Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

Synthetic motor oil

1152153155157158175

Comments

  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    There is a war of claims going on now:
    Valvoline Synpower claims 4 times the wear protection compared to Mobil1. We don't know if they can back it up, but the Mobil lawyers are trying to shoot them down on that.
    Valvoline's Claim to be better than M1
    and also this link: Valvoline's website showing the claim
    AND, oh this is getting good so far: Mobil 1 Synthetic Oil's response to the scathing accusation
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Indeed many goals are accomplished with LONGER oil changes. They are actually pretty logical and too numerous to cite, time and time again.

    However on the other side, MANY things are accomplished with SHORTER oil changes and I mean specifically 2,000, 3,000,4,000, 5,000 miles OCI's. The ones that I am thinking of do not benefit the consumer so much as the vendors on many levels.

    You almost have to shake your head when the UOA trendline/spot tests positively show that wear is GREATER during so called "NEW OIL BREAK IN !!!!! People literally glaze over when you say this.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Funny how there is not one UOA.

    But on the other hand since I run 3 vehicles that use 5w30,0w30 @ 15,000 mile oci's. Would that mean that I can run 60,000 mile OCI's????
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Actually, the Synpower/Mobil1 Sequence IVA test is a great measure of wear performance. They carefully weigh parts before and after the test to see how much metal was lost during the test. I don't see how a UOA would do much more. The end-game goal is to keep wear to a minimum.

    Instead of manufacturers publishing UOAs after standard sequence tests, it would be better to just see how many repeated Sequence IVA tests can be run and still pass. Amsoil did something like this a while back and found their 10w-30 oil could survive the Sequence IIIF test at least 3 times (maybe more). If more companies did this, then we as consumers could pick the oil that survived the longest! Then one company could claim "we're a 3-Seq-IVA oil" and another could say "we're a 4-Seq-IVA oil", and I'd probably buy the one that could make it through the most.
  • bassprobasspro Member Posts: 34
    I like this idea and add an UOA to each test and it would be facinating,factual, comarative for us, the everyday oil user to make a better informed decision. MPC
  • rick2456rick2456 Member Posts: 320
    I remember Arco graphite. I used it in my 1984 VW Jetta GLI. Never did have any problems with it (kept it until 85,000 miles).
  • f0rl0rnf0rl0rn Member Posts: 71
    My lubricants of choice are currently from Royal Purple. My '04 600RR and '07 Accord both enjoy the benefits.

    I get mixed signals from oil companies (including Royal Purple) about using oil additives. Even the vehicle manufacturers warn against them.

    With additives like, ZMAX for instance, they are hugely endorsed and advertise on most of the auto programs and networks.

    These networks and shows sell you on ZMAX and on High-End Synthetics. But when you go to the Oil company regarding additives they say it is not recommended.

    How do I filter through everything? If an additive is actually beneficial then I am fine investing the money in an application from time to time. If it isn't I don't want to mess up a good thing. :confuse:

    No pun intended on "filtering" through everything.

    Does anyone have any factual input? No anecdotes please. I get enough of those from the advertisers. :blush:
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    You might want to go on www.bobistheoilguy.com. and plow through:

    1. the UOA's
    2. UOA's of addtives like ZMAX
    3. UOA's of bypass oil filtering.

    I would indeed stay FAR away from additives like ZMAX.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    So what did you end up doing?
  • f0rl0rnf0rl0rn Member Posts: 71
    For some reason it didn't message me from your first post about bobs site. Based on other recommendations I will not be using an additive. I have not yet read the site you recommended but I will so I can get more information. Thanks for the heads up.
  • bassprobasspro Member Posts: 34
    My two cents on the ten or so on the Read New Posts tab on syn. oil were good.
    The one point that was said a time or two but not stressed throughout is this: Oil analysis is the best way to know you oil and engine condition. Three to five tests over a year or two would give one a good read on your specific vehicle under your driving conditions.
    Syn. oil is better than conventional oil in every way. I do not use conventional oil even in my push mower or weed eater.
    That said, I have read where different people, who use tests,look at cylinder walls,run compression test etc. and use conventional oil, with LOW mile oil and filter changes have as much success as I do.
    The common thread here, I see, again is oil testing takes a lot of guess work out of the equation.
    I have a vehicle that has a oil bypass system and two that do not. The vehicle with the bypass system has now run over 15,000 miles with no oil change. I only change filters and top off. I have added almost 4 quarts of top off oil and the vehicle has 132,000 miles on it. The oil filters I use have increased the oil capacity of the system to just over 6.5 quarts.
    Unless testing indicates the need, I will not change the oil. I will only change filters and top off.
    I,for one do not like to climb under my vehicle and I moved the filters where I can easily reach them. I plan on keeping the vehicle for an extended period of time.
    All that said, OIL TESTING, finding the difference between syn. vs. conventional oil from sites like this, and opinions of visitors helped me to be comfotable with the oil maintenance process I use. Thanks to this site
  • bassprobasspro Member Posts: 34
    I am pretty sure the once a year would not work for me and a lot of other people. If i took your advice as fact with no oil testing, I believe it would cause mechanical issues with my driving conditions. I drive 45,000 to 55,000 miles a year and my vehicle engine only holds 4.5 quarts of oil.
    My point is, your driving conditions are unique as mine. We probably should recommend oil testing before one attempts extended oil change intervals?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Well the answer is really no and yes.

    Upshot 2/3 OIC's per year with 45,000 to 55,000 miles per year should put you in good stead with good products; such as Mobil One. The contrast would be 11- 19 OCI's with conventional oil.

    So for example you can run a 15 k OCI, send in a UOA, and adjust accordingly. Realistically you are establishing a baseline as to how severe your driving really is. Indeed the truth is if one insists on using conventiona,l oil UOA's are more critical than with a good synthetic. :shades: Of course the rational is flipped completely 180 degrees. :lemon:
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    basspro, Wow thats a lot of miles in a year. You could probably draw the line at 30,000 miles or 1 year, whichever comes first. Most people don't have to worry about that. If you're concerned about oil filter performance during long synthetic oil changes, like I am, then there is a cool new oil filter out there that supercleans the oil using a parallel path single filter: MicroGreen Oil Filter click here.
    That one looks very good. Fleetgaurd has done that with over the road big diesels to scrub the oil, but this is the first time I've seen the parallel path method used in a single spin on canister filter like we use. The parallel path ensures no big pressure drop happens. Then you can go 30,000 miles or 1 year, which for most people will just be 1 year. Take a look at Mobil Oil's website for an around the world high mileage usage of Mobil 1 synthetic in some Land Rovers to see that mileage is rarely the issue with these oils.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    I remembered something else about the Mobil Oil Land Rover around the world test they have on their website that the MicroGreen oil filter would satisfy: They said particle count got too high in their oil, so they had to change the oil after 28,000 miles in severe dusty conditions. The MicroGreen oil filter, changed about every 10,000 miles or so, would scrub the oil down to 3 microns or so, very small. And adding oil as its gradually burned, and changing the oil filter every 10,000 miles would create a need for makeup oil, and all that would mean some fresh oil would make its way into the engine during a 1-year oil change interval.
    Web link: 28,000 miles on Mobil 1 in severe dusty conditions -- click here
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    ..........Or. You can just do it my way. Oil and M1 filter change every 6 months which is 3500-4000 miles for me. Pennzoil Platinum 5-20,no muss;no fuss.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    blufz1, That misses the point. The idea here is to cut down on the number of oil changes one does. (Unless you enjoy it, which most people don't.) Also, if you read posts above and google a little, you'll find there is tons of evidence saying that clean oil has a higher rate of wear metals per mile than used oil. So, to cut costs, save time, wear your engine down less, waste less oil, change once a year, use a MicroGreen oil filter if you think its necessary, and spend the remaining money on the high cost of living. I would recommend the MicroGreen oil filter (see posts above) as it does get the 3 micron stuff out best.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    WHY change oil 4 times when 16 times will DO !!??? ;)

    (15,000 OCI's vs 3,500 OCI's 55,000 miles)
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Exactly, ruking1, if 3,000 mile oil change intervals are good, then 1,000 mile ones must be better.

    I was having a conversation with my brother-in-law the other day, and he said he doesn't understand why synthetics are on the market when you can easily get an engine to go over 200,000 miles on the cheapest oil on sale at Walmart. Thats true, but I'd rather drain the oil pan fewer times, saving the labor, oil, and time. Anything that helps me change it less often (synthetics + MicroGreen) is welcome.

    I was just thinking how ALL the other fluids (steering, brake, coolant, transmission, differential) in a car these days go 100,000 miles without changing, while we're stuck with frequent oil changes just like the good old days. Well, maybe by using synthetics, and maybe just changing the oil filter every 10,000 miles, and draining at one year intervals, one can at least try and minimize that one last pesky maintenance task, too.
  • blufz1blufz1 Member Posts: 2,045
    I agree it's a great "idea".....but my car dilutes the oil with fuel and I am towing a bass boat in Texas heat so 6 mos and 3500-4000 is what I do. Each automotive use situation is unique.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    blufz1, I agree with you. I generally assume fuel doesn't get into the oil much in cars with good rings when I talk about these things. If you are towing a bass boat, then I'd do 2 things:
    1. Don't use Pennzoil Platinum, as it isn't good enough to pass the latest ACEA A1 test (it's only good enough to pass the older version of that test which is easier to pass).
    2. Don't use 5w-20, use 0w-30 or 5w-30, for towing, and use Valvoline synthetic, as it has much better wear performance than Mobil 1 in tests. And it passes all the latest ACEA tests, unlike Pennzoil 5w-20. Also, a 5w-30 will fight fuel dilution better than a 5w-20. In Texas, a 30 weight is great.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I remember doing 1,500 to 3,000 OCI's on a 1970 VW Beetle. I clocked close to 250,000 miles on that Bug. Oil changing ceased being fun the second time and in 1971. :surprise:

    FF to 2009, since we had a warm day, I wanted to change from tires that had 112,000 miles on them. (no marathoners ;) ) While I was at it, I was on a roll and decided to change my oil and filter early. @ 22,500 miles instead of 25,000 miles. So since this is now once a year or so, I had forgotten how to work the evacuation pump. Upshot: instead of 5 mins, it took 10 mins. Hey guys don't get old. :lemon: :shades:
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    ruking1, Tempted by the MicroGreen oil filter? Three micron filtration is alluring...
    Helps those synthetic oil change 1-year intervals.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    From what you say, it sounds like a great product.

    However on this particular car, the recommended oem Mann oil filter is actually specified for 30,000 mile oil change intervals. The next leap would be for a bypass oil system ($200.00) with an EA bp 90 Amsoil filter ($25 a pop?) , which would bump the miles a min of 24% or 30-31k and actually removed larger particles (down to 2 microns) that come in brand new oil !!! i.e., used oil to a certain mileage would have less particles than new oil. I am only planning to keep the car a min of 500,000 miles. ;)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    You got 250,000 miles on ONE VW ENGINE??!!! :surprise:

    Maybe I read that wrong....?
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    The MicroGreen oil filter does seem like a good thing. I actually "invented" it in my mind, but did nothing about it of course, a few years ago, only to find out Fleetgaurd had done it already way back in the '80's with big diesel truck oil filters, and now MicroGreen has given this idea (parallel path 2-in-one filtration) to us lowly car drivers. I've talked with a few other engineer friends of mine, and most say they have thought of something (invention) only to find out a patent had already been issued years ago, too. Too late with ideas.

    The only problem I have with the Amsoil bypass filtration is that about 10% just gets dumped back into the pan without going through the engine (the "bypass" idea). I was never comfortable having reduced oil flow volume to the engine parts, but people say 90% flow is good enough, I dunno. I'm too lazy to put one on anyway, and don't want to pay $200 for the parts. Thats where MicroGreen is good, as its just a plain old canister filter on the outside, no special anything needed. (I'm not connected with the MicroGreen filter people, BTW.)

    Since the subject of this thread is synthetic oil, I'm saying this is related because I think the real usage of synthetic oil is to get long oil change intervals, and better filtering helps in those long intervals, so it goes hand in hand, I'm claiming.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Yes but the clutch was changed app 119,000 miles or so.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Ah okay. Yeah I never have burned out a clutch either. But I have friends who go through them like they were paper plates.

    I'm having a weird issue with synthetic oil. On my Subaru, which is a boxer engine as you know, I get too much valve lifter noise when cold using the synthetic. It could be I suppose the weight I'm using, a 5W-30???
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Oh my !!! I think you almost need horse race daily score cards to keep up with oils and specifically synthetic oil or what is aka supposedly synthetic. JUST when you think you got your intellectual arms around a concept/issue, things change ! This of course makes you once again look to real world testing and other longitudinal validations.

    So specifically, if 5w30 synthetic IS oem recommended, then troubling shooting for potential issues is in order. The switch from conventional oil ( I am presuming here) might have just uncovered something that was being masked. If after the diagnosis reveals... (nothing would be my swag) then decide if the louder valve lifter noise is tolerable. If not, switch back to conventional recommendation.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Switching from conventional to synthetic doesn't cause lifter noise. There really is nothing magically different between synthetic and conventional oil, just that synthetic has more consistent hydrocarbon molecules and is purer than conventional oil. All these old wive's tales about synthetic oil doing funny things is a bunch of crap.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Since I run synthetic in all mine (happens to be the same brand- one stop at WalMart and the oils are mostly all there, 0w20,5w20,0w30, 5w30, 5w40 and in 5 qt jugs I might add ;) ) it has been and remains a NON issue for me.

    Actually I have noticed the ever so slight perceptual sound difference on my cars ! Now I have to admit the last time I noticed this "ever so slight perceptual sound difference " was when I switched from oem (conventional oil) fill in 05 and @ 10,000 miles on a Honda Civic. That is going on 70,000 miles ago.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Well yes there are plenty of myths about the effects of synthetic, but when I started up an engine to warm up the oil (so I'm listening to it, right?) and then drained the oil and put in synthetic, and then started it up again----there was the lifter noise. And it continues to do it each cold start for 2-3 minutes.

    Also, boxer type engine do have certain peculiarities that might be more sensitive to different oil weights.

    I think the weight is the problem. I'm going to switch back to non-syn next week and I will report to you guys as to what happens.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Mr_Shiftright, Try an engine flush for 5 minutes, as that sticking lifter might have some excess varnish on it. Then, with a cleaner engine, thats a better place to put expensive, long-oil-change-interval synthetic oil.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    It's ALL the lifters unfortunately. It's quite a performance. But 3 minutes later, quiet as a mouse.

    I've had this engine apart. It is a very tight clean engine.
  • the_big_althe_big_al Member Posts: 1,079
    A few years ago, I stuck to the mantra of an OCI of 3k miles. No matter what. It got to the point one time where I was changing the oil twice a month on one of my vehicles and paying someone $30 bucks to do it too. Then we moved and finances became a little more tight and I did some research and decided to switch over to synthetic in all my vehicles. It was a gradual switchover. First my truck with over 100K on the odo then my family car which has less than 40K on the odo and now my work van which has the same drivetrain as my truck and just hit 100K.

    The van gets changed every 10K miles and that happens about every 8 months or so. The car gets it changed every 10K miles or once a year. At the rate I am going it's going to be a year this time around. The truck get's it changed once a year no matter the mileage. It probably won't even see 3K miles a year, but once a year is good for me. I also have gone to changing it myself. I went from spending $60-$90 a month to around $100 a year by doing so.

    In the long run it has all worked out well. It takes me 15 minutes tops to do it myself and costs about $30 per vehicle. I use M1 0W30 and OEM filters. I have usually had to add about 1 1/2 quarts of oil per vehicle per change interval. I just have to remember to check the oil every couple thousand miles to make sure all is good...
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    You probably know this already, but just making the point for others who are dubious or doubtful about synthetic oil changes and their intervals in general.

    Since your consumption seems to be 1.5 quarts per oil interval (10,000 miles) , the so called "topping up" freshens up the sump. So in fact, you can very safely and conservatively EXTEND the OCI mileage. So for example, if your sump is 6.5 qts, 1.5 qts is 23%. So indeed you can extend to 12,300 miles.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    .... and if you're a little paranoid about those long oil synth oil change intervals, then throw on a single MicroGreen oil filter / scrubber, down to 3 microns, baby.
  • the_big_althe_big_al Member Posts: 1,079
    ya - I had figured as much, but 10K is nice easy number to remember and so I have been sticking to that. Plus when I happen to go over that number (like I did with the last one for the van; it actually went about 11K before finally getting changed), I knew I didn't really need to worry.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    In the old days, I was brought up (literally) on 1,000,1,500, 2,000, MAX 3,000 mile oil change intervals (OCI's) .

    Synthetic oil and filtering has come (literally) almost exponentially along. So much so, there are some oil filters that literally can clean up particles left (during the current state of the art oil refining process) in a NEW container of oil !!! Synthetic oil can be run up to 30,000 miles !!?? With bypass oil filtering, usually a min of 25% over even that figure !! (37,500). Further, oil analysis once the exclusive realm of jet aircraft analysis and maintenance is commonly available.... @ the internet level, literally mouse clicks on a credit card away !

    Now I am a belt and suspenders kind of guy, so my new border is 25,000 miles. oil change intervals (OCI's) ;)

    It seems the markets are STILL stuck or artificially kept in the "old days", despite quantum leap advances.

    I do NOT miss the "old days"

    THESE.... are the good OLD days !!!!
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    I agree, as is apparent by my past posts. However, the whole bypass filter idea (Amsoil) is too much trouble for us lazy people. OK, the ambitious ones with lots of time on their hands can spend $200 bucks and install it, but for the rest of us, there is nothing like just throwing on a parallel path MicroGreen. Also, should the engine just get 90% oil flow (bypass dumps 10% directly back into the pan)?

    Another strategy for ambitious people that I actually like better than bypass, is to set up a remote filter mount, attached with tough hoses to the old canister hole, that puts 2 oil filters in parallel, one of the Amsoil-super-duper low micron type (bypass type), and the other a Mobil 1 Ext Perf oil filter or Purolator PureOne. Then, the pressure drop problem is not there, and full volume gets to your engine. About 5% to 10% or so of the oil flow goes through the low-micron filter, and the majority flows through the normal oil filter path, scrubbing the oil slowly over time.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Here is a link to a website that has the parallel flow concept: Parallel Flow click here.

    Then you can make one of the oil filters on that mount a bypass-type low-micron filter, and the other a regular filter.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    TOO... much work already!! :confuse:

    No seriously, first and foremost the "modern" oil filter is/always been designed to be an over flow valve. The issue since inception has always been full to fuller to MAXIMUM flow vs what is that point of MAXIMUM flow consistent with (whatever level) filtering ?

    A bypass filter and for lack of a systems diagram and arguments sake, your design will allow MAX flow and so called off main line filtering allow maximium filtering, which technologically, adds restriction.

    One upshot is oem's can put in these systems @ FAR lower costs than we can buy it aftermarket !? :surprise: :sick: :lemon:
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    ruking1 said "...your design will allow MAX flow and so called off main line filtering allow maximium filtering, which technologically, adds restriction..."

    Actually, a parallel flow path, one through a normal filter, and another through a better, more restrictive filter, will have less restriction overall.

    Think of it this way: Take a light bulb with a resistance of 5 ohms, and then take another light bulb of 10 ohms (higher resistance) in parallel with the other one. The overall circuit will have a resistance of 3.3 ohms, less than the lowest of the two. Less than the 5 ohm one alone. (Fluid flow is fully analogous to electrical flow, and is taught that way in engineering school.)
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Right. I don't have any problem with the analogy, just how it would be implemented once an oem decided to go with it, if any are going with it at all.

    This subject is a tad arcane in that the average driver/owner would go... Huh???????

    For me the combination /option of massive flow combine with (in effect) 2 (TWO) micron filtering would be revolutionary (in application only, as the technology has been around for a long time) !

    1. if one uses synthetic oil in an engine specified and designed with it in mind, OCI's can be a min of 30,000 miles if not 50,000 miles.
    2. new oil fresh out of the container does NOT come that clean !!
    3. USED oil will actually be CLEANER than NEW oil (if folks can conceptualize that) given the calculated passing through this/these filters.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    In a previous post, I noted Valvoline's Sequence IVA tests and the marketing campaign, repeated here for convenience:
    "There is a war of claims going on now:
    Valvoline Synpower claims 4 times the wear protection compared to Mobil1. We don't know if they can back it up, but the Mobil lawyers are trying to shoot them down on that.
    Valvoline's Claim to be better than M1
    and also this link: Valvoline's website showing the claim
    AND, oh this is getting good so far: Mobil 1 Synthetic Oil's response to the scathing accusation "


    Since posting that, I've noticed that Mobil (actually Exxon-Mobil) has taken down their initial response from their website. They aren't saying a word. The Exxon-Mobil lawyers want to say something but know they don't have a case at all!

    Now, Castrol says their Sequence IVA test beats Mobil1 AND Valvoline -- click here
    For those who think the Seq IVA test doesn't mean anything, remember that test actually measures the wear on the cams, with 90 micrometers as the pass/fail point, and Mobil 1 synthetic oil had 8 times as much metal taken off the cams as Castrol Edge (new product). That means that if Mobil 1 synthetic had 80 micrometers of wear on their cams, then Castrol Edge had only 10 micrometers. Since the pass/fail point is 90 micrometers, thats about what happened, something like 80 to 10 or so! Mobil 1 has some catching up to do in the wear department.

    Now I do like Mobil 1 synthetic and Pennzoil Platinum for their Acura (Honda) HTO-06 standard for turbocharged engines, since those oils seem to pass that tough test and resist deposits the best. However, since Mobil 1 does so incredibly poorly on the Sequence IVA test (and Castrol Edge & Valvoline Synpower do well), I wouldn't use Mobil 1 unless I had a turbo on board. Wear means a lot to me.
    Mobil 1 HTO-06 test standard -- deposit minimization -- click here
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    So you are saying the FE wear would be far less than Mobil One?

    This is truly NOT the results of specified Castrol Oil 507.00 and this is in a TDI (turbo charger diesel ) application.

    Indeed for the tribologists who track these things FAR closer than I do, other than using VW 507.00 specification oils, there are not yet conclusive results as to WHICH VW 507.00 oil REIGNS supreme (Iron Chef nexus) . However there are rank orders....

    Indeed of the old spec stuff, the Delvac One 5w40 aka Mobil One Truck and SUV 5w40 is head and shoulders above the competing Castrol product and products.

    ..."Oil Performance in descending order with 2 or more entries.
    Mobil 1 TDT CI4+ 5W40 API 8
    Mobil 1 Delvac ESP CJ4 5W40 API 3
    Schaeffer S9000 CJ4 5W40 API 2
    Amsoil DEO CJ4 5W40 API 2
    Elf LLX 504/407 5W30 VAG 6
    Castrol Pro 505.01 5W30 VAG 3
    Amsoil AFL 505.01 5W40 VAG 2
    Elf CRV 506.01 0W30 VAG 4
    Castrol SLX III 504/507 5W30 VAG 5
    Shell Rotella T CI4+ 5W40 API 6
    Mobil 1 ESP 504/407 5W30 VAG 2
    Elf DID 505.01 5W40 VAG 6
    Motul Specific 505.01 5W40 VAG 3"...

    link title

    So my take would be more VOA's and a few more data point UOA'a on the new Castrol Edge 5w30 product would be my min take; say posted to bobistheoilguy.com. Then all the usual drills, bang for the buck, etc.

    So for example while UOA's are inconclusive, I did NOT go with the Mobil One 5w30 ESP 507.00, nor the Castrol SLX (gold bottle if one is interested) but rather the Total Quartz INEO 5w30, VW 504/507, even as Castrol SLX is designed for and in league with VW and designed SPECIFICALLY for the VW 507.00 specifications. Funny as the scuttle butt is the oem fill is indeed a Fuch's or Total Ineo 5w30 product!!

    I am specifically staying with Delvac One 5w40 as it clearly drawfs Castrol's and is not even VW rated for that application. So now the next gig is, is the 5w30 Castrol EDGE GM 4187 M rated and does it come in a 0w30? Can I run it 15,000 to 20,000 OCI in a 5w30 SUV application?

    Honda appliciations have long been 0w20, 5w20 to meet the Honda and Ford specifications with Ford having more stringent standards. Most folks dont know that Honda's seem to run better on Mobil oils and Mobil One in particular.

    This stuff used to be far less informational overload AND easier.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    The Castrol Edge product is a new one. Past conclusions on earlier Castrol products may not apply. For what its worth, I have always heard complaints that Mobil1 Synthetic has leaned toward high Iron (Fe) wear.

    Also, if you read all the test ratings for Castrol Edge 5w-30, you'll see it beats all the latest ACEA tests, and the Corvette GM 4718M.

    And, there is a weird marketing strategy when labelling Castrol Edge as a 5w-30. It may qualify to be a 0w-30, as many synthetics will be able to qualify the zero part of that. However, the buying public generally freaks out a little bit when seeing the leading zero, so they just market it as 5w-30 to fit perceptions and what Owner's Manuals generally emphasize.

    Take a look at all the Castrol Edge test ratings. They beat Mobil 1 Ext Perf 5w-30, as Mobil 1 Ext Perf only meets the older 2004 ACEA standards, and notice its not good enough to make 4718M (and HTO-06). Regular Mobil 1 does get the latest ACEA tests, 4718M, and HTO-06. Not bad, but it can't get away from the Sequence IVA tests!
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Based on what is known

    ..."2.333 ----- ALH ----------- Mobil TDT CI4+ ~~ BPFilter"...

    8x/2.33=.29 is what you would project using an Castrol Edge product in the specification. It would be great if that were true. However there is no known time for a Mobil TDT, Castrol competitor to the market. The nexus: some (hard core) diesel owners love to routinely go 200,000, 3000,000, 400,000 miles. A .29 vs a STELLAR 2.33 would throw the whole community into a state of frenzy !!! The results on the newest Castrol SLX 507.00 product certainly do NOT indicate that.

    In lieu, I'd like to see a side by side UOA on say same or a/b Corvette's. The price on the Castrol Edge product is 2 x's the Mobil One product. But if it did drop the FE ppm/1k 8x's it will take that community a bit longer to digest. They are notorious for changing a full synthetic (a now 13.44 per qt oil) @ 3,000 miles !!
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    The best thing for the consumer to do is to just compare the test ratings (ACEA, Ford, GM specs, SM, GF-4, etc.) all on the bottle. In my opinion, a turbo gas engine should have an oil that meets HTO-06 (Mobil 1 synthetic 5w-30). Non-turbo gas engine users should go with a synthetic that has strong test evidence that it does lower wear, Castrol Edge 5w-30, and passes many tough tests.

    User Oil Analysis (UOA) is subject to so much variability that differences can be due to many other factors than just the oil itself (driving style, type of engine type, sand in the air/oil, coolant in the oil, fuel in the oil etc.). You can maybe trust them if you have a hundred to look at across many types of cars and users, but its a sample of one by itself to just look at one or even a few. Not recommended. The engineering tests SM, GF-4, ACEA A1/B1 & A5/B5, GM 4718M, Ford specs, Chrysler specs, etc., taken together paint a picture of a tough oil for a gas engine vehicle.

    The marketing scheme to throw in the Sequence IVA test results mean the companies are opening up some formerly secret information to show their products (Castrol Edge, and to some extent Valvoline Synpower) have an advantage in wear protection, and they are right to do so. Exxon-Mobil is notably silent, and has had months to respond to the initial Valvoline Synpower claims.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Well yes and no. Some folks are of the opinion that Castrol specs oil to barely exceed min specs, and markets like a beer commercial. Now beer commercials make a LOT of claims but all I know is @ the 20 min mark I make for the rest signs! Once you look at the boring stuff like UOA's and VOA's; well I can can see why folks do say the above second sentence and in my case look for the rest signs.

    So for example the current Castrol 5w30 DOES indeed pass 4178 M GM specs !!!! And like you say, so does the Edge !!! Now it is because of the Castrol win in arbitration; that the term "synthetic" can mean just about anything (in Castrols case hydrocracked group III can mean synthetic). Indeed they claim the Edge is FULL synthetic. So does that mean their other products were not FULL synthetic even as they claim it was "synthetic"? Or do they really mean to imply that full synthetic is what Mobil One has claimed all along : base oils are PAO IV/V !!!?? My take by the advertisements... who really knows?????
Sign In or Register to comment.