My Oil Change Interval Debate Rant

[UnleashedBeast]

Originally Posted by craigsfocus

The engine was quieter too, you could barely hear the valve train with the hood open.

See, I never mentioned that because I thought it was all in my head. Now that you said it, I know it really was quieter. So quiet in fact....it made the injectors sound louder.

True story!

[treoless]

What do you guys think of Pennzoil Ultra? According to some guys on BITOG, oil vapor is the major cause of intake valve deposits in DI engines and a low volatility oil is recommended. Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 seems to have the lowest Noack Volatility - 5.0% (Amsoil Signature is 5.7%)

[dan50]

Originally Posted by treoless

What do you guys think of Pennzoil Ultra? According to some guys on BITOG, oil vapor is the major cause of intake valve deposits in DI engines and a low volatility oil is recommended. Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 seems to have the lowest Noack Volatility - 5.0% (Amsoil Signature is 5.7%)

Some think Ultra's reported Noack value is too good to be true given it evidently still uses a fair amount of Group III (super-refined conventional) base oil. On the other hand, these are the values Pennzoil has reported and confirmed.

I'm using Ultra in my Focus because of the low reported Noack. Even if the volatility numbers are wrong, it's still a great oil. Hard to see how one could go wrong.

[UnleashedBeast]

Originally Posted by treoless

What do you guys think of Pennzoil Ultra? According to some guys on BITOG, oil vapor is the major cause of intake valve deposits in DI engines and a low volatility oil is recommended. Pennzoil Ultra 5W-20 seems to have the lowest Noack Volatility - 5.0% (Amsoil Signature is 5.7%)

Ultra's above reported 5.0% NOACK Volatility is incorrect. It's not possible for a 100% group III formulation to have a NOACK lower than 10%. Any formulation containing group III base stocks will naturally have a high NOACK. This is why Mobil 1 refuses to include this specification on any product information sheet. They do not want the "educated" public to know they are using refined petroleum yet calling it "Fully synthetic".

Pennzoil Ultra's NOACK for their 5W-20 grade is actually 12.6%, and is verified by their very own .pdf product sheet.

Ultra .pdf - scroll down

Pennzoil Platinum's NOACK for thier 5W-20 grade is higher @ 13.2%. They were sneaky hiding this .pdf sheet. It was not listed on their website, I had to internet ninja the link.

Platinum .pdf - scroll down

Amsoil Signature Series 5W-20 is the king of low NOACK @ 5.7%

ALM 5W-20 product info - scroll down

Even OE 5W-20 that is 100% group III has a better NOACK than Ultra @ 10%. If someone is looking for very affordable oil for their focus, wants to achieve the 10,000 mile OLM rating, and wants to sleep easy at night. OE offers the BEST bang for the buck.

OEM 5W-20 product info - scroll down

You are correct about higher NOACK causing more deposits in a direct injected engine. That's why I choose to use the lowest NOACK percentage available in Amsoil ALM 5W-20 Signature Series. I will also be installing an oil separator to get what little does evaporate in the crankcase and sucked into the PCV system. Since Signature Series has half the NOACK %, it will also have 50% less chance for potential deposits.

For the record, Motorcraft 5W-20 synthetic blend has a very high NOACK in the 13-15% range. To be API SN certified, no lubricant can exceed 15% NOACK Volatility.

[BiggerBoat]

Originally Posted by UnleashedBeast

You are correct about higher NOACK causing more deposits in a direct injected engine. That's why I choose to use the lowest NOACK percentage available in Amsoil ALM 5W-20 Signature Series. I will also be installing an oil separator to get what little does evaporate in the crankcase and sucked into the PCV system. Since Signature Series has half the NOACK %, it will also have 50% less chance for potential deposits.

For the record, Motorcraft 5W-20 synthetic blend has a very high NOACK in the 13-15% range.

Interesting. I tried to look up this value for Mobil 1 Extended Performance but their spec sheet did not seem to list it. Have you ever seen a Mobile 1 spec that include this value?

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lub...rformance.aspx

[UnleashedBeast]

Originally Posted by BiggerBoat

Interesting. I tried to look up this value for Mobil 1 Extended Performance but their spec sheet did not seem to list it. Have you ever seen a Mobile 1 spec that include this value?

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_1_Extended_Performance.aspx

Mobil 1 will NOT ever post a specification for NOACK Volatility on any product information sheet. They do not want John Q. Public to know that their claimed "Fully Synthetic" is a lie.

Mobil 1 syn has contained refined petroleum since 2005, after the hurricane destroyed their PAO true synthetic plant.

EP is suspect to contain refined petroleum because of Mobil 1's newly released VISOM group III+ base stock (circa 2010). Read the stakeholder release from Mobil 1 referring to VISOM.

"Visom is viewed as a precursor of GTL, and hence it’s use now in our flagship formulations eases our transition to a GTL world"

Translation, Extended Performance must contain group III+ highly refined petroleum base stocks. It's not 100% pure as Mobil 1 would have you to believe. That's why the NOACK spec isn't supplied.

A natural evolution of the formulation

The Mobil 1 formulation strategy has always been based on selecting the best components available. We now have the very high quality Group III+ base stock, ‘Visom’ exclusively available to ExxonMobil. As we developed the Mobil 1 ESP technology we found that combining Visom with PAO could deliver a formulation of equivalent performance to an all PAO formulation.

Competitive advantage

Visom is the only non-PAO stock that can deliver the required performance to formulate a 0W grade oil that meets European OEM engine oil specifications. Visom is not available to our competition.

To support Mobil 1 growth

Global PAO capacity is limited. As we quickly approach this limit, new base stocks must be explored to ensure we can support the continued growth of the Mobil 1 family of products.

To ensure continuity of supply

As we saw with the 2005 hurricane, the more flexibility we have in our formulations, the better placed we are to withstand disruption to our supply. We can balance PAO and Visom supply fluctuations to ensure we can always deliver the final product to our customers.

To maintain market relevant pricing

As PAO supply has tightened globally, raw material costs have increased substantially. In the future, an exclusively PAO formulation may be priced out of the market or result in significant margin erosion.

To prepare for next generation basestocks (GTL)

Commencing 2010, the next generation of base stocks derived from Natural Gas (Gas To Liquids) will enter the market. These high quality basestocks will arrive in substantial quantities and will probably be used in the majority of competitive premium formulations. Visom is viewed as a precursor of GTL, and hence it’s use now in our flagship formulations eases our transition to a GTL world, and helps us understand how to maintain flagship performance using these high quality non-PAO basestocks.

and this follow up post on BITOG by a man who already tried to tell people of the change, but no one would hear it.

I reported this change in the M1 formulations here four years ago and a global firestorm ensued. I took lots of grief over it, including people writing to the owner of my company, and dragging my name through the mud on the Internet. There are still people who adamantly deny that M1 formulations use Group III.

This presentation, dating sometime between 2005 and 2009, clearly shows that EM changed the M1 formulations to include Group III+, and that they did not want to tell their customers:

"With the exception of Germany, this reformulation will be invisible to consumers and B2B customers."

and:

"There will be no proactive customer communication relating to this reformulation. However, an internal briefing document and Q&A has been prepared to allow sales to respond in the unlikely event of a customer question."

This explains all the canned responses customers got when they asked EM about the change.

As I have consistently said, I use M1 and consider it a great oil, but I am happy that the truth is finally confirmed by EM. My name is finally cleared.

Tom NJ

[BiggerBoat]

Originally Posted by UnleashedBeast

Mobil 1 will NOT ever post a specification for NOACK Volatility on any product information sheet. They do not want John Q. Public to know that their claimed "Fully Synthetic" is a lie.

Mobil 1 syn has contained refined petroleum since 2005, after the hurricane destroyed their PAO true synthetic plant.

EP is suspect to contain refined petroleum because of Mobil 1's newly released VISOM group III+ base stock (circa 2010). Read the stakeholder release from Mobil 1 referring to VISOM. ......

It hard to believe an oil company wouldn't be fully honest and forthcoming with the public??

The other big player (Royal Purple) also seemed to lack this value in their specs. An knowledge of this from your research?

[UnleashedBeast]

Originally Posted by BiggerBoat

It hard to believe an oil company wouldn't be fully honest and forthcoming with the public??

The other big player (Royal Purple) also seemed to lack this value in their specs. An knowledge of this from your research?

I chat with a friend who is actually employed by RP, but his time there and level of employment would make that information "beyond his pay grade".

Since RP's reformulation of the mainline product, which removed their proprietary synerlec additive, I noticed all product specification sheets have been removed. Asking about this removal, no acceptable reply. My guess, Royal Purple moved their mainline lubricants to refined petroleum, while their HPS and XPR lubricants remain true synthetics.

I ran a 2004 Lincoln Town Car for one year with Amsoil ATM 10W-30 Signature Series (10,350 miles). This year, the car has Royal Purple 5W-30 main line oil (non-synerlec). With Amsoil, the car used NO oil and remained on the full line for the entire 10,350 mile interval. If the car consumes oil this year, It would suggest that Royal Purple may have moved to refined petroleum.

I sent the Amsoil sample to the lab for testing. I should have results today, or Monday. I will also take a sample of the RP fill July of next year for comparison.

[PratoN]

Yeah, I'm just gonna keep buying Mobil1. (0W-20 Synthetic, actually)

EDIT: Not so much on the topic of synthetic, but isn't re-refined oil just as good as refined oil these days?

[UnleashedBeast]

Originally Posted by PratoN

Yeah, I'm just gonna keep buying Mobil1. (0W-20 Synthetic, actually)

EDIT: Not so much on the topic of synthetic, but isn't re-refined oil just as good as refined oil these days?

That's what the big oil companies want you to believe. No matter how good they tell you it is, you still have high NOACK % contaminating your engine.

"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."