAO in their base oil for synpower, explains the better cold viscosity, as well as altered flash points.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Looking at the cold viscosities of both,maybe the biggest difference is Synpower has some pao whereas Napa is a pure grp III? Maybe that's why the difference in price point.


I agree....the Synpower performs better in cold weather than NAPA syn. so I assume the base oil is different....(some PAO like you surmised)...

Can Napa syn. do 10K OCIs?...I wonder?


They both have pretty much identical TBN out of the gate. The only difference would be, does the small amount of PAO in synpower help the viscosity hold up better on a long run than NAPA with no PAO and does it aid in TBN retention as well? Honestly, there probably isn't going to be enough difference to make an argument. Most UOA's I have seen posted have looked very good with both oils out to 7-8K miles. I don't think either oil was designed to do a 10K run, but its not saying they can't do it, the only way to know is to sample the oil at certain miles and see. Oil has come a long way in a short amount of time, even the top conventional oils can make a case for a 10K run. Personally I like to stick to the 6-7K change intervals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
Valvoline Restore and Protect 2AZ-FE Observations & Questions
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
5K
NITester
C
Oil formulation games. Opinions, facts, thoughts?
Replies
0
Views
249
Coffee 0W-40
B
Valvoline Maxlife Syn Blend vs Maxlife Full Syn
Replies
12
Views
1K
Carlostrece
C
Examples of "low quality" oil?
4 5 6
Replies
103
Views
11K
4WD
Glenda W.
Valvoline R&P Oil Burner Test Results
26 27 28
Replies
549
Views
42K
tired
Back
Top Bottom