Which Oil

[jehartley]

Originally Posted by nova

Oh yeah, I'm naive for actually reading the performance spec.

Dexos1 requires a NOACK high temp volatility rating of <13. It also has a really low tolerance for oxidation. Those were the main requirements underlying 4718M. In all areas, Dexos1 requirements are at least as stringent as 4718M and in some case more so.

The only base stock that can reach those levels of performance is high quality Group III and Group IV, in other words, the same types of base stock used in oils like Pennzoil Platinum and Mobil 1.

There is a marketing aspect to Dexos1 with the "official licensing" but at the base it is STILL a performance specification and if an oil meets the performance spec, it meets the performance spec.

BTW, wanna venture a guess as to who makes that "terrible semi-synthetic" for GM?

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_artic....cfm?x=b11,0,w

Betcha $$$ the base stock is not much different than the rest of Mobils oils....

That's all fine and good, but Virgin Oil Analysis show the truth. You look at the VOA's of oils before the dexos spec, and then you go and look at a VOA of one now that has changed to meet the spec: Weak Sauce. Period.

[midnighter]

I used Royal Purple in my Ram 1500 Hemi. On the Camaro I had them use Mobile 1. Both good oils.

[nova]

Originally Posted by jehartley

That's all fine and good, but Virgin Oil Analysis show the truth. You look at the VOA's of oils before the dexos spec, and then you go and look at a VOA of one now that has changed to meet the spec: Weak Sauce. Period.

VOAs? So you're concerned about the composition of the additive packages? I guess whatever you wanna focus on instead of performance is your business so don't let me dissuade you.

I will never understand people who care more about WHAT something is made out of rather than how it performs in measurable metrics, which is what actually matters.

[jehartley]

Originally Posted by nova

VOAs? So you're concerned about the composition of the additive packages? I guess whatever you wanna focus on instead of performance is your business so don't let me dissuade you.

I will never understand people who care more about WHAT something is made out of rather than how it performs in measurable metrics, which is what actually matters.

I mention the VOA because it shows at the start how weak they are, but you are more than welcome to look at the lastest UOA's also which show the actual performance over at BITOG. Guess what? They suck. Comparatively speaking of course, compared to pre-dexos.

I think you just don't want to accept the truth. The VOA's show they are weak from the beginning, and the UOA's coming in show that they perform weaker as well. Facts are facts.

[NavyDood]

Originally Posted by nova

VOAs? So you're concerned about the composition of the additive packages? I guess whatever you wanna focus on instead of performance is your business so don't let me dissuade you.

I will never understand people who care more about WHAT something is made out of rather than how it performs in measurable metrics, which is what actually matters.

Actually yes. Base oil is just that, the base. It could be hydrocracked dino (Group III), PAO (Group IV) or Ester (Group V). A group III has the similarities of a true synthetic but it is still dino oil where groups IV and V are chemically engineered. The additives are what gives the oil it's capabilities and longevity. Some additives that are being used in Group III oils now have a splash of PAO or Ester. The biggest reason for this is to get the cold pour point at a lower level than what a Group III can give you. Depending on the strength of the additives, those additives will determine how the oil will hold up from breaking down, keep contaminates in suspension, maintaining viscosity, reduce acids and reduce moisture. Those are just a few of the things the additive packages do for the oil.

[pdesanctis]

Originally Posted by NavyDood

Actually yes. Base oil is just that, the base. It could be hydrocracked dino (Group III), PAO (Group IV) or Ester (Group V). A group III has the similarities of a true synthetic but it is still dino oil where groups IV and V are chemically engineered. The additives are what gives the oil it's capabilities and longevity. Some additives that are being used in Group III oils now have a splash of PAO or Ester. The biggest reason for this is to get the cold pour point at a lower level than what a Group III can give you. Depending on the strength of the additives, those additives will determine how the oil will hold up from breaking down, keep contaminates in suspension, maintaining viscosity, reduce acids and reduce moisture. Those are just a few of the things the additive packages do for the oil.

You must be on Bobistheoilguy often

as am I.

[IrocJack]

Originally Posted by NavyDood

Seriously hope there is a ton of sarcasm in your post. Lucas is no better than any off the shelf oil at Wally World. Mobil 1 and Fram in the same sentence? Seriously?

What's wrong with a Fram filter? I have used them on my vehicles forever, 2002 Silverado with 247,000 miles on it.

[NavyDood]

Originally Posted by pdesanctis

You must be on Bobistheoilguy often

as am I.

Actually not much. I do scope around every now and then, but I'm not a regular. Most of what I have learned is from owning my Dodge/Cummins. A diesel will test what an oil is capable of much more than what a gas engine can, even with the differences in additives. Base stock makes up something like 75% of the bottled oil and the rest is additives.

[Car_Almond]

Originally Posted by NavyDood

The rating on the WIX is nominal. Nominal is nice to know, but the absolute rating is what is important. Nominal is what the filter will filter at 50% of the time. Absolute is what the filter will filter at 98.7% of the time. That WIX filter has a nominal rating of 21um which would make the absolute rating around 35um. That would make it a smidge better than the AC Delco. AC Delco ratings are 25um nominal and 40um absolute. WIX is good at playing the marketing game and so are other companies. They only publish the nominal rating because it is the lower number. For the average person they think they are getting a top notch filter when all they are really getting is an average filter. Some of WIX’s fuel filters only have a nominal rating; they don’t even publish an absolute number. Stay far away in that case.

Then there is a little unknown company called Baldwin. The Baldwin filter for our Camaro SS is the Baldwin B160. In general, all Baldwin filters are in the 10-15um range nominal and 20-30um range absolute. This would be a much better filter than the WIX or AC Delco. They can be bought online for as little as $4.35 a piece.

This leads me back to the Amsoil EA oil filter. The correct Amsoil oil filter for the Camaro SS is the Ea15K50. Amsoil doesn’t even bother posting nominal ratings since they have little meaning. The absolute ratings are 100% at 20um, 98.7% at 15um, and up to 70% at 7um.

Here’s another piece of info. Normal wear particles in your oil are sub-micron and pass right through the filter. Not even a bypass filter will remove them.

Although I rambled on, just about any filter will do you just fine. It all comes down to the individual and what makes them feel good.

The smaller the hard silica or metal grit you get out of the oil, the better for reducing wear. Only the MicroGreenFilter.com can get out junk down to as low as 2 microns. (Uses a parallel path internal to filter, one path gets out 30 micron stuff, the other path gets out 2 micron stuff multi-pass.) All the discussions on this thread don't mention anything better.

[mailclerk]

I don't get too involved into the argument about which is the best oil anymore. Just use Mobil 1 synthetic or any synthetic that meets the Dexos requirements!

Durango