I know this topic has probably been beaten to death, but this article had a new take on the subject. At least new to me. What is Synthetic Oil? - Synthetic Oil vs. Conventional Oil I use Synthetic oil because my car is a turbo. It looks there are other benefits as well.
My car leaked like a sieve and blew more smoke with synthetic. I think the cats have a harder time with it Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Which synthetic, group 2plus, group 3 Group 4.... FYI it's a truck question... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Synthetic oil is better in every way as an engine lubricant. This has been pretty well known since Mobil 1 became readily available in the late '70s. Oil leaks/burning is not the fault of the oil, but the fault of the gasket/sealing surfaces and the piston ring/cylinder wall condition. The only good reason to use dino oil is... Hmmm, well, there is no good reason.
I'm always amused when people forget, or never knew, that many "dino-running-cars" acquired 250,000, 500,000, a million miles.... how many Ferraris acquire even 100K miles... using dino, synthetic, or some miracle lubricant?
Not entirely true. 1st, most synthetic oils aren't actually synthetics. Mobil and Castrol had a few lawsuits over this about 17 years ago and now it's rare to find a PAO base oil. Most are group 2 plus or group 3 which are hydrogenized and severely hydrogenized (hydrocracked) mineral base oils 2nd, Polyalphaolephins are not naturally seal compatible. We add various ester stocks to enhance compatibility. I have PAO and PAGs in 100 Year old gear boxes with the proper esters not leaking next to the same boxes without the proper ester chemistry. 3rd, the only true advantage to a PAO, PAG, or various hindered, POE, and diesters is extreme high temperatures (well over 450F) and low temperatures well below-30 F because if I'm most real Synthetics inherit hi VI. I'll take a properly blended Group 3 over a half assed PAO any day of the week in 89% of the applications on earth. They carry additives much better because of solubility challenges. They also don't varnish ( they will sludge as bad base oils increase viscosity under oxidative stress) they have a much wider room for abuse when it comes to contamination like fuel dilution and soot loading in high powered applications. PAOs have their place, as do other synthetic base stocks. But marketing has basically ruined the general publication understanding of tribology. Mobil put up a good fight (mostly because they owned that market till about 2001) but lost and gave in. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A good reason for conventional oil is if you have an old beater that you put a lot of miles on that either leaks or burns oil. You're not going to invest in a new engine and it's cheaper to use the dino oil if you have to add a quart or two every week.
Many regular oils today actually have some synthetic component, and synthetics can be derived from regular oil base stocks, so its becoming blurry to distinguish one type of oil from another. It is not clear to me why every oil is not now synthetic, in that I have never found information suggesting any circumstance under which conventional oil would be technically better or more effective for the purpose. The only advantage may be cost, but even then the trade off for lower cost is never clear to me. I think advances in oil today are relating to emissions, and fuel economy. Low viscosity oils seem to require base stock that can only be synthetic to meet the criteria, so this may be the beginning of the end of conventional oils if all car manufacturers engineer for low vis oils, which would make sense as they have to target fuel economy and have no practical concern about higher costs of future oil changes that might result. I have read about a canola seed oil base stock that has properties superior to even the grade 5 ester synthetics, so perhaps there remains real technical lubrication progress to be had. But at this point, conventional oil seems to be a holdover for cost sensitive purposes. But no one would use it for a better technical lubrication outcome (caveat, unless you run a very old car with very old (ie pre-1990) gaskets/seals that would not hold up to ester (i.e. alcohol) based compounds in some synthetics, just as some old rubber hoses can not handle ethanol based fuels). (just edited noting some technical advantages raised by Jimdawg, eg. additive soluability, were you referring to certain synthetic base stocks are better than others or certain synthetics base stocks are better than conventional oil?)
I run asset management, predictive and proactive analytics and tribology consulting for 3 billion in hard assets around the world. I choose mineral base oils over real Synthetics most of the time because of the reasons I stated above. Real Synthetics have many drawbacks that the general public isn't aware if because of marketing. They are absolutely a pita when it comes to so many variables. But, it's not like I can teach a tribology class on here. At least not for free Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Interesting. First time I have ever heard of someone advocating the properties of conventional oils. I did work in a lubrication laboratory in my early days with Gulf Oil, when base stock hydrotreating refining technology was just getting traction. Always maintained a casual interest in what goes on in the sector.
I want to caveat this with high quality mineral vs Synthetics. Not a majors mineral vs a synthetic. Big difference. And you could technically call a group 3 a synthetic according to the lawsuit results between Mobil and Castrol. I personally consider synthetic a nonsense word. It has almost no use in my field and only causes confusion. So, group 1,2,3 mineral stocks ( and even Group 1s have their place and outperform everything in those applications) PAOs, All the esters, PAGs and so on. Each has its place. None is better in than everything than the others. ICEs have wide variability. Most I'd choose a group 2 plus or 3 over a PAO. Or a PAO with a high quality group 3 as a carrier stock. In the end it's all nonsense if the oil doesn't do what it's supposed to. The most important value of the oil is its condition when your done with it, and the condition of the asset it's been used in. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I suspect that I am correct when I surmised my CATS had a more difficult time burning the "synthetic" oil thereby causing more smoke from the car near startup (considering the higher temp the synthetic tolerates). Yes some oil (within factory limits) burns in my engine.. but that isn't unusual for a 40 year old build. It probably did the same when new. So for me at least there is a huge benefit to using dyno oil.
What is a "majors mineral" ? An an example of high quality mineral? Thanks for the debate on this thread - for once, it seems there's some new & interesting technical information on the oil debate.
Highly unlikely. Look up Ali haas' oil analysis and be prepared to read for 3 days. I don't think anything else can be said. Whatever oil you use, just change it and the filter when required and drive the damn car.
I don't take my car care advice from a surgeon. [/QUOTE]I don't think anything else can be said. Whatever oil you use, just change it and the filter when required and drive the damn car.[/QUOTE] I agree.
Recently read on a bmw motorcycle site where a bike owner's engine started making terrible noises and he took it to the dealer. They found there was less than a quart of oil in the engine and the engine was basically toast. The owner's response was it was the BMWs fault because the bike wasn't due for an oil change so if it was low on oil it was a manufacturing defect of some sort. He never checked the oil and had no idea at all that he should do so despite the manual stating to check the oil weekly or at every fuel fill and add as necessary. The scary part to me was that at least half of the people on the site had the same impression - that there was no reason to pay any attention to oil other than at the scheduled changes. Re synthetic oil...In 1978 or thereabouts, when Mobil 1 became readily available, Dyno tests on performance engines showed that there was free HP with synthetic oil. We commonly saw 10+ HP increases on a dyno on big block v8s with no change other than putting Mobil 1 of the same viscosity as dino oil. Teardowns of engines with Mobil 1 vs dino oil routinely showed less wear on the same surfaces. I am NOT claiming Mobil 1 is as good, better, or worse than other Syn oils. Back then there was only ONE synthetic oil and that was Mobil 1. I am just saying that ENGINES worked better with Mobil 1 synthetic than they did with dino oil.
I had the same experience, in addition to fouled plugs, when I briefly switched to PennGrade on my former 308. I was compelled to switch as this oil also has the extra benefit of high Zinc content. I switched back to conventional 20W 50 and the issues went away.
I do agree with Mike about synthetic oil are good in every way except for one thing, the price, it cost more than conventional oil.
Not accepting responsibility for stupidity appears to be a common trait among the populace these days.
The horse power increases are real, but it's because the higher quality base oils, not just Synthetics, will run lower in the bandwidth of the viscosity allowed for a specific weight without shearing quickly and becoming a lower vis oil as quickly. This lower viscosity causes lower fluid friction. Which is basically free horse power. Mobil knew this, and I see it on oil analysis. Viscosity is a fluids internal resistance to flow. Make it flow easier, the parts pushing it around move easier. Until you lose your hydrodynamic film and you enter boundary or mixed regimes. But, if you make enough horse power, loosing a few to fluid friction doesn't matter if you're more interested in the bearings living. That's why John Force uses 80 weight. More film strength as opposed to a few extra ponies. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
