When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
but additives in your common dino oil are not the same as additives in the better synthetics. Plus, some synthetics require little to no VI improvers, while dino base stocks still rely on those to meet the multi grade viscosity.
So? Ultimately, it is how the oil performs. With the right add pack, if dino performs as well as syn but at a lower cost, why pay more?
Please read the original question before you post.
I did read the original post, but also read the follow up comments which you must have missed in your haste to post a comment that added nothing to the conversation other than to say something derogatory. And if you cannot afford synthetic, that is fine. I use it in MN, and would also use it in TX.
If I need to go a bit longer in my oil change interval because I do not have time to stop and change oil, I can relax. The Synthetic oil has a longer life-span, it also makes less wear and tear upon initial startup. If it's better in cold weather on the initial start, it's also better in warm weather. That is where most of the engine cylinder wall wear is.
Originally Posted by jschira
There is an interesting statement in "National Oil & Gas News", an industrial newsletter, about the new gas motor SN+ certification: https://noln.net/2018/04/01/on-the-c...-gf-6-and-more. So the argument of paying more for syn over dino just got weaker..
SN+ is not even available yet.
So, we have API SN+ on the cusp. We have GF-6 still undecided and at least two years away, and we have SAE XW-16 not yet in the marketplace — but will be soon. There’s a lot of activity in new viscosities and specifications, and no signs of slowing down.
Originally Posted by No.15
I think there is very little difference in the protection of dino and most syns on the market right now.
Here is a 9-1/2 page long list of oils that Ford has tested (or at least reviewed) and are approved by Ford for use in the Powerstroke.
So Ford has tested these oils and say that all of them meet Ford's specs for wear, oxidation, soot, etc. According to Ford, all of these oil will get a Powerstroke to its tested duty cycle (currently 250,000 to 350,000 miles).
Why should I care about chemistry? People a lot smarter than me test oils and engines all day, 5 days a week. They formulate and test oils. They formulate and publish performance standards. So after years of research, they tell me Brand X is good to go, why should I not believe them?
And I know, everyone is going to keep their trucks "forever" so they want the best. But the reality is that the number of people who keep their trucks more than 15 years is in the low single digit percentage.
So for the very vast majority of the truck owners out there, spending more than necessary on oil is a "feel good" exercise rather than a longevity enhancement.
But if it makes you feel good, then it makes you feel good.
Here is a 9-1/2 page long list of oils that Ford has tested (or at least reviewed) and are approved by Ford for use in the Powerstroke.
So Ford has tested these oils and say that all of them meet Ford's specs for wear, oxidation, soot, etc. According to Ford, all of these oil will get a Powerstroke to its tested duty cycle (currently 250,000 to 350,000 miles).
Why should I care about chemistry?
Why should I care what you care about? Use what you want.