Cave Drawings

 Related Pages
 Reciprocal Links

We recommend Internet Explorer set to 1024x768.

© 2003 Brian F. Schreurs
Even we have a disclaimer.

Treading the line between enthusiasm and religion.
The synthetic oil life study has received requests numerous times to test SynLube Lube-4-Life oil. Thus far we have declined to do so. This is not because we are out to get them, but simply because SynLube uses a rather radical formula that we are not entirely comfortable with using in our test engine. We will readily admit that we have absolutely no data indicating that SynLube specifically causes problems in engines, but we will also readily point out that we have no data about SynLube whatsoever, pro or con. No research reports, no SAE technical papers, not even a string of oil analyses. This complete lack of publicly available information makes it very hard to judge SynLube.

We have two primary technical concerns with the use of SynLube in our test car's LS1:

  • SynLube contains PTFE. PTFE naturally is attracted to itself, clotting much like blood. Dispersants can retard this behavior but we have to wonder whether the benefits of PTFE outweigh the risk in using it. We recognize that there are current studies regarding the use of PTFE in motor oils that we have not yet had the chance to read.
  • SynLube is a 5W50 oil. The LS1 engine in our test car requires 5W30 oil. SynLube is therefore far out of spec for this engine (see: SAE Technical Paper 970915).

Until these matters are addressed, we are not comfortable running this oil in our $5000 engine. It's nothing personal; it's just the level of risk we're willing to accept.

If you'd like to make a Cave Drawing of your own, please report to the Main Cave.

From Miro Kefurt on 13 May 2003:

Please accept my apology, there was no intent to "attack" you or your study.

I wrote most of it on the fly.

OK I did re-check the site, what was confusing is this:

"To prevent a previous test oil from contaminating a new test oil, we will run a
1,000 mile buffer of the new oil between tests. After 1,000 miles, we will drain the
crankcase (putting the 1,000-mile-old synthetic oil in a different car, rather
than wasting it) and refill with fresh oil, resuming the test."

Also since the "0" miles was at:
Oil/Vehicle miles: 0 / 9,939
Oil added after sample: none

It is NOT clear that it is from the bottle:

HERE ARE TBN NUMBERS from CTC for the Same Mobil 1 Oil:

Different test dates & product batches:


Same SAE 5W-30 Mobil 1 for Moly PPM:


More data since TBN was not done on one of the samples above.

As for statistically significant results both CARB and EPA has specific procedures on
how to conduct "tests" on anything automotive, be it parts or components or entire

Unfortunately single vehicle test is not considered validating anything, that is not
an "attack" just a critique, but both a government and industry stand.

By comparison we have may "single" vehicle and single owner experiences on our web
under Syn Uses (with direct links to real people) so in the same sense of "validity"
we have real life "tests" that should match what you are doing up to 20 years
without oil changes, up to 375,000 miles without oil changes and up to 5,200 hours
without oil changes (top limits from THREE different cars).

At $20.00 per test and 200 tests you are talking about $4,000 and perhaps another
$200.00 in additional oil and you are worried about $5,000 engine?  You will be
spending OVER $15,000 on gasoline if not more (20 MPG @ $1.50 per gallon).

So you should be a realist the "cost" of your engine is just part of the operating
expense of the vehicle!

If it fails on SynLube, we would not just buy you a new one we would want the
"failed" engine just to find out what happened, since we have never had that
opportunity (to see any engine that had ANY problem)

As for oil consumption, I have NEVER seen ANY GM manual that has oil consumption
specific (any mileage numbers) since that is a legal liability.

I know customers with Northstar engines that burn oil in 900 mile range and the
dealer excuse is that it is within GM guidelines !!!

Again please accept my apologies, I do not intend to be mean, just few suggestions
and of curse nothing is CAST in IRON, or what ever.

Also for GM R&D purposes the ONLY engine they now take seriously in  6Liters V-8 that
is used in trucks.

The LS1 is history and so is your model of the car, out of production out of mind and
out of any interest in ANY result(s).

We had that problem with running GM sponsored tests in 350 engined vans, before the
150,000 miles is on, the vehicle is out of production and the engineer in charge
changed job (different company) after 20 years with GM R&D and the next guy, is
convinced that SynLube cannot possibly work....

Same old oil story, unfortunately our oil lasts longer than most companies and or
peoples jobs (KIA, YUGO, BERTONE, Skoda, TATRA, Moretti, Bugatti, etc....)


Miro Kefurt
SynLube, Inc.

PS: I think you have a great car, too bad GM does not make them any more, I think
that is a BIG mistake.
A little late for butter, isn't it?

It looks to me like you have an older formulation of Mobil 1 there. Mine is not the only VOA to show moly in Mobil 1 SuperSyn. Now, you are right when you say it would be better to have a fleet of vehicles in a perfectly controlled environment. The question then is, do we abandon hope of learning anything, simply because we cannot have the perfect environment? Or do we do the best we can with what we have, and interpret the results as well as possible? I choose the latter route. My test is imperfect but it still provides useful data. Your results would be of great interest if they were accompanied by some sort of periodic analysis so that we could have a better idea of what's going on inside those long-life engines.

This study isn't targeted at GM so what they think of the LS1 as a test engine is immaterial. The point here is that real people can see what we've done and maybe take that information and include it in their decision-making process for their own car care. Obviously the study is more relevant for vehicles with a similar design and operational environment, which is why I explained these circumstances as well as I could.

Once again you are targeting the study when the question here, from our point of view, is only whether you are interested in helping us learn something about your oil by providing us with some sort of documentation for it, or helping us develop that documentation for ourselves. The study will continue whether you approve of its methodology or not, because many of us feel that, despite its imperfections, it's the best shot we have at answering some questions about synthetic oil.

PS. I'll send you the page out of the GM factory service manual that specifies acceptable levels of oil consumption for the LS1. I at least owe you the courtesy of forwarding proof of MY claims.

From Miro Kefurt on 13 May 2003:

Look at J300 standard it has two HTHS specs one for "normal" engine oils and one for
"heavy-duty" engine oils, reason the 20% increase in viscosity at 300 F makes engines
last 200% to 500% longer.  (SAE 40 oils)

All SAE 30 oils and lower are considered light duty oils and SAE 50 is heavy duty oil
by the HTHS specs.

The FLOW to a bearing has to do with the W number as that is how the oil acts when
COLD (and it does not have to be below freezing) to engine for which NORMAL operating
temperature is about 190 to 220 on oil, even 120 F in Arizona is COLD (when
first started).

So what matters is cold flow for CONVENTIONAL OIL, but for COLLOIDAL OIL (like
SynLube) which lubricates and separates irrespective of speed or oil pressure, the
lubricant is already there even at zero speed !

This reduces over all wear by 75% to 95% -- another "theory" from Cummins and
International Diesel Tests.

HD engines have typical life of 750,000 miles or more and the ONLY real magic between
them and "light" duty engines is the Oil Viscosity at REAL OPERATING temperatures AND

Numerous studies were conducted by Tribology Institute in Austria which concluded
that HTHS viscosity is the ONLY important
specification for engine longevity -- that is once the oil is flowing.


Miro Kefurt
SynLube, inc.

PS: The GM reason for the 5W-30 oil is:

#1 Mobil 1 gives it to them free in exchange for the Mobil 1 logos on the valve cover
and or oil cap.

#2 Mobil does not have high quality 5W-50 oil in USA (only Australia and Europe)

#3 The 5W-30 oil gets higher fuel economy (about 0.7%)

#4 The 5W-50 being "Heavy-duty" oil is not in ILSAC GF current specifications as
"energy conserving" since no conventional oil meets the Fuel Efficiency Test (SynLube
exceeds SAE 5W-20 fuel economy by 3% - test in Crown Victoria by AAA in Los Angeles)
Help me locate these reports, so that we can all see how they apply to SynLube. I am sure they exist (I don't think you're making them up) but I can't find them. You're obviously familiar enough with them to cite them as defense of your product, so tell me how to get copies.

From Miro Kefurt on 13 May 2003:

Thank you for responding.

1.) Our oil has 10 years or 300,000 mile warranty if you change the oil filter every
5 year or 50,000 mile and submit oil sample from the used oil filter.

2.) Alternately you can change the oil every 5 years or 50,000 miles

At any time you get 100% credit or refund for ANY used oil returned any time any
mileage even after 10 years.

Compared to Lamborghinis, Bugattis and HD Cummins diesels, $5,000 is nothing I can
put in on our business credit card any time, but then you are already convinced that
you will ruin the engine in 200,000 miles, after all GM ONLY guarantees it for
36,000 !!! and that is with Mobil 1 oil changes every 10,000 miles !!!

PS: You are NOT using the GM MicroGlass oil filter that is specified for use with
Mobil 1 for "corvette" engines, the  NAPA filter just will not last indefinitely.

#3 Mobil 1 only has TBN of 5.0 or so so I see a serious problem with you TBN of 16 +

#4 You have never tested the virgin oil form the bottle

#5 Mobil 1 has big variances from batch to batch, so unless you stocked up on the oil
EVERY additional Mobil 1 quart HAS to be tested fresh before you can make any serious
sense out of your study.

#6 You have not tested the USED oil form the engine OEM or otherwise.

#7 How many miles really is on the engine ?

#8 1/2 quart every 1,000 miles or so, that engine ALREADY has a serious problem, most
LS1 will go 10,000 to 16,000 miles on quart of oil !!!

#9 where does the fuel in the oil come from ? Bad injectors ? there should be NO fuel
in the oil period not on OBD II engine.

Need I go on?

As for our product it has been the same since 1996, and previous version was
unchanged since 1985.

The oil you are testing now will be obsolete when ILSAC GF-4 comes to effect, so what
is the point of testing oil that by the time you figure out anything will not be

If you are using as much oil as you do, the oil filter will fail long before you will
have any significant change in the oil, of course you will deplete the excess TBN,
where ever that came from.

More there is NO Moly in Mobil 1 so where did that come from?  GM has Moly ONLY in
assembly Lube, did you build that engine yourself  and used GM assy Lube ?

The factory for sure does not use it in OEM engines.

As far as our product goes check for any complaints about SynLube there
are none.

There will be few pages about Teflon on our site, and about colloids in general, when
it is there I will send you a link.

MIROX which is our parent corporation is the US representative for OKA, but they are
available only in racing trim for $5,000 (as much as your engine) and of course we
guarantee to buy them back, less mileage and engine hour depreciation you can use
one in SCCA autocross racing.

We do not give out free cars or SynLube to anyone for any purpose even GM Research
has to pay for it, and they do, and so does Alison and Isuzu they use it in test
vehicles (not for production vehicles) as they need both longevity and low emission
on more or less one off prototypes.

GM Research has been using SynLube since 1972, we have developed the AC MicroGlass
oil filters with them, they make them for us and they are available for the Corvette
as OEM filter.

If you really want to make scientific, and statistically correct oil test you need a
NEW vehicle for EACH and EVERY OIL and you need to do full emission test both on
4,000 mile car and on end of oil test to see any deterioration, industry does not
care about oil or engine life they only care about tail pipe emissions and so does

Then you would also have to have a driver for every car that drives the same and
identical trip each and every day as all the other cars or drivers will.

Short of that you are generating lot of numbers, some of which already are in error
(TBN and Moly) on single vehicle.

DO you plan to start with "new' engine for each OIL ?

If not what is the purpose of all of this, just getting $20 for the Lab ?  The only
people who can profit from all of this.

And what Warranty or "bond" did ExxonMobil give you that you trust them with your
$5,000 engine ?  After all they specifically indicate that their oil MUST NOT BE USED
in excess of OEM oil drain specifications for oil.

At 10,000 miles you are already violating both Mobil and GM advice, and as far as
NAPA oil filter goes they only specify 6,000 miles or 6 months !!!


Miro Kefurt
SynLube, Inc.

We have over 17,000 oil tests on file since 1985, but that is our proprietary
information so we do not share it unless you are willing to pay at least $1.00 per
result. ALL tests are by Analyst or CTC.
There's no need to get snarky. Just because the warranty runs out at 36k doesn't mean I expect that to be the service life. 150,000 miles is easy on today's engines, 200,000 should be a piece of cake as long as there is no catastrophic failure along the way.

#2. I don't expect the filter to last forever; when the insolubles go out of range I will change it.

#3. There are different ways of measuring TBN that produce different numbers. The method used by my lab tends to produce higher numbers than other methods.

#4. Re-read the report; I did in fact test the virgin oil from the bottle.

#5. Keep in mind that this is intended to be a real-world test so I am not sure what would be gained from your suggestion.

#6. I don't understand this comment at all -- the entire purpose of the study is to test the used oil at regular intervals.

#7. 20,198 as of this morning.

#8. Subtracting the oil extracted for the analysis, the engine is using one quart per 5,000 miles. Unfortunate but well within the specs listed in the service manual.

#9. Testing error as mentioned previously.

I am not sure why you feel compelled to attack the study. Continuing with answers to your questions:

What is the point when the oil will eventually be obsolete: What's the point of climbing a mountain, if in a few years someone will invent a helicopter that can fly you there?

No moly in Mobil 1: According to the VOA, there were 68 ppm in the Mobil 1. I did not build the engine myself; it came off the GM assembly line.

FTC complaints against SynLube: I never said there were any. I am an avid watcher of the FTC site.

Free car: I didn't want a freebie. Geez, you're getting snarky again. It was just an idea.

GM Research: Too bad they haven't published any research validating your results eh?

Scientific study: I agree to have a truly scientific study I'd need more controls. However, part of the purpose of this is to see how oil behaves out in the real world. The car goes through a fairly consistent driving cycle so it should be a fairly level playing field for each oil.

Testing errors: A point on which we will have to agree to disagree.

Mobil trust: There are hundreds of oil analysis results available to the world for Mobil 1, Amsoil, and Red Line. Therefore it is easy to determine that I am working within the limits of the oil. There is not one oil analysis available for SynLube. Therefore I have no way to determine the effectiveness of SynLube without actually trying it.

Proprietary test results: All right, it was just an idea, no need to get all snarky.


I'm disappointed that you've chosen to attack me instead of discussing your oil. I never did anything to you. I'm not on any crusade against SynLube.

From Miro Kefurt on 13 May 2003:

I have checked with guys at GM research the LS1 engine is designed for 7 year or
70,000 mile life with UP TO 100,000 or maybe 120,000 possibly possible.

That is why it is guaranteed for emissions that long, see owner manual emission

It may run at 100,000 or even 120,000 miles but it will NOT meet EPA emissions by
then, i.e., by industry standard it should be taken out of service as the "useful
life" is officially over.

200,000 miles you are just dreaming no matter what oil you are using and yes both the
oil consumption and fuel in oil is indicative or serious mechanical problem(s).

Best got to GM dealer and have them plug in their OBD II $4,200 computer that will
tell you what is wrong with the fuel trim or injection.

3% fuel is absolutely horrifying.


Miro Kefurt
SynLube, Inc.
Whatever. I've driven plenty of GM engines way beyond 150,000 miles even with regular $1/qt. oil. Any properly cared-for engine will make 200,000 miles. I've had several. The fuel problem in the 1K sample is most likely a smpling error. That's why I test every 1K, to identify the errors. You'll note the 3% never appeared again. Are you telling me you've never driven a GM vehicle past 70k miles?

From Miro Kefurt on 11 May 2003:

It came to my attention from one of our customers who has been arguing about oil
changed and lack of them on

I suggest that if you do not want to waste oil, money and your engine you should
install SynLube Lube-4-Life into a NEW car and just drive it for 10 years or 150,000
miles or 3,000 engine hours with NO OIL CHANGES.

It will cost you far less than your $20.00 every 1,000 miles tests, and you will
consume far less than 1/2 quart almost every 1,000 miles with Mobil 1.

You will also get 10 year 300,000 miles engine warranty FREE something Mobil 1 will
not give you (nor any other oil company)

And on end of the 10 years or 150,000 miles you can drain the used oil and send it
back for 100% credit (for volume returned) just try that one with ANY used oil !!!


Miro Kefurt
SynLube, Inc.
Mr. Kefurt,

It's good to hear from you. Those boys over on sure stirred up a hornet's nest, and managed to drag my study into it.

I am intrigued by your product, I must admit. I can see how the theory behind it could work. However, I have refrained from contacting you for inclusion in the study for a couple of reasons:

* Your oil is a 5W-50 oil when the LS1 in my study calls for 5W-30. I am concerned about such a thick oil causing problems, particularly in the bearing areas. So far I have not located any studies that specifically analyze the rate of wear by oil weight. Nor does your website list the viscosity of your oil.

* Your oil includes particles of PTFE. Now, I realize some recent research has indicated that more modern applications of PTFE do not have the problems experienced by early Slick 50-style formulations. However, I have not yet seen these research papers for myself, and therefore must retain a certain degree of skepticism.

* There are no independent tests of your oil anywhere that I can find, not so much as a used oil analysis, let alone an SAE paper or something along those lines.

Where does that leave us? Well, I am not one of those who believes you're a fraud -- like I said, I can see how the theory behind your program could work. However, my test engine has a replacement cost of $5000, so you can understand why I must approach something as radical as SynLube with extreme caution. I'm presuming you can't afford to post $5000 bond for the value of the engine over 200,000 miles, so that leaves us at a bit of an impasse.

Ideas? Both far-fetched but not impossible:

1. I believe you sell the Oka car from Russia. If you would like to entrust us with a loaner test vehicle, I will certainly test both oil and car.

2. According to your website, your customers send samples to you for periodic analysis. If you have been keeping diligent records of these analyses, a researcher could use your data as a basis for a large-scale study of the effectiveness of SynLube. I would find such a study very interesting.

Or, if you have another idea, I am open to it.

From C. Philip Houck on 2 May 2003:

Thank you for your response.  I appreciate your consideration of SynLube.  I would
however like to offer so additional food for thought as to why I believe SynLube
would work just fine in your engine.

1) SynLube is a 5W50 oil but that doesn't mean your engine can't use it.  I had 18K
miles on my ZX3 during the course of 1.5 years of driving.  Though we don't have the
extremes of weather you have in West Virginia (I think that's where you are.  Am I
right?) it never failed to provides less than full protection.  Even though 18K miles
is not much distance in relation to the total life of an engine, it is probably
enough to reveal any problems with using SynLube and there were none.  As you know
Ford specifies a 5W20 weight oil for the engine.  Moreover, my understanding of
viscosity may be different than yours.  It is my belief that a 5W50 oil flows like a
5 weight oil at low temperatures and has the film strength of a 50 weight oil.  It
does not mean that the oil is actually that thick.  The viscosity index of SynLube is
200 which is higher than any other oil, dino or synthetic I am familiar with.  This
high index makes the oil less prone to viscosity change with temperature than other
oils.  I believe therefore that your engine would use SynLube without problem.  On my
Focus SVT which must idle high as soon as the engine starts to minimize emissions,
SynLube never exhibited any problems at all this winter.  I installed the oil at 668
miles.  I have had no oil consumption since that time with about 3K miles on the oil.

SynLube is recommended for all engines except Mazda rotary engines.  SynLube offers a
300K warranty for new cars maintained according to the guideslines SynLube
establishes for the car for any oil-related problems.

2) SynLube does contain PTFE but it is not a question of whether there is PTFE in the
oil that's critical.  It is its implementation in the lubricant that's important. 
PTFE comes in a number of different forms and this is extemely important as to
whether the PTFE is helpful or detrimental to the engine.  I discussed this with Miro
Kefurt of SynLube who had the following comments: 

"We do not use DuPont since they do not have Teflon in "colloidal" size, but they
have other products such as Fluon, and few others, that if you take time to go to
DuPont site you will find are specifically made for use in oil additives. 

We use Nanoflon which is 0.3 to 1.2 microns [red blood cells are 7.5 microns] and
looks like an egg under 400X magnification, both SIZE, SHAPE and surface charge make
[a] difference. 

The MAJOR reason why we use PTFE in SynLube is that engines have [a] measurable
reduction in noise (dB levels), as for wear reduction, in [an] "objective" controlled
test we would have to run 15 to 30 vehicles for 15 years to have "scientifically" and
"statistically" recognized proof. 

For now 22 years of research and over 45,000 cars that have our products in them are
good enough proof both for us and for [the] FTC. 

[Fifteen] years ago DuPont Teflon were chips from rod machining in 400 mesh size and
they indeed block filters and settle in oil pan they are 2,000 to 2,500 times LARGER
than the Nanoflon in SynLube - and further their surface charge is uneven so they
tend to agglomerate to much bigger globs even visible by naked eye. ..."

SynLube implementation of colloidal solids is very important because the solids do
not fall out of suspension because SynLube is a hydrophilic sol, that is the solids
are electrically attracted to the liquid lubricants at the molecular level.  The
problems that arose with products like Petrolon (Slick 50) do not apply with SynLube.

One final point: SynLube's website is a bit unfortunate.  Miro's a lubrication
specialist not a webmaster.  His means of communication is a bit idiosyncratic too. 
Still I would contend that his website is worth a second look.  He offers a wealth of
objective information about viscosity principles and other information which I
believe to be very valuable for anyone interested in knowing more about lubrication.
One could spend hours reading all this information.  When I was considering SynLube,
I had many of the same reservations you and others have expressed.  Reading the
information on his site gave me confidence that the SynLube formulation makes sense.

There now, I've said my piece.  I hope you understand that rather than trying to
browbeat people into using SynLube, my real purpose is simply to get them to know
what it really is.  After that, they can make their own decision.  Too often, I am
faced with the response: "Ah, so it contains PTFE, must be snake oil, you better get
some real oil before your engine explodes!"

Please send me a mailing address where I can send a check.  I don't have a Paypal
account.  Initially, I decided not to contribute because I was disappointed in the
choice of Mobil 1 but since you've spent so much time answering my concerns, the
least I can do is pay for an oil analysis.

If the main reason for using PTFE is to reduce engine noise, then we'd be a lot happier if they'd just leave it out. We have no data that specifically condemns SynLube; indeed, we cannot find any data on SynLube, pro or con, anywhere at all except from SynLube themselves. At this time we consider SynLube too high a risk to test. We would sure like to see some objective data to evaluate it. If SynLube would like to publicly demonstrate the abilities of their product, they can either post bond for the cost of an engine to 200,000 miles, or they can provide us with their own test car (maybe one of those little Russian Oka cars they sell) for the duration of the test.

From Brett Schulte on 26 April 2003:

I'm really enjoying your oil life study.  I'm particularly interested in a
company called Synlube which is suggesting a rather absurd interval of 25K.
>From following your tests it looks like filtration alone would make that an
impossible number even if (and that's a big if) the oil would last that

I have a lot of issues with this company from their unverifiable claims of
an association with NASA to the fact that their corporate email address is
an AOL account...all very incongruent with a successful company.

Will contributions sway which product you'll test next?
I've been asked about SynLube before, and I'm not interested in testing their oil. It includes Teflon (PTFE) which is something that really doesn't belong in an engine, regardless of whether it is blended with an additive like Slick 50 or with a motor oil like SynLube. As if that weren't enough, it's a 5W50 oil and our test car calls for a 5W30 oil. There are just too many strange things going on with SynLube to run it through our $5,000 test engine. Regarding the next test, we already purchased the oil for the Amsoil test so that's up next. After that, we're open to ideas.

From C. Phillip Houck on 17 March 2003:

I think the study that you are going to do will be great.  I have believed that 
it is possible to extend oil drains while maintaining a higher level of engine 
protection than that which is provided by petroleum lubricants for some time.  
I also believe one can save money, time, and reduce the environmental impact of 
a car by reducing waste oil.

The trouble with the study is that it begins with Mobil 1.  This oil isn't even 
recommended by the manufacturer to be used beyond the OEM recommendation for 
changing dino oil.  The vast majority of cars out there can last 200K miles 
with regular oil changes, even if it's plain motor oil providing that the oil 
is changed in keeping with the useage, i.e. change intervals related to the 
severity of service.

The study you'll conduct will only be valuable if you can demonstrate that 
synthetics substantially extend the quality and breadth of protection so that 
the engine is totally protected for less money and less maintenance time while 
at the same time reducing the amount of waste oil produced which is difficult 
to dispose of and dangerous too because of it being a known carcinogen.

I found a company that shares my beliefs.  It is SynLube and they state their 
oil will last 150K miles, 3000 hours, or 10 years, whichever comes first.  It 
is a maintenance oil which means that you add either "Service Fill" for low oil 
consumption cars or "Add oil" for normal consumption cars.  Their oil filters 
(made by GM) last 2-5 years.  When it's time to change the oil, you can take 
the used oil and send it back to the company where they will microfilter it and 
restore the additive balance.  The end result is an oil meeting new oil specs 
and ready for the same service all over again.

Of course I use this oil.  I have not had time to build up a huge amount of 
miles but what mileage I have (about 20K miles) indicates that the oil works 
very well.  In my previous car which I traded in at 20K miles, I had 18K miles 
on the SynLube oil.  In that time, I only consumed 9.5 ounces of oil which 
works out to 62K miles per quart.  In addition, over the course of 100K miles, 
I would have saved hundreds of dollars, about 24 hours of maintenance time and 
almost 150 quarts of waste oil.

I have no connection with the company other than that of a satisfied customer.

I will be glad to make a donation to your experiment though I have no Paypal 
account.  I'm with NetBank.  What do you suggest considering I don't want to 
open an account with Paypal just for this one transaction?
Phil, thanks for the compliments and financial support for the synthetic oil life study. I have to say that testing Mobil 1 is critical as it is the only high-quality synthetic motor oil available at retail. As Mobil 1 is an OEM supplier, I would expect that their conservative oil-change recommendations are a CYA move rather than a lack of faith in their own product. The test will show for certain. Regarding SynLube, I checked out their offerings to see whether I could include them in the test. I won't be able to test it for two reasons: 1) their oil is 5W50 and the LS1 engine calls for 5W30; and 2) their oil contains PTFE, a.k.a. Teflon, the same stuff you'll find in Slick 50, and there's no WAY I'm putting PTFE in a $5000 engine!