Mobil 1 5W-20
#121
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:23:46 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Are they using identical engines? If not, you can't make a direct
>>>comparison. What other variables are there? To draw any conclusion, you
>>>have to control the test parameters and only change one variable at a
>>>time. That's the basis of the scientific method.
>>
>>Actually, that isn't the basis of the scientific method, at least not
>>for sophisticated scientists. In many "real world" situations, this
>>simply isn't possible, yet much science is still accomplished. Look up
>>Taguchi for more information.
>
>
>
> You can do controlled, high-precision tests on few parts, or take the
> empirical route with many samples.
Testing/experimentation IS the empirical route! Look up the meaning of
empirical...
> If it were me, I would test it on a fleet of 200 identical cars. 100 with,
> 100 without synthetic oil. After 100K miles, tear them all down and measure
> all ID's and OD's. Average them up, and there you have a valid test. Even
> with that many samples, you may not get a statistically significant
> variation between oil types.
I'd do something similar, but I'd run at least 200K miles and preferably
longer. Almost anything will last 100K these days and I'm not even
intested in engines that won't go at least 200K!
You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
the data.
This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
Matt
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:23:46 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Are they using identical engines? If not, you can't make a direct
>>>comparison. What other variables are there? To draw any conclusion, you
>>>have to control the test parameters and only change one variable at a
>>>time. That's the basis of the scientific method.
>>
>>Actually, that isn't the basis of the scientific method, at least not
>>for sophisticated scientists. In many "real world" situations, this
>>simply isn't possible, yet much science is still accomplished. Look up
>>Taguchi for more information.
>
>
>
> You can do controlled, high-precision tests on few parts, or take the
> empirical route with many samples.
Testing/experimentation IS the empirical route! Look up the meaning of
empirical...
> If it were me, I would test it on a fleet of 200 identical cars. 100 with,
> 100 without synthetic oil. After 100K miles, tear them all down and measure
> all ID's and OD's. Average them up, and there you have a valid test. Even
> with that many samples, you may not get a statistically significant
> variation between oil types.
I'd do something similar, but I'd run at least 200K miles and preferably
longer. Almost anything will last 100K these days and I'm not even
intested in engines that won't go at least 200K!
You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
the data.
This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
Matt
#122
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
#123
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
#124
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
>
>> You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>> me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>> unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>
>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>
>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
>> Gah! You can have that cold weather man!
>
>I don't mind it for the most part, but as I approach 50 it is getting a
>little less fun each year. Then again, there is nothing like sitting in
>front of a wood fire with a cup of hot chocolate or coffee in hand,
>reading a good book, and watching the big snow flakes come down. It
>doesn't get much better than that!
Ya, I miss that part.
Here in Louisiana, I have no excuse for not being out working.
--
Bob
#125
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:15:38 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
#126
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:15:38 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
#127
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:15:38 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
>You'd also have to put extensive data recorders on each car to find out
>the driving conditions each experienced so you could try to normalize
>the data.
>
>This would be a great experiment. When do you plan to start it? :-)
No, I'm afraid my quality assurance days are over. And I'm glad of it! :-)
--
Bob
#128
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:05:06 -0500, "Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
#129
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:05:06 -0500, "Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
#130
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:05:06 -0500, "Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
wrote:
>Super Tech oil is packaged by Warren Oil. They do not add or delete anything
>from the oil that they repackage. I've been using Super Tech synthetic in my
>vehicle for several years with no problems, and I called them to find out
>what kind it was. They said it's made by specialty oil which is Pennzoil, or
>Quaker State - they are the same, just different bottles.
>http://www.wd-wpp.com/index.html
>
>Just type super tech in the product name box http://msds.walmartstores.com/
Ah! So I WAS right!
--
Bob
#131
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
#132
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
#133
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:12:37 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>You could arrange tests on a fleet of rental cars for chump change. Believe
>>>me, there have been many tests. If the results were impressive and
>>>unambiguous, they would post them on the Goodyear Blimp!
>>
>>But you then have no idea what driving conditions each car is seeing,
>>unless you heavily instrument each car. Again, this wouldn't be cheap.
>> And you'd have to ensure that none of the rental customers ever added
>>a quart of oil as that would contaminate your test.
>>
>>The closest I've seen to this was a test that Consumer Reports ran with
>>a fleet of taxis many years ago.
>
>
>
> With a sample size of 200, all conditions average out.
Not necessarily. And it would be hard to cover the full range of
driving conditions encountered in the USA with only 100 cars with each
type of oil. However, let me know when you plan to start the test and
I'll drive one of the cars for you ... no charge! :-)
Matt
#134
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Bob Adkins wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:09:52 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Can you point me to these tests. I've never seen the off-brand
>>>> SuperTech tested anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> I'm coming in late here, but last I heard, SuperTech is re-labeled
>>> Penzoil/Quaker State, in turn made by Shell. I suppose that would
>>> quickly
>>> change if Wal-Mart would get a better contract from Texaco, BP,
>>> Exxon-Mobil,
>>> etc.
>>
>> Actually, SuperTech comes from Warren Oil, a large blending company
>> that produces oils for many labels. I didn't realize how the industry
>> worked until I checked into SuperTech oils. Many of the oils on the
>> market are not blended by the companies that sell them. Companies like
>> Warren buy base stocks from refiners (like Shell), blend in an
>> additive package and resell them to companies that put their label on
>> them. SuperTech is effectively "generic" oil, in that it comes from
>> the same source and is likely identical to some name brands, but it's
>> sold cheaper since it's not advertized and doesn't pass through as
>> many hands in the supply chain. It may well be indentical to Pennzoil
>> and/or Quaker State.
>
>
> The oil MAY be identical, but it may not be. Even worse is that it may
> vary widely from lot to lot as often the oil is whatever is available at
> the lowest price at a given time. All crude oils aren't created equal.
It comes from ONE source and it's blended to a standard specification.
The lab test I saw indicated that it was comparable to other synthetic
oils on the market. Your comments are just idle speculation with no
basis in fact. Fear mongering doesn't help anyone.
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Bob Adkins wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:09:52 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Can you point me to these tests. I've never seen the off-brand
>>>> SuperTech tested anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> I'm coming in late here, but last I heard, SuperTech is re-labeled
>>> Penzoil/Quaker State, in turn made by Shell. I suppose that would
>>> quickly
>>> change if Wal-Mart would get a better contract from Texaco, BP,
>>> Exxon-Mobil,
>>> etc.
>>
>> Actually, SuperTech comes from Warren Oil, a large blending company
>> that produces oils for many labels. I didn't realize how the industry
>> worked until I checked into SuperTech oils. Many of the oils on the
>> market are not blended by the companies that sell them. Companies like
>> Warren buy base stocks from refiners (like Shell), blend in an
>> additive package and resell them to companies that put their label on
>> them. SuperTech is effectively "generic" oil, in that it comes from
>> the same source and is likely identical to some name brands, but it's
>> sold cheaper since it's not advertized and doesn't pass through as
>> many hands in the supply chain. It may well be indentical to Pennzoil
>> and/or Quaker State.
>
>
> The oil MAY be identical, but it may not be. Even worse is that it may
> vary widely from lot to lot as often the oil is whatever is available at
> the lowest price at a given time. All crude oils aren't created equal.
It comes from ONE source and it's blended to a standard specification.
The lab test I saw indicated that it was comparable to other synthetic
oils on the market. Your comments are just idle speculation with no
basis in fact. Fear mongering doesn't help anyone.
#135
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Mobil 1 5W-20
Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Bob Adkins wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:09:52 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Can you point me to these tests. I've never seen the off-brand
>>>> SuperTech tested anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> I'm coming in late here, but last I heard, SuperTech is re-labeled
>>> Penzoil/Quaker State, in turn made by Shell. I suppose that would
>>> quickly
>>> change if Wal-Mart would get a better contract from Texaco, BP,
>>> Exxon-Mobil,
>>> etc.
>>
>> Actually, SuperTech comes from Warren Oil, a large blending company
>> that produces oils for many labels. I didn't realize how the industry
>> worked until I checked into SuperTech oils. Many of the oils on the
>> market are not blended by the companies that sell them. Companies like
>> Warren buy base stocks from refiners (like Shell), blend in an
>> additive package and resell them to companies that put their label on
>> them. SuperTech is effectively "generic" oil, in that it comes from
>> the same source and is likely identical to some name brands, but it's
>> sold cheaper since it's not advertized and doesn't pass through as
>> many hands in the supply chain. It may well be indentical to Pennzoil
>> and/or Quaker State.
>
>
> The oil MAY be identical, but it may not be. Even worse is that it may
> vary widely from lot to lot as often the oil is whatever is available at
> the lowest price at a given time. All crude oils aren't created equal.
It comes from ONE source and it's blended to a standard specification.
The lab test I saw indicated that it was comparable to other synthetic
oils on the market. Your comments are just idle speculation with no
basis in fact. Fear mongering doesn't help anyone.
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Bob Adkins wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:09:52 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Can you point me to these tests. I've never seen the off-brand
>>>> SuperTech tested anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> I'm coming in late here, but last I heard, SuperTech is re-labeled
>>> Penzoil/Quaker State, in turn made by Shell. I suppose that would
>>> quickly
>>> change if Wal-Mart would get a better contract from Texaco, BP,
>>> Exxon-Mobil,
>>> etc.
>>
>> Actually, SuperTech comes from Warren Oil, a large blending company
>> that produces oils for many labels. I didn't realize how the industry
>> worked until I checked into SuperTech oils. Many of the oils on the
>> market are not blended by the companies that sell them. Companies like
>> Warren buy base stocks from refiners (like Shell), blend in an
>> additive package and resell them to companies that put their label on
>> them. SuperTech is effectively "generic" oil, in that it comes from
>> the same source and is likely identical to some name brands, but it's
>> sold cheaper since it's not advertized and doesn't pass through as
>> many hands in the supply chain. It may well be indentical to Pennzoil
>> and/or Quaker State.
>
>
> The oil MAY be identical, but it may not be. Even worse is that it may
> vary widely from lot to lot as often the oil is whatever is available at
> the lowest price at a given time. All crude oils aren't created equal.
It comes from ONE source and it's blended to a standard specification.
The lab test I saw indicated that it was comparable to other synthetic
oils on the market. Your comments are just idle speculation with no
basis in fact. Fear mongering doesn't help anyone.