Recent Topics
Shocks / Struts
by WyrTwister - 08/23/19 08:04 AM
Stihl HT 50 CE Pole Pruner
by ssamaroo01 - 08/23/19 08:01 AM
LQ4/LQ9 direct swap for LS1?
by cwilliamsws6 - 08/23/19 08:00 AM
Fearing the RockAuto worst
by Kira - 08/23/19 07:40 AM
Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost?
by Corollaman - 08/23/19 07:06 AM
Weedwacker advice
by supton - 08/23/19 07:05 AM
Temps pre & post diff cover change
by kehyler - 08/23/19 06:51 AM
DIY: Mazda 2.5L Skyactiv Water Pump
by The Critic - 08/23/19 06:03 AM
vavoline syncpower 4T
by bonjo - 08/23/19 03:24 AM
Great Price but...
by Marco620 - 08/23/19 02:02 AM
CV Joint Leaking Grease
by 92saturnsl2 - 08/22/19 10:20 PM
Craftsman 6 pc. Screwdriver Set $12.14
by Warstud - 08/22/19 09:32 PM
Got My ATF Replaced.
by Mr_Luke - 08/22/19 09:20 PM
Wht do people with labor intensive jobs lay on their back?
by motor_oil_madman - 08/22/19 09:14 PM
Date code 5 Q Chevron location?
by Onetor - 08/22/19 08:06 PM
Confused, what oil to use?
by BelAir - 08/22/19 08:00 PM
2015 KIA optima turbo Coolant Flush
by Grambo - 08/22/19 07:52 PM
Motul 300V -- oops
by xr650boy - 08/22/19 06:35 PM
Newest Members
lubetech82, Lockguard, PTL, vdubw, NJ01MGM
69036 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
86 registered members (Alfred_B, 2004tdigls, ABerns, aircooled, 1978elcamino, Anduril, 9 invisible), 1,722 guests, and 19 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics293,675
Posts5,044,777
Members69,034
Most Online3,532
Jul 30th, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Base Oil Content and Marketing #4109005 05/28/16 03:08 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
MolaKule Offline OP
Global Moderator
OP Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
From the "Amsoil - Strategic Direction" thread

Amsoil - Straegic Direction


Originally Posted By: Justin
99% conventional and 1% synthetic (real synthetic or not) is technically a blend.

So saying it contains PE polyol Ester could mean it has anywhere from 1% to 99% of it. The rest could be PYB [conventional or mineral] basestocks. lol



And this is a problem in my view with the industry in terms of content vs advertising, because there are no guidelines wrt definitions for Conventional, Blend (or semi-synthetic, partial synthetic), Synthetic, or Full Synthetic.

Today, a full synthetic often means that the oil could be a mix of Group III, IV, and V base oils in various proportions, thanks to the ignorant BBC decision.

In my view, there should only be three categories of base oil content declarations as follows, so here is my "self-policing" declarations/definitions for Base Oil content for the industry for our future base Oils:

Full Synthetic - Base oils would contain:
Majority Group IV PAO's and Group V esters;
or Group IV PAO's with Group V AN's and or Group V esters;
or Group IV PAO's with Group V Ionic Liquids and or Group V esters;
or Group IV PAO's with Group V OSP's and or Group V esters;
or Group IV PAO's with Group V specialty Polymers and or Group V esters;
or any combination thereof of Group IV/Group V base oil combinations that would fall into a strict definition of chemically synthesized base oils of Group IV or Group V, with an appropriate additive package.

The only Group I or II base oils allowed would be those used as additive carriers, with an ("Exclusive of") phrase.

In other words, the content/Liter would be: Total Content/Liter - %Additive Content = %Synthetic Base Oil Content as defined above.


BLEND - Any combination thereof of Group II or Group III or Group IV or Group V base oils with a minimum 10% content of Group IV and or Group V base oils (as defined above), with an appropriate additive package.


Conventional Mineral Oils - Any combination thereof of Group I, Group II or Group III mineral oils with an appropriate additive package.

This would still allow the formulator or blender plenty of latitude in selecting base stocks and the Marketing department can still go ga-ga. LOL


I feel that if we don't self-police ourselves, some "Over-Zealous, Over-Regulation Mentality" type will come along and do it for us.

Last edited by MolaKule; 05/28/16 03:11 PM.

The value of a scientific theory is its ability to prompt further study, not that it has any relation to the established facts of scientific reality.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109035 05/28/16 03:55 PM
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,941
S
SR5 Offline
Offline
S
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,941
I like it MolaKule.

I'm happy for Group I & II to be an additive carrier in a Full Synthetic, as long as it doesn't become a loop-hole for dilution.

So under the MK rules, many of today's SynBlends and even "full synthetics" (Grp III) would become Conventional oil, including things like GTL Shell Helix Ultra.

Looking at my breakfast cereal I can see another way foward, on the back of the pack is a table with percentage contents. % Protein, % Sugar, % Carbohydrate, % Fat, % Fibre, % Sodium, etc. Why can't oil companies simply do this? They already know the answers. They can keep the front label the same and just add the table to the back label. % Group V, % Group IV, % Group III etc and also list the metallics like Mo, Zn, P, Ca, etc and while they are at it Noack, TBN and HTHS would be great.

Just tell us what it is and let the customer decide. The food labeling rules hasn't stopped the diversity of cereal on the store shelf, and it should not be a problem to any oil maker. Only the oil nerds would read the table anyway. Most people would follow OEM specs or price or family tradition or advertising glam.

Last edited by SR5; 05/28/16 04:02 PM.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Castrol Edge 10W30 A5/B5 + Wesfil-Cooper Z154
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109038 05/28/16 03:59 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,504
N
Nate1979 Offline
Offline
N
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,504
Why? The specs on the back don't care what's on the front of the bottle Sounds like you agree with the German politician definition of the word synthetic vs the rest of the world. Maybe some day they will enter the 21st century.

I've also never heard of a group 3 oil not synthesized by chemical reactions. They pumping it from the ground now? May want to inform Shell that little detail for their GTL. I guess I would have expected better from you.

Maybe the word synthetic should be banned and they should just use the specs instead?


2015 GMC Sierra 2500 6.0L
2010 Subaru Forester 2.5X
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: SR5] #4109042 05/28/16 04:09 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
MolaKule Offline OP
Global Moderator
OP Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
Originally Posted By: SR5
I like it MolaKule.

I'm happy for Group I & II to be an additive carrier in a Full Synthetic, as long as it doesn't become a loop-hole for dilution.

So under the MK rules, many of today's SynBlends and even "full synthetics" (Grp III) would become Conventional oil, including things like GTL Shell Helix Ultra.

Looking at my breakfast cereal I can see another way foward, on the back of the pack is a table with percentage contents. % Protein, % Sugar, % Carbohydrate, % Fat, % Fibre, % Sodium, etc. Why can't oil companies simply do this? They already know the answers. They can keep the front label the same and just add the table to the back label. % Group V, % Group IV, % Group III etc and also list the metallics like Mo, Zn, P, Ca, etc and while they are at it Noack and HTHS would be great.

Just tell us what it is and let the customer decide. The food labeling rules hasn't stopped the diversity of cereal on the store shelf, and it should not be a problem to any oil maker. Only the oil nerds would read the table anyway. Most people would follow OEM specs or price or family tradition or advertising glam.


The line:
Quote:
BLEND - Any combination thereof of Group II or Group III or Group IV or Group V base oils with a minimum 10% content of Group IV and or Group V base oils (as defined above), with an appropriate additive package.


Should have said "Synthetic Blend or BLEND - Any combination thereof of Group II or Group III or Group IV or Group V base oils with a minimum 10% content of Group IV and or Group V base oils (as defined above), with an appropriate additive package."

The editor got me again. shocked2


Quote:
Looking at my breakfast cereal I can see another way foward, on the back of the pack is a table with percentage contents. % Protein, % Sugar, % Carbohydrate, % Fat, % Fibre, % Sodium, etc. Why can't oil companies simply do this? They already know the answers. They can keep the front label the same and just add the table to the back label. % Group V, % Group IV, % Group III etc and also list the metallics like Mo, Zn, P, Ca, etc and while they are at it Noack and HTHS would be great.


I am afraid that would never fly because it would declare too much of the Proprietary formula.

As long as the oil is tested against repeatable analytic methods, there would be no question as to content in case of a suit or other question.

Last edited by MolaKule; 05/28/16 04:13 PM.

The value of a scientific theory is its ability to prompt further study, not that it has any relation to the established facts of scientific reality.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109049 05/28/16 04:20 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,881
U
userfriendly Offline
Offline
U
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,881
Base oil type is the last thing I need to know about an engine oil.
In fact, my take on additive packages; looking at P&Z levels and making a decision based on those two additives is obsolete.

That leaves me with; personal experience, API, other governing body certifications, engine manufactures' approval
and price when selecting an engine oil.


Last edited by userfriendly; 05/28/16 04:21 PM.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109052 05/28/16 04:23 PM
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,941
S
SR5 Offline
Offline
S
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,941
OK, but just so I'm sure, how would the MK rules label two full synthetics that are in my garage right now?

- GTL Shell Helix Ultra 5W-40 ( MB229.5, BMW LL-01, Porsche A40, etc)

- Castrol Edge 5W-30 A3/B5, I believe it's Group III only but still meets MB229.5, BMW LL-01, Etc.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Castrol Edge 10W30 A5/B5 + Wesfil-Cooper Z154
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: Nate1979] #4109057 05/28/16 04:27 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
MolaKule Offline OP
Global Moderator
OP Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Why? The specs on the back don't care what's on the front of the bottle Sounds like you agree with the German politician definition of the word synthetic vs the rest of the world. Maybe some day they will enter the 21st century.


I think most people know my position on government regulation(s).

I am not proposing more government or political regulation from political appointees who have no technical competencies.

What I am proposing is an industry "self-regulation" or industry agreement on content vs. Marketing.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
I've also never heard of a group 3 oil not synthesized by chemical reactions. They pumping it from the ground now? May want to inform Shell that little detail for their GTL. I guess I would have expected better from you.


When the API moves GTL or hydro-cracked/isomerized oils from the Group III category into the Group IV or V category, AND proves it falls into a strict definition of chemically synthesized base oils, then it is still considered Group III base oil.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Maybe the word synthetic should be banned and they should just use the specs instead?


To what specs are you referring?

Last edited by MolaKule; 05/28/16 04:29 PM.

The value of a scientific theory is its ability to prompt further study, not that it has any relation to the established facts of scientific reality.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109059 05/28/16 04:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 84
Z
zveroboy Offline
Offline
Z
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 84
Good initiative, that's about time to do something about it, this marketing party went way too far.

Personally, as an enthusiast, I feel that the manufacturers' secrecy (boutique included) is at its zenith, and so is the informed customer's mistrust.

It's unnaceptable that the customer needs to learn to decrypt an MSDS, just to have a vague ideea on the product he will / will not buy.

Imagine this situation in the food or pharmaceutics industry smile

I suppose that the boutique oils' success was partially due to the fact that the informed customer perceived them as "more honest" than the Big Guys in the industry.

I don't think they understood this subtile aspect.

Now its too late, the Big Guys offer very good products at lower prices, approuved by automotive manufacturers... See Shell/Pennzoil with GTL technology, the new Petronas CoolTech/Selenia 2015 (this topic here) and so on.

No, I don't think that the change will come from within ( maybe PQIA might help?)

Most probably, the authorities will finally impose regulations, as there was the case many times before. And we'll hear many more liberal-style whines about the opressing State authority that limits private initiative etc.
History repeats itself.


2014 AlfaRomeo Giulietta 1.4 MAir - Selenia Sport Power 5w40
2008 Fiat Panda 1.1 - Lukoil Genesis Premium 5w40
2010 Ford Ka 1.2 - Total Quartz 9000 Energy 5w40
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109062 05/28/16 04:40 PM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
O
OneEyeJack Offline
Offline
O
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
I gave up on trying to figure all this out and decided to pick a brand of oil with spec's that suited my needs and trust them. I use their engine and transmission oil and pay a bit more but I'm okay with that because it's a small part of my over all cost of operation since I do most of my own work when possible.

Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: userfriendly] #4109064 05/28/16 04:41 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
MolaKule Offline OP
Global Moderator
OP Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
Originally Posted By: userfriendly
Base oil type is the last thing I need to know about an engine oil.
In fact, my take on additive packages; looking at P&Z levels and making a decision based on those two additives is obsolete.

That leaves me with; personal experience, API, other governing body certifications, engine manufactures' approval
and price when selecting an engine oil.



I fully agree that base oils and add packs should not be a determining factor, but rather performance, certifications and approvals should dominate.

But the current base oil definitions and declarations vs. Marketing, Price and hype does not help the situation.

The main problem seems to be public perception by an uneducated public with regard to content vs. price.

As a consumer, if an oil is Syn-Blend, should it not cost less than a Full Synthetic, but more than a conventional MO, realizing cost differential among the base oil groups?


The value of a scientific theory is its ability to prompt further study, not that it has any relation to the established facts of scientific reality.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: SR5] #4109083 05/28/16 05:06 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
MolaKule Offline OP
Global Moderator
OP Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 20,305
Originally Posted By: SR5
OK, but just so I'm sure, how would the MK rules label two full synthetics that are in my garage right now?

- GTL Shell Helix Ultra 5W-40 ( MB229.5, BMW LL-01, Porsche A40, etc)

- Castrol Edge 5W-30 A3/B5, I believe it's Group III only but still meets MB229.5, BMW LL-01, Etc.




Boy, is that a loaded question. LOL


Under the MK definitions, I would place them under the Synthetic Blend definition.


The value of a scientific theory is its ability to prompt further study, not that it has any relation to the established facts of scientific reality.
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: SR5] #4109084 05/28/16 05:07 PM
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 84
Z
zveroboy Offline
Offline
Z
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 84
Originally Posted By: SR5


Looking at my breakfast cereal I can see another way foward, on the back of the pack is a table with percentage contents. % Protein, % Sugar, % Carbohydrate, % Fat, % Fibre, % Sodium, etc. Why can't oil companies simply do this? They already know the answers. They can keep the front label the same and just add the table to the back label. % Group V, % Group IV, % Group III etc and also list the metallics like Mo, Zn, P, Ca, etc and while they are at it Noack, TBN and HTHS would be great.

Just tell us what it is and let the customer decide. The food labeling rules hasn't stopped the diversity of cereal on the store shelf, and it should not be a problem to any oil maker. Only the oil nerds would read the table anyway. Most people would follow OEM specs or price or family tradition or advertising glam.


+1! That's what I was trying to say before.


2014 AlfaRomeo Giulietta 1.4 MAir - Selenia Sport Power 5w40
2008 Fiat Panda 1.1 - Lukoil Genesis Premium 5w40
2010 Ford Ka 1.2 - Total Quartz 9000 Energy 5w40
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109115 05/28/16 05:47 PM
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 675
J
Justin251 Offline
Offline
J
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 675
Yay. I created extended discussion. Please let's talk more about combining oil definitions and common sense.

I think it was pennzoil gold that actually says 50% synthetic on the back. But motorcraft synthetic blend does not. I like the motorcraft oil and have used it extensively but wish they were more clear as to what I was buying.

Also, if the US adopted the European standards and some of my favorites like mobil 1 or pennzoil had to be renamed as a conventional or a blend then that wouldn't affect my purchasing habits one bit. I've learned on here that good oil is good oil.

Last edited by Justin251; 05/28/16 05:49 PM.

2014 Ram 5.7 PUPPP 5w20 ultra
2015 Tuscon 2.4 PP 5w20 wix
1996 Ranger 4.0 SuperS 5w30 wix
1989 formula 5.0
Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109120 05/28/16 05:54 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,881
U
userfriendly Offline
Offline
U
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,881
I'm holding out for new Amsoil with CoolTech.

Re: Base Oil Content and Marketing [Re: MolaKule] #4109157 05/28/16 07:03 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,504
N
Nate1979 Offline
Offline
N
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,504
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Why? The specs on the back don't care what's on the front of the bottle Sounds like you agree with the German politician definition of the word synthetic vs the rest of the world. Maybe some day they will enter the 21st century.


I think most people know my position on government regulation(s).

I am not proposing more government or political regulation from political appointees who have no technical competencies.

What I am proposing is an industry "self-regulation" or industry agreement on content vs. Marketing.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
I've also never heard of a group 3 oil not synthesized by chemical reactions. They pumping it from the ground now? May want to inform Shell that little detail for their GTL. I guess I would have expected better from you.


When the API moves GTL or hydro-cracked/isomerized oils from the Group III category into the Group IV or V category, AND proves it falls into a strict definition of chemically synthesized base oils, then it is still considered Group III base oil.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979

Maybe the word synthetic should be banned and they should just use the specs instead?


To what specs are you referring?


OEM specs like Dexos, API, etc - you know, the actual performance specs that actually matters. To me your definition is just as "marketing" as any other definition. Now you want to change the definition of Group 3 so that GTL is moved to another group and fit your definition of synthetic? It sounds like what you actually want is just to know what is in the product. If you can make a great oil with group 3 and a horrible oil with group 4 or 5 (and vice versa) why does the label matter?

Group 3 oils are synthesized using base raw material feedstock no different than any other synthetic oil. You just choose to decide that the chemical reactions that make group 3 are not within your definition. Strict definition of synthetic? I would flunk a HS chemistry student for that answer.


2015 GMC Sierra 2500 6.0L
2010 Subaru Forester 2.5X
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™