Your Next Air Filter?

With many choices of automotive air filters on the market today it can sometimes become daunting for the consumer to select a filter that represents the best protection and flow characteristics for their dollar.

But why do we really need to be concerned about air filtration in the first place?  The answer is quite simple.  It's been said that many of the contaminates found in a vehicles motor oil gets there through the air filtration system. It's also been commonly held by lubricant experts that dirt is the number one cause of premature engine failure. With this in mind, it should be of high importance to research air filters and determine what the differences are and if anything can be gained by using one type of air filter over another.

In this thread, we will mainly focus on three popular types of air filters available today; paper - otherwise known as cellulose, wet gauze, and nanofiber.

Air Filter Construction

Paper: Cellulose media

Wet Gauze: Cotton media with wire screen reinforcement

Nanofiber: Glass media and wire screen reinforcement depending on application

The Paper Filter

The paper air filter is the most universally used air filter available on the market today and has been standard issue on cars and trucks since the early 1960s .  A paper filter filters and flows relatively well, are cost effective, and are found at every auto parts store.  The down side to paper is that they have to be replaced as much as every 3-months or 12,000-miles whichever comes first. 

The Wet Gauze Filter

The wet gauze filter has been available for over 35-years and has become a popular choice among automotive and power sport enthusiasts.  This style of air filter is marketed as a better flowing alternative to paper air filters and are commonly thought to increase a vehicles horsepower.  Some manufactures back these filters with a million mile limited warranty and recommend filter cleaning every 30,000-to-50,000-miles.  These filters are serviceable with a recommended cleaning and oil  tackifier reapplication kit which are purchased additionally to the filter.  Some find that a downside to these filters are the additional cost of a cleaning and re-oiling kit.

The Nanofiber Filter

While products containing  microfibers have been available since the 1950s, the ultra-fine nanofiber technology didn't become available to the commercial market until 1981 by the Donaldson Company, Inc.  Nano or Nano-technology refers to extremely small technology at the nano-meter scale.  A nanometer is equal to one billionth of a meter.  Donalson Company, Inc,. produces both stock replacement paper type air filters and their patented Ultra-Web and Synteq air and oil filters which utilize the nanofiber technology the company perfected.  These top grade nanofiber filtration products have benefited such industries as transportation, construction, agriculture, mining, military and gas turbine.  Up until recently, nanofiber technology was not widely available to the automotive market until Amsoil, Inc. gained exclusive licensing rights in 2004 to utilize Donaldson's proprietary nanofiber technology marketing both motor oil and air filtration products under their Ea filter line.

Watch Your Next Air Filter In Action

Click on image to enlarge - Cited: Donaldson Company, Inc. 

M1 Abrams tank with pulse-jet air cleaner and Donaldson Nanofiber filter system for filtration of the turbine combustion air.

Article: Donaldson Company Selected to Develop Filtration System for U.S. Army Abrams-Crusader Common Engine Program - link

Paper and Wet Gauze now have a tough new competitor to contend with after the introduction new Amsoil/Donaldson agreement.  Availability of nanofiber air filters to the automotive market is now a reality.

 

AMSOIL Ea Air Filter media removes 5 times more dust than traditional cellulose filters and 50 times more dust than wet gauze. Cited: Amsoil, Inc. 

Amsoil, Inc., produce air filters utilizing Donaldson Nanofiber media for a wide verity of domestic and foreign cars and light trucks.

AMSOIL Ea Stock Replacment Air Filters

AMSOIL Ea Universal Air Induction Filters

 Amsoil Ea Induction Filter/K&N Cross Referance - Click on image to enlarge

AMSOIL Carbureted Racing Filters

Amsoil Racing Filter specifications and photos - pdf. link

AMSOIL/Injen Cold Air Intake Kits

Image: Injen/Acura Cold Air Intake (CAI) 

"During the 2007 SEMA show an official announcement was made launching the Co/Branded Injen/AMSOIL Power-Flow Diesel air intake systems.

Injen Technology and AMSOIL Inc. officially signed an agreement to cooperatively brand an all new diesel air intake system. Both Injen Technology and AMSOIL are established leaders within the performance industry and are known for innovation, quality and high performance products. These two highly acclaimed and successful companies came together and Co/Branded an advanced line of performance air intake systems called Diesel Power-Flow.

Representatives from both Injen and AMSOIL announced during the SEMA show, that the Power-Flow system is the only air intake system that incorporates an all new patent pending Injen Variable Induction Technology and an AMSOIL dry media Ea Nano-Fiber absolute efficiency air filter

Some of the top features and benefits will include:

Vi Technology (variable induction) will provide additional airflow and power on demand based upon the draw of the engine. There are four internal and totally independent valves designed to open and allow more air for those crucial moments when that extra power is required; passing, towing, climbing hills or track and off road racing.

AMSOIL Ea Nano-Fiber absolute efficiency custom designed air filter will filter out the finer dirt and dust particles up to 99.53% efficiency. For Diesel engines the Ea –filter removes 5 times more dust then traditional (paper) filter media and 50 times more dust then a wet gauze air filter. Injen Dyno tests show equivalent gains in horse power and torque. Incorporating the dry media allows for a simple cleaning by using a standard shop Vac.

Stainless steel pre-filters which will deflect the larger dirt particles commonly associated with immediate loss of air flow and power.

For added styling, proper air flow and that macho look, an all cast aluminum tube is included

You can anticipate seeing significant Co/Branding efforts to launch this powerful partnership in a wide variety of media and marketing materials along with a significant amount of race events, trade and consumer shows. The Injen/AMSOIL Diesel Power-Flow air intake systems will be available through all AMSOIL Dealers, most major automotive aftermarket retailers and wholesale distributors.

Injen/AMSOIL; The beginning of a New Era!" - Cited: Injen Technology

To select the correct Amsoil Ea Air Filter product for your vehicle, contact Anthony Garner via e-mail:  compsyn@live.com

Below, the comments of Certified Lubrication Specialist, George Morrison regarding air filtration.

Introduction: The late George Morrison, was a Certified Lubrication Specialist by the Society of Trobologists and Lubrication Engineers as well as the founder and CEO of AV Lubricants, one of the largest Exxon/Mobil distributors in the United States. During his 35 years in the lubricant industry, He worked with such industries as Aviation and Coal Mining assisting with their specific lubricant needs in which hundreds of Used Oil Analysis reports went through his hands a week. As a result, Mr. Morrison was an expert in lubricant and lubricant filtration.

Quotes by Mr. Morrison:

"From a lube engineer's perspective that looks at a hundred or so oil analysis results a day, I would highly recommend you or anyone running a K&N or other aftermarket air filter do an engine oil analysis to determine that the filter is indeed doing its job. I can easily spot a K&N equipped vehicle oil analysis results as in 90% of cases the filter keeps out bricks and birds very effectively but little else. The #1 cause of reduced engine life is dirt. The #1 engine oil alert I look at is dirt. One teaspoon of dirt will destroy a large V-16 CAT engine.. i.e. we need to make sure we have the best filter media, tightest induction system possible to ensure maximum engine life. If you look at a K&N filter you can see through the medium very easily. Supposedly the 'tackifier' grabs the incoming dirt particles. Visualize a dirt particle approaching the filter medium at 100+ MPH: there is NO oil, no tackifier that is going to reach out and capture that particle. Filter face impact velocity is just too great." Cited: George Morrison - link

"Regarding the "easy 10 hp increase", I would be wary of the claim. A recent VW TDI dyno day revealed that the highest horsepower developed at the rear wheels was for a TDI equipped a paper, OEM equipped VW vs. the foam/paper/K&N, snorkled VW's." Cited: George Morrison - link

"If you have single digit silicon and low wear metals with your oil analysis results, you are about as good as it gets! That is a general target for dirt: i.e. single digits. If you have this with spectro, you have excellent air filtration with no induction leaks. As for recommendations, I suggest name brand/OEM paper. If a person wants to try another, do an oil analysis with quality paper, then another oil analysis, with particle count, for the aftermarket. This will give a complete picture of exactly how the aftermarket is doing." Cited: George Morrison - link

Summary: As stated above, Used Oil Analysis is the real world test which proves OR disproves the as advertised filter efficiency claims.

Below, a picture of a K&N brand wet gauze type air filter.  If you click on the image to enlarge, look closely and notice the small pin holes of light in the cotton gauze filter media:

Click on the image to enlarge

Below, a picture of an Amsoil Ea Air filter, a optional replacement of the K&N wet gauze filter as shown above.  Note the solid construction of the nanofiber media.  
 

Click on the image to enlarge

Additional Reading 

Technical Paper: CUMMINS - DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH DUST CAPACITY, HIGH EFFICIENCY ENGINE AIR FILTER WITH NANOFIBERS


Technical Paper: Donaldson Company Selected to Develop Filtration System for U.S. Army Abrams-Crusader Common Engine Program - link

Blog Post: Air and Oil Filters With Nanofiber Technology - link

Manufacturer & Dealer Information

Donaldson Company, Inc., headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota., is a leading worldwide provider of filtration systems and replacement parts. Founded in 1915, Donaldson is a technology-driven company committed to satisfying customer needs for filtration solutions through innovative research and development. Our 10,000 employees contribute to the company's success at over 30 manufacturing locations around the world. Donaldson is a member of the S&P MidCap 400 Index and Donaldson shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DCI.



AMSOIL INC., headquartered in Superior, Wisconsin., is a recognized leader in synthetic lubricant and filtration products since 1972 producing the first 100% synthetic motor oil to be recognized by the American Petroleum Institute (API).



For more information about AMSOIL synthetic lubricants and performance filtration products contact Anthony Garner at Competition Synthetics.  Anthony is an Amsoil T-1 Certified Independent Dealer.  E-mail Anthony at compsyn@live.com, or visit http://competitionsynthetics.com

Really! How Good Are Amsoil Oil Filters?

As we have seen previously in this blog, the charts, graphs and marketing data supplied by Amsoil, Inc., the Amsoil Absolute Efficiency Oil Filter is compelling, but how does it really perform in a real world environment? And is there any data or tests independent of Amsoil that support their claims? Read on and be the judge!

Introduction: The late George Morrison, was a Certified Lubrication Specialist by the Society of Trobologists and Lubrication Engineers as well as the founder and CEO of AV Lubricants, one of the largest Exxon/Mobil distributors in the United States. During his 35 years in the lubricant industry, He worked with such industries as Aviation and Coal Mining assisting with their specific lubricant needs in which hundreds of Used Oil Analysis reports went through his hands a week. As a result, Mr. Morrison was an expert in lubricant and lubricant filtration.

While the accomplishments of his career are highly notable, his enthusiasm and devotion to the lubricants industry was further demonstrated through his regular posts at a popular motor oil forum, Bob Is The Oil Guy. There, Mr. Morrison supplied valuable motor oil and filter information most of which were based off of his personal experience and testing.

Provided below are Mr. Morrison’s findings regarding the filtering efficiency of the Amsoil Absoilute Effecentcy oil filter. Again, Mr. Morrison was in the business of selling Exxon/Mobil products, so he had no financial gain by reporting his findings of the Amsoil filter.

The Summary: Amsoil Nanofiber oil filters versus traditional paper oil filters:

1) Removes up to 93% more contaminates
2) Lower pressure drop across filter surface
3) Lasts 2 to 4 times longer
4) Filter media does not freeze in cold weather
5) Proven to increase equipment life

Seem to good to be true? Below, the in depth analysis of Mr. Morrison’s oil filter test.

1) The Test Vehicle: 2001 Toyota Sequoia 4.7L V8
2) The Motor Oil: Mobil 1 Racing 0W-30
3) Oil Filter Test (1): Toyota #90915-YZZB5
4) Oil Filter Test (2): Amsoil #EaO57

Laboratory tests were conducted on the used oil samples taken from Mr. Morrison's Sequoia via spectrographic as well as particle count through both laser and pore blockage methods.

Spectrographic Analysis

(Image provided by Polaris Laboratories)

Spectrographic Analysis ASTM D5185 Description:

Elemental Analysis by ICP (inductively-coupled plasma) detects up to 24 metals, measuring less than 5μ in size, that can be present in used oil due to wear, contamination or additives. Wear Metals include iron, chromium, nickel, aluminum, copper, lead, tin, cadmium, silver, titanium and vanadium. Contaminant Metals include silicon, sodium, and potassium. Multi-Source Metals include molybdenum, antimony, manganese, and lithium. Additive Metals include boron magnesium, calcium, barium, phosphorous and zinc. Elemental Analysis is instrumental in determining the type and severity of wear occurring within a unit. (Cited: Polaris Laboratories)

Pore Blockage Particle Counting

Pore Blockage (Image provided by Machinery Lubrication)

Pore Blockage Particle Counting (BS3406) Description:

The pore blockage method is a widely used method of obtaining an automatic particle count. In this method, a volume of fluid is passed through a mesh screen with a clearly defined pore size, commonly 10 microns. There are two instrument-types that use this method. One instrument measures the flow decay across the membrane as it becomes plugged while pressure is held constant, first with particles greater than 10 microns, and later by smaller particles as the larger particles plug the screen. The second measures the rise in differential pressure across the screen while the flow rate is held constant as it becomes plugged with particles. Both instruments are tied to a software algorithm, which turns the time-dependent flow decay or pressure rise into an ISO cleanliness rating according to ISO 4406:99.

While pore block particle counters do not suffer the same problems as optical particle counters with respect to false positive caused by air, water, dark fluid, etc., they do not have the same dynamic range as an optical particle counter, and because the particle size distribution is roughly estimated, are dependent on the accuracy of the algorithm to accurately report ISO fluid cleanliness codes according to ISO 4406:99. Nevertheless, they accurately report the aggregate concentration of particulates in the oil, and in certain situations, particularly dark fluids such as diesel engine oils and other heavily contaminated oils, pore block particle counting does offer advantages. (Cited: George Morrison)

Laser Light Particle Counting

(Image provided by Noria)

Laser Light Particle Counting Description:

Automated light blockage particle counting technology was first introduced in the 1960s. The basic function of a light blockage APC is simple; a beam of light is projected through the sample fluid, if a particle blocks the light, it results in a measurable energy drop that is roughly the proportional to the size of the particle.
A more modern type of particle counter is the light scattering APC. As with the light blockage method, particles produce a measurable interference in the transmission of light through the sample in the light scattering cell. However, instead of simple white light, this method employs a laser. The highly focused light emitted is interrupted by a particle, producing a scattering effect. The increase in energy across the sampling area is measured with this type of particle counter, just the opposite of the light blockage method. (Cited: Noria)

Oil Filter Test Sequence

1) 1/17/07: At 155,876 total vehicle miles (10,000-miles on oil/filter), got spectrographic and Pore Blockage base line of Toyota Oil filter and Mobil 1 oil. Then changed oil and oil filter. The ISO cleanliness for this base line reading was 20/19/17 , a level consistent with previous ISO readings for the oil and filter at the 10k Oil Change interval as noted by Mr. Morrison.

2) 2/5/07: At 157,550 total vehicle miles (1,574-miles on oil/filter), got second spectrographic and Pore Blockage result of Toyota Oil filter and Mobil 1 oil. Then changed the oil filter only from the Toyota to the Amsoil. The ISO cleanliness level for the second reading with OEM filter was 18/17/15.

3) 2/27/07: At 159,000 total vehicle miles (3,124-miles on oil/ 1,550-miles on filter), got third spectrographic and Pore Blockage result of Amsoil Oil filter and Mobil 1 oil. The ISO cleanliness level for the third reading with Amsoil filter was 14/13/11. Keep in mind the Amsoil filter was exposed to 3,124-miles of oil service while the the Toyota filter was exposed to 1,574-miles of oil service; a ratio of 2-to-1.

4) 2/28/07: The third spectrographic and Pore Blockage results were so good that the sample was retested with a Laser Particle Count to verify the initial test results. After test results were verified and both pore blockage and laser particle counts were found to be consistent with each other, the real world Amsoil EaO Oil Filter Test Results were posted on Bob Is The Oil Guy as follows:

OEM oil filter PC vs. Amsoil EaO57 Oil filter PC
>4 Microns = 1,817 particles, 128 particles
>6 microns = 990 particles, 70 particles
>14 microns = 168 particles, 12 particles
>25 microns = 34 particles, 2 particles
>50 microns = 3 particles, 0 particles
>100 microns = 0 particles, 0 particles

George Morrison; a few of his comments regarding Amsoil EaO Oil Filter:

"The ISO cleanliness is reduced from 18/17/15 to 14/13/11 with the Amsoil EaO oil filter." Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(2/28/07)

"This level of cleanliness *will* provide meaningful, long term wear reduction and attendant increase in component life" Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(2/28/07)

"My used engine oil is cleaner than the oil which came out of the quart bottle" Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(2/28/07)

"The EaO is simply the highest quality automotive filter on the market today, from my testing and experience" Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(3/1/07)

"I had seen Amsoils graphs, etc. but there is nothing quite like real world testing, especially when it comes to filtration. A lab test of constant flow, perfect conditions is far removed from our vibrating, pulsing, real world engines.. Again, to achieve robotic level ISO cleanliness in an engine with 160,000 miles on it... Wow......" Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy (3/4/07)

"The last AC Gold I cut open had a cellulose/glass blend, same as the Mobil 1 medium...... That is the only medium I have seen produced for mass sale: no full synthetics, as in the Amsoil EaO, to the best of my knowledge and cut filters too numerous to mention! :-) And yes, had run particle counts on AC Gold and they were not in the same world as the EaO oil filter....."Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy (3/6/07)

"Yes, I did test the EaO oil filter under varying pressure conditions: on my Toyota Sequoia used oil analysis/particle count which I published the results on this thread some months ago. The EaO turned in "real world" filtration performance (not laboratory constant flow) to a level of cleanliness cleaner than the Mobil 1 coming out of the bottle!!

And I would also agree that the Amsoil EaO, Mobil 1 and Pure One are superb filters with the EaO superior in every performance aspect simply due to its 100% microglass medium construction vs. the glass/cellulose blend used in the Mobil 1 and Pure 1 filters." Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy (2/28/08)

"The major component was the extraordinary filtering capabilities of the Amsoil EaO filter vs. "the rest".. For those of us who indeed understand the long term life extension of incredibly clean engine oil, the use of the EaO is of great value.. When I can use an oil filter which provides cleaner used engine oil than the oil coming out of the bottle AND understand the premise that the #1 cause of mechanical wear are dirt/particulates carried in the oil, it is your essential "no brainer".. That coupled with significant engine oil drain interval extension is a win/win..

And then, to each his own.. The information was presented was for someone to make the informed decision of whether to go orange or utilize the highest level of filtration.."Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(4/28/08)

"(NOT an Amsoil dealer ever, nor now: no affiliation)"Cited: Bob Is The Oil Guy(3/4/07)

In Memory: George Edward Morrison 1944 - 2008
He is missed

See also:

Link - A Look Inside Your Next Oil Filter

Link - AMSOIL Introduces Donaldson Endurance Air and Oil Filters with Nanofiber Technology

Link - Superior Filtration Leads to Reduced Costs, Extended Equipment Life



For more information about AMSOIL synthetic lubricants and performance filtration products contact Anthony Garner at Competition Synthetics. Anthony is an Amsoil T-1 Certified Independent Dealer. E-mail Anthony at compsyn@live.com, or visit http://competitionsynthetics.com

3,000-Mile Oil Change Comes Under Fire

Do you hold the view that it is important to change your vehicles motor oil every 3,000-miles?

Read on and consider how the antiquated 3000-mile oil change recommendation is based on old technology and is outdated by many of today’s standards.

Compiled below is information provided by General Motors, California Integrated Waste Management Board, and Amsoil, Inc.

The standard 3,000-mile oil change interval is under attack. Promoted for years by most motor oil companies and quick lube businesses as an essential part of proper vehicle maintenance, the public has become much more skeptical in recent years. In fact, searches for “3,000 mile oil change” in top Internet search engines such as Google and Yahoo! primarily yield articles and blog postings that challenge the practice and refer to it as a “scam” or “myth.”

Note: The video below is helpful in the debate because it demonstrates how it is impossible to tell when motor oil needs to be changed based on the color of the oil alone.



AMSOIL synthetic motor oil was introduced in 1972 as the only motor oil on the market recommended for 25,000-mile/one year drain intervals, and the company has spent much of the last 37 years as the lone voice promoting the benefits of extended drain intervals. However, AMSOIL has recently welcomed an increasing number of companies and organizations to the party. Although they still don’t recommend drain intervals as long as AMSOIL recommendations, the momentum is growing.

Vehicle manufacturers have mostly recommended oil change intervals exceeding 3,000 miles in recent years. In fact, most recommend intervals of 5,000 miles or more. Ford Motor Company recommends drain intervals of 7,500 miles in its model year 2007 and newer vehicles, while other manufacturers incorporate oil monitoring systems in their newer vehicles that allow motorists to extend drain intervals even further.

In its December 2006 issue, Consumer Reports encourages drivers to follow the longer oil change recommendations of vehicle manufacturers, saying, “Although oil companies and quick-lube shops like to promote this idea [that engine oil should be changed every 3,000 miles], it's usually not necessary. Go by the recommended oil-change schedule in your vehicle's owner's manual. Most vehicles driven under normal conditions can go 7,500 miles or more between oil changes. Some models now come with a monitoring system that alerts the driver when the oil needs changing. Depending on driving conditions, these can extend change intervals to 10,000 or 15,000 miles.”

Steve Ritter, senior editor of Chemical & Engineering News, writes, “Conventional wisdom has held that the oil should be changed about every 3,000 miles. This notion has been ingrained into people's heads for decades, in part as a marketing ploy by oil companies. The 3,000-mile interval made sense when engines used single-grade nondetergent oils. But with the latest oils and car designs, it's no longer necessary to change oil that often under normal driving conditions.”

Concerned about the effects of used oil on the environment and responding to research that indicates 73 percent of California drivers change motor oil more often than their vehicle’s manufacturer recommends, the California Environmental Protection Agency and its Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) have emerged as another strong opponent of the 3,000-mile oil change. The group recently launched a public information program and website (www.3000milemyth.org) designed to “bust the 3,000-mile myth” and encourage drivers to reduce used oil volume by following the longer oil drain recommendations of vehicle manufacturers.

“Used motor oil poses a great risk to the environment,” said CIWMB Chair Margo Reid Brown. “With better made cars and the rise of synthetic oils, the 3,000-mile standard is not always recommended.”

Most recently, General Motors announced its support of the CIWMB program to educate drivers about oil change intervals. According to GM, standard 3,000-mile oil change recommendations are based on outdated engine and oil technology, and the company instead recommends changing oil based on its Oil Life System. Currently included on over 97 percent of all GM vehicles sold in the U.S., the GM Oil Life System typically allows drivers to extend drain intervals up to 10,000 miles through use of a computer-based software algorhythm that measures vehicle operating conditions. With 31 million vehicles on the road equipped with the Oil Life System, GM spokesman Tom Henderson claims following its recommendations rather than the 3,000-mile rule could save 100 million gallons of oil annually.



In addition to the environmental benefits associated with less waste oil, extended drain intervals save consumers money. For example, customers who purchase conventional oil at $3 or more per quart, drive 25,000 miles per year and follow 3,000-mile oil change recommendations spend at least $120 per year on oil alone (assuming a five-quart sump capacity). AMSOIL customers who pay $9.15 per quart under the same conditions pay only $61.75 per year.

“When it comes to oil changes, less is more,” claims the CIWMB. “You’ll have more money in your wallet by changing your oil less, and fewer oil changes mean less oil that needs to be safely managed and recycled.”

Premium AMSOIL synthetic motor oils offer the longest drain intervals on the market, unsurpassed protection and performance that effectively extends equipment life and improved fuel economy, saving customers money at the pump and reducing the nation’s dependence on foreign oil.

Work Cited: https://www.amsoil.com/news/2008_aug_3000mileoilchange.pdf

See also: Lube Report, GM, California to Bust '3,000 Mile Myth', Nancy DeMarco, Volume 8, Issue 24, Wednesday, June 11 2008

Yahoo Autos: The 3,000 Mile Oil Change Myth

Amsoil Dealer info:


For more information about AMSOIL synthetic lubricants and performance filtration products contact Anthony Garner at Competition Synthetics. Anthony is an Amsoil T-1 Certified Independent Dealer. E-mail Anthony at compsyn@live.com, or visit http://competitionsynthetics.com

A Look Inside Your Next Oil Filter

A look inside popular motor oil filters. Do you have the best protection and value for your engine?

Note that all filters listed below serve the same application.

Oil Filters Made by Purolator: Bosch, Motorcraft, Mopar, PowerFlo, ProLine, Purolator Premium Plus, Purolator Pure One, Quaker State, MicroGard

Retail Price for Purolator Premium Plus #L14670: $3.99 Auto Zone(1/30/07)


Retail Price for Mopar #MO-090: $4.97 Wal-Mart(1/30/07)


Retail Price for MicroGard #GL14670: $3.48 O"Reilly Auto Parts (10/19/09)

Oil Filters made by Honeywell: Fram Extra Guard, Fram Tough Guard, Fram Double Guard, Fram High Mileage, Pennzoil, Quaker State.

Retail Price for Fram Extra Guard #PH16: $3.99 O"Reilly Auto Parts (10/19/09)

Manufacturer recommended change interval: 5,000-miles


Retail Price for Fram Tough Guard #TG16: $6.29 Auto Zone (1/30/07)

Manufacturer recommended change interval: 7,500-miles

Oil Filters made by WIX: Carquest, NAPA, WIX

Retail Price for WIX #51085: $5.69 O"Reilly Auto Parts (10/19/09)

Oil Filters made byChampion labs: AC Delco, Car and Driver, Champ, Deutsch, STP, K&N, Mobil 1, Royal Purple

Retail Price for Bosch #3402: $5.99 Auto Zone (1/30/07)


Retail Price for STP #S16: $3.19 Auto Zone (1/30/07)


Retail Price for Mobil 1 #M1-204: $12.99 O"Reilly Auto Parts (10/19/09)

Oil Filters made by AMSOIL: Amsoil EaO

Retail Price for Amsoil EAO42: $18.10 Amsoil.com (10/19/09)

Amsoil EAO 42 Service Life

AMSOIL Ea Oil Filters are guaranteed for 25,000 miles or one year, whichever comes first, when used in conjunction with AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oil. AMSOIL recommends changing the oil filter at the time of oil change.

If used in conjunction with AMSOIL Motor Oil that is being changed at intervals less than 25,000 miles, the EaO Filter should be changed at the same time. AMSOIL EaO Filters are not guaranteed for 25,000 miles when used with any oil other than AMSOIL Motor Oil and should be changed according to vehicle OEM recommendations.

For more on Amsoil EaO oil filters click on the links below:

Superior Filtration Leads to Reduced Costs, Extended Equipment Life

AMSOIL Introduces Donaldson Endurance Air and Oil Filters with Nanofiber Technology



For more information about AMSOIL synthetic lubricants and performance filtration products contact Anthony Garner at Competition Synthetics. Anthony is an Amsoil T-1 Certified Independent Dealer. E-mail Anthony at compsyn@live.com, or visit http://competitionsynthetics.com

The YouTube videos posted here are produced by YouTube user ckermit8, who is not affiliated with Your Next Oil Change or Competition Synthetics

Synthetic Lubricants

By Tom Schaefer


For most products, the word “Synthetic” is often a negative term, implying cheap, imitation, or artificial - just not up to the “real thing”. In the world of lubrication, however, just the opposite is true. Synthetic lubricants by virtually all measures are distinctly superior to their petroleum counterparts. And while they may be more expensive to buy, their cost saving performance benefits make them less expensive to use. In this market, Synthetic clearly means Premium.


Some definitions

Defining the term “synthetic lubricant” is becoming more controversial these days, but in general it refers to a lubricant or grease whose basestock has been manufactured by chemical synthesis or organic reaction, as opposed to being extracted or refined from naturally occurring oils. In many respects synthetics represent a different approach altogether from conventional petroleum based oils in that their molecular structures are custom designed and tailored to meet specific performance targets. To appreciate this concept better, we need to understand something about the composition of lubricants and how they work.

Most lubricants consist of a basestock and various additives selected to improve or supplement the basestocks’ performance. The basestock is the primary component, usually 70 to 99% of the finished oil or grease, and its properties play a vital role. To a great degree the structure and stability of the basestock dictate the flow characteristics of the oil and the temperature range in which it can operate, as well as many other vital properties such as volatility, lubricity, and cleanliness. Additives enhance these properties or impart new ones, such as improving stability at both high and low temperatures, modifying the flow properties, and reducing wear, friction, rust and corrosion. The basestocks and additives work together and must be carefully selected and balanced to allow the finished oil to do its intended job, which includes protecting moving parts from wear, removing heat and dirt, preventing rust and corrosion, and improving energy efficiency. Since the basestock is the dominate component with the most important role, one obvious way to make a better oil is to start with a better basestock. That is exactly what synthetic oils endeavor to accomplish.

Conventional petroleum basestocks or mineral oils begin with crude oil, a mixture of literally hundreds of different molecules derived from the decomposition of prehistoric plant and animal life. The lighter more volatile components of crude oil are stripped away to make gasoline and other fuels, and the heaviest components are used in asphalt and tar. It’s the middle cuts that have the right thickness or viscosity for lubricants, but first they must be cleaned up; undesirable components such as waxes, unsaturated hydrocarbons, and nitrogen and sulfur compounds must be removed. Modern processing techniques do a pretty good job of removing these undesirable components, good enough for well over 90% of the world’s lubricant applications, but they cannot remove all of the bad actors. And it’s these residual “weak links” that limit the capabilities of mineral oils, usually by triggering breakdown reactions at high temperatures or freezing up when cold. These inherent weaknesses limit the temperature range in which mineral oils can be used and shorten the useful life of the finished lubricant.


Synthetic basestocks, on the other hand, start from relatively pure and simple chemical building blocks which are then reacted together or synthesized into new, larger molecules. The resulting synthetic basestock consists only of the pre-selected molecules and has no undesirable weak links that inhibit performance. This ability to pre-select or design specific ideal molecules tailored for a given job, and then create those molecules and only those molecules, opens a whole new world for making superior basestocks for lubricants. In fact, the entire formulation approach is different: instead of trying to clean up a naturally occurring chemical soup to acceptable levels with a constant eye on cost, the synthetic molecular engineer is able to focus on optimum performance in a specific application with the knowledge that he can build the necessary molecules to achieve it. Since synthetics cost considerably more than petroleum based basestocks, they are generally reserved for problem applications where conventional oils fail, or where the efficiency benefits of synthetics recoup the initial cost.

A bit of history

The use of synthetic basestocks to solve lubrication problems is not new. Various synthetics were developed and used extensively during the second world war to prevent the oil from freezing in the army tanks during winter combat. After the war, synthetics were found to be essential for the new jet engines which ran too hot for mineral oils, causing them to burn off rapidly and leave deposits. These jet engines also had to be able to restart at high altitudes where temperatures were often -50°F, so the oil had to be pumpable at very low temperatures as well as surviving the searing temperatures within the engine. Indeed the modern jet engine would not exist today if not for the simultaneous development of synthetic basestock technology in the 1950s, and today virtually every jet engine in the world operates exclusively on synthetic lubricants.

During the 1960s and 70s, synthetics moved steadily into severe industrial applications where they solved high temperature deposit problems with air compressors and oven conveyor chains, and low temperature flow problems in arctic climates. New synthetic chemistries emerged to meet and match every problem industrial users could create, and there were many! Gradually these expensive high-tech synthetic lubricants were entering the mainstream and taken seriously as they proved their ability to save money through reduced downtime, less maintenance costs, extended equipment life, lower energy consumption, and higher productivity. Focus shifted to the total cost of lubrication, not just the cost of the lubricant, and synthetics were often the winners.

Synthetic automobile motor oils were introduced in the early 1970s with such fantastic performance claims that they initially turned the auto manufacturers and oil companies against the new unproven products. While most claims were directionally valid, the level of improvements were often exaggerated to the point of fostering a “snake oil” reputation. Over the ensuing years, the true benefits of synthetic motor oils were identified and quantified to industry satisfaction and include better high temperature stability, improved low temperature flow characteristics, lower volatility, increased fuel efficiency, and extended life capability. Today car manufacturers and oil companies alike readily acknowledge the superior performance of synthetic motor and gear oils, especially in fleet or severe duty usage. For the average car owner, however, driving conditions are mild enough for conventional mineral oils to work satisfactorily, which raises the question of whether synthetic benefits are really needed for passenger cars and worth the higher price tag. In most cases the combined improvements will repay the higher initial cost, especially in severe duty applications, but since these improvements are not readily perceived by the driver, market penetration remains only a few percent after more than thirty-five years of active marketing. Synthetic motor oil usage will likely accelerate in future years as engine builders exploit the benefits in new engine design and ratchet up oil performance through tighter specifications.

In summary

Today the use of synthetic lubricants is accepted, widespread, and rapidly growing as their capability and cost efficiency benefits become better known worldwide. Jet aircraft use synthetic oils in the engines, hydraulic systems, instruments and landing gears; compressors use synthetics in the crankcase and cylinders; refrigeration systems use synthetics with the new environmentally friendly refrigerants; truck fleets use synthetics in the engine, transmission, and gear box; and the list goes on and on. Wherever a problem exists with mineral oils or a potential for improved cost efficiency uncovered, there is a synthetic lubricant ready and able to step in and lower the cost of total lubrication.

ESTERS IN SYNTHETIC LUBRICANTS

By Tom Schaefer

In the simplest terms, esters can be defined as the reaction products of acids and alcohols. Thousands of different kinds of esters are commercially produced for a broad range of applications. Within the realm of synthetic lubrication, a relatively small but still substantial family of esters have been found to be very useful in severe environment applications. This paper shall provide a general overview of the more common esters used in synthetic lubricants and discuss their important benefits and utilities.

Esters have been used successfully in lubrication for more than 60 years and are the preferred stock in many severe applications where their benefits solve problems or bring value. For example, esters have been used exclusively in jet engine lubricants worldwide for over 50 years due to their unique combination of low temperature flowability with clean high temperature operation. Esters are also the preferred stock in the new synthetic refrigeration lubricants used with CFC replacement refrigerants. Here the combination of branching and polarity make the esters miscible with the HFC refrigerants and improves both low and high temperature performance characteristics. In automotive applications, the first qualified synthetic crankcase motor oils were based entirely on ester formulations and these products were quite successful when properly formulated. Esters have given way to PAOs in this application due to PAOs lower cost and their formulating similarities to mineral oil. Nevertheless, esters are often used in combination with PAOs in full synthetic motor oils in order to balance the effect on seals, solubilize additives, reduce volatility, and improve energy efficiency through higher lubricity. The percentage of ester used can vary anywhere from 5 to 25% depending upon the desired properties and the type of ester employed.

The new frontier for esters is the industrial marketplace where the number of products, applications, and operating conditions is enormous. In many cases, the very same equipment which operates satisfactorily on mineral oil in one plant could benefit greatly from the use of an ester lubricant in another plant where the equipment is operated under more severe conditions. This is a marketplace where old problems or new challenges can arise at any time or any location. The high performance properties and custom design versatility of esters is ideally suited to solve these problems. Ester lubricants have already captured certain niches in the industrial market such as reciprocating air compressors and high temperature industrial oven chain lubricants. When one focuses on temperature extremes and their telltale signs such as smoking and deposits, the potential applications for the problem solving ester lubricants are
virtually endless.


Ester Chemistry

In many ways esters are very similar to the more commonly known and used synthetic hydrocarbons or PAOs. Like PAOs, esters are synthesized from relatively pure and simple starting materials to produce predetermined molecular structures designed specifically for high performance lubrication. Both types of synthetic basestocks are primarily branched hydrocarbons which are thermally stable, have high viscosity indices, and lack the undesirable and unstable impurities found in conventional petroleum based oils. The primary structural difference between esters and PAOs is the presence of multiple ester linkages (COOR) in esters which impart polarity to the molecules. This polarity affects the way esters behave as lubricants in the following ways:

1) Volatility: The polarity of the ester molecules causes them to be attracted to one another and this intermolecular attraction requires more energy (heat) for the esters to transfer from a liquid to a gaseous state. Therefore, at a given molecular weight or viscosity, the esters will exhibit a lower vapor pressure which translates into a higher flash point and a lower rate of evaporation for the lubricant. Generally speaking, the more ester linkages in a specific ester, the higher its flash point and the lower its volatility.

2) Lubricity: Polarity also causes the ester molecules to be attracted to positively charged metal surfaces. As a result, the molecules tend to line up on the metal surface creating a film which requires additional energy (load) to wipe them off. The result is a stronger film which translates into higher lubricity and lower energy consumption in lubricant applications.

3) Detergency/Dispersency: The polar nature of esters also makes them good solvents and dispersants. This allows the esters to solubilize or disperse oil degradation by-products which might otherwise be deposited as varnish or sludge, and translates into cleaner operation and improved additive solubility in the final lubricant.

4) Biodegradability: While stable against oxidative and thermal breakdown, the ester linkage provides a vulnerable site for microbes to begin their work of biodegrading the ester molecule. This translates into very high biodegradability rates for ester lubricants and allows more environmentally friendly products to be formulated.

Another important difference between esters and PAOs is the incredible versatility in the design of ester molecules due to the high number of commercially available acids and alcohols from which to choose. For example, if one is seeking a 6 cSt synthetic basestock, the choices available with PAOs are a straight cut 6 cSt or a “dumbbell” blend of a lighter and heavier PAO. In either case, the properties of the resulting basestock are essentially the same. With esters, literally dozens of 6 cSt products can be designed each with a different chemical structure selected for the specific desired property. This allows the “ester engineer” to custom design the structure of the ester molecules to an optimized set of properties determined by the end customer or application. The performance properties that can be varied in ester design include viscosity, viscosity index, volatility, high temperature coking tendencies, biodegradability, lubricity, hydrolytic stability, additive solubility, and seal compatibility.

As with any product, there are also downsides to esters. The most common concern when formulating with ester basestocks is compatibility with the elastomer material used in the seals. All esters will tend to swell and soften most elastomer seals however, the degree to which they do so can be controlled through proper selection. When seal swell is desirable, such as in balancing the seal shrinkage and hardening characteristics of PAOs, more polar esters should be used such as those with lower molecular weight and/or higher number of ester linkages. When used as the exclusive basestock, the ester should be designed for compatibility with seals or the seals should be changed to those types which are more compatible with esters.

Another potential disadvantage with esters is their ability to react with water or hydrolyze under certain conditions. Generally this hydrolysis reaction requires the presence of water and heat with a relatively strong acid or base to catalyze the reaction. Since esters are usually used in very high temperature applications, high amounts of water are usually not present and hydrolysis is rarely a problem in actual use. Where the application environment may lead to hydrolysis, the ester structure can be altered to greatly improve its hydrolytic stability and additives can be selected to minimize any effects.

The following is a discussion of the structures and features of the more common ester families used in synthetic lubrication.

Diesters

Diesters were the original ester structures introduced to synthetic lubricants during the second World War. These products are made by reacting monohydric alcohols with dibasic acids creating a molecule which may be linear, branched, or aromatic and with two ester groups. Diesters which are often abbreviated DBE (dibasic acid esters) are named after the type of dibasic acid used and are often abbreviated with letters. For example, a diester made by reacting isodecyl alcohol with adipic acid would be known as an “adipate” type diester and would be abbreviated “DIDA” (Diisodecyl Adipate).

Adipates are the most widely used diesters due to their low relative cost and good balance of properties. They generally range from about 2.3 to 5.3 cSt at 100°C and exhibit pour points below -60°C. The viscosity indices of adipates usually run from about 130 to 150 and their oxidative stability, like most of the diesters, are comparable to PAOs. The primary difference between adipate diesters and PAOs is the presence of two ester linkages and the associated polarity benefits outlined previously. The most common use of adipate diesters is in combination with PAOs in numerous applications such as screw compressor oils, gear and transmission oils, automotive crankcase oils, and hydraulic fluids. Adipates are also used as the sole basestock where biodegradability is desired or high temperature cleanliness is critical such as in textile lubricants and oven chain oils.

Azelates, sebacates, and dodecanedioates are similar to adipates except that in each case the carbon chain length (backbone) of the dibasic acid is longer. This “backbone stretching” significantly increases viscosity index and improves the lubricity characteristics of the ester while retaining all the desirable properties of the adipates. The only downside to these types of diesters is price which tends to run about 50 - 100+% higher than adipates at the wholesale level. This group of linear DBEs are mainly used in older military specifications and where the lubricity factor becomes an important parameter.

Phthalates are aromatic diesters and this ring structure greatly reduces the viscosity index (usually well below 100) and eliminates most of the biodegradability benefit. In all other respects, phthalates behave similar to other diesters and are about 20 - 30% lower in cost. Phthalates are used extensively in air compressor lubricants (especially the reciprocating type) where low viscosity index is the norm and low cost clean operation is desirable.

Dimer acid is made by combining two oleic acids which creates a large branched dibasic acid from which interesting diesters are made. Dimerates exhibit high viscosity and high viscosity indices while retaining excellent low temperature flow. Compared to adipates, dimerates are higher in price (30 - 40%), have marginal biodegradability, and are not as clean in high temperature operations. Their lubricity is good and they are often used in synthetic gear oils and 2-cycle oils.

The alcohols used to make diesters will also affect the properties of the finished esters and thus are important factors in the design process. The alcohols may be reacted alone or blended with other alcohols to form coesters with their own unique properties. The first three alcohols in the table above all contain eight carbons, and when reacted with adipic acid, all create a dioctyl adipate. However, the properties are entirely different. The n-octyl adipate would have the highest viscosity and the highest viscosity index (about 50% higher then the 2-ethylhexyl adipate) but would exhibit a relatively high freeze point making their use in low temperature applications virtually impossible. By branching the octyl alcohol, the other two DOAs exhibit no freeze point tendencies and have pour points well below -60°C. The isooctyl adipate offers the best balance of properties combining a high viscosity index with a wide temperature range. The 2-ethylhexyl adipate has a VI about 45 units lower and a somewhat higher volatility. These examples demonstrate the importance of combining the right alcohols with the right acids when designing diester structures and allows the ester engineer a great deal of flexibility in his work.

Polyol esters

The term “polyol esters” is short for neopentyl polyol esters which are made by reacting monobasic acids with polyhedric alcohols having a neopentyl structure. The unique feature of the structure of polyol ester molecules is the fact that there are no hydrogens on the beta-carbon. Since this “beta-hydrogen” is the first site of thermal attack on diesters, eliminating this site substantially elevates the thermal stability of polyol esters and allows them to be used at much higher temperatures. In addition, polyol esters usually have more ester groups than the diesters and this added polarity further reduces volatility and enhances the lubricity characteristics while retaining all the other desirable properties inherent with diesters. This makes polyol esters ideally suited for the higher temperature applications where the performance of diesters and PAOs begin to fade.

Like diesters, many different acids and alcohols are available for manufacturing polyol esters and indeed an even greater number of permutations are possible due to the multiple ester linkages. Unlike diesters, polyol esters (POEs) are named after the alcohol instead of the acid and the acids are often represented by their carbon chain length. For example, a polyol ester made by reacting a mixture of nC8 and nC10 fatty acids with trimethylolpropane would be referred to as a “TMP” ester and represented as TMP C8C10.

Each of the alcohols shown above have no beta-hydrogens and differ primarily in the number of hydroxyl groups they contain for reaction with the fatty acids. The difference in ester properties as they relate to the alcohols are primarily those related to molecular weight such as viscosity, pour point, flash point, and volatility. The versatility in designing these fluids is primarily related to the selection and mix of the acids esterified onto the alcohols.

The normal or linear acids all contribute similar performance properties with the physicals being influenced by their carbon chain length or molecular weight. For example, lighter acids such as valeric may be desirable for reducing low temperature viscosity on the higher alcohols, or the same purpose can be achieved by esterifying longer acids onto the shorter alcohols. While the properties of the normal acids are mainly related to the chain length, there are some more subtle differences among them which can allow the formulator to vary such properties as thermal stability and lubricity.

Branched acids add a new dimension since the length, location, and number of branches all impact the performance of the final ester. For example, a branch incorporated near the acid group may help to hinder hydrolysis while multiple branches may be useful for building viscosity, improving low temperature flow, and enhancing thermal stability and cleanliness. The versatility of this family is best understood when one considers that multiple acids are usually co-esterified with the polyol alcohol allowing the ester engineer to control multiple properties in a single ester. Indeed single acids are rarely used in polyol esters because of the enchanced properties that can be obtained through co-esterification.

Polyol esters can extend the high temperature operating range of a lubricant by as much as 50 - 100°C due to their superior stability and low volatility. They are also renowned for their film strength and increased lubricity which is useful in reducing energy consumption in many applications. The only downside of polyol esters compared to diesters is their higher price tag, generally 20 - 70+% higher on a wholesale basis.

The major application for polyol esters is jet engine lubricants where they have been used exclusively for more than 40 years. In this application, the oil is expected to flow at -65°C, pump readily at -40°C, and withstand sump temperature over 200°C with drain intervals measured in years. Only polyol esters have been found to satisfy this demanding application and incorporating even small amounts of diesters or PAOs will cause the lubricant to fail vital specifications.

Polyol esters are also the ester of choice for blending with PAOs in passenger car motor oils. This change from lower cost diesters to polyols was driven primarily by the need for reduced fuel consumption and lower volatility in modern specifications. They are sometimes used in 2-cycle oils as well for the same reasons.

In industrial markets polyol esters are used extensively in synthetic refrigeration lubricants due to their miscibility with non-chlorine refrigerants. They are also widely used in very high temperature operations such as industrial oven chains, tenter frames, stationary turbine engines, high temperature grease, fire resistant transformer coolants, fire resistant hydraulic fluids, and textile lubricants.

In general, polyol esters represent the highest performance level available for high temperature applications at a reasonable price. Although they cost more than many other types of synthetics, the benefits often combine to make this chemistry the most cost effective in severe environment applications. The primary benefits include extended life, higher temperature operation, reduced maintenance and downtime, lower energy consumption, reduced smoke and disposal, and biodegradability.


Other esters

While diesters and polyol esters represent the most widely used ester families in synthetic lubrication, two other families are worth mentioning. These are monoesters and trimellitates.

Monoesters are made by reacting monohydric alcohols with monobasic fatty acids creating a molecule with a single ester linkage and linear or branched alkyl groups. These products are generally very low in viscosity (usually under 2 cSt at 100°C) and exhibit extremely low pour points and high VIs. The presence of the ester linkage imparts polarity which helps to offset the high volatility expected with such small molecules. Hence, when compared to a hydrocarbon of equal molecular weight, a monoester will have a significantly higher flash point giving it a broader temperature range in use. Monoesters are used primarily for extremely cold applications such as in Arctic hydraulic oils and deep sea drilling. They can also be used in formulating automotive aftermarket additives to improve cold starting.

Trimellitates are aromatic triesters which are similar to the phthalates described under diesters but with a third ester linkage. By taking on three alcohols, the trimellitates are significantly more viscous then the linear adipates or phthalates. Viscosities range from about 9 to 20 cSt at 100°C. Like phthalates, trimellitates have a low viscosity index and poor biodegradability with a price range between adipates and polyols. Trimellitates are generally used where high viscosity is needed as in gear lubricants, chain lubricants, and grease.

Summary

Esters are a broad and diverse family of synthetic lubricant basestocks which can be custom designed to meet specific physical and performance properties. The inherent polarity of esters improves their performance in lubrication by reducing volatility, increasing lubricity, providing cleaner operation, and making the products biodegradable. A wide range of available raw materials allow an ester designer the ability to optimize a product over a wide range of variables in order to maximize the performance and value to the client. They may be used alone in very high temperature applications for optimum performance or blended with PAOs or other synthetic basestocks where their complementary properties improve the balance of the finished lubricant. Esters have been used in synthetic lubricants for more than 60 years and continue to grow as the drive for efficiency make operating environments more severe. Because of the complexity involved in the designing, selecting, and blending of an ester basestock, the choice of the optimum ester should be left to a qualified ester engineer who can better balance the desired properties.

Base Oils & Lubricant Performance

By Anthony Garner

Introduction

The purpose of this thread is to open up productive conversation into the various kinds of base oils used in motor oil finished products. We will also look at how automotive lubricants are marketed as well as theory into lubricant heat control and friction reduction. This thread is not intended to be the final word, but rather an ongoing discussion where all are encouraged to contribute. Please provide links and or cited sources whenever possible.


Motor Oil Base Stocks

Base Stock: A motor oil base stock is usually refined from petroleum or a selected synthetic material. It is the main foundational component of the oil into which additives are blended to create a finished lubricant. Currently, the American Petroleum Institute (API) divides motor oil base stocks up into five separate group categories listed below.

Theory: Conventional Motor Oil

"Conventional lubricants are refined from crude oil. Refining is a process of physically separating light from heavy oil fractions. Crude oil is a natural substance. It contains millions of different kinds of molecules. Many are similar in weight but dissimilar in structure. Because refining separates products by weight, it groups molecules of similar weight and dissimilar structure, so refined lubricants contain a wide assortment of molecules.

However, not all of those molecules are beneficial to the lubrication process. Some of the molecules found in refined lubricants are detrimental to the lubricated system or to the lubricant itself. For example, paraffin, a common refined lubricant component, causes refined lubricants to thicken and flow poorly in cold temperatures. Some refined lubricant molecules also may contain sulfur, nitrogen, and oxygen, which act as contaminants and invite the formation of sludge and other by-products of lubricant breakdown." - Amsoil, Inc.

Theory: Synthetic Motor Oil

"Synthetic lubricants are not refined. They are chemically engineered from pure chemicals.

Pure – Because they are derived from pure chemicals. Synthetic lubricants contain no contaminants or molecules that “don’t pull their own weight.”

Uniform – Because synthetics contain only smooth lubricating molecules, they slip easily across one another. On the other hand, the potpourri of jagged, irregular and odd-shaped molecules of refined lubricants don’t slip quite so easily. The case with which lubricant molecules slip over one another affects the lube’s ability to reduce friction, which in turn, affects wear control, heat control and fuel efficiency.

Heat Control – Because uniformly smooth synthetic lubricant molecules slip easily over one another, they are superior friction-reducers to conventional lubricants. (Technically, because they slip more easily over one another, synthetics are said to have a lower “coefficient of friction” than conventional lubricants.) The less friction in a system, the less heat in it, too. Friction and heat are two major contributors to component failure and wear. By controlling friction and heat more effectively, synthetics significantly reduce the incidence of component failure and significantly reduce the rate of component wear." Amsoil, Inc.

The “Synthetic” Controversy

The topic of base oils and their perspective level of performance is generally a controversial topic among motor oil enthusiasts and on up through oil industry experts. Even defining what “synthetic” means results in controversy. Evidence of this can be seen by the conflicting comments made by oil industry experts after the much famed 1999 National Advertising Division (NAD) cases which defined the way synthetic lubricants would be labeled in the United States. In short, the result of the case ruled in favor of Castrol North America Inc. against the claim made by Mobil Oil Corp., that Castrol was not truthful in their advertising. The NAD ruling ultimately changed the way synthetic lubricants would be marketed in the United States setting the stage for what are known as group III lubricants to be labeled as synthetic. See the full two part article, A Defining Moment For Synthetics. Many would agree that the implication of the ruling blurs the lines of what a true synthetic lubricant really is and the levels of performance potential among the various base oil categories. In addition, some argue that this ultimately gives oil industry marketing the upper hand and leaves consumers at a disadvantage. A trip the local auto parts store reveals a dizzying array of synthetic motor oil choices. Terms like Full Synthetic, 100% Synthetic, Semi-Synthetic, Synthetic Blend and Synthetic Plus all grace the covers of motor oil bottles. Without further research, this often leaves one to wonder which version of synthetic motor oil best suites their specific application. Research into synthetic motor oils may also lead one to decide that top tier synthetic lubricants are not the best value for their dollar, while others may draw the conclusion that they will use nothing but top tier synthetics. The reality is that when considering such variables as driving habits, climate conditions, and equipment design, some motor oils fit some applications better than others, having their own proprietary blend of base oils and additives which make for a unique finished product.

For comparison, we will use three different motor oils as examples to help illustrate how motor oils are formulated using the various base stocks, how they are marketed, their associated cost, and discuss the perceived levels of performance each lubricant has.

Lubricant #1: Conventional Motor Oil

Chevron Supreme SAE 5W-30 API (SM)
Base stock – API Group II
Retail price per quart $2.99

Base Stock Origin: Refined from crude oil.

Today, conventional motor oils are formulated with Group II base stocks.

Other examples of Group II motor oils include but are not limited to Pennzoil (Yellow Bottle), Castrol GTX, Quaker State Peak Performance, Valvoline Conventional, Schaeffer Supreme 7000 Synthetic Plus, Brad Penn, and Shell Rotella T.

Note A: Advancements in oil technology like those pioneered by the Chevron Corporation have greatly improved the quality of conventional motor oils and have given way to group III synthetic motor oils. Read more on group II and III oil technologies at Chevron U.S.A Inc. and Shell Oil Company. Some have argued that this type of technology has closed the gap in performance between conventional motor oil and top tier synthetic lubricants.

Note B: Retail pricing provided by CSK Auto, Inc., and Amsoil, Inc., as of 10/18/09

Lubricant #2: Full Synthetic Motor Oil

Pennzoil Platinum SAE 5W-30
Base stock - API Group III
Retail price per quart $6.99

Base Stock Origin: Refined from crude oil.

Group III oils are refined from crude oil and are commonly marketed as “Full Synthetic” motor oil.

Other examples of Group III motor oils include Castrol Syntec, Amsoil Extended Life Synthetic Motor Oil, Schaeffer Supreme 9000 Full Synthetic, Shell Rotella T Synthetic, and Royal Purple High Performance Motor Oil.

Refer to notes A and B

Lubricant #3: 100% Synthetic Motor Oil

AMSOIL 100% Synthetic SAE 5W-30 Motor Oil
Base stock - API Group IV/V
Retail price per quart $8.75

Base Stock Origin: Pure chemicals derived from Crude Oil or Natural Gas.

Other examples of Group IV/V motor oils include Red Line, Royal Purple eXtreme Performance (XPR) Racing Oil, and Mobil 1.

Refer to note B.

100% Synthetic motor oils are often referred to as Top Tier Synthetics or Polyalpholefin (PAO) group IV based lubricants. Although PAO Group IV base stocks are not refined from crude oil like Group II and III oils are, there can still be some basis in crude oil. Ethylene is a colorless gas that is commonly derived from crude oil or natural gas. In addition to being a building block for Group IV synthetic base stocks, other products made from the ethylene family can also include plastics and rubber. Group V Ester oils are commonly used as additives in PAO based synthetic motor oils to improve various aspects of the finished product. See also Esters In Synthetic Lubricants. Finally, while many companies utilize PAOs in their finished products either as the main base stock or as an additive, there are only four companies currently in the United States that produce PAOs. According to the October 29, 2008 edition of Lube Report, producers of PAOs in the US include Chevron Phillips Chemical, ExxonMobil Chemical, Ineos Oligomers, and Chemtura. See also, Synthetic Lubricants.


Debate: Friction and Heat

Another area of debate among the oil industry experts is how the various base stocks perform with respect to coefficient of friction and heat reduction. For some, the conclusion has been made that with the advancements in base stock technology, there is little or no difference with respect to coefficient of friction and heat reduction between Group II/Group III and Group IV oils. However, this argument does not hold true for others. Some experts have indicated that PAO oils, or PAO oils blended with Ester oils both offer friction reducing abilities. Further, the purported added benefits of using a motor oil with friction reducing abilities include increased horsepower , higher rpm range, improved fuel economy, and lengthened engine component life. Provided below is responses from oil industry experts Tom Schaefer, formerly of the Hatco Corporation, and Ed Kellerman, manager of Oil Analyzers Inc., a subsidiary of Amsoil, Inc. Also provided is a related experience from an automotive Internet forum member.

Below, Ed Kellerman and Tom Schaefer comment about base oil characteristics with regards to Group IV Synthetic motor oils and friction reduction when compared to modern day Group II conventional motor oils.

"If we are talking just straight base stock, with no other additives, then group IV basestocks reduce friction far greater than groups II or III. You are correct: it’s a function of even molecular structure vs. molecules of all different shapes and sizes. The base stock argument, however, is for the most part irrelevant, in that there is so much more to a finished engine oil than just the base stock. It is possible to take a lesser base stock and improve anti-frictional characteristics by using high quality additives such as viscosity index improvers, anti-wear additives, friction modifiers, etc... Conversely, you can have a super high quality group IV base stock that if formulated with inferior additives and not formulated correctly, may not offer higher performance than a properly formulated group III finished engine oil. This is what makes the basestock argument irrelevant when it comes to the performance of a finished oil. AMSOIL engine oils are made from the finest base stocks and additives and there is no way any finished group II or III engine oil could come close." - Ed Kellerman

"A good group IV formulation will run cooler. This is not as important, however, as the fact that a group IV are far more resistant to thermal breakdown in high heat conditions, thereby offering far superior protection compared to groups II and III.

An oil's effect on engine temperature is a function of viscosity, coefficient of friction, and heat transfer properties. I don't doubt that these properties are similar among group I - IV hydrocarbons as they are all in the same chemical family, that is, there would be some differences based on such factors as aromatic content and molecular weight distribution, but the differences should be relatively small. Between different chemical families, however, the differences can be significant. Esters, for example, have significantly lower coefficients of friction and better heat transfer rates than most hydrocarbons, and much lower engine oil temperatures were frequently reported from the original all ester formulations back in the 1970s.

Since modern synthetic oils today are based almost entirely on hydrocarbon base oils, I wouldn't expect to see much difference in engine temperatures when viscosities are equal, especially since friction modifier additives are more potent than the base oils. That being said, those formulations with larger quantities of esters or ANs may indeed show some lowering of friction and temperatures." - Tom Schaefer

An automotive Internet forum member describes his experiences with lower engine operating temperatures when comparing conventional and synthetic motor oils.

"I work on an off-road race truck and we run oil temp gauges and found the following: During a fifteen minute race our oil temps would get up to 300+ if using any non synthetic oils. Mobil 1 dropped the oil temps by about twenty degrees to 280 and switching to Amsoil we dropped it to about 250-260 .......this is not representative of everyday usage but keep in mind that the water temp stays always in between 180-200 at all times no matter which oil.....so all in all it is kind of an accepted opinion that Mobil 1 is the cheapest and least effective of the synthetics but all of the higher end oils.......Amsoil, Royal Purple, etc. work better under extreme conditions. I guess it all depends on what your uses are. I just have my own opinions formed because of the info stated above." - LS1.com, Liquifire

Kellerman and Schaefer’s statements show slightly differing views with respect to the coefficient of friction of oil base stocks in their own right. However, both men seem to agree that a properly formulated lubricant with a quality additive package will provide improved anti-friction capabilities when compared to other lubricants using lower-grade additives. The exact rate to which friction reduction occurs between dissimilar finished lubricants is currently unknown. Further, a request was made for any relevant test data or studies on this subject, but none have been provided or located as of this writing. Mr. Kellerman did offer to review any information that would indicate no difference in friction reducing performance between GroupII/GroupIII and Group IV oils.

Further Discussion

While using cost effective Group II/III refined crude oil lubricants in mild-to-mid range performance applications can provide satisfactory results, other more demanding applications may gain additional benefits from utilizing Group IV based oils. Some example include, cooler engine operating temperatures, increased power and rpm ranges through friction reduction, lengthened oil change intervals, and better volatility and cold flow properties. Hopefully, after reading this post, one will come away with greater understanding and appreciation of what goes into producing a balanced lubricant, why some are cost effective, and why costly alternatives may offer a degree of increased performance potential.


For more information about AMSOIL synthetic lubricants and performance filtration products contact Anthony Garner at Competition Synthetics. Anthony is an Amsoil T-1 Certified Independent Dealer. E-mail Anthony at compsyn@live.com, or visit http://competitionsynthetics.com