# Tiered Engine Oils List for the Cruze



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Great stuff Andrei. 

Do the above apply to both gasoline and Diesel engines?


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Original post updated with a tiered oil list.
> 
> Sent from mobile.


Question: You recommend 0W oils - is the above list "tiered" with respect to 0W oils (if offered) or based off 5W-30 results?

Reason I ask - 0W oils are made from a thinner base stock and have more viscosity spread that is made up by other additives. Therefore they tend to shear more easily when at full temperature, and with some miles on them, will provide slightly lesser protection than a comparable 5W-30 or 10W-30-weight. 

Sure, with a 0W, there's the added benefit at cold start-up (which a good oiling system with a drainback valve will prevent anyway - I have never heard my Cruze oil-starved at a cold start), *but* these oils tend to [generally] provide lesser TBN numbers than the same company's 5W-30 and *also *tend to lose their hot viscosity number much more quickly [in terms of mileage]. 

For instance, not to pick on, but to compare with oils that I know well personally, let's take a 10W-30 M1 oil and compare it to a 5W-30. The 5W-30 shears down more easily than the 10W-30 at lower mileage to close to a 20-weight hot oil. Some looking for extended OCI's go to their 0W-40 (5W-40 is very hard to find)...this also shears down, but it becomes close to a 30-weight hot pretty soon.

With a lower TBN number and higher viscosity ratio spread, I would recommend changing whatever oil that you use much sooner than an oil with a higher TBN number. When the TBN runs low, the oil becomes acidic and begins to eat away at metals inside the motor. And...well, you can figure out the lowered hot viscosity part.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jblackburn said:


> Question: You recommend 0W oils - is the above list "tiered" with respect to 0W oils (if offered) or based off 5W-30 results?
> 
> Reason I ask - 0W oils are made from a thinner base stock and have more viscosity spread that is made up by other additives. Therefore they tend to shear more easily when at full temperature, and with some miles on them, will provide slightly lesser protection than a comparable 5W-30 or 10W-30-weight.
> 
> ...


You are correct in the shearing. This is represented by the NOACK volatility ratings. For Amsoil's Signature Series, it is 6.9% for 5W-30, 7.6% for the 0W-30, and 5.3% for the 10W-30. That said, even 7.6% is excellent in the range of NOACK volatility. The TBN is the same across all of them at 12.6. 

I'm glad you asked this question, because it's one of the topics I was going to write about. This is naturally going to depend on the exact oil being used. I cannot speak for all oils as I haven't done the research, but the NOACK volatility of true synthetics at any cold viscosity so far outperform those of group 3 oils that it's not really an issue. The oil is simply formulated differently. Here's how I would put it. A Group 4/5 synthetic at 5W-30 is like a radial tire at 35PSI. A Group 4/5 synthetic at 0W-30 is the same tire 15PSI higher. A group 3 synthetic is like a bias-ply tire. No matter what pressure you run it at, it's still a bias-ply tire. It will get you down the road, but it has its drawbacks. A conventional oil is, well...how do I put this...a wagon wheel. 

0W-30 is more expensive to produce, so if indeed the TBN is lower than that of a 5W-30, then I will change my recommendation for 0W-30 to refer to Tier 1 and Tier 2 oils. The tiered list is based on results for 5W-30 oils. I believe the Redline oil also only comes in a 0W-30. In those cases, the shearing isn't an issue. Here's a tidbit I found on BITOG:



> The main difference between dexos1 and SN/GF-5 is NOACK, 13% and 15% respectively. (1) NOACK increases when the first number in SAE xW-Y decreases. (2) NOACK also increases when the base-oil quality decreases from Group IV to III to II to I.
> 
> We don't know the NOACK on Mobil 1 0W-30; so, we don't know whether it would satisfy the 13% requirement of dexos1 or not if GM started licensing dexos1 for SAE 0W-30.


Thanks for pointing this out. To explain the reasoning, I recommended it due to improved cold fuel economy and cold protection. Even with a good drain-back valve, oil will still take a while to get moving through the engine.


----------



## spcrollins405 (Sep 14, 2013)

Xtreme, I think I've read all of your oil posts and I haven't seen anything about TBN retention. UOA tests from bitog confirm that for some reason, AMSOIL has one of the lowest TBN retention out there. Regular Mobil 1 UOA with starting 8.4 TBN tests nearly the same, sometimes better than an AMSOIL SS with starting 12.6 TBN of the same weight and mileage in the same vehicle. Granted one can never completely standardize all driving conditions, but it's been noticed more than a few times by multiple UOAs. I would agree with most everything else. By the way, it's good to see you again. Haven't seen you on RGS in years. I think there's a lot of clutter here, too. The most important items when it comes to motor oil is TBN, oil additive package, cost, and volatility/viscosity. I would like to add emphasis on oil filters. Since you are preaching exclusively for extended oil change intervals, you must inform the good people about using a quality filter with a high particulate first time pass number, and if at all possible a large capacity. After all, no matter how good your oil is, there will always be carbon/byproducts of combustion trapped in the oil. Lastly, I would like to make a small point for the other 92% of oils out there. Even a cheap dino oil, but with a respectable TBN and balanced additive pac paired to a decent filter and changed and tested regularly (I tested every third oil change) not only can, but will ALWAYS provide better protection and lubrication than an expensive exotic oil changed after either it has collected excessive particulate matter, or ran to a TBN of 1.0 or lower.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

spcrollins405 said:


> Xtreme, I think I've read all of your oil posts and I haven't seen anything about TBN retention. UOA tests from bitog confirm that for some reason, AMSOIL has one of the lowest TBN retention out there. Regular Mobil 1 UOA with starting 8.4 TBN tests nearly the same, sometimes better than an AMSOIL SS with starting 12.6 TBN of the same weight and mileage in the same vehicle. Granted one can never completely standardize all driving conditions, but it's been noticed more than a few times by multiple UOAs. I would agree with most everything else. By the way, it's good to see you again. Haven't seen you on RGS in years. I think there's a lot of clutter here, too. The most important items when it comes to motor oil is TBN, oil additive package, cost, and volatility/viscosity. I would like to add emphasis on oil filters. Since you are preaching exclusively for extended oil change intervals, you must inform the good people about using a quality filter with a high particulate first time pass number, and if at all possible a large capacity. After all, no matter how good your oil is, there will always be carbon/byproducts of combustion trapped in the oil. Lastly, I would like to make a small point for the other 92% of oils out there. Even a cheap dino oil, but with a respectable TBN and balanced additive pac paired to a decent filter and changed and tested regularly (I tested every third oil change) not only can, but will ALWAYS provide better protection and lubrication than an expensive exotic oil changed after either it has collected excessive particulate matter, or ran to a TBN of 1.0 or lower.


As you noted, the results differ greatly based on driving conditions and not all additives are created equal. As long as the TBN is over 1.0 at the time of the drain, you're fine. We have also noted significant variation between then same oils used in the same cars with two different drivers. This is one reason companies often spec a normal interval and a severe service interval. Amsoil SS for example is 25k mikes normal and 15k mikes severe. Big difference. I have not seen evidence to suggest that the reduction in the tested TBN number is a linear one. They are also entirely different oils; one being a group 3 petroleum base and the other being a group 4/5 synthetic base. I would expect them to react differently. 

This thread is by no means complete. Filtration is another topic I had listed to talk about when I would get around to explaining extended drain intervals compared to the oil life monitor, not to conventional oils. I will be changing my filter least once before I actually drain the oil. I simply don't have the time to create a finalized production of this thread yet but believe the information is valuable. 

A cheap dino oil is not an option for our cars. While the oil doesn't need to be Dexos1 certified, it does have to meet or exceed the Dexos1 certification. It's not just about protection, which it is far inferior to synthetics, but also what it does to the internals of your engine. The issues of boil-off and time-based oxidization are serious concerns, as is the cost of the low drain intervals necessary to use Dino oil. There's just no benefit to it.

Obviously, you don't want to exceed the usable life of any oil. That is a given. That said, the reason I personally use Amsoil is not just because I can extend those drain intervals, but because those drain intervals are guaranteed by Amsoil and protected by a warranty against any lubrication-related engine failure. The whole of the informative bits of this article are designed to shed light on the differences between synthetics and conventional oils, not suggest that everyone blindly exceed the oil life monitors in their cars. 

RGS? Doesn't ring a bell. Are you referring to clutter in this thread, or in the forum overall?

Sent from mobile.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Following up with the TBN retention, I've done some specific research on this topic to determine just why I was never concerned with it. The reason is because not only is it not a linear reduction, but the drop decreases exponentially. A quick google search brought the following quote from Mobil 1:



> As for TBN retention, it is only a single parameter that provides an indication of the used oil condition. A reduction in TBN is an indication that the overbased detergent is doing its job by neutralizing acids that form as a result of combustion. TBN should be used in combination with other used oil parameters such as oxidation, nitration, TAN (Total Acid Number), ICP metals, D4684 MRV viscosity, and D445 kinematic viscosity to determine the overall condition of the used oil.
> 
> Finally, in our experience in severe-service Las Vegas field testing, Mobil 1 engine oil TBN levels typically do not drop below 2 for vehicles with 15,000 mile oil drain intervals. Furthermore, it is our experience that those oils tend not to drop any lower when we continue to 20,000 mile oil drains.


At this point, we are concerned primarily with the TBN at the time of our desired oil drain interval, not any sooner. If I go from 12.6 to 5.0 in the first 5,000 miles, but drop from 5.0 to 3,0 in the next 5,000 miles, and from 3.0 to 2.5 in the next 5,000 miles after that, I am not the least bit concerned. 

When comparing oils, one thing you need to keep in mind is (as I discovered in the same googled thread), the detergent formulation may be entirely different from one oil to the next, which will affect the TBN "retention." It would appear that Mg-based detergents in the past formed hard ash deposits in the combustion chambers. I also found this little gem. 



> Diesel oils with primarily Mg based detergent systems show apprarently slower rates of TBN depletion in service, compared to old school (CI-4 and previous), Ca based detergent oils. However the magnesium based oils also show correspondingly higher TAN's ("Total Acid Numbers"), for a given number of miles. The speculation is that the Mg based oils don't do a good job neutralizing some of the weaker acids formed by combustion.


It appears based on the VOAs I've looked at that Amsoil SS does not use an Mg based detergent, so while Mobil 1 (which does use an Mg based detergent) may show slower rates of TBN depletion, it isn't as effective of an acidity neutralizer. One thing to keep in mind is that Mobil 1 sold out to a Group 3 hydrocracked base stock in addition to an Mg based detergent. Amsoil SS is still a true PAO/Ester synthetic with what appears to be a Ca based detergent. The shift to an Mg based detergent was, as with the shift to Group 3 base stocks, likely done for cost purposes.


----------



## WhiteAndBright (Mar 4, 2013)

Awesome Awesome read.. I love reading threads like this by Xtreme!!


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

Just switched to Pennzoil Ultra 5W30 for my ECO. Have not driven the car yet, but on start up engine definitely sounds quieter. I will use the case of Royal Purple I still have in my LS1 GTO.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

I do want to caution people about the use of oil from Walmart. I have seen claims made that the oil formulation is actually different. Walmart does sell tires under the same name as other places, but at cheaper prices, and those tires are of inferior quality. They do this with other products, and I suspect they may do this with engine oil. The label is specifically made for walmart. 

The reason I suspect this is due to the price difference per quart when buying individual quarts and when buying the 5-gallon jugs. The individual quarts are ~9 per quart and the 5-quart jug is $27. That's a difference of ~40% comparing $45 for 5 individual quarts or $27 for a 5-quart jug. I have a hard time chalking that up to just "buying power." I won't say anything for sure until I get some oil testing analysis done on both oils, but if you happen to buy an oil like Pennzoil Ultra at Walmart and it doesn't perform to spec, you were warned.


----------



## zerogravity (Jul 21, 2013)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I do want to caution people about the use of oil from Walmart. I have seen claims made that the oil formulation is actually different. Walmart does sell tires under the same name as other places, but at cheaper prices, and those tires are of inferior quality. They do this with other products, and I suspect they may do this with engine oil. The label is specifically made for walmart.
> 
> The reason I suspect this is due to the price difference per quart when buying individual quarts and when buying the 5-gallon jugs. The individual quarts are ~9 per quart and the 5-quart jug is $27. That's a difference of ~40% comparing $45 for 5 individual quarts or $27 for a 5-quart jug. I have a hard time chalking that up to just "buying power." I won't say anything for sure until I get some oil testing analysis done on both oils, but if you happen to buy an oil like Pennzoil Ultra at Walmart and it doesn't perform to spec, you were warned.


I have been saying that for years. Never no real evidence to back it up.... I know the TV you buy at best buy can be bought at Walmart for cheaper. .... and so are the specs... same Samsung Model two different type of stores and the specs are different. Not sure about the apple products. . But it would not surprise me. If you find this to be true, man oh man!! That will open up a whole new can of worms. That would also make me no longer be a loyal customer to companies like Pennzoil, Mobile, Quebec state etc. That would be a poor excuse to move products. Same name on the bottle with a different formula


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

zerogravity said:


> I have been saying that for years. Never no real evidence to back it up.... I know the TV you buy at best buy can be bought at Walmart for cheaper. .... and so are the specs... same Samsung Model two different type of stores and the specs are different. Not sure about the apple products. . But it would not surprise me. If you find this to be true, man oh man!! That will open up a whole new can of worms. That would also make me no longer be a loyal customer to companies like Pennzoil, Mobile, Quebec state etc. That would be a poor excuse to move products. Same name on the bottle with a different formula


Walmart has no shortage of vendors who are willing to bend over and produce an inferior product to meet THEIR price point. The luxury Walmart has is that they tell the vendors what price they are willing to pay, and the vendor has to decide if they want to sell a product at that price point, or at what product they will sell at that price point. They do this with produce, they do this with electronics as you pointed out. Heck, even with car radios, I spoke to a guy who worked for Pioneer who told me that the models shipped to Walmart had plastic parts whereas the exact same models shipped to other stores had metal parts. 

From the $27/5qt price point at Walmart, I am fairly confident that the product is *not *the same as the one you find at any other retail store. Keep in mind that these bottles only go to Walmart and nobody else can buy them. It would be very easy with a private Walmart label for Pennzoil to shove a Group 3 product down the line at a low price point. Pennzoil cannot turn a profit selling a true synthetic at the price of a Group 3 oil.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

Erm.

I doubt it's any different, but if it's spread as a rumor over the internet, it'll catch like wildfire.

Anyway, here you go with people thinking the same thing.

Mobil 1 Syn in Walmart? [Archive] - Drive Accord Honda Forums

Mobil 1 | Quality at Walmart

http://coloradok5.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-245283.html


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jblackburn said:


> Erm.
> 
> I doubt it's any different, but if it's spread as a rumor over the internet, it'll catch like wildfire.
> 
> ...


As I said before, the numbers just don't add up. If you buy the 1-quart bottles, it will cost you $44.60 to buy 5 quarts. If you buy the 5-quart jug, with Walmart's label clearly on the jug, it will cost you $27. That's a 40% difference in price. That cannot be just "buying power." Either Pennzoil is losing money on Pennzoil Ultra, or it is not the same product, and you cannot buy those oils anywhere else because they are very clearly packaged specifically for Walmart.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

I've just ordered six pre-paid Blackstone tests with TBN. 

When I get them I'll test some Mobil 1 that I bought at Wal-Mart, along with the diesel factory-fill and the Total INEO MC3 Dexos2 I will be switching to. 

I'll let y'all know what Blackstone has to say when I get the results. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Tomko said:


> I've just ordered six pre-paid Blackstone tests with TBN.
> 
> When I get them I'll test some Mobil 1 that I bought at Wal-Mart, along with the diesel factory-fill and the Total INEO MC3 Dexos2 I will be switching to.
> 
> ...


I'm not entirely sure what we'll see from Mobil 1. The big one I'm concerned with is Pennzoil Ultra, since it's supposed to be a PAO-based oil, not a group 3 hydrocracked. I am looking forward to your results, however.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Some recently discovered information has resulted in my lowering Pennzoil Platinum to Tier 2 and raising Redline 0W-30 to Tier 1. Royal Purple HPS would be a Tier 1 if I could find some data on it, but their refusal to publish specifications makes it impossible for me to recommend them at Tier 1. So, Tier 2 they go.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

This is good stuff Andrei. Please continue to keep your listings up to date. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Tomko said:


> This is good stuff Andrei. Please continue to keep your listings up to date.
> 
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


I will as I find more information. I'm looking forward to seeing the results from PQI America for 2014. 

I'm also looking forward to an update from Amsoil in Q1 of 2014 for the Cruze Diesel. They haven't yet had a chance to look at one to see what oils would be suitable. Here's what I got in an e-mail from them:



> At this time I have no lubricant recommendations for a Chevrolet Cruze Diesel fueled engine. Is this a 2014 model? We will get this information sometime in the first quarter of 2014.


I suspect that they may add a Dexos2 certification compatibility for either AEL...

AMSOIL European Car Formula 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil

...or HDD...

AMSOIL Series 3000 SAE 5W-30 Synthetic Heavy Duty Diesel Oil

We'll see what comes of this. I'll keep you guys informed of any news I get on that front.


----------



## winks79 (Dec 20, 2013)

According to what all I've been reading in all of the posts on the different oils. If I am using a tier 2 oil, and change my oil between 3-5k, should not be an issue right? Only need a tier 1 oil if running extended oil change intervals? I've had really good luck with QS ultimate durability and also the Super Tech Walmart branded 5-30 synthetic. I just always change them before 5k, mostly around 3-4k. My wife drives this car and it is totally stock and is not run hard at all. I've heard that the Super Tech synthetics are made by Warren oil and that the Super Tech conventional is made by Warren and or Exxon/Mobil. I always used Pennzoil conventional oil in all my trucks and cars for over 20 years and never had any issues. I always changed oil and filter at the 3k mark with conventional oils. I have since changed over to the Super Tech conventionals for 2 of my other non turbo autos and have not had the first problem and looking at the specs of these oils, they are just as good as the previous Pennzoil conventional oils that I had used in the past. I totally agree that Amsoil is probably the best oil out there, but for as often as I like to change my oil, (and I know it is probably a waste, but I'm old school with the way I like to change my oil, just can't leave it in that long), do you think it is an issue for me. I have ran my cars/trucks over the years with this same type oil/change interval for several 100 of thousands of miles without any engine issues whatsoever. I had one truck that I put over 400k on that only had a set of lifters and timing chain/gear put in and that was the only trouble I had out of the engine, and that was done at around the 100k mark. What say you Xtreme? Do you think the Super Tech Synthetic is a decent enough tier 2 oil to run in my Cruze on shorter oil change intervals, and do you think their conventional brand oil is as good as Pennzoil conventional as long as you are changing it every 3k? I know you like Amsoil, (I do too), but I would like a non-biased answer knowing that it will be changed very frequently. Thank you for you in depth analysis on oils, enjoy reading your posts on these matters.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

winks79 said:


> According to what all I've been reading in all of the posts on the different oils. If I am using a tier 2 oil, and change my oil between 3-5k, should not be an issue right? Only need a tier 1 oil if running extended oil change intervals? I've had really good luck with QS ultimate durability and also the Super Tech Walmart branded 5-30 synthetic. I just always change them before 5k, mostly around 3-4k. My wife drives this car and it is totally stock and is not run hard at all. I've heard that the Super Tech synthetics are made by Warren oil and that the Super Tech conventional is made by Warren and or Exxon/Mobil. I always used Pennzoil conventional oil in all my trucks and cars for over 20 years and never had any issues. I always changed oil and filter at the 3k mark with conventional oils. I have since changed over to the Super Tech conventionals for 2 of my other non turbo autos and have not had the first problem and looking at the specs of these oils, they are just as good as the previous Pennzoil conventional oils that I had used in the past. I totally agree that Amsoil is probably the best oil out there, but for as often as I like to change my oil, (and I know it is probably a waste, but I'm old school with the way I like to change my oil, just can't leave it in that long), do you think it is an issue for me. I have ran my cars/trucks over the years with this same type oil/change interval for several 100 of thousands of miles without any engine issues whatsoever. I had one truck that I put over 400k on that only had a set of lifters and timing chain/gear put in and that was the only trouble I had out of the engine, and that was done at around the 100k mark. What say you Xtreme? Do you think the Super Tech Synthetic is a decent enough tier 2 oil to run in my Cruze on shorter oil change intervals, and do you think their conventional brand oil is as good as Pennzoil conventional as long as you are changing it every 3k? I know you like Amsoil, (I do too), but I would like a non-biased answer knowing that it will be changed very frequently. Thank you for you in depth analysis on oils, enjoy reading your posts on these matters.


If you are running a stock tune with a Tier 1, 2, or 3 oil, then there is no reason why you wouldn't change it according to the oil life monitor. If you are using the GM oil, change it every 5,000 miles. The quality of the oil does a lot more than extend the oil drain intervals, but if that's what you're concerned with, then just stick with that recommendation. 

You'll have good luck with anything under the sun in a normal engine if you change it at under 5k miles. However, at that point you're probably just wasting oil. SuperTech synthetic is nothing special. It is higher than the Tier 3 oils I recommended in NOACK volatility, and the TBN is right at the border at 8.0. There are better options out there. 

The concept that people have used such and such oil at such and such interval is invalid and irrelevant, for a few reasons. First, most people don't take apart their engines to see what those oils do over time. Conventional oils do leave a lot of sludge behind due to how easily they boil off and oxidize. Second, newer engines have far tighter tolerances and far more stringent oil requirements. 

AMSOIL isn't all that expensive to be honest with you. Their OE oil is designed to be used according to the manufacturer recommended drain intervals. I always refer to wholesale pricing because people can get that pricing with a preferred account. AMSOIL OE is $4.70 per quart. That's even cheaper than Mobil 1 at Walmart. By the case, it's even cheaper than that. If you were going to change your oil every 3k, it would be a waste to use a high end synthetic unless you required the extra protection. I wouldn't use a conventional oil though no matter what drain interval. 

You said you had a set of lifters replaced in that truck. That to me indicates that you did have an issue. You didn't go that whole 400k miles without issues. Lifters are metallic parts, and are hydraulic. If they sludge up, their hydraulic function no longer works. If the rollers scar, you have an oil issue. Why do I suggest this was an oil-related issue? Because we have AMSOIL dealers running over 1 million miles on 25k mile oil change intervals who have pristine, brand new looking engines internally with not a single mechanical issue. 

In most cases, the "extra cost" of a synthetic oil is negated by the fuel economy increase during cold starts and short trips. A 12-quart case of AMSOIL OE for example is $53.28. That's $4.44 per quart or $22.20 per 5-quart oil change. How much more does that cost than a conventional oil change? You would find that the difference is almost negligible when you pick up a few extra miles on each tank of gas. Keep in mind, I'm only using AMSOIL as an example since I'm a dealer and I know the products well. You can fill in that blank for other good Group 3 synthetic oils. 

Super Tech Synthetic is not a Tier 2. It is not even a Tier 3 on my list. From the oil testing analysis reports I've seen of it, the TBN drops fairly rapidly and the oil isn't really good for a drain interval of over 6,000 miles. Furthermore, it starts to lose viscosity after 5,000 miles. Is it decent enough to run at a short oil drain interval? Yeah, you could get away with that, but there are better options out there. That said, there are other reasons why I don't buy my oil from Walmart. As cheap as I am, I still prefer to support my local businesses and buy USA made products whenever possible. I wouldn't run a conventional oil in anything. Synthetic oils have become so inexpensive and there are so many benefits to it that there's just no reason to run a conventional oil anymore. Those 3k mile oil change intervals are a complete waste of time and money no matter how old your engine is. Cars run smoother, get better fuel economy, and are protected far better with a synthetic oil than with conventional oils.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

What happened to Pennzoil Platinum on your list?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> What happened to Pennzoil Platinum on your list?


Accidentally removed that when I was shifting things around earlier. I added it back under Tier 3.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I do want to caution people about the use of oil from Walmart. I have seen claims made that the oil formulation is actually different. Walmart does sell tires under the same name as other places, but at cheaper prices, and those tires are of inferior quality. They do this with other products, and I suspect they may do this with engine oil. The label is specifically made for walmart.
> 
> The reason I suspect this is due to the price difference per quart when buying individual quarts and when buying the 5-gallon jugs. The individual quarts are ~9 per quart and the 5-quart jug is $27. That's a difference of ~40% comparing $45 for 5 individual quarts or $27 for a 5-quart jug. I have a hard time chalking that up to just "buying power." I won't say anything for sure until I get some oil testing analysis done on both oils, but if you happen to buy an oil like Pennzoil Ultra at Walmart and it doesn't perform to spec, you were warned.


I find this hard to believe! Certainly hope your wrong. Might not get a straight answer but I have emailed this question to Shell and Blackstone Labs for their input. I would be scared to make accusations like this on the web without some proof! Could wind up in a law suit, especially since your speaking as an Amsoil rep and not just an individual.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

cruze01 said:


> I find this hard to believe! Certainly hope your wrong. Might not get a straight answer but I have emailed this question to Shell and Blackstone Labs for their input. I would be scared to make accusations like this on the web without some proof! Could wind up in a law suit, especially since your speaking as an Amsoil rep and not just an individual.


I am not an AMSOIL rep, I am an AMSOIL _independent dealer_. I serve the same function as a retail store. I do not and cannot speak for or on behalf of AMSOIL Inc. I also made it clear that it is a suspicion until I see proof one way or another. Since making that post, I've discovered that Pennzoil Ultra is in fact a primarily Group 3 oil, which can be quite cheap when produced in very large quantities for one specific distributor.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I do want to caution people about the use of oil from Walmart. I have seen claims made that the oil formulation is actually different. Walmart does sell tires under the same name as other places, but at cheaper prices, and those tires are of inferior quality. They do this with other products, and I suspect they may do this with engine oil. The label is specifically made for walmart.
> 
> The reason I suspect this is due to the price difference per quart when buying individual quarts and when buying the 5-gallon jugs. The individual quarts are ~9 per quart and the 5-quart jug is $27. That's a difference of ~40% comparing $45 for 5 individual quarts or $27 for a 5-quart jug. I have a hard time chalking that up to just "buying power." I won't say anything for sure until I get some oil testing analysis done on both oils, but if you happen to buy an oil like Pennzoil Ultra at Walmart and it doesn't perform to spec, you were warned.


As mentioned earlier I emailed Blackstone labs and Shell to try to find out if this is true. Answers from both below.

I got the answers back from Blackstone and Pennzoil! Blackstone says they really cant tell the difference between any of the oils, in fact they say the store brand stuff is just as good. Pennzoil says they sell the same product no matter where you get it. So, If I got the truth looks like this is not the case, oil bought at Wal-Mart is just as good as anywhere else.

Blackstone's Answer:
Michael: Thanks for the e-mail. Let me first say that we can't see the difference between a regular petroleum oil and a synthetic oil with out tests. However, we do see a lot of off-brands like Wal-Marts Super-Tech and from what we can tell, it's the same oil as you would get from any name-brand supplier. Wal-Mart isn't in the business of making oil, so the just pay a major company to re-label their product. That way they can get the API's approval rating. They get the price down because they are Wal-Mart and buy huge quantities.

Let me know if you have any more questions.


Sincerely,
Ryan Stark
Blackstone Labs

Pennzoil's Answer:

Dear Michael, 
All of our Pennzoil Oils that we sell at Walmart or anywhere is the same. They should have the same quality and performance. 
Should you have further questions, please feel free to contact us at 800-Best Oil (237-8645), option 3,2.
Regards,
Technical Service, 
The material in this email may be confidential, privileged and/or protected by copyright. Use of this e-mail should be limited accordingly. If this email has been sent to you in error, please contact us immediately.
Shell Shared Services (Asia), B.V.
21st Floor, Solaris One
130 Dela Rosa Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City
1229 Philippines


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

cruze01 said:


> As mentioned earlier I emailed Blackstone labs and Shell to try to find out if this is true. Answers from both below.
> 
> I got the answers back from Blackstone and Pennzoil! Blackstone says they really cant tell the difference between any of the oils, in fact they say the store brand stuff is just as good. Pennzoil says they sell the same product no matter where you get it. So, If I got the truth looks like this is not the case, oil bought at Wal-Mart is just as good as anywhere else.
> 
> ...


Blackstone's response is the reason I have moved over to using Oil Analyzers Inc for my oil testing analysis. The notion that they cannot see the difference between a petroleum and a synthetic oil and that petroleum oils are perfectly fine for any use is not just misleading, but blatantly false. I can't tell you how many Audi and BMW engines I've seen with worn piston rings blowing blue smoke because they were using an inferior oil than what was designed for and available for in Europe. 

It doesn't take a genius to look at the valve train of TDI motor with 250k miles that used a true synthetic and compare it to the same engine that used a petroleum oil and see an enormous difference. 

Perhaps if Blackstone can't tell the difference with their testing, they should improve their testing. Maybe that's why they don't test cold viscosity. 

Sent from mobile.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

I agree with you totally on that. They didn't rally answer my question either but at least Pennzoil gave me a straight answer.


----------



## spcrollins405 (Sep 14, 2013)

I was unaware Mobile switched to a Mg-based detergent. Attached is my last UOA with Mobil 1 10W30. Sounds like I need to go back and grab as much as I can.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

spcrollins405 said:


> I was unaware Mobile switched to a Mg-based detergent. Attached is my last UOA with Mobil 1 10W30. Sounds like I need to go back and grab as much as I can.


You can pretty much be sure that big oil will produce oil at the cheapest rate possible. There are very few of us that will actually know what the numbers mean. Keep in mind that these are the same companies that went from a PAO synthetic to a hydro cracked base stock without telling anyone. As if they were even comparable.

Sent from mobile.


----------



## Farmerboy (Sep 2, 2012)

spcrollins405 said:


> I was unaware Mobile switched to a Mg-based detergent. Attached is my last UOA with Mobil 1 10W30. Sounds like I need to go back and grab as much as I can.


My question is why are the copper and lead so high? A few years ago when I had a Cummins TD I had high copper and they suggested turbo bearings or oil cooler problems. Is this oil not protecting these parts. My last sample at 13,000 mi. showed 1 and 0 ppm respectively.

View attachment 54681


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

spcrollins405 said:


> I was unaware Mobile switched to a Mg-based detergent. Attached is my last UOA with Mobil 1 10W30. Sounds like I need to go back and grab as much as I can.


I'd go back to the spec 5W30 and test again.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Blackstone's response is the reason I have moved over to using Oil Analyzers Inc for my oil testing analysis. The notion that they cannot see the difference between a petroleum and a synthetic oil and that petroleum oils are perfectly fine for any use is not just misleading, but blatantly false.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps* if Blackstone can't tell the difference with their testing*, they should improve their testing.


To be fair I think you missed a part in the reply,


> Let me first say that we *can't see the difference* between a regular petroleum oil and a synthetic oil *with out tests*.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Diesel Dan said:


> To be fair I think you missed a part in the reply,


I believe that was a typo on their part and they meant to say with *our *tests (given the proximity between R and T on the keyboard). Without is one word, not two.


----------



## cyclewild (Aug 14, 2013)

I think they mean that to the naked eye it is impossible to tell them apart, and that by the numbers generic oils test almost as well as name brand conventionals.


----------



## spcrollins405 (Sep 14, 2013)

My copper and tin numbers were from bearing wear--that engine was modified and had been to the strip a few times. You have to remember the main reason people test their oil. It's never to find out what tier their oil base stock it is. It is unfair to smear a company such as Blackstone or any other oil analysis company for not proving your theory that a top tier oil should test better. Again, remember what they test for: additive and wear elements, viscosity, flashpoint, fuel, antifreeze, water, insolubles, and TBN. UOA are used primarily for monitoring engine wear and oil performance, and perfecting oil change intervals.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Royal Purple HPS has been moved to a Tier 3. Sorry RP fans, but I got tired of not finding any data on it anywhere. Royal Purple has something to hide there. It will stay a Tier 3 until I get some specs on it. 

That said, I did find a UOA on Royal Purple 5W-30, and it confirms what I've said earlier. This was run in a 1.8L Ecotec. 










Despite Blackstone going up and down this report and claiming they find nothing wrong (of course, they didn't test TBN or TAN), there is one glaring issue. This oil was labeled as a 5W-30 oil. Observe the SAE industry kinematic viscosity ranges:


SAE
Viscosity
 Kinematic
(cSt)
100° C Min
 Kinematic
(cSt)
100° C Max
*20**5.6**<9.3**30**9.3**<12.5**40**12.5**<16.3**50**16.3**<21.9**60**21.9**<26.1*

In the oil testing analysis, we find a 100C viscosity of 8.7, which means that the Royal Purple oil thinned down to a 20-weight oil within 5k miles. In other words, it is out of spec. 

If you had an engine problem such as a failed turbo bearing and GM drained your oil, found this, and sent it in for analysis (believe me, I've talked to GM techs who have), your warranty will be instantly voided and your only recourse will be a lawyer. This engine requires a 30-weight oil, NOT a 20-weight oil. Don't use an oil that thins down to a 20-weight before you can go even 5k miles on it.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Royal Purple HPS has been moved to a Tier 3. Sorry RP fans, but I got tired of not finding any data on it anywhere. Royal Purple has something to hide there. It will stay a Tier 3 until I get some specs on it.
> 
> That said, I did find a UOA on Royal Purple 5W-30, and it confirms what I've said earlier. This was run in a 1.8L Ecotec.
> 
> ...


Interesting. Is this the oil that Royal Purple claims meets dexos1, but that has never been registered with GM as dexos1?


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Tomko said:


> I've just ordered six pre-paid Blackstone tests with TBN.
> 
> When I get them I'll test some Mobil 1 that I bought at Wal-Mart, along with the diesel factory-fill and the Total INEO MC3 Dexos2 I will be switching to.
> 
> ...


Received the reports back from Blackstone this afternoon. Andrei is working them up for us so they can be posted with his value added analysis and comment. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Reports are from Tomko.

First up we have factory fill DEXOS2 synthetic blend from GM. The detergents seem to be holding up decently as the TBN is still at 2.0. Bear in mind that TBN loss is not a linear function. No moly here. More on that later. Seems to be a lot of break-in metals present, so it's too soon to tell what's going on with those. Virtually no boron. 










This I believe was the Mobil 1 from WalMart. Compare to PQI America's test in March of 2013: Petroleum Quality Institute of America. There are a few differences there; mostly in the reduced additive levels across the board. Some of those are quite significant to what PQI tested. Tomko, was this a sample from a quart or a 5-quart jug (I really wanted to see the cheaper 5-quart jug results)? This confirms what I said earlier about Mobil 1 moving toward Mg-based detergents. I'm still researching this, but superficial google searching has noted that Mg tends to leave ash deposits. We do find moly here, which I like, in addition to Boron. Boron is also an anti-wear additive. 












Total Quartz Neo. Zero Mg and an entirely Ca-based detergent. A TBN of 6.2 is a bit low, however. We find no moly here either, which indicates that this is a rather cheap oil. Moly is found in EP (extreme pressure) additives which create a surface layer on moving metal parts that has a film strength exceeding 500,000PSI. AMSOILS SS has ~150PPM of moly; more than double what you find in Mobil 1. Since oil makers are limited in how much phosphorous they can put in oils (ZDDP) for EP additives, moly is used in conjunction with phosphorous when the oil maker requires additional protection. We don't find that here, and we don't find boron either. 










The DEXOS2 and Total Quarts appear to be plain-jane oils that provide no special anti-wear or high-pressure additives beneficial for reducing engine wear. I would prefer to use an oil that does feature those additives, but those additives cost money to include in engine oils. 

Tomko, do you mind if I take this opportunity to create a comparison between the Mobil 1 and AMSOIL SS?


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

The Mobil 1 came from a small bottle bought at Wal-Mart - not a larger jug. 

On the factory oil we still don't know if it's a semi- or full synthetic. But now we do know that it is a 5w30 and not something closer to a 5w40 as some opined. 

I wonder if the lack of moly may have something to do with the dexos2 specification or the low-saps. It's an interesting question. 

No problem for drawing apples-to-apples comparisons with other competitive products. And thanks for getting the results up. Hopefully other members will contribute their own oil analyses to the discussion. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

> On the factory we still don't know if it's a semi- or full synthetic. But now we do know that it is a 5w30 and not something closer to a 5w40 as some opined.


At that mileage, it may have sheared down a bit and been near the top of the -30 scale at the beginning of its life. That viscosity at that mileage is actually not bad at all.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Tomko said:


> The Mobil 1 came from a small bottle bought at Wal-Mart - not a larger jug.
> 
> On the factory oil we still don't know if it's a semi- or full synthetic. But now we do know that it is a 5w30 and not something closer to a 5w40 as some opined.
> 
> ...


I do not know if the factory fill is a synthetic blend, only that the GM dexos2 bottles you can buy are a synthetic blend. Unfortunately Blackstone doesn't test for NOACK volatility. 

I have seen a lack of Moly in many other oils. 

Here is a VOA I found for Mobil 1 ESP on the TDI forums, which shows significant levels of Moly and Boron. Note that TBN reduction is far slower when it comes to Diesel oils.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

A rather interesting oil testing specimen this time. 
Link: http://imageshack.com/a/img15/6433/98sz.png










Let's analyze this one for a bit. This is AMSOIL Signature Series 0W-30 in a Chevy Cruze 1.4T ECO MT (not mine), with ~100k miles on it. Sample had 11,236 miles on it. First thing I want to bring to your attention is TBN. Starting is 12.6-12.8. This tested at 5.65. Keep in mind that TBN is not a linear reduction. In fact, the decay reduces exponentially with mileage. 

We see a depletion in Moly (extreme pressure) and Born (anti-wear) additives as well as Calcium (detergent) levels. 

Now for the problem. 3.6% fuel dilution, resulting in a viscosity of 8.1. That is effectively a 20-weight oil. This particular sample led me to research the causes of fuel dilution. This engine lost and burned absolutely no oil. I then found a TSB from AMSOIL about this. 

www.amsoil.com/techservicesbulletin/MotorOil/TSB MO 2004-07-02 Fuel Dilution.pdf

The TSB notes a few causes for fuel dilution:


Leaking injectors 
Excessive idle time 
Incomplete combustion 
Cool engine operating conditions 
Frequent short trip driving 
Performance chips/engine modifications 
Restricted air filter/bad air to fuel ratio 
Worn piston rings/excessive blow-by 
Incorrect choke settings 
Towing/lugging engine 
Fuel pump/over fueling 
Seals and gaskets 
Improper injector timing 


We can write off some of the obvious ones. In this particular case, the vehicle:


Idled for extended periods of over one hour and sometimes up to 5 hours results in cool engine operating conditions. This is basically two of those causes in one. This idling occurred with the heat on, which means that any fuel that seeped past the pistons would not be burned off due to the lack of sufficient engine operating temperature. Remember, the 1.4T does not produce enough heat to remain at operating temperature when the heater is on max and the fan is on the 3rd or 4th setting (ECO) out of 4. 
Tuned by vtuner. Remember that at WOT, our engines dump a significant amount of fuel to combat EGT (exhaust gas temperature) and reduce combustion chamber temperatures. The owner of this vehicle had occasions where he drove under heavy loads for extended periods of time. 

I wouldn't really include any of the others causes, but it I wanted to bring to your attention the issue that this car can have with fuel contamination. I am fairly certain that, given the maintenance records for this vehicle, there is not something significantly wrong with this vehicle. However, the fuel dilution nonetheless brought the viscosity down to an SAE 20 weight. 

Fortunately, however, it seems that this engine tolerates a viscosity drop without any immediate adverse results. Wear metals are spectacularly low, which is even more noteworthy given that we are looking at an 11,200 mile sample. Wear metals are practically nonexistent, which would be great for a 5,000 mile sample, excellent for a 11,200 mile sample, and are unbelievable for an 11,200 mile sample that thinned to a 20 weight from fuel dilution. Seems that when it thinned, this oil did a fine job at protecting that motor.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

Wow, hope my wear metals come down like that. 
Was showing 10x the iron @ 9k miles.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Diesel Dan said:


> Wow, hope my wear metals come down like that.
> Was showing 10x the iron @ 9k miles.


Yeah, and did you see that TBN? Amazing, and that's with Ca-based detergents, not Mg-based. 

Yours will improve as the engine breaks in. This sample was from an engine that had 100k miles on it. I need to find another UOA on this motor to compare wear metals to.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Yours will improve as the engine breaks in.


Time will tell as some engines just wear more than others.
My brother has a re-man 6.2L Diesel that has similar mileage as my 6.5TD but his generates much more lead in the oil than mine.

Right now the Cruze is sitting at 7K+ on the oil with 7-8% OLM left and 16,500+ on the odometer.
Going to change the oil pretty soon here and send out another sample.


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

I wanted to updated everyone on some insight to Pennzoil Ultra. I'm not sure were Xtreme saw that it is not 100% synthetic but that's besides the point. I talked to a friend who owns an oil supplier business and as a dealer/vendor of Pennzoil, I thought it would be a good idea to pick his brain on how Walmart can sell Ultra so cheap.

Based on from his discussions with Gulf reps., he believes its all muscle and thus the product is exactly the same in a 5 quart jug versus 1 quart bottles from an auto store. Have you every seen 5 quart jugs of Ultra at an auto parts store? No you haven't. Apparently Walmart paid an to have exclusive rights to sell Ultra (and I suspect this is the same with other oils) in branded 5 quart jugs. 

Another reasoning to how can they make money on this, is that Walmart controls all touch points. Pennzoil does not have to do the distributing for this and that alone says Walmart a ton. 

Just my .02c and for the record, I'm going to give Amsoil SS a shot next oil change!


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Makes sense. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## SunnyinHollister (Mar 17, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Blackstone's response is the reason I have moved over to using Oil Analyzers Inc for my oil testing analysis. The notion that they cannot see the difference between a petroleum and a synthetic oil and that petroleum oils are perfectly fine for any use is not just misleading, but blatantly false. I can't tell you how many Audi and BMW engines I've seen with worn piston rings blowing blue smoke because they were using an inferior oil than what was designed for and available for in Europe.
> 
> It doesn't take a genius to look at the valve train of TDI motor with 250k miles that used a true synthetic and compare it to the same engine that used a petroleum oil and see an enormous difference.
> 
> ...


I understand you are a Amsoil dealer, but enough of the speculation and mis-information. Pray tell what $40 UOA can tell the composition of base stocks in a motor oil? I'll answer that one for you, there is none. The tests that might tell the composition are very expensive. And since all oil formulations are proprietary, how do you know what the ratio of Grp III/IV/V is in Ultra or Royal Purple? For that matter what is the ratios for Amsoil? Here is what they have to say on the subject:


> "AMSOIL maintains formulation details as proprietary and does not divulge specifics regarding the type of synthetic base stocks used in its synthetic lubricants. AMSOIL developed the world’s first API-qualified synthetic motor oil in 1972 and has remained the leader in the synthetic lubricant industry by continually researching new technologies and demanding only the highest-quality raw materials. As the company moves forward with new technologies it is increasingly more important that this information remains proprietary. AMSOIL views synthetic base oils the same as it views additives, with each having its own set of unique properties. AMSOIL does not insist on a particular type of base stock, but insists on particular performance parameters. AMSOIL chooses whichever synthetic base stock or combination of base stocks delivers the desired result and tailors its lubricants to be application-specific (gasoline, diesel, racing, transmission, gear, extended drain, extreme temperatures, etc.). At the end of the day, the type of base stock used to formulate the oil is inconsequential; the product’s performance is what matters.


 The last sentence sums it up perfectly. Look I admire your passion and enthusiasm, and I actually use Amsoil products, but stick to the facts. We can speculate all day long on the base stock make up of various motor oils, but realistically it's the performance that counts. And if you want to believe Amsoil's own marketing data, a grp V oil (Redline) performed the worst, and a supposed grp III oil (Castrol) performed the best for deposit control under the TEOST test. Don't get so hung up on base oil composition, but focus on the overall performance in the areas that are important for your particular engine and your driving conditions. I apologize in advance if I offended.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

SunnyinHollister said:


> I understand you are a Amsoil dealer, but enough of the speculation and mis-information. Pray tell what $40 UOA can tell the composition of base stocks in a motor oil? I'll answer that one for you, there is none. The tests that might tell the composition are very expensive. And since all oil formulations are proprietary, how do you know what the ratio of Grp III/IV/V is in Ultra or Royal Purple? For that matter what is the ratios for Amsoil? Here is what they have to say on the subject: The last sentence sums it up perfectly. Look I admire your passion and enthusiasm, and I actually use Amsoil products, but stick to the facts. We can speculate all day long on the base stock make up of various motor oils, but realistically it's the performance that counts. And if you want to believe Amsoil's own marketing data, a grp V oil (Redline) performed the worst, and a supposed grp III oil (Castrol) performed the best for deposit control under the TEOST test. Don't get so hung up on base oil composition, but focus on the overall performance in the areas that are important for your particular engine and your driving conditions. I apologize in advance if I offended.


In ~90% of cases, the NOACK volatility allows you to determine what base stocks are used. NOACK volatility is extremely important and often ignored, but critical for a few big reasons. I'll employ wikipedia to explain those. "The more motor oils vaporize, the thicker and heavier they become, contributing to poor circulation, reduced fuel economy and increased oil consumption, wear and emissions." In short, the higher the NOACK volatility, the less it will protect your car, the faster it will wear out, and the more problems it will cause. For that reason alone, I dwell on the effects of using certain base stocks over others. The NOACK volatility of AMSOIL Signature Series 5W-30 is rated at 6.9%. Compare this to Valvoline SynPower at 11.6%. That is an enormous difference. The vast majority of group 3 based oils have a NOACK volatility of ~10% or above. Two exceptions are Quaker State Ultimate and Pennzoil Ultra.

AMSOIL's own test of Redline regarding deposit control indicated that Redline lacks the same anti-oxidants found in other engine oils. An oil's oxidation tendencies under heat have a lot more to do with the additive package employed than the base stock formulation. It is interesting that you mention that, because I've been researching that exact topic lately as it has been bothering me. I've advocated for quite some time that people should choose an oil that performs well across the board, and Redline falls flat in that area. I've moved it down the list. 

I suspect that a great part of the reason why AMSOIL makes the statements they do is so that they don't blatantly state that their OE and XL oils are hydrocracked group 3 base stocks. The fact that AMSOIL doesn't trust either to go beyond 10,000 miles, while they guarantee the Signature Series for 25,000 miles, should highlight a difference in base stock performance. The research I've done also shows that Group 3 oils require heavier quantities of pour point depressants and viscosity index additives than Group 4/5 synthetics, which will deplete over time, limit the total usability of the oil, and raise the percentage of additive to base stock in the oil. 

Back to what I've said in this thread before, what matters most is an oil that performs well in all areas. The NOACK volatility testing eliminates most Group 3-based oils from that recommendation. That being said, two of my vehicles use Group 3 oils. 

No offense taken, but I have to admit it threw me back a bit to be told to "stop with the misinformation," given that nobody has fought to prevent the spread of misinformation more than I have on this forum. That is the entire basis behind the Gearhead group.


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

Well said! I have seen NOACK values for pennzoil ultra at 6.4%. 

http://www.pennzoil.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2012+Ultra+TDS.pdf


----------



## SunnyinHollister (Mar 17, 2011)

The lower NOACK on PU is due to its GTL base stocks. PU is not a grp III base stock oil, rather a mix of different base stocks, as is Amsoil. GTL base stocks actually out perform PAO in several ways. Here's a link to a discussion on it: Group III, PAO and GTL (Group III+) base oils | Interesting Articles | Bob Is The Oil Guy


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

Thanks for the link - good read.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

I personally have been suspect of Valvoline for some years now. 

Andrei knows more about lubricants than anyone else that I know. But what impresses me more is that he's continuing to research and is learning more AND updating his advice and opinions along the way. For me that is a sign of intellectual honesty. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## WhiteAndBright (Mar 4, 2013)

Tomko said:


> Andrei knows more about lubricants than anyone else that I know. But what impresses me more is that he's continuing to research and is learning more AND updating his advice and opinions along the way. For me that is a sign of intellectual honesty.
> 
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


I totally agree!!


This extraordinary insight brought to you from the confines of my iPhone..


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

Any thoughts on Liqui Moly 0w30? I saw my local Napa sells this and I used to get this for my wife's Jetta. LIQUI MOLY - Motor Oils, Additives, Car Care - Products - Synthoil Longtime Plus 0 W-30

If its one thing the Germans know and understand its turbo charged engines!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

giantsnation said:


> Any thoughts on Liqui Moly 0w30? I saw my local Napa sells this and I used to get this for my wife's Jetta. LIQUI MOLY - Motor Oils, Additives, Car Care - Products - Synthoil Longtime Plus 0 W-30
> 
> If its one thing the Germans know and understand its turbo charged engines!


I was only able to find a VOA for the 0W-40, but here's my analysis.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2377569

Artificially high TBN from the use of Magnesium Sulfonate dispersants. I prefer Calcium. Low enough quantity of it to not concern me much though. Decent level of Boron but no Molybdenum. I love seeing Moly, and other oils have it, but at least they put in an effort to include an anti-wear additive.

The spec they provide for 100C viscosity is 9.7, which is very close to the minimum viscosity range for an SAE 30-weight oil. The range is 9.3-12.5. It's only a problem if you happen to get some fuel dilution, which will thin you to a 20-weight more easily. 

I would have liked to see some Moly, but otherwise the oil looks OK to me. Whether or not I would use it depends on the price. The oil is suitable for an OE drain interval.

Sent from mobile.


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

Yea I found that thread as well. So lets classify this as Tier 3. By the way, its very expensive and "wasteful". It comes in 5 liter jugs which is roughly 5.2 quarts. It would be hard to re-purpose that extra.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

Here's a link that shows the real #'s on all major brands, take a look!

March 2013 - Test Results for AP


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

cruze01 said:


> Here's a link that shows the real #'s on all major brands, take a look!
> 
> March 2013 - Test Results for AP


I posted a link to that a couple of pages back. I can't wait for them to perform the testing for 2014. 

Sent from mobile.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I posted a link to that a couple of pages back. I can't wait for them to perform the testing for 2014.
> 
> Sent from mobile.


Sorry, my bad! I must have missed it.....


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

With the recent sale posted on Pennzoil Ultra, I decided to revisit the virgin oil analysis samples. This right here proves that oil makers are changing their formulation. Observe:

VOA taken back in 2010:
Penz Ultra VOA
TBN: 11.7
Boron: 498
Calcium: 3057
100C Viscosity: 9.74

VOA taken by Petroleum Quality Institute of America in 2013:
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
TBN: 9.4 (-20%)
Boron: 152 (-69%)
Calcium: 2,648 (-13%)
100C Viscosity: 10.5 (+8%)

A few variations in the single percentages are normal for additives, but that's just silly. Sounds like another VOA on my part may actually be in order, and this time I won't be picking up the $9 bottle off the shelf.


----------



## blackbowtie (Jul 4, 2013)

Hmmm... Please do. I posted this as I knew you had it listed as a Tier 1 and held it in a somewhat higher regard than most. But if their product quality has slipped drastically, I may reconsider using it. 


Will be watching. opblood:


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> With the recent sale posted on Pennzoil Ultra, I decided to revisit the virgin oil analysis samples. This right here proves that oil makers are changing their formulation. Observe:
> 
> VOA taken back in 2010:
> Penz Ultra VOA
> ...


Andrei, seems the formula was changed circa early 2012 to be more compatible with GF-5/Dexos-1 specs and direct-injection engines. The 2013 test matches Pennzoil's spec sheet.









Lots more discussion in this post:
New Pennzoil ULTRA PDS | Passenger Car Motor Oil (PCMO) - Gasoline Cars/Pickups/Vans/SUVs | Bob Is The Oil Guy


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jblackburn said:


> Andrei, seems the formula was changed circa early 2012 to be more compatible with GF-5/Dexos-1 specs and direct-injection engines. The 2013 test matches Pennzoil's spec sheet.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Last I checked, they are still not dexos1 certified while PP is. The virgin oil viscosity is the least of my concerns. 

I'm not saying it's a bad oil, but I am saying they've changed the formula at least once and not for the better based on the additives and TBN.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

> I'm not saying it's a bad oil, but I am saying they've changed the formula at least once and not for the better based on the additives and TBN.


Whoops, you're right about the D1 certification...my bad.

It's the same oil you referenced in the aforementioned 2013 test above...the same reformulated GF-5 one that has been around and had good UOA's in the past 2 years. Just saying.

Here's an example from an engine known to be hard on oil. At a 7500 mi change, looks pretty good to me...at 2x the recommended Subie interval:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2726793#Post2726793


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jblackburn said:


> It's the same oil you referenced in the aforementioned 2013 test above...the same reformulated GF-5 one that has been around and had good UOA's in the past 2 years. Just saying.
> 
> Here's an example from an engine known to be hard on oil. At a 7500 mi change, looks pretty good to me...at 2x the recommended Subie interval:
> http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2726793#Post2726793


I love how they refer to 7500 miles as a "nice, long oil run." Maybe for those cars. 

I never said it's a bad oil. I had concluded based on analysis that others like Mobil 1 changed base stock formulation for the worse, but this was the first example I researched where there was blatant proof that the oil changed. 

For the record, given typical oil change intervals in European cars, nothing under 10,000 miles impresses me. American oil quality is not my standard to meet.

I look back at those results you linked and wonder what the Blackstone guys are smoking when they write their report comments. For example, they mention TAN "probably isn't too acidic." What? Probably? I don't send my oil in for analysis to get a "probably." This is another blunder to add to the one where they said they saw nothing wrong on a RP sample that sheared to a 20 weight oil. The mounting evidence is that these report comments are worthless. Just another reason I have switched to recommending Oil Analyzers.

A TAN above 2.7 is generally considered too high according to NORIA (a reputable source). A TAN of 5.0 therefore is too high, and that isn't "probably." No wonder subie guys blow through turbos in under 100k miles. 

That oil failed to neutralize acidity effectively in that engine. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## giantsnation (Oct 11, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> For the record, given typical oil change intervals in European cars, nothing under 10,000 miles impresses me. American oil quality is not my standard to meet.
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


Your right about that! My wife's TDI has a 10K mile oil change interval and the dealership won't even touch it if you wanted to do an oil change earlier (granted maintenance is included). I don't even think her car has an OLM.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

giantsnation said:


> Your right about that! My wife's TDI has a 10K mile oil change interval and the dealership won't even touch it if you wanted to do an oil change earlier (granted maintenance is included). I don't even think her car has an OLM.


Toyota does the same thing...they looked at me like I was crazy when I asked to have the factory fill changed earlier (under their free maintenance program).


----------



## blackbowtie (Jul 4, 2013)

So I swung through my local Wally world due to every other auto store being closed for the evening. As I meanders by the motor oil I saw a section of Pennzoil Platinum with **NEW PurePlus™ Technology**. I was unaware that they were going to start advertising this even thought they had actually changed the formula back last summer.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

*Tiered Oils List & Understanding Synthetics*

Somehow the idea of a synthetic oil sourced from natural gas via GTL seems like a non-sequitur to me. 

And I now have an irresistible urge to say: "My name is Nomad."


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## AlainSDL (Jun 13, 2013)

Hi Andrei, 

So I'm getting an oil change at the moment. Double checked and the synthetic oil is Castro Edge. Again, I'm getting free oil changes for the 1st 3 years and I upgrade to the Synthetic. Castro is not on your recommended list. What is your advice?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

AlainSDL said:


> Hi Andrei,
> 
> So I'm getting an oil change at the moment. Double checked and the synthetic oil is Castro Edge. Again, I'm getting free oil changes for the 1st 3 years and I upgrade to the Synthetic. Castro is not on your recommended list. What is your advice?


I didn't like the high magnesium levels. Magnesium is not as effective at neutralizing acidity and gives a false sense of oil performance. Moderate levels of moly and boron are god to see. Not as high as others, but at least they're present. As a result of the high detergent level, the volatility is a bit higher than other options too.

All that said, it's still miles ahead of the GM oil. I'd trust it to run the OLM down to 10%.

I think there was one other issue too that AMSOIL's case study revealed. I'll look into that when I get back home.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

AlainSDL said:


> Hi Andrei,
> 
> So I'm getting an oil change at the moment. Double checked and the synthetic oil is Castro Edge. Again, I'm getting free oil changes for the 1st 3 years and I upgrade to the Synthetic. Castro is not on your recommended list. What is your advice?


Now I remember. Refer to pages 4 and 6. 

http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g3115.pdf

Poor film strength and poor cold viscosity. While the 4-ball wear test is not really intended to be used as a sole metric of oil quality, there are oils on that list that perform admirably across the board, and this isn't one of them.


----------



## AlainSDL (Jun 13, 2013)

Thank you for taking the time to look this up for me. I really appreciate it.

As it now stands I'm changing the oil at about 4,000 to 5,000 miles. Partly because I get them free for 3 years and I have a total of nine free changes. . . so once every 4 months or so. 

My concern, however, is that free isn't worth it if I am actually doing harm to the engine. In fact, short term gain is not worth the long term cost if I end up with a mechanical failure related to the oil used. We are moving into warmer weather now so the cold performance is not an issue right now (although having just gone through the coldest winter I've had in my part of the world. . .) But winter will return. And what of the rest? 

I'm a firm believer that any car can last a long time if it is well maintained. I have a high mileage Dodge Caravan that hasn't experienced any mechanical failures in the 10 years we've had it. I attribute that to faithful maintenance. I want the same from the Cruze.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

AlainSDL said:


> Thank you for taking the time to look this up for me. I really appreciate it.
> 
> As it now stands I'm changing the oil at about 4,000 to 5,000 miles. Partly because I get them free for 3 years and I have a total of nine free changes. . . so once every 4 months or so.
> 
> ...


I do not believe that oil will harm your engine at that mileage or number of changes. It still performs better than the synthetic blend GM put in there. I wouldn't really be concerned with a few oil changes. If you are buying it and changing it yourself, however, there are simply better options out there. I cannot say for certain if the poor film strength will cause an issue long-term as I'd have to see some oil testing analysis, but given the options available, I see no reason to use it. At 4,000-5,000 miles, you'll be perfectly fine. It is VERY rare to have a mechanical failure due to the oil used. It is far more likely to have an oil that breaks down too easily and causes other issues such as excessive piston wear from the oil vaporizing and entering the PCV system, or oil sludging from oxidization or depleted additives. Most engine issues caused by oil are not directly related to the oil. It will be more an issue of gradual wear and contaminant/sludge buildup than catastrophic failure.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

In response to the now deleted posts from a member of BITOG that joined specifically to call me out on the errors of my ways:

I went through and updated the titles that I never did when moving oils around between the tiers. I have decided that labeling which oil is and which oil isn't a group 3/4/5 is rather unimportant. Since PP is so close to QSU, I went ahead and bumped PP up to Tier 1 as well, so some good did come out of that. 

It doesn't matter all that much what "group" the oils are based on. The numbers speak for themselves. I also added a disclaimer to state what should have been a given.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

Any thoughts on the new Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus? It replaces Pennzoil Platinum.


----------



## cruze01 (Mar 25, 2011)

BowtieGuy said:


> Any thoughts on the new Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus? It replaces Pennzoil Platinum.


Just put it in mine... I may send it out for analysis in 6-8k.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> Any thoughts on the new Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus? It replaces Pennzoil Platinum.


I will reserve my comments on it until I see a VOA and some UOAs as well. It will be nice to see some PQI test that oil as well but I don't know when they would get to it.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Quaker State Ultimate Durability has been removed from the list altogether. The reason is that NOACK shot up from 8.8% to 12.3%. 

All oils now have a date behind them and the list is effective only for those years. The new Pennzoil Platinum with PurePlus is now a Tier 2 due to an increase in NOACK volatility. 

The new Pennzoil Platinum Ultra, which replaces Pennzoil Ultra (2013) has a NOACK volatility that shot up from 6.6% to 11.5%. It has been placed in Tier 3. 

This leaves AMSOIL ASL as the only remaining 5W-30 oil to have a NOACK volatility of under 10%, in case anyone in the future wonders why no other oils are Tier 1 oils. 

I encourage anyone to post data about oils that are not yet on the list.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## blackbowtie (Jul 4, 2013)

A couple thoughts just now...

1.)Why do we suppose the NOACK numbers are falling on all these oils in recent months?
2.)Are your NOACK numbers in first post taken from one sample or an average of several samples?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

blackbowtie said:


> A couple thoughts just now...
> 
> 1.)Why do we suppose the NOACK numbers are falling on all these oils in recent months?
> 2.)Are your NOACK numbers in first post taken from one sample or an average of several samples?


1. A shift in base stock and total package formulation. It seems that this time, Shell and it's child companies were affected. 

2. The NOACK volatility numbers are drawn from the PQI America chart. AMSOIL numbers are taken directly from their site and compared to the PQI chart to ensure that they are at least reasonably close enough to meet my requirements. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

The new NOACK rating on Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus is disappointing. Everything else looks better though. Has a PQI done any test on this new formulation yet? Links?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> The new NOACK rating on Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus is disappointing. Everything else looks better though. Has a PQI done any test on this new formulation yet? Links?


The pure plus is actually the one that didn't suffer as much. That one didn't even go up one percentage point. The new platinum ultra was the one that went from 6.6% to 11.5%. 

PQI hasn't done any testing. These oils just barely came out. As soon as they do, I'll be sure to post them, but you can expect about the same NOACK volatility numbers.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Just a heads up. API specification requires 15% or lower NOACK volatility. DEXOS1 specification requires 13% or lower NOACK volatility. 

It should be inferred that GM's DEXOS1 synthetic blend is at at or very close to 13%. This is shared to shed some light on how ridiculous the new QSUD's NOACK volatility is.


----------



## BladeOfAnduril (Apr 27, 2012)

This really bothers me. Pennzoil reformulated the oil and somehow made it worse than it was before? They made the Ultra so much worse that the Platinum is now better? I wish I had stocked up on Ultra before it changed. I've been running it since my car was new. I'm not sure what I'll use now.


----------



## 888 (Jan 14, 2014)

After having read this entire thread while trying to determine the best "local purchase" synthetic oil for my new 1.4 MT Cruze when it comes time to change it first. I was waiting on the Cruze diesel with a manual transmission and cloth seats and gave up waiting, thus the 1.4.

Are we sort of waiting to see the 2014 results of this web site's testing before going much farther than saying the Amsoil is best again? 

March 2013 - Test Results for AP


I was thinking the Pennzoil was a good local purchase option till just reading towards the end that the formulations are subject to change without notice. Also really surprised about the Royal Purple, I've always thought that stuff was really good. 

Interesting discussion on Walmart and oil quality. I've owned TDI's and Cummins 12 valve trucks for quite a while and I always use Rotella T6 5w40 synthetic. It's not easy to find but Tractor Supply and Walmart have it in gallon bottles, there is one of each a half mile apart. TSC has always been in the $26 to $27 range while Walmart was around $20 but has recently gone up to $21. That's a pretty big difference in price and the bottles are marked the same way in each location (no reference to Walmart that I recall seeing) so I have to believe it is the same oil and Walmart is just that much bigger than TSC so they drive down the price they pay for it. 

I've always thought that all the "other" oils were the same between Walmart and anywhere else and they were big enough to drive those differences too. Plus, I was thinking of the complexity of keeping all this Walmart oil segregated throughout the production process would add cost and complexity. 

So I'm looking forward to seeing some testing between Walmart and other samples of the same oil to see what light that sheds on that question.


----------



## Arcticat (Feb 16, 2012)

I don't pretend to understand half of what as been said here, but my questions is simply this. Is regular Mobil 1 in the 5quart jug better then GM dexos1 oil? I will never go over 5000 mile oil changes, and I don't run my 0012 1.4 cruze hard. I get my oil from Meijer's inl Michigan.--Thanks--Mike


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

888 said:


> After having read this entire thread while trying to determine the best "local purchase" synthetic oil for my new 1.4 MT Cruze when it comes time to change it first. I was waiting on the Cruze diesel with a manual transmission and cloth seats and gave up waiting, thus the 1.4.
> 
> Are we sort of waiting to see the 2014 results of this web site's testing before going much farther than saying the Amsoil is best again?
> 
> ...


Don't count on any of the big manufacturers coming out with a n oil that has a 12+ TBN, tons of Moly and Boron, and a sub-8% volatility. AMSOIL signature series is not going to be beat, not when the entire industry is moving toward reducing oil quality. 

Pennzoil changed formulations recently and drove up volatility like crazy. Their Ultra was renamed to Platinum Ultra, with a volatility increase from 6.6% to 11.5%. Used to be awesome, now is worse than Mobil 1. This downward trend has been consistent for the past 10 years. 

Royal Purple is called "shear oil" for a reason. Ever wonder why they came up with their HPS oil in 2011? Think about it for a second. Their standard Royal Purple bottle used to have their synerlec additive package. Now, that is no longer advertised and their HPS bottle has their synerlec additive package. Why did they go from having one oil to having two?

I'll give you a hint, it wasn't to offer people a higher quality oil. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Arcticat said:


> I don't pretend to understand half of what as been said here, but my questions is simply this. Is regular Mobil 1 in the 5quart jug better then GM dexos1 oil? I will never go over 5000 mile oil changes, and I don't run my 0012 1.4 cruze hard. I get my oil from Meijer's inl Michigan.--Thanks--Mike


Yes, Mobil 1 is better than the GM dexos1 oil.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## 888 (Jan 14, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Don't count on any of the big manufacturers coming out with a n oil that has a 12+ TBN, tons of Moly and Boron, and a sub-8% volatility.
> 
> Sent from AutoGuide.com App


Interesting and probably true. When doing some research on dexos 1 synthetic oils, I was surprised to find Schaeffer in there. They make synthetic food grade hydraulic oil used by a customer company in Wisconsin (and nowhere else) for our German built high speed punch presses, I had no idea they even made anything else, certainly not vehicle oils. There were a number of companies I had never heard of on that dexos1 list and on the link above.

Having lived in the diesel 5w40 world for a long time and buying Rotella at Walmart, I noticed a number of "new" oils showing up there. Most recently a Chevron Delo "full synthetic" 5w40 for ~ $19 a gallon. I imagine that's probably not all that great of an oil either, despite the number of certifications it meets on the bottle. I honestly haven't looked because I've been using the T6 so long but it is odd to see these new options showing up in Walmart so cheap. 

Assuming I go with your Amsoil signature 5w30 full synthetic, at what mileage do I start using it? 5k?

Thanks


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

888 said:


> Interesting and probably true. When doing some research on dexos 1 synthetic oils, I was surprised to find Schaeffer in there. They make synthetic food grade hydraulic oil used by a customer company in Wisconsin (and nowhere else) for our German built high speed punch presses, I had no idea they even made anything else, certainly not vehicle oils. There were a number of companies I had never heard of on that dexos1 list and on the link above.
> 
> Having lived in the diesel 5w40 world for a long time and buying Rotella at Walmart, I noticed a number of "new" oils showing up there. Most recently a Chevron Delo "full synthetic" 5w40 for ~ $19 a gallon. I imagine that's probably not all that great of an oil either, despite the number of certifications it meets on the bottle. I honestly haven't looked because I've been using the T6 so long but it is odd to see these new options showing up in Walmart so cheap.
> 
> ...


I changed the OE fluid out at 5500 miles but you can change it whenever. There's really not a point to changing it sooner.

The signature series doesn't really have as much value as the XL unless you are willing to take it to 10k miles or if you're tuned. 

Rotella T6 is a good oil. It has more Zinc than Brad Penn racing oil. Not that you need it in modern engines. The detergents are mostly Mg-based, which I don't prefer for gasoline engines as it won't neutralize acidity as effectively. 

Schaeffer Supreme is one of the good ones. I'd take it over Mobil 1 if you can find it. 

The only reason Mobil 1 isn't high on my list is due to the Mg dispersant levels. TBN drops more slowly so the UOA newbies will drool all over it and herald it as an excellent oil, but Mg is less effective at neutralizing acidity, which is why it doesn't drop as quickly. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## BradSt (May 2, 2013)

Not sure if this has been posted here yet or not. This guy tested lowly M1 5w30 as the highest ranking "street" oil, for film strength. Amsoil 0w30 signature was right behind. 540RAT - Tech Facts, NOT Myths


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BradSt said:


> Not sure if this has been posted here yet or not. This guy tested lowly M1 5w30 as the highest ranking "street" oil, for film strength. Amsoil 0w30 signature was right behind. 540RAT - Tech Facts, NOT Myths


I have a hard time taking someone seriously when they won't even keep all variables the same. If you're going to test oils, at least stick to ONE viscosity, and make the test relevant for modern engines, not flat tappet cam-based engines.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

thats true, the test isnt worth anything if you're comparing apples to oranges


----------



## BradSt (May 2, 2013)

money_man said:


> thats true, the test isnt worth anything if you're comparing apples to oranges


I'm not endorsing the test, but what was the "apples to oranges" portion? They tested a bunch of different brands, viscocities, types, etc. The whole point was to see how various oils performed against one another. This test was to determine film strength only, which isn't only important in flat tappet cams. I'm not going to only use oil that faired well in this test, and disregard oil that didn't, but it is another data set to consider. It appears to be unbiased, unlike oil company tests, that are usually setup in their favor.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

I tried to click on it like 4 times and didn't work on my phone. I read xtremes post and thought they compared 5w30 to 0w30. My apologies


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

Brad, your comment is right on. The only thing this test looked at was film strength. It didn't measure any of the other popular oil parameters like viscosity. For the record, of all the reading I've done on oil lately there's little mention of film strength. Most oil bloggers are concerned with Viscosity Index, NOACK and additive packages.

The only thing that's really debatable is the integrity of the data since it wasn't done in a lab environment. The tester did make a reasonable effort to eliminate variables, but that only goes so far. Without calibrated test equipment to verify forces, temperatures, surface finishes, etc. etc. etc., the validity of the test can surely be questioned.

I've used M1 for years and I'm sure it's a good oil, but I'd be very surprised if it actually compares as well as that test indicates.

The other thing to consider is the relevance of film strength in modern engines. In the days of flat tappet camshafts a high film strength was vital. Today's engines don't place nearly as much importance on film strength which is why many oils have been produced with less. Not to say film strength isn't important, it is, but the "point of diminishing returns" seems to be set much lower with modern engines.


----------



## BradSt (May 2, 2013)

I agree. Obviously, film strength isn't the only important quality of motor oil, but it is still important in areas, other than the valvetrain. As the tester said, just because a tested oil's film strength isn't as high as another's, doesn't necessarily mean it will allow more wear. Truth is, we don't know how much film strength is required, for a given application...at least I don't anyway. Anything over what is required to prevent metal on metal, would technically be overkill. 

As far as oil in my Cruze goes, I'm not really worried about any oil related issues. The engine doesn't get abused, and the oil is changed at regular intervals. M1 0W30 has been my choice in my commuters (Cobalt XFE previously). Neither car has ever consumed a measureable amount of it in 8-10k miles, and everything under the valve cover has been spotless. 

However, I am more concerned how it relates to my LS7 Corvette. GM specifically stated that the engine was designed around M1 5W30, and that they had concerns about the oil's film strength in the rod bearings on this 4" stroke, 7100 rpm engine. This is why they selected Ti connecting rods, vs. steel...less bearing loading, when the rod assembly quickly changes direction. But this isn't a vette forum, so we will stay on topic with our Cruzen. Just wanted to point out that film strength is also important in the bottom end.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

> Just wanted to point out that film strength is also important in the bottom end.


Especially if you accidentally (or intentionally) lug the engine at high throttle and low RPM.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

Yep, good points. Any time the oil "wedge" dynamics are not enough to keep things separated film strength will come into play. Looks like the LS7 application is a good example of designing around that wedge. My good old 6600 RPM LS6 gets by with steel rods. 

Low RPM is interesting, J. I've noticed the Cruze will shut the engine down if you lug it too far. I'm not sure what the cutoff RPM is, but it will cut if trying to be too aggressive with the clutch on takeoff, and this could well be to protect the bearings. Inadequate oil shear in the bearing at low speeds reduces pressure in the wedge.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

jblackburn said:


> Especially if you accidentally (or intentionally) lug the engine at high throttle and low RPM.


Also a reason why I'm a fan of how the boost ramps up slowly in the MT version of the 1.4T, instead of coming in hard and fast like the auto. That combined with the variable displacement oil pump gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

Blue Angel said:


> Yep, good points. Any time the oil "wedge" dynamics are not enough to keep things separated film strength will come into play. Looks like the LS7 application is a good example of designing around that wedge. My good old 6600 RPM LS6 gets by with steel rods.
> 
> Low RPM is interesting, J. I've noticed the Cruze will shut the engine down if you lug it too far. I'm not sure what the cutoff RPM is, but it will cut if trying to be too aggressive with the clutch on takeoff, and this could well be to protect the bearings. Inadequate oil shear in the bearing at low speeds reduces pressure in the wedge.


I've rattled the lower end a few times being a klutz in reverse. I don't know why (ok, I do - it's way different than first), but I always stall the darn thing in reverse. Actually seems a bit easier to rattle it or shake the engine a little bit at real low RPM on the current Pennzoil Ultra 10W-30 than the Mobil-1 5W-30 in there before, but it could just be my imagination too.

Edit: Read this earlier today - it more eloquently explains what I meant...http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/bogging-lugging-how-can-you-tell-when-you-12190-3.html. I think the Cruze is fine to cruise down to 1000 RPM or below, but mine definitely does not like being accelerated below 1200.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

I've rattled mine a couple times too, but it was starting on a hill. Where I used to work I had an afternoon lineup of traffic that went up and over a steep highway overpass. On a busy afternoon I'd have to start from a stop as much as ten times or so, inching my way towards the ramp everyone else wanted to be on as well.

Not wanting to abuse the clutch, I would try to get going with the fewest revs possible. Most times this worked just fine thanks to the Cruze's otherwise too-short 1st gear, but every now and then I'd let the revs drop just a little too far and I'd get a shudder from the engine. Bad. It's a good thing I'm using the highest film strength engine oil known to mankind! Kidding of course...



jblackburn said:


> I think the Cruze is fine to cruise down to 1000 RPM or below, but mine definitely does not like being accelerated below 1200.


What kind of plugs are you using?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

As far as film strength is concerned, I trust shell's 4-ball wear test performed by a testing lab over something someone with a WordPress blog made up on his own.

It is also worth noting that this test alone claims that film strength is the end-all to wear protection. However, that is certainly not true, as viscosity stability at temperature extremes is also just as important. An oil that thins will fail to protect as you lost not only film strength but also oil pressure.

AMSOIL torture tested their 20W-50 motorcycle oil in a Harley with cylinder temperatures reaching 550F. When they removed the filter, the threaded lug slipped out. They melted two sensors and had to replace them. They had to use pyrex beakers because the oil melted their standard sample containers. The oil came out steaming, but the analysis showed that wear metals were extremely low, viscosity was tested as the same as it started out, oxidation was very low, and the oil was suitable for continued use. THAT is wear protection.

Given the oil temperatures in main bearings under severe loads, I'd say there's a **** of a lot more to wear protection than severe extreme pressure film strength testing will reveal. The author of the blog is far too convinced that his test is the only valid metric for telling apart engine wear protection. The temperatures experienced in racing conditions would destroy valvoline VR1, while his test places it pretty high on the list.

Furthermore, his constant use of all caps words every 5-10 words to add emphasis became a tad annoying after a while. 

What also bothered me was that during no point in the very long and overdrawn article did he reveal just how his test was performed. Maybe I haven't read far down enough past the actual reports. 

There's more I wanted to comment on, but those were the ones I remembered. I'll have to review his article again. 

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Updated initial post to include Elf, Motul, Total Quartz, and LiquiMoly products. Added another tier to separate group 3 oils from group 3/4 blends and group 3 oils with robust additive packages. 

On the "understanding synthetics" portion, I wrote an article a few weeks ago as well that would be of benefit to readers of this thread:

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/113-titan-synthetics/87241-case-true-synthetics.html


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

PQI America did some new testing recently on the 2014 "PurePlus" based Pennzoil Platinum. Figured I'd discuss. 

Petroleum Quality Institute of America

This looks pretty much exactly like their previous formulation according to the PQI testing. There is no consequential difference whatsoever. The 0.2% reduction in volatility can be written off as statistical noise. 

I was hoping to see a better additive package, but instead, we still find no Boron, and very little Moly. Aside from that, not bad for a Group 3 oil.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

Odd that PQIA testing of Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus (PPPP) shows essentially the same NOACK of the previous version when Pennzoil's official data sheets on PPPP show a NOACK of 10.1%. Hopefully it's closer to the PQIA test, as the comparatively low NOACK was one of my reasons for choosing it in this application.
http://www.pennzoil.com/wp-content/...0-Full-Synthetic-Motor-Oil-SN-GF-5-en-TDS.pdf

As a side note, since updating your list, what would you consider a "low" volatility?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> Odd that PQIA testing of Pennzoil Platinum Pure Plus (PPPP) shows essentially the same NOACK of the previous version when Pennzoil's official data sheets on PPPP show a NOACK of 10.1%. Hopefully it's closer to the PQIA test, as the comparatively low NOACK was one of my reasons for choosing it in this application.
> http://www.pennzoil.com/wp-content/...0-Full-Synthetic-Motor-Oil-SN-GF-5-en-TDS.pdf
> 
> As a side note, since updating your list, what would you consider a "low" volatility?


I would consider a low volatility in the range of 5-7% with a few exceptions such as racing oils.

Bear in mind that volatility is only one metric. I reviewed the differences between petroleum-based group 3 oils and true synthetics in an article I wrote in my vendor section on "The Case for True Synthetics." One of the ways that PP achieves its low volatility is by compromising on additives. There is no Boron, and very little Molybdenum.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

In all honesty, I don't know nearly enough about engine oil to make any informed arguments. But does compromising on additives such as Boron and Molybdenum make a difference at the typical oil change intervals for the Cruze? Outside of Amsoil and Motul, most of the oils on the list I have never heard of before.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> In all honesty, I don't know nearly enough about engine oil to make any informed arguments. But does compromising on additives such as Boron and Molybdenum make a difference at the typical oil change intervals for the Cruze? Outside of Amsoil and Motul, most of the oils on the list I have never heard of before.


Boron is an anti-wear/anti-friction additive. This has the net effect of reducing heat and improving fuel economy. Although the difference is likely to be very small, over the course of 8000 miles, even a 1% improvement puts more money back in your wallet. Boron is used by many companies for this purpose. 

Molybdenum is an extreme pressure protection additive that embeds itself into the pores and crevices of metal to create a strong boundary layer to prevent metal on metal contact. It has wear-reducing benefits, and a good number of group 3 oils contain it in some quantity.

The OE Dexos1 oil contains both in moderate quantities. Neither of these additives affect drain intervals. Drain intervals are affected by:

Total base number, which represents the total acidity neutralizing ability of the oil
Oxidation, which represents how far the oil has reacted to oxygen. Oxidation leads to sludge.
Total acidity, which represents how acidic the oil has become. This is a function of the TBN in addition to the type of detergents/dispersants used to raise the TBN level of the oil. 

It is curious that Blackstone doesn't test for oxidation, however, as that is certainly relevant. Oxidation causes an increase in viscosity leading up to full blown sludge.


----------



## Daryl (Nov 10, 2013)

Does the Amsoil contain a good healthy amount of Boron, and Molybdenum? I tend to think it would.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Daryl said:


> Does the Amsoil contain a good healthy amount of Boron, and Molybdenum? I tend to think it would.


According to the PQI America testing, yes. Both OE and Signature Series contain lots of it. 

http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/Marchsyntheticsallfinal.html

http://www.pqiamerica.com/2012 April results/Amsoil.htm


----------



## Daryl (Nov 10, 2013)

Nice! Looks like I made a good decision then.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

I've made a few more additions to the Tier 1 list.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Redline 5w-30 has been moved back to the Tier 1 list. 

Those of you who have been following along noticed I condemned it a while ago due to high oxidation levels in AMSOIL's testing. I recently discovered that this oxidation is a cause of the heavy concentration of Ester base oil, and that even a virgin oil sample will report high oxidation levels. As a result, I have returned it to a highly recommended oil, noted for racing applications.

Specific to this application, I've moved M1 EP to the Tier 4 list. Oil analysis has shown it to provide adequate performance within our OEM drain intervals. I've moved a few more oils into the Tier 4 list as well, and removed the "not recommended" section.


----------



## rcclockman (Jan 16, 2012)

Was at Pepboys tonight and noticed that Penzoil now has a Ultra 5w30 Dexos Approved right next to the Regular UltraPlatium, the new Ultra is in a completely different Bottle...Is this a new Formula? or is it still worse than Platinum? I still cant over how the Ultra is now worse than the Platinum and costs more....! Glad I stocked up on 15 quarts of the original Ultra a year ago...


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

rcclockman said:


> Was at Pepboys tonight and noticed that Penzoil now has a Ultra 5w30 Dexos Approved right next to the Regular UltraPlatium, the new Ultra is in a completely different Bottle...Is this a new Formula? or is it still worse than Platinum? I still cant over how the Ultra is now worse than the Platinum and costs more....! Glad I stocked up on 15 quarts of the original Ultra a year ago...


It is worse in some ways, better in others. Worse in that volatility went up, better in that I'm sure the additives are differnet. It is however a lot worse than it was prior to 2014. Old news now. You'll go through those 15 quarts sooner than you think. 

In other news, I added a neat oil I just found out about to the Tier 1 list. Can anyone guess what it is and why?


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

I'll bite... is it the Xado Atomic 0W30? Because PAO + Ester?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Blue Angel said:


> I'll bite... is it the Xado Atomic 0W30? Because PAO + Ester?


Indeed! And a respectably high TBN.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

Any user data/feedback or UOAs?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Blue Angel said:


> Any user data/feedback or UOAs?


Got some feedback from a couple of guys in another group that said it holds up to some incredible abuse. At $15.95 a liter, I would hope so too.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> At $15.95 a liter, I would hope so too.


Ha, yeah for anyone in the US used to paying reasonable prices for oil that must be severe sticker shock! Up here that would be considered a "small premium".


----------



## AZ007 (Sep 26, 2014)

I was just reading this guy's oil blog. It's pretty interesting. He ranks AMSOIL SS 0w30 at #12, Mobil1 5W30 at #10. This is all based on film strength. 5W30 AC Delco is way down at #90. I will be upgrading to Mobil1 for my next oil change.

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/

It was interesting to see some conventional oils place so highly. The other oil that I was considering, Castrol Magnatec, didn't do so hot (#100). Granted, this test doesn't really capture its claim to fame, but I still probably won't use it. Royal Purple generally did poorly.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

AZ007 said:


> I was just reading this guy's oil blog. It's pretty interesting. He ranks AMSOIL SS 0w30 at #12, Mobil1 5W30 at #10. This is all based on film strength. 5W30 AC Delco is way down at #90. I will be upgrading to Mobil1 for my next oil change.
> 
> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
> 
> It was interesting to see some conventional oils place so highly. The other oil that I was considering, Castrol Magnatec, didn't do so hot (#100). Granted, this test doesn't really capture its claim to fame, but I still probably won't use it. Royal Purple generally did poorly.


He makes the fatal error of assuming that film strength is remotely relevant to modern engines. It takes last place after oxidation stability, volatility, shear stability, acidity neutralizing, and traction coefficient, which are FAR more important to modern engines. He is stuck in 1985 mentality.


----------



## Beelzebubba (Apr 3, 2015)

Back to the Wal Mart issue:

The used oil analysis on 5W20 Mobil Super 5000 in the 5 qt jug from WalMart was right where it was supposed to be. (not to worry....it was in my Mazda's MZI/Duratec30) 

Same product.

So at least one ExxonMobil product is good there. Didn't do a UOA for SOPUS 

1 out of 3 people in the US visit a WalMart at least once a week. WalMart doesn't just buy a truckload. They buy entire trainloads, and like you mentioned, WalMart squeezes the margins of their suppliers pretty hard. Plus, I am sure they are buying huge amounts of bulk for their service centers and to maintain their fleet.


----------



## ace2123 (Jan 17, 2015)

AZ007 said:


> I was just reading this guy's oil blog. It's pretty interesting. He ranks AMSOIL SS 0w30 at #12, Mobil1 5W30 at #10. This is all based on film strength. 5W30 AC Delco is way down at #90. I will be upgrading to Mobil1 for my next oil change.
> 
> https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
> 
> It was interesting to see some conventional oils place so highly. The other oil that I was considering, Castrol Magnatec, didn't do so hot (#100). Granted, this test doesn't really capture its claim to fame, but I still probably won't use it. Royal Purple generally did poorly.


You'll also notice that almost all of the ones above Amsoil and Mobil have an additive added to them for the test. Plus the Mobil only beat it by a negligible amount.


----------



## Hood Star (Sep 24, 2014)

I asked this question in the wrong thread but this one seems to be it.
I use 0w30 amsoil as reading threads and and hearing about how turbos work. Is 0w30 better for turbo or 5w40.
Apparently I read that the 5w40 will reduce and mind of noise for the engine.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Hood Star said:


> I asked this question in the wrong thread but this one seems to be it.
> I use 0w30 amsoil as reading threads and and hearing about how turbos work. Is 0w30 better for turbo or 5w40.
> Apparently I read that the 5w40 will reduce and mind of noise for the engine.


Both will be fine if the oil is good enough to handle the heat without causing coking deposits to form. 

I would stick with 0W-30 as that will flow more oil, which will provide more cooling.


----------



## Blue Angel (Feb 18, 2011)

ace2123 said:


> You'll also notice that almost all of the ones above Amsoil and Mobil have an additive added to them for the test.


Putting additives into fully formulated engine oils is a bad thing to do, unless you just happen to be an oil formulator by trade and know what you're doing.

About the only exception to this would be if you're adding something as a cleaner to the oil and plan to flush it almost immediately.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Blue Angel said:


> Putting additives into fully formulated engine oils is a bad thing to do, unless you just happen to be an oil formulator by trade and know what you're doing.
> 
> About the only exception to this would be if you're adding something as a cleaner to the oil and plan to flush it almost immediately.


Yup, I used to put additives in. Then I actually did some research and realized I probably shouldn't mess with it


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Can't tell you many people are still stuck in the mentality that they need "oil stabilizer" to prevent "dry starts" and "keep high viscosity."


----------



## AZ007 (Sep 26, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> He makes the fatal error of assuming that film strength is remotely relevant to modern engines. It takes last place after oxidation stability, volatility, shear stability, acidity neutralizing, and traction coefficient, which are FAR more important to modern engines. He is stuck in 1985 mentality.


Can you explain further?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

AZ007 said:


> Can you explain further?


Back in the early 80s and before that, we had engines with flat tappet cams. What would happen is you'd have a cam lobe that acted as a lever. That lobe, when turned, would press down on a bucket, or tappet (which would be upside down), and push the valve down. Because this was a solid cam lobe against a solid tappet, there would need to be a clearance between the two when the valve would be at its rest position, which was referred to as valve lash. They'd look something like this:










What would happen is that every time that cam lobe would hit the flat tappet, it would break the oil film and you'd get a bit of wear. High levels of ZDDP would prevent such wear from occurring and allow you to run your engine without wearing down your camshaft lobes. The impact of that cam lobe hitting the flat tappet is what we'd call an extreme pressure scenario. 

For the last 30+ years, we've been using something called a roller cam. In this scenario, we have a lifter with a roller on the end that constantly rides against the camshaft. The gap is always closed by hydraulic oil pressure through the lifter. 










Since there is constant pressure, there is never an "impact," and therefore, there are no extreme pressure conditions existing. The main and crank bearings rely on hydrodynamic lubrication, and also don't have any extreme pressure conditions. 

Therefore, of what benefit is it for us to test for extreme pressure film strength, when none of our engines will ever experience conditions that place the oil under extreme pressure? What would be more important to test? 

Oxodation stability - the oil's ability to resist oxidizing (reacting to oxygen), which causes the oil to leave deposits around the engine. We sometimes refer to this as sludge. The oil's ability to resist oxidation over time or during extreme heat is far more important. 

Volatility - the oil's ability to resist vaporizing under heat. This contributes to oil consumption, which contributes to valve deposits, which contributes to poor valve seals and eventual burned valves. This also contributes to piston and combustion chamber deposits, which contributes to the development of hot spots, which causes knock and detonation. This is far more important. 

Shear stability is the oil's ability to maintain viscosity throughout the duration of its service life and during high heat conditions. At 150C, can the oil maintain at least a 3.0 HTHS? At 7,500 miles, will the oil be at least as thick as it was when it went in? This is far more important. 

Acidity neutralizing is the oil's ability to neutralize acidity from byproducts of the combustion cycle, which contaminate oil and cause it to darken. High levels of acidity cause accelerated soft metal (bearing wear). This is far more important. 

Traction coefficient is the oil's ability to reduce friction and parasitic loss. Not all oils are created equal, and some base oils exhibit exceptional friction reducing properties. While this is usually mostly seen in gear oils, there are some mild benefits to engine oils as well. 

That particular article is a disservice to the automotive community as it assumes that film strength is not only of critical importance, but implies that it is the most important of all. In reality, none of our engines will ever see any conditions that would be representative of the test he made, which is why I called it a fatal error. This self-proclaimed expert/specialist is stuck in the mentality that has been obsolete for over 30 years.


----------



## tdc (Jan 24, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> This thread contains a tiered oils recommendation list for the Cruze.
> (list of tiers of oils)
> 
> Oh, man, I guess that means that 'Mobil 1 5W-30 Dexos approved' I use is the lowest tier oil. (I though it was ok). Thanks for posting this list. tonyd\.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

tdc said:


> XtremeRevolution said:
> 
> 
> > This thread contains a tiered oils recommendation list for the Cruze.
> ...


----------



## ExtremePower (Sep 13, 2014)

Hey Xtreme, what oil weight and brand would you recommend in a 14 LS 1.8 6MT during the summer days. Average around 25C and have hit a few times now 35-38C? I run AMSOIL in my tranny and was going to run AMSOIL all around but I thought I might as well see what everyone else likes in their Cruze's for the summer! Thanks!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

WarDevil161 said:


> Hey Xtreme, what oil weight and brand would you recommend in a 14 LS 1.8 6MT during the summer days. Average around 25C and have hit a few times now 35-38C? I run AMSOIL in my tranny and was going to run AMSOIL all around but I thought I might as well see what everyone else likes in their Cruze's for the summer! Thanks!


Just run the signature series 5w-30. No need to run anything else.


----------



## ExtremePower (Sep 13, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Just run the signature series 5w-30. No need to run anything else.



Awesome! Sounds good! I haven't had any problems with AMSOIL yet!


----------

