What is more important in an oil?
- Thread starter Rglossip
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
It's all about the perfect equilibrium.
The standards, specifications, licenses or approvals the oil meets or carries.
Most important would be to buy a name brand that meets the specs.
Some of the brands from the dollar store or other seedy places do not meet the specs printed on their label.
Also important is to make sure its not returned used oil in a wiped clean container.
Some of the brands from the dollar store or other seedy places do not meet the specs printed on their label.
Also important is to make sure its not returned used oil in a wiped clean container.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted by Rglossip
My question is what is more important in an oil,the base oil or the additive package? Dino base or synthetic base vs additives.
A quality base stock cannot survive without a decent add-pack, and vice-versa.
So, really, it's none of the above.
Actually, it's about wear rates and contamination control.
To that end, whatever gets you there, in your specific application, with the highest ROI is the "best" oil.
Don't worry about what's in the bottle; focus on what comes out of the crankcase. THAT is the truth ye should seek.
My question is what is more important in an oil,the base oil or the additive package? Dino base or synthetic base vs additives.
A quality base stock cannot survive without a decent add-pack, and vice-versa.
So, really, it's none of the above.
Actually, it's about wear rates and contamination control.
To that end, whatever gets you there, in your specific application, with the highest ROI is the "best" oil.
Don't worry about what's in the bottle; focus on what comes out of the crankcase. THAT is the truth ye should seek.
Last edited:
Approvals, not 'meets or exceeds' and it must come from a reputable source.
Yeah, I have to agree. Whatever gets you the lowest wear rates and greatest longevity and cost effective. I actually have gotten the best value with a syn blend HDEO. 75% Group II+ and 25% Group IV PAO with a very good add pack. My Detroit 60 12.7L now has 1,030,560 miles on it and it is still all original (except water pump) and the wear metals in the UOA's look as good as they did at 50,000 miles. I even take the OCI 50% beyond the OEM recommended interval. Still only uses about 1 qt per 11-12,000 miles. I rarely give much attention to actual "approvals" and the "Meets and Exceeds" works just fine for me when it comes to reputable brands.
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by kschachn
The standards, specifications, licenses or approvals the oil meets or carries.
This!
For me.....it has to meet ACEA A3/B4 or C3/C4 with additional MB/BMW/VW specs...
The standards, specifications, licenses or approvals the oil meets or carries.
This!
For me.....it has to meet ACEA A3/B4 or C3/C4 with additional MB/BMW/VW specs...
Originally Posted by LeoStrop
Originally Posted by Rglossip
My question is what is more important in an oil...
Changing it on the right time.
Spot on. Your engine, your oil, your driving habits make your proper interval different from someone else's.
Originally Posted by Rglossip
My question is what is more important in an oil...
Changing it on the right time.
Spot on. Your engine, your oil, your driving habits make your proper interval different from someone else's.
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par (sic) base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
But I also know, that even the best base oil will grenade a engine if it does not also include a good add pack.
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par (sic) base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
But I also know, that even the best base oil will grenade a engine if it does not also include a good add pack.
Originally Posted by TiredTrucker
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par (sic) base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
I was speaking broadly, for starters..Does "lower quality base oil" work, or is that still to nebulous?... if we can't quantify good v. bad, better v. best, mediocre v. poor in re to base stocks on at least some level, than just what the h-e-double-L is this board for?
What's next, handing out participation trophy's to all base stocks?...‚...."good job barely a grp2 base stock"...‚
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par (sic) base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
I was speaking broadly, for starters..Does "lower quality base oil" work, or is that still to nebulous?... if we can't quantify good v. bad, better v. best, mediocre v. poor in re to base stocks on at least some level, than just what the h-e-double-L is this board for?
What's next, handing out participation trophy's to all base stocks?...‚...."good job barely a grp2 base stock"...‚
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by TiredTrucker
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par (sic) base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
I was speaking broadly, for starters..Does "lower quality base oil" work, or is that still to nebulous?... if we can't quantify good v. bad, better v. best, mediocre v. poor in re to base stocks on at least some level, than just what the h-e-double-L is this board for?
What's next, handing out participation trophy's to all base stocks?...‚...."good job barely a grp2 base stock"...‚
Whether a base oil can be quantified as "lower quality" it must be shown that it doesn't do the job equally compared to a base oil that is "higher quality". It is purely subjective, based more on perception than reality, depending on the application.
To wit, I now have 1,030,560 miles on a Detroit 60 12.7 engine. It still uses only 1 quart of oil in 11-12,000 miles, has 22,000 mile OCI's (50% longer than the OEM recommended interval), and wear numbers are no higher than when it had 50,000 miles on the engine. Engine is all original (except for water pump) and has gotten a Schaeffer Group II (75%) / Group IV (25%) blend.
What would a base oil of 100% Group III or 100% Group IV offer that would deliver any better results than the "lower quality" Group II that has been used?
Likewise, a Cummins N14 I had previous. 1.4 million miles and all original except 1 injector. Still was fully functional, used only about 1/2 gallon of oil every 10,000 miles, got 30,000 mile OCI's (again, 50% longer than the OEM recommended drain interval) and it went right to work for the next owner. All on a Group II Kendall. Again, how would a Group IV have delivered any better results? So then is the Group II still a "lower quality" base oil than the Group IV? On paper is may seem so. In real world situations, not so much.
It would seem, that the base oil is not so much the real determinate in the results, but that in both cases a quality add pack is more in play.
Originally Posted by TiredTrucker
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Additives help the base oil, not take the place of it. Using quality additives with a subpar base oil(s) is akin to putting lipstick on a pig...it will always be a pig.
A good performing finished lube starts with quality base oil(s) (the foundation) and builds off that.
That would be true if one can quantify what is a sub par base oil. I know of no major brand or major blender that is using a sub par (sic) base oil. Seems everyone is getting the same base oils from the recognized suppliers.
I was speaking broadly, for starters..Does "lower quality base oil" work, or is that still to nebulous?... if we can't quantify good v. bad, better v. best, mediocre v. poor in re to base stocks on at least some level, than just what the h-e-double-L is this board for?
What's next, handing out participation trophy's to all base stocks?...‚...."good job barely a grp2 base stock"...‚
Whether a base oil can be quantified as "lower quality" it must be shown that it doesn't do the job equally compared to a base oil that is "higher quality". It is purely subjective, based more on perception than reality, depending on the application.
To wit, I now have 1,030,560 miles on a Detroit 60 12.7 engine. It still uses only 1 quart of oil in 11-12,000 miles, has 22,000 mile OCI's (50% longer than the OEM recommended interval), and wear numbers are no higher than when it had 50,000 miles on the engine. Engine is all original (except for water pump) and has gotten a Schaeffer Group II (75%) / Group IV (25%) blend.
What would a base oil of 100% Group III or 100% Group IV offer that would deliver any better results than the "lower quality" Group II that has been used?
Likewise, a Cummins N14 I had previous. 1.4 million miles and all original except 1 injector. Still was fully functional, used only about 1/2 gallon of oil every 10,000 miles, got 30,000 mile OCI's (again, 50% longer than the OEM recommended drain interval) and it went right to work for the next owner. All on a Group II Kendall. Again, how would a Group IV have delivered any better results? So then is the Group II still a "lower quality" base oil than the Group IV? On paper is may seem so. In real world situations, not so much.
It would seem, that the base oil is not so much the real determinate in the results, but that in both cases a quality add pack is more in play.
Originally Posted by TiredTrucker
Whether a base oil can be quantified as "lower quality" it must be shown that it doesn't do the job equally compared to a base oil that is "higher quality". It is purely subjective, based more on perception than reality, depending on the application. - huh? "subjective"? Are you suggesting standardized testing can not objectively class oils based upon test result? Then please help me understand the purpose of the oil grouping thing and how that's derived because it seems my understanding of it has been wrong this entire time..
What would a base oil of 100% Group III or 100% Group IV offer that would deliver any better results than the "lower quality" Group II that has been used? - well for starters, a full grp3 or 4 is going to have a naturally higher VI making it more shear stable and because of the more severe processing/engineering of grp3 and 4 oils, they better resist thermal and oxidative breakdown when compared to grps1 & 2. Now whether or not these (superior) properties translate to "better results" in your engine is more a function of your driving/maintenance habits and engine condition than the lube.
It would seem, that the base oil is not so much the real determinate in the results, but that in both cases a quality add pack is more in play. - I find your use of "not so much" and "is more in play" interesting for someone who lamented much about "subjective"..but I digress. This part by you, if I'm reading it right, belies a fundamental misunderstanding of finished lubricant and the role it plays in the engine. The role additives play in a finished lube are of a helper. Additives allow the formulator to design a finished lube with properties that the base oil alone does not meet. Whether it be allowing for a lower pour point or better resistance to thinning at operating temp, to mitigating metal to metal contact, additives HELP the base oil...not replace it. Where unique requirements are not needed, there are examples of lubes and greases that contain little to no additives because the base oil alone is adequate
Whether a base oil can be quantified as "lower quality" it must be shown that it doesn't do the job equally compared to a base oil that is "higher quality". It is purely subjective, based more on perception than reality, depending on the application. - huh? "subjective"? Are you suggesting standardized testing can not objectively class oils based upon test result? Then please help me understand the purpose of the oil grouping thing and how that's derived because it seems my understanding of it has been wrong this entire time..
What would a base oil of 100% Group III or 100% Group IV offer that would deliver any better results than the "lower quality" Group II that has been used? - well for starters, a full grp3 or 4 is going to have a naturally higher VI making it more shear stable and because of the more severe processing/engineering of grp3 and 4 oils, they better resist thermal and oxidative breakdown when compared to grps1 & 2. Now whether or not these (superior) properties translate to "better results" in your engine is more a function of your driving/maintenance habits and engine condition than the lube.
It would seem, that the base oil is not so much the real determinate in the results, but that in both cases a quality add pack is more in play. - I find your use of "not so much" and "is more in play" interesting for someone who lamented much about "subjective"..but I digress. This part by you, if I'm reading it right, belies a fundamental misunderstanding of finished lubricant and the role it plays in the engine. The role additives play in a finished lube are of a helper. Additives allow the formulator to design a finished lube with properties that the base oil alone does not meet. Whether it be allowing for a lower pour point or better resistance to thinning at operating temp, to mitigating metal to metal contact, additives HELP the base oil...not replace it. Where unique requirements are not needed, there are examples of lubes and greases that contain little to no additives because the base oil alone is adequate
Last edited:
Originally Posted by dnewton3
Originally Posted by Rglossip
My question is what is more important in an oil,the base oil or the additive package? Dino base or synthetic base vs additives.
A quality base stock cannot survive without a decent add-pack, and vice-versa.
So, really, it's none of the above.
Actually, it's about wear rates and contamination control.
To that end, whatever gets you there, in your specific application, with the highest ROI is the "best" oil.
Don't worry about what's in the bottle; focus on what comes out of the crankcase. THAT is the truth ye should seek.
Like the mod to Old King James.
Originally Posted by Rglossip
My question is what is more important in an oil,the base oil or the additive package? Dino base or synthetic base vs additives.
A quality base stock cannot survive without a decent add-pack, and vice-versa.
So, really, it's none of the above.
Actually, it's about wear rates and contamination control.
To that end, whatever gets you there, in your specific application, with the highest ROI is the "best" oil.
Don't worry about what's in the bottle; focus on what comes out of the crankcase. THAT is the truth ye should seek.
Like the mod to Old King James.
- Status
Similar threads
