4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Or they did not get enough lucrative LNG contracts from the Persian Gulf
Penzoil Platinum 100% Synthetic ????
- Thread starter Talent_Keyhole
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by painfx
You are right. The AFE 0w20 is not PAO, but majority of GTL base.
What you think about Mobil 1 AFE vs Pennzoil Platinum, which has better base oil?
They have the same base oil. To convolute things further, they also co-own the same additive manufacturer.
You are right. The AFE 0w20 is not PAO, but majority of GTL base.
What you think about Mobil 1 AFE vs Pennzoil Platinum, which has better base oil?
They have the same base oil. To convolute things further, they also co-own the same additive manufacturer.
What makes an oil a true "extended" performance (i.e. long oci) oil? Is it mainly the base oil or the additives or the combination? I'm assuming you can't make a dino an extended oil no matter what additives you pile in there!
I sometimes buy extended oils but dump them at 7500 +/- miles. Also buy non-extended syn and same oci (maybe 500-700 miles less). since I don't do or don't like to do long OCIs, thinking about dumping "extended" oils unless if they have a very impressive Noack
I likes me low Noack oils
I sometimes buy extended oils but dump them at 7500 +/- miles. Also buy non-extended syn and same oci (maybe 500-700 miles less). since I don't do or don't like to do long OCIs, thinking about dumping "extended" oils unless if they have a very impressive Noack
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
Last edited:
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
My Gawd Man..... Group III is 100% synthetic. Group 4&5 is 100% synthetic.
This has been fought in courts and Group III won the right to claim it as-such.
If you want a particular group of 100% synthetic - that's outside of Group III, then be ready to pay more for it.
Also find out beforehand if your engine runs best on either 4 or 5. Odds are (average vehicle age of 10 years old), it won't.
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
My Gawd Man..... Group III is 100% synthetic. Group 4&5 is 100% synthetic.
This has been fought in courts and Group III won the right to claim it as-such.
If you want a particular group of 100% synthetic - that's outside of Group III, then be ready to pay more for it.
Also find out beforehand if your engine runs best on either 4 or 5. Odds are (average vehicle age of 10 years old), it won't.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
My Gawd Man..... Group III is 100% synthetic. Group 4&5 is 100% synthetic.
This has been fought in courts and Group III won the right to claim it as-such.
If you want a particular group of 100% synthetic - that's outside of Group III, then be ready to pay more for it.
Also find out beforehand if your engine runs best on either 4 or 5. Odds are (average vehicle age of 10 years old), it won't.
It was brought before the BBB not the court system, for what must be the 30th time.
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Could be a number of reasons but you don't pin yourself down to a number if you don't have to. But my guess is (their) marketing shows that "Full" v. "100%" is a more effective term?? Every word, including graphics, is carefully chosen on a label.. nothing is on there by accident.
Gotcha. Let's just see what the reply is.
My Gawd Man..... Group III is 100% synthetic. Group 4&5 is 100% synthetic.
This has been fought in courts and Group III won the right to claim it as-such.
If you want a particular group of 100% synthetic - that's outside of Group III, then be ready to pay more for it.
Also find out beforehand if your engine runs best on either 4 or 5. Odds are (average vehicle age of 10 years old), it won't.
It was brought before the BBB not the court system, for what must be the 30th time.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
overkill
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
If all this BBB stuff is BS, then why hasn't a government court intercepted here? Why hasn't any Group4-5 oil producer gone after the Group-3 all synthetic flag wavers?
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
If all this BBB stuff is BS, then why hasn't a government court intercepted here? Why hasn't any Group4-5 oil producer gone after the Group-3 all synthetic flag wavers?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
overkill
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
The difference is that when you say "the court" you make it sound like Mobil and Castrol went to the Supreme court and hashed out this epic debate, which is not at all what happened. Mobil made a complaint to the NAD (National Advertising Division) of the council for the Better Business Bureau, who reviewed Castrol's advertising activities and concluded that they were not out of line. That's it, it wasn't some drawn out court battle, it was a simple review and subsequent ruling by a division of the BBB regarding the ability for Group III to be advertised as synthetic.
Quote
In a ruling released in April 1999, the NAD addressed complaints filed by Mobil Oil Corp. regarding the truthfulness of Castrol North America Inc.'s claim that its Syntec Provides "superior engine protection" to all other motor oils, both synthetic and conventional, and that Syntec's esters provide "unique molecular bonding." Mobil charged that the advertisements inaccurately represented that the current formulation of Syntec is synthetic. The challenge was filed based on statements Castrol made in a series of television commercials, Web site publications, package labels, and brochures. The NAD divided its decision to address three issues raised in the complaint.
- Is the reformulated Syntec synthetic motor oil?
- Has Castrol substantiated its superiority claims?
- Has Syntec been degraded?
The NAD determined that the evidence presented by the advertiser constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil. NAD noted that Mobil markets hydroisomerized basestocks as synthetic in Europe and elsewhere. NAD noted that the actions taken by the SAE to delete any reference to "synthetic" in its description of basestocks in section J354 and API's consequent removal of any mention of "synthetic" in API 1509 were decisions by the industry not to restrict use of the term "synthetic" to the definition now preferred by Mobil. Further, the SAE Automotive Lubricants Reference Book, an extensively peer-reviewed publication, states base oils made through the processes used to create Shell's hydroisomerized basestock, severe cracking, and reforming processes may be marketed as "synthetic".
Despite its prior ruling, the NAD advised that Syntec could not advertise a superior protection claim. The NAD determined that though Mobil presented clear evidence that Castrol has made a major change to Syntec's formulation, it was not sufficient to demonstrate that Syntec has been "degraded".
Quote taken from here: https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ainst-group-iii-manufacturers-ie-castrol
overkill
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
The difference is that when you say "the court" you make it sound like Mobil and Castrol went to the Supreme court and hashed out this epic debate, which is not at all what happened. Mobil made a complaint to the NAD (National Advertising Division) of the council for the Better Business Bureau, who reviewed Castrol's advertising activities and concluded that they were not out of line. That's it, it wasn't some drawn out court battle, it was a simple review and subsequent ruling by a division of the BBB regarding the ability for Group III to be advertised as synthetic.
Quote
In a ruling released in April 1999, the NAD addressed complaints filed by Mobil Oil Corp. regarding the truthfulness of Castrol North America Inc.'s claim that its Syntec Provides "superior engine protection" to all other motor oils, both synthetic and conventional, and that Syntec's esters provide "unique molecular bonding." Mobil charged that the advertisements inaccurately represented that the current formulation of Syntec is synthetic. The challenge was filed based on statements Castrol made in a series of television commercials, Web site publications, package labels, and brochures. The NAD divided its decision to address three issues raised in the complaint.
- Is the reformulated Syntec synthetic motor oil?
- Has Castrol substantiated its superiority claims?
- Has Syntec been degraded?
The NAD determined that the evidence presented by the advertiser constitutes a reasonable basis for the claim that Castrol Syntec, as currently formulated, is a synthetic motor oil. NAD noted that Mobil markets hydroisomerized basestocks as synthetic in Europe and elsewhere. NAD noted that the actions taken by the SAE to delete any reference to "synthetic" in its description of basestocks in section J354 and API's consequent removal of any mention of "synthetic" in API 1509 were decisions by the industry not to restrict use of the term "synthetic" to the definition now preferred by Mobil. Further, the SAE Automotive Lubricants Reference Book, an extensively peer-reviewed publication, states base oils made through the processes used to create Shell's hydroisomerized basestock, severe cracking, and reforming processes may be marketed as "synthetic".
Despite its prior ruling, the NAD advised that Syntec could not advertise a superior protection claim. The NAD determined that though Mobil presented clear evidence that Castrol has made a major change to Syntec's formulation, it was not sufficient to demonstrate that Syntec has been "degraded".
Quote taken from here: https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...ainst-group-iii-manufacturers-ie-castrol
20 years ago.
That ship sailed.
For practical purposes outside the arctic circle,
It is irrelevant.
Synthetic oils today are performing better than synthetic oils in the 90s.
Living in the present, cars are lasting longer, and engine failure isn't the primary reason for condemnation.
Severe service intervals with any brand appropriate synthetic engine oil are the best bet for a clean engine that produces consistent power throughout its life.
That ship sailed.
For practical purposes outside the arctic circle,
It is irrelevant.
Synthetic oils today are performing better than synthetic oils in the 90s.
Living in the present, cars are lasting longer, and engine failure isn't the primary reason for condemnation.
Severe service intervals with any brand appropriate synthetic engine oil are the best bet for a clean engine that produces consistent power throughout its life.
Last edited:
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
overkill
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
If all this BBB stuff is BS, then why hasn't a government court intercepted here? Why hasn't any Group4-5 oil producer gone after the Group-3 all synthetic flag wavers?
A State court decides cases involving state law or the state constitution...a Federal Court decides cases involving federal Laws or the Constitution, so a court decides cases according to a Rule-of-Law standard.
None of this was ever decided in a Court of Law so legally, none of the BBB's decision are legally binding on any party.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/state_court
What is a Bureau???
Definition of bureau - an office or organization that collects or provides information
How does the BBB/NAD handle disputes?
Quote
dispute resolution procedures
The organization's dispute resolution procedures are established by the International Association of Better Business Bureaus, and implemented by local BBBs. Usually, disputes can be resolved through mediation; when appropriate, low- or no‑cost arbitration may also be offered and provided through the BBB. The BBB acts as a neutral party when providing dispute resolution services.[12]
While neutrality is claimed the BBB leans very heavily toward their dues paying members. In any dispute the BBB picks the arbiter and the complainant has to agree that the decision reached by the BBB's arbiter will be the end of the dispute and no lawsuit may be brought after that.
Complaints about the practice of professions like medicine and law are usually not handled by the BBB and are referred to associations regulating those professions.[13] The BBB does not handle complaints that have gone to court or are in the process of going to court as the complaint is already being handled by an alternative entity.[14]
If a BBB receives a consumer dispute, the BBB contacts the business in question and offers to mediate the dispute. A business does not need to be a member of the BBB to use its mediation services. BBB accreditation, or membership, is completely optional for a business to accept and participate in through the payment of dues....
...National Advertising Division
The National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau in the United States and Canada reviews factual claims made in national advertisements.[16] They offer alternative dispute resolution services for advertisers, typically reaching a conclusion within 90 days of a filing. Compliance with findings is voluntary. From Wiki
So gents, there were no legally binding outcomes, there was (were) no court decision(s), so let's please understand that this was not a court decision or proceeding!
While a business bureau may conduct dispute discussions and resolutions in a court-like manner, as many do with expert witnesses and debate, for the Nth time let's quit repeating that this BBB/NAD decision was a court decision or proceeding; WHY? Because it is neither true nor accurate!
overkill
For the 31st time, what's the difference - since the oil producers are now allowed to print that the Group-3 in the jug is all synthetic?
Sure sounds to me like BBB had the authority and was court-like, in ruling judgement here. Otherwise, no.
But the BBB-verdict to allow it, was indeed court-like, much like an arbitration panel that many businesses use.
In other words, it is a business court that ruled Group 3 is full synthetic. Court is Court..... whether it be government, private or otherwise.
If all this BBB stuff is BS, then why hasn't a government court intercepted here? Why hasn't any Group4-5 oil producer gone after the Group-3 all synthetic flag wavers?
A State court decides cases involving state law or the state constitution...a Federal Court decides cases involving federal Laws or the Constitution, so a court decides cases according to a Rule-of-Law standard.
None of this was ever decided in a Court of Law so legally, none of the BBB's decision are legally binding on any party.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/state_court
What is a Bureau???
Definition of bureau - an office or organization that collects or provides information
How does the BBB/NAD handle disputes?
Quote
dispute resolution procedures
The organization's dispute resolution procedures are established by the International Association of Better Business Bureaus, and implemented by local BBBs. Usually, disputes can be resolved through mediation; when appropriate, low- or no‑cost arbitration may also be offered and provided through the BBB. The BBB acts as a neutral party when providing dispute resolution services.[12]
While neutrality is claimed the BBB leans very heavily toward their dues paying members. In any dispute the BBB picks the arbiter and the complainant has to agree that the decision reached by the BBB's arbiter will be the end of the dispute and no lawsuit may be brought after that.
Complaints about the practice of professions like medicine and law are usually not handled by the BBB and are referred to associations regulating those professions.[13] The BBB does not handle complaints that have gone to court or are in the process of going to court as the complaint is already being handled by an alternative entity.[14]
If a BBB receives a consumer dispute, the BBB contacts the business in question and offers to mediate the dispute. A business does not need to be a member of the BBB to use its mediation services. BBB accreditation, or membership, is completely optional for a business to accept and participate in through the payment of dues....
...National Advertising Division
The National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau in the United States and Canada reviews factual claims made in national advertisements.[16] They offer alternative dispute resolution services for advertisers, typically reaching a conclusion within 90 days of a filing. Compliance with findings is voluntary. From Wiki
So gents, there were no legally binding outcomes, there was (were) no court decision(s), so let's please understand that this was not a court decision or proceeding!
While a business bureau may conduct dispute discussions and resolutions in a court-like manner, as many do with expert witnesses and debate, for the Nth time let's quit repeating that this BBB/NAD decision was a court decision or proceeding; WHY? Because it is neither true nor accurate!
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Thank you Mola!
Originally Posted by OilUzer
I like "Nth time". Reminds me of a college friend ... after a math class he couldn't resist not using that phrase
Now for the Nth+1 time, shouldn't 5Wx30 be very thin near freezing since 5 is lower than 30? It's a simple math Y'all.
Very simple math ... And wrong. The 5w has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the 30 ...
A 5w30 oil near freezing will be roughly 50 X THICKER than at 212*F .
I like "Nth time". Reminds me of a college friend ... after a math class he couldn't resist not using that phrase
Now for the Nth+1 time, shouldn't 5Wx30 be very thin near freezing since 5 is lower than 30? It's a simple math Y'all.
Very simple math ... And wrong. The 5w has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the 30 ...
A 5w30 oil near freezing will be roughly 50 X THICKER than at 212*F .
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Thank you Mola!
I'll 2nd that
Thank you Mola!
I'll 2nd that
Originally Posted by 4WD
Let's not forget that PP has been in no rush to enter the "extended" market...
Doing so would reverse a decades long tradition, if not actual policy, of Pennzoil referring to the OEM's OCI recommendations. I was told to do that as a young sales rep in the '80s, that claiming longer OCIs were permissable could be considered a way of assuming an OEM warranty. I don't know if that's true, but they were looking at the liability of it way back then. Then, as recently as July, in the thread "Pennzoil GF-6 and Low Viscosity Engine Oil Q&A - Answers," you'll find : "Always follow your owner's manual for the recommended oil drain interval."
I'm not saying it will never happen, but it would be a significant change of direction.
Let's not forget that PP has been in no rush to enter the "extended" market...
Doing so would reverse a decades long tradition, if not actual policy, of Pennzoil referring to the OEM's OCI recommendations. I was told to do that as a young sales rep in the '80s, that claiming longer OCIs were permissable could be considered a way of assuming an OEM warranty. I don't know if that's true, but they were looking at the liability of it way back then. Then, as recently as July, in the thread "Pennzoil GF-6 and Low Viscosity Engine Oil Q&A - Answers," you'll find : "Always follow your owner's manual for the recommended oil drain interval."
I'm not saying it will never happen, but it would be a significant change of direction.
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic. As discussed in the thread, "synthetic" is a marketing term here in the US market. The basis of Pennzoil's synthetic claim for Pennzoil Platinum is that each and every molecule is made by chemical synthesis, as you will find with PAO. Pennzoil Platinum is made from natural gas, each molecule of natural gas being synthetized into to performance leading Gas-To-Liquid base oil. Pennzoil Platinum is not derived from crude petroleum oil or from "Hydro-cracked petroleum oil". By the commonly understood US legal, marketing, technical, OEM standards and chemical definitions, Pennzoil Platinum is truly a full synthetic motor oil.
Pennzoil sets a standard in being "synthetic" that other motor oils might struggle to meet, for example all Pennzoil Platinum grades are entirely composed of modern full synthetic base oil, offering the customer real performance such as better oil volatility and better oxidation stability leading to consistent oil performance for longer.
Pennzoil has invested in gas-to-liquid technology to progress full synthetic motor oil performance, unlike many oil marketers who continue to offer technology developed decades ago. You will have seen our full synthetic technology regularly beating other motor oil brands in US motorsports, such as Joey Logano winning the NASCAR Championship in 2018 and Simon Pagenaud winning the 2019 Indianapolis 500.
Thanks,
Gena
Thanks for weighing in Gena..👠any word on the Dexos certs for the new product lineup? And IIRC, you indicated in the past that certain current PP/PUP products will meet GF-6 without needing reformulation, is this still true or did I get that wrong?
We are currently working towards securing Dexos approval for applicable viscosity grades within the Pennzoil Designed For Your Drive portfolio and expect to meet the latest specification - we'll be sure to update the BITOG community when we have more details.
Additionally, the testing protocol for ILSAC GF-6 has been established, engine test set-ups are available and performance limits have now been established. At this point in time, no motor oils in the marketplace can be marketed as API SP or ILSAC GF-6 as the licensing period is not yet open. However, Pennzoil has completed the relevant ILSAC GF-6 testing protocols for the below Pennzoil Platinum products. Based on those results, the following products meet API SP and ILSAC GF-6A- and GF-6B test limits:
ILSAC GF-6A:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full-Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
• Pennzoil Platinum High Mileage Full Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
ILSAC GF-6B:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full Synthetic Motor Oil - SAE 0W-16
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic. As discussed in the thread, "synthetic" is a marketing term here in the US market. The basis of Pennzoil's synthetic claim for Pennzoil Platinum is that each and every molecule is made by chemical synthesis, as you will find with PAO. Pennzoil Platinum is made from natural gas, each molecule of natural gas being synthetized into to performance leading Gas-To-Liquid base oil. Pennzoil Platinum is not derived from crude petroleum oil or from "Hydro-cracked petroleum oil". By the commonly understood US legal, marketing, technical, OEM standards and chemical definitions, Pennzoil Platinum is truly a full synthetic motor oil.
Pennzoil sets a standard in being "synthetic" that other motor oils might struggle to meet, for example all Pennzoil Platinum grades are entirely composed of modern full synthetic base oil, offering the customer real performance such as better oil volatility and better oxidation stability leading to consistent oil performance for longer.
Pennzoil has invested in gas-to-liquid technology to progress full synthetic motor oil performance, unlike many oil marketers who continue to offer technology developed decades ago. You will have seen our full synthetic technology regularly beating other motor oil brands in US motorsports, such as Joey Logano winning the NASCAR Championship in 2018 and Simon Pagenaud winning the 2019 Indianapolis 500.
Thanks,
Gena
Thanks for weighing in Gena..👠any word on the Dexos certs for the new product lineup? And IIRC, you indicated in the past that certain current PP/PUP products will meet GF-6 without needing reformulation, is this still true or did I get that wrong?
We are currently working towards securing Dexos approval for applicable viscosity grades within the Pennzoil Designed For Your Drive portfolio and expect to meet the latest specification - we'll be sure to update the BITOG community when we have more details.
Additionally, the testing protocol for ILSAC GF-6 has been established, engine test set-ups are available and performance limits have now been established. At this point in time, no motor oils in the marketplace can be marketed as API SP or ILSAC GF-6 as the licensing period is not yet open. However, Pennzoil has completed the relevant ILSAC GF-6 testing protocols for the below Pennzoil Platinum products. Based on those results, the following products meet API SP and ILSAC GF-6A- and GF-6B test limits:
ILSAC GF-6A:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full-Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
• Pennzoil Platinum High Mileage Full Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
ILSAC GF-6B:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full Synthetic Motor Oil - SAE 0W-16
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic....
Thanks,
Gena
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Essentially, "100% synthetic" and "full synthetic" mean the same thing. However, these statements can be interpreted differently by consumers. We have purposely chosen to communicate "full synthetic" on our packaging as we've found this term resonates more with end consumers and is commonly communicated language in the current motor oil market.
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic....
Thanks,
Gena
If that is the case, then why not place "100% Synthetic" on the packaging instead of "Full Synthetic"?
Essentially, "100% synthetic" and "full synthetic" mean the same thing. However, these statements can be interpreted differently by consumers. We have purposely chosen to communicate "full synthetic" on our packaging as we've found this term resonates more with end consumers and is commonly communicated language in the current motor oil market.
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic. As discussed in the thread, "synthetic" is a marketing term here in the US market. The basis of Pennzoil's synthetic claim for Pennzoil Platinum is that each and every molecule is made by chemical synthesis, as you will find with PAO. Pennzoil Platinum is made from natural gas, each molecule of natural gas being synthetized into to performance leading Gas-To-Liquid base oil. Pennzoil Platinum is not derived from crude petroleum oil or from "Hydro-cracked petroleum oil". By the commonly understood US legal, marketing, technical, OEM standards and chemical definitions, Pennzoil Platinum is truly a full synthetic motor oil.
Pennzoil sets a standard in being "synthetic" that other motor oils might struggle to meet, for example all Pennzoil Platinum grades are entirely composed of modern full synthetic base oil, offering the customer real performance such as better oil volatility and better oxidation stability leading to consistent oil performance for longer.
Pennzoil has invested in gas-to-liquid technology to progress full synthetic motor oil performance, unlike many oil marketers who continue to offer technology developed decades ago. You will have seen our full synthetic technology regularly beating other motor oil brands in US motorsports, such as Joey Logano winning the NASCAR Championship in 2018 and Simon Pagenaud winning the 2019 Indianapolis 500.
Thanks,
Gena
Thanks for weighing in Gena..👠any word on the Dexos certs for the new product lineup? And IIRC, you indicated in the past that certain current PP/PUP products will meet GF-6 without needing reformulation, is this still true or did I get that wrong?
We are currently working towards securing Dexos approval for applicable viscosity grades within the Pennzoil Designed For Your Drive portfolio and expect to meet the latest specification - we'll be sure to update the BITOG community when we have more details.
Additionally, the testing protocol for ILSAC GF-6 has been established, engine test set-ups are available and performance limits have now been established. At this point in time, no motor oils in the marketplace can be marketed as API SP or ILSAC GF-6 as the licensing period is not yet open. However, Pennzoil has completed the relevant ILSAC GF-6 testing protocols for the below Pennzoil Platinum products. Based on those results, the following products meet API SP and ILSAC GF-6A- and GF-6B test limits:
ILSAC GF-6A:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full-Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
• Pennzoil Platinum High Mileage Full Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
ILSAC GF-6B:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full Synthetic Motor Oil - SAE 0W-16
Thank you Gena.
My 2019 Lexus U 250h F-Sport is spec'd for 0W16.
I have used PP 0W16 and switched to Pennzoil Hybrid 0W16 when you came to market with this product.
I have also noted that the PDS numbers on these two motor oils are identical.
Can I presume that all is fine, without certifications having been obtained quite yet ?
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by GenaFishbeck
Hi there!
Pennzoil Platinum is 100% synthetic. As discussed in the thread, "synthetic" is a marketing term here in the US market. The basis of Pennzoil's synthetic claim for Pennzoil Platinum is that each and every molecule is made by chemical synthesis, as you will find with PAO. Pennzoil Platinum is made from natural gas, each molecule of natural gas being synthetized into to performance leading Gas-To-Liquid base oil. Pennzoil Platinum is not derived from crude petroleum oil or from "Hydro-cracked petroleum oil". By the commonly understood US legal, marketing, technical, OEM standards and chemical definitions, Pennzoil Platinum is truly a full synthetic motor oil.
Pennzoil sets a standard in being "synthetic" that other motor oils might struggle to meet, for example all Pennzoil Platinum grades are entirely composed of modern full synthetic base oil, offering the customer real performance such as better oil volatility and better oxidation stability leading to consistent oil performance for longer.
Pennzoil has invested in gas-to-liquid technology to progress full synthetic motor oil performance, unlike many oil marketers who continue to offer technology developed decades ago. You will have seen our full synthetic technology regularly beating other motor oil brands in US motorsports, such as Joey Logano winning the NASCAR Championship in 2018 and Simon Pagenaud winning the 2019 Indianapolis 500.
Thanks,
Gena
Thanks for weighing in Gena..👠any word on the Dexos certs for the new product lineup? And IIRC, you indicated in the past that certain current PP/PUP products will meet GF-6 without needing reformulation, is this still true or did I get that wrong?
We are currently working towards securing Dexos approval for applicable viscosity grades within the Pennzoil Designed For Your Drive portfolio and expect to meet the latest specification - we'll be sure to update the BITOG community when we have more details.
Additionally, the testing protocol for ILSAC GF-6 has been established, engine test set-ups are available and performance limits have now been established. At this point in time, no motor oils in the marketplace can be marketed as API SP or ILSAC GF-6 as the licensing period is not yet open. However, Pennzoil has completed the relevant ILSAC GF-6 testing protocols for the below Pennzoil Platinum products. Based on those results, the following products meet API SP and ILSAC GF-6A- and GF-6B test limits:
ILSAC GF-6A:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full-Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
• Pennzoil Platinum High Mileage Full Synthetic Motor Oils - SAE 0W-20, SAE 5W-20, SAE 5W-30 and SAE 10W-30
ILSAC GF-6B:
• Pennzoil Platinum Full Synthetic Motor Oil - SAE 0W-16
Thank you Gena.
My 2019 Lexus U 250h F-Sport is spec'd for 0W16.
I have used PP 0W16 and switched to Pennzoil Hybrid 0W16 when you came to market with this product.
I have also noted that the PDS numbers on these two motor oils are identical.
Can I presume that all is fine, without certifications having been obtained quite yet ?
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Don't they make it from natural, as in not synthetic, gas? I'm happy with not knowing more than what is says on the botlte. Eventually there has to be a limit on time spent thinking about lubricating oils for engines.
Good question, how can something from "natural gas" be synthetic at the same time? The answer is semantics. We call methane 'natural gas' which carries with it a suggestion of it's common origin. But that has no bearing on products derived from it. Alcohols also occur quite naturally as well, and they're the basis for "real" synthetic oils. You wouldn't disqualify GrV esters from being synthetic products simply because their chemical feedstocks naturally occur?
As already covered, GTL oils are made using the Fischer-Tropcsh process like a few other GrIII synthetic base oils, and since these oils share a Group with hydrocracked petroleum oil, people are likely to casually conflate all Group III base oils with hydrocracked, hydroprocessed crude oil products that the GIII is famous for. It's unfortunate for F-T oils and their reputation, but despite this, in my opinion F-T products, even those derived from coal are considered real synthetics to me, because at least there is a full chemical and phase change into feedstocks that are directly synthesized into 'brand new' custom-chain liquid hydrocarbons as pure as the feedstock itself. The oil producer has full control of the syngas purity, unlike taking crude and just severely cracking it clean-ish and into the desirable HC chain structure you want. F-T oils are then fractioned, just like cracked oils, and this is because there is a range of oil molecule chain lengths (viscosities) created by the catalyst. The catalyst type is chosen based on the product needed. With SHELL PEARL, they produce mostly synthetic 'gasoil': jet fuel for aviation which is quite a light product relative to engine oil. At the bottom of these reactors there is a heavier 'waste product', which happens to be suitable for fractioning engine oil bases and this is where Shell sources it's GTL engine oil from. "Reactor bottoms" sounds worse than it is, just the leftover sludge from the bottom of synthetic jet fuel reactors, but it's objectively nice, clean (and synthetic) stuff for making engine oil with.
tldr; The intermediate feedstock in the F-T synthesis process is quite literally called "syngas" so maybe that is the answer.
Don't they make it from natural, as in not synthetic, gas? I'm happy with not knowing more than what is says on the botlte. Eventually there has to be a limit on time spent thinking about lubricating oils for engines.
Good question, how can something from "natural gas" be synthetic at the same time? The answer is semantics. We call methane 'natural gas' which carries with it a suggestion of it's common origin. But that has no bearing on products derived from it. Alcohols also occur quite naturally as well, and they're the basis for "real" synthetic oils. You wouldn't disqualify GrV esters from being synthetic products simply because their chemical feedstocks naturally occur?
As already covered, GTL oils are made using the Fischer-Tropcsh process like a few other GrIII synthetic base oils, and since these oils share a Group with hydrocracked petroleum oil, people are likely to casually conflate all Group III base oils with hydrocracked, hydroprocessed crude oil products that the GIII is famous for. It's unfortunate for F-T oils and their reputation, but despite this, in my opinion F-T products, even those derived from coal are considered real synthetics to me, because at least there is a full chemical and phase change into feedstocks that are directly synthesized into 'brand new' custom-chain liquid hydrocarbons as pure as the feedstock itself. The oil producer has full control of the syngas purity, unlike taking crude and just severely cracking it clean-ish and into the desirable HC chain structure you want. F-T oils are then fractioned, just like cracked oils, and this is because there is a range of oil molecule chain lengths (viscosities) created by the catalyst. The catalyst type is chosen based on the product needed. With SHELL PEARL, they produce mostly synthetic 'gasoil': jet fuel for aviation which is quite a light product relative to engine oil. At the bottom of these reactors there is a heavier 'waste product', which happens to be suitable for fractioning engine oil bases and this is where Shell sources it's GTL engine oil from. "Reactor bottoms" sounds worse than it is, just the leftover sludge from the bottom of synthetic jet fuel reactors, but it's objectively nice, clean (and synthetic) stuff for making engine oil with.
tldr; The intermediate feedstock in the F-T synthesis process is quite literally called "syngas" so maybe that is the answer.
- Status
Similar threads
