"High mileage" motor oil

the rayovac they sell at the 99 cent store dont last long.

 

The chemistry of petroleum-based oils is still not precise and even
"synthetics" vary in compositions.

I'd like to see the evidence.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

||Rex B wrote:
||> On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:30:38 GMT, (Timothy J. Lee) wrote:
||>
||> ||In article <5LcKc.6271$>,
||> ||>I agree. My decision to go Pennzoil all the way is based merely on
groupthink
||> ||>(that is, a lot of people swear by it) and some sludge experiences with
||> Quaker
||> ||>State 20 years ago.
||> ||
||> ||Pennzoil and Quaker State are now the same company.
||>
||> In My Opinion:
||>
||> Oil API specs are so stringent now that brand dfferences are essentially
||> eliminated. They all have to use the same chemistry to meet the requirements
of
||> the current specs. Even more so when GF4 comes with the 2005 models.
||> For that same reason, I believe it is also safe to mix different brands.
Used
||> to be a concern that the additives might react. But now, the additives are
the
||> same, with perhaps slight differences in ratios.
||> Texas Parts Guy
||
||hey rex - have a question. this is not personal so please take it with
||a spirit of enquiry, not criticism: how come people say there's no
||difference between engine oils? you're right about api specs, but these
||are /minimum/ performance specs, not uniformity specs.
||
||i ask because i find it fascinating to see people happily recommend
||honda-only automatic transmission fluid - because it has an immediate
||and tangible effect on shift quality - yet are still prepared to say all
||engine oils are the same. a.t.f. has minimum specs to satisfy dexron
||III, which is essentially honda spec, yet anyone who's driven a honda
||with non-honda fluid will agree that transmission oils are different.
||why not engine oils? /they/ are different too, but no one ever seems to
||acknowledge it. why is that?

My opinion on oils does not extend to ATF, But then your question is apples
and oranges. If it meets Honda's spec, but isn't Honda brand, it's fine by me.
So you can mix ATF's from different brands as long as they meet the same spec.
No different from oil.

And I'd further qualify my post on oil. I'm just talking traditional dino-oil.
I use synthetics in my vehicles that do not use oil, and I never mix them.
Right now I have Mobil 1 in one car, Castrol Syntec in the lawn tractor, and
Valvoline SynPower in the Beetle. For the 2 that do need an occasional quart, I
use inexpensive private label oil, and I mix them if it's more convenient.

Texas Parts Guy

 

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:44 -0400, George Macdonald

||On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 21:43:45 GMT, (Rex B) wrote:
||
||>On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:30:38 GMT, (Timothy J. Lee) wrote:
||>
||>||In article <5LcKc.6271$>,
||>||>I agree. My decision to go Pennzoil all the way is based merely on
groupthink
||>||>(that is, a lot of people swear by it) and some sludge experiences with
||>Quaker
||>||>State 20 years ago.
||>||
||>||Pennzoil and Quaker State are now the same company.
||>
||>In My Opinion:
||>
||>Oil API specs are so stringent now that brand dfferences are essentially
||>eliminated. They all have to use the same chemistry to meet the requirements
of
||>the current specs. Even more so when GF4 comes with the 2005 models.
||
||The chemistry of petroleum-based oils is still not precise and even
||"synthetics" vary in compositions.
||
||> For that same reason, I believe it is also safe to mix different brands.
Used
||>to be a concern that the additives might react. But now, the additives are
the
||>same, with perhaps slight differences in ratios.
||
||I'd like to see the evidence.

No evidence offered, only opinion, as stated.
Texas Parts Guy

 

I looked. I saw the QS Peak Performance MSDS (#14938) and the Pennzoil
multiweight MSDS (#12978). The Pennzoil one was in the commercial and
industrial list. The QS MSDS was more specific (i.e. "HYDROTREATED
HEAVY PARAFFINIC PETROLEUM DISTILLATES") while the Pennzoil MSDS refers
to the rather vague "BASE LUBRICATING OILS". That doesn't tell me that
they were necessarily different. I did find that Quaker State full
synthetic contains "1-DECENE, HOMOPOLYMER, HYDROGENATED" which George
says is PAO.

Since Pennzoil and QS are both "premium" brands where the product is
developed by the same chemists/engineers and sold for about the same
price, I can't imagine any reason why they would intentionally make
one substantially inferior than the other. If they are, I'd think it
would be as minor as the difference between Tide and Cheer detergent.

What I did find strange was in looking at the Formula Shell motor oil
MSDS. While the Pennzoil and QS MSDS listed at least 5% VI improver,
the Shell ones listed 90-98.99 "Highly refined petroleum oils" and
1-2.99% "Proprietary additives". I guess that might leave room for
about 5% VI improver.

 

I can't say whether one is a sub-category of the other. But with the other
specs, and from the same company, I think the MSDS's argue there likely are
differences.

But I couldn't say whether the differences are insignificant or not.

That right about the prices?

IIRC years ago Quaker State was notably cheaper than Pennzoil. I was on a
tighter budget then, and so took more careful note. These days all I see are low
prices on certain ordinary 5W-30 (my car's needs) oil brands and then the higher
priced brands like Pennzoil.

If they're now both considered "premium" oils, then I agree this tends to
suggest they may not be at all different.

 

||> Caroline wrote:
||> >>
||> >>>I agree. My decision to go Pennzoil all the way is based merely on
||groupthink
||> >>>(that is, a lot of people swear by it) and some sludge experiences with
||> >
||> > Quaker
||> >
||> >>>State 20 years ago.
||> >>
||> >>Pennzoil and Quaker State are now the same company.
||> >
||> >
||> > Did you bother to check whether Pennzoil-Quaker State puts the same oil in
||its
||> > Pennzoil and Quaker State containers?
||> >
||> > They don't.
||> >
||> > See http://www.pennzoil-quakerstate.com/techdata/l7_msds_fs.htm
||>
||> I looked. I saw the QS Peak Performance MSDS (#14938) and the Pennzoil
||> multiweight MSDS (#12978). The Pennzoil one was in the commercial and
||> industrial list. The QS MSDS was more specific (i.e. "HYDROTREATED
||> HEAVY PARAFFINIC PETROLEUM DISTILLATES") while the Pennzoil MSDS refers
||> to the rather vague "BASE LUBRICATING OILS". That doesn't tell me that
||> they were necessarily different.
||
||I can't say whether one is a sub-category of the other. But with the other
||specs, and from the same company, I think the MSDS's argue there likely are
||differences.
||
||But I couldn't say whether the differences are insignificant or not.
||
||> I did find that Quaker State full
||> synthetic contains "1-DECENE, HOMOPOLYMER, HYDROGENATED" which George
||> says is PAO.
||>
||> Since Pennzoil and QS are both "premium" brands where the product is
||> developed by the same chemists/engineers and sold for about the same
||> price, I can't imagine any reason why they would intentionally make
||> one substantially inferior than the other.
||
||That right about the prices?
||
||IIRC years ago Quaker State was notably cheaper than Pennzoil. I was on a
||tighter budget then, and so took more careful note. These days all I see are
low
||prices on certain ordinary 5W-30 (my car's needs) oil brands and then the
higher
||priced brands like Pennzoil.
||
||If they're now both considered "premium" oils, then I agree this tends to
||suggest they may not be at all different.

The ricing was more a product of popularity than and indication of quality or
cost to produce. They got more for Pennzoil because the market would pay it.
Even now, we get deals and special buys and advertising money from All the major
oil labels, but Pennzoil is the tightest of the bunch. All we get from them is
a price, with no advertisng allowance and no buy-ins at a deeper deal. But we
still sell as much Pennzoil as all other labels combined, so we put up with it.

Texas Parts Guy

 

i think manufacturers are given more latitude with ATF formulations,
since its not part of the combustion process. oil burns and gets in the
emissions system... ATF doesnt.

 

Well - there's often not going to be a "perfect" arrangement of prices.
At a certain Wal-Mart store, I found the 5 qt jugs of QS to be slightly
less, but Wal-Mart's pricing structure is heavily based on purchase
analysis. However - here's one online retailer that carries both
Pennzoil and QS:

<http://www.midwayautosupply.com/detailedproductdescription.asp?482>
<http://www.midwayautosupply.com/detailedproductdescription.asp?18>

PENNZOIL® 5W30 MOTOR OIL, QUART: $2.29
QUAKER STATE 5W30 PEAK PERFORMANCE MOTOR OIL, QUART: $2.29

It's my belief that that SOPUS uses its "brand portfolio" to maintain an
overall market share that they wouldn't have if they canned the Quaker
State name. Id GM theoretically canned Chevy trucks. I'd imagine that
part of the market would gravitate towards GMC, and the other part to
Ford, Dodge, and (to some degree) import brands.

 

Well done.

I'll take a look at the prices at Autozone and Wal-Mart next time I'm at these
stores, but I bet they'll give the same result. If not, I'll post.

Sounds plausible to me.

 

why not? i guess that's the question i have - does not compute.

 

Thanks - I had a bit too much time on my hands at the time. I still
can't figure out why anyone would buy a fairly common motor oil
mailorder. The prices (before shipping) are more than at a discount
or parts store. I'd understand someone trying to get some esoteric
brands like Redline, Royal Purple, or (ahem) Amsoil. Who the heck
would buy Pennzoil online?

 

Perhaps ATF might work better if it has a specific amount of friction.
Honda has a very funky auto tranny design (I hear). It may work with
Dexron-III, but most indications are that they work better with the
Honda-specific fluid.

And nobody's said that all motor oil is the same. Looking at the
MSDS for various "conventional" oils, many have settled on the same
ingredients: a VI improver, calcium based detergent, ZDDP antiwear
additive, anti-foam additives, hydrotreated petroleum oil. Most
of the major players probably know what's in their competitors'
products. There may be some patented sooper-dooper ingredients,
but it seems that most of the stuff in their is well known and
cheap.

 

Just to elaborate a little 1-decene has a single double bond in its first
C=C bond and C-C single bonds in the other eight... also known as
alpha-decene or maybe alpha-decylene and as such belongs to the olefin
family. Limited polymerisation (also known as oligomerisation) under the
right conditions, in the presence of hydrogen to fill in the double bonds
and you get basically a branched chain paraffin.

Now that one is interesting. Mobil spent years discovering that, in
addition to PAO you needed first, some ester to cover seal swell correctly
and second, something else (IIRC it was you who said an alkylated
naphthalene) to improve solubility with additives... and came up with
Tri-Synthetic. Now Mobil has SuperSyn which contains some very high VI,
high density PAOs to get the VI without the usual VI improvers. Of course
Mobil is tight-lipped about what is actually in their SuperSyn, i.e.
whether it contains any ester or other "improving agents". This kinda
thing starts to make me nervous about synthetics again.<shrug>

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Definitely. The EPA & CARB basically put all the small guys, the ones with
the "tea-kettle" refineries, out of business with their reformulated
gasoline... too expensive in capital investment to make. I believe Crown
petroleum is till alive but don't know what shape it's in. Then there were
the farmers co-ops who did their own refining... mostly gone though there's
FCL in Canuckistan. Of course Unocal got some shiny new patents and made a
bundle out of reformulated gasoline.

After that fiasco, the govts here and in Europe did nothing while all the
other mergers took place on the grand scale, like Exxon-Mobil,
(Chevron-Gulf)-Texaco, (BP-Amoco)-Arco(?) et.al. We still have Hess on the
East coast and they're big in the Carribean and some parts of the South
U.S. Makes you wonder who's next.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

I know that Mobil paid for a lot of very expensive overhauls on light
aircraft engines when their synthetic aviation oil turned out to be
not-so-swell. Don't know what the actual problem was.

 

Yep and the price for the partial overhaul was silence. Many of the
damning articles were removed from Web sites but you can still find a few
by searching on "lycoming AV-1". Lead was blamed but the problem is
obviously more a general dispersion deficiency in the application where
particulates were not being carried back to the oil filter. Apparently the
sludge used to start in the front hollow section of the crankshaft, which
is often very cold on even a running engine - the story goes that from
there the sludge migrated throughout the engine and caused cylinder/ring,
camshaft, tappet and bottom end damage. Mobil did not accept
responsibility for every potential damage claimed due to AV-1 and many
owners who participated in the class action got short changed.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

I think many of the MSDSs on the Web are out of date and as already noted
have been trimmed of proprietary non-toxic info. ZDDP is more or less
banned - allowed in such small amounts it is essentially useless. The
later anti-wear additive is molybdenum dialkyl-dithio-carbamate. - MoDDC.
Note that those kinds of additives are supplied by several mfrs, one
notable one being R.T. Vanderbilt with their Molyvan range; note also that
is a non-specific molecule: alkyl just tells you about a generic molecular
group of radicals and nothing about which, nor how many, nor any
stereo-chemistry... same for ZDDP. Vanderbilt will tell you theirs is the
best.<shrug>

So yes, I believe that different additives, even from the same source
supplier, have different effectiveness, longevities, characteristics etc.
etc. and of course different costs.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

I believe it was a lead dispersal problem, and the fact that there
was a low-flow area in the oil path. Aviation gas has never stopped
using lead. From what I gather, reciprocating aircraft engines
aren't terribly "tight", and a lot of the lead will inevitably
end up in the oil due to blowby past the rings.

<http://www.avweb.com/news/news/182891-1.html>

 

||> > > Since Pennzoil and QS are both "premium" brands where the product is
||> > > developed by the same chemists/engineers and sold for about the same
||> > > price, I can't imagine any reason why they would intentionally make
||> > > one substantially inferior than the other.
||> >
||> > That right about the prices?
||>
||> Well - there's often not going to be a "perfect" arrangement of prices.
||> At a certain Wal-Mart store, I found the 5 qt jugs of QS to be slightly
||> less, but Wal-Mart's pricing structure is heavily based on purchase
||> analysis. However - here's one online retailer that carries both
||> Pennzoil and QS:
||>
||> <http://www.midwayautosupply.com/detailedproductdescription.asp?482>
||> <http://www.midwayautosupply.com/detailedproductdescription.asp?18>
||>
||> PENNZOIL® 5W30 MOTOR OIL, QUART: $2.29
||> QUAKER STATE 5W30 PEAK PERFORMANCE MOTOR OIL, QUART: $2.29
||
||Well done.
||
||I'll take a look at the prices at Autozone and Wal-Mart next time I'm at these
||stores, but I bet they'll give the same result. If not, I'll post.
||
||> > IIRC years ago Quaker State was notably cheaper than Pennzoil. I was on a
||> > tighter budget then, and so took more careful note. These days all I see
are
||low
||> > prices on certain ordinary 5W-30 (my car's needs) oil brands and then the
||higher
||> > priced brands like Pennzoil.

We buy both labels direct from SOPUS by the trailerload.
We pay 8 cents for for the Pennzoil than the Quaker State in that weight.

Texas Parts Guy