Some four months before, in late May, the national average broke $3.25 per gallon. While the mid-October price was down from that peak, it is still 54 cents higher than the price a year earlier. Overall, gasoline prices are at an all-time high and continue to fluctuate, so much that I have to check them every Saturday.

Market research has shown that it is not higher prices that drive consumers crazy; what they find unnerving is to be in a constant state of price fluctuation. When a market price adjustment occurs, consumers complain – and then adjust their lifestyles to accommodate this price change and go on with their lives. The market data will reflect this adjustment, then become consistent again.

However, if consumers drive by their favorite gasoline station and see that prices jumped 20 cents per gallon from the previous day, then see prices trickle down over the next week or two – and then see prices jump again 15 to 20 cents per gallon, it drives them crazy, and it makes it hard for them to adjust. This type of fluctuation keeps the issue of gasoline prices in the forefront of consumers minds.

As long as gasoline prices fluctuate significantly, consumers will be reevaluating their driving behavior and the automotive products used to maintain their vehicles – including motor oil, automotive chemicals, etc. – in hopes of gaining greater fuel efficiency.

Pain at the Pump

One question U.S. consumers are asking is, How is my car, SUV, minivan or light truck saving me money at the gasoline pump? Prior to record-breaking gasoline prices, U.S. attitudes toward vehicles were the bigger the better. Eight-cylinder vehicles like the Ford Excursion and Chevy Suburban were liked because they have more power than six-cylinder engines, they can be relied on to accelerate out of tight situations, and they can haul or tow heavy loads.

Similarly, buyers of six-cylinder engines favored these engines because they deliver more power than four-cylinders. As a gentleman in one focus group session said, I like cars with six cylinders over four-cylinders, because when I punch it [the accelerator] in a four-cylinder car, it goes nowhere. I gotta have power.

The other reason given for owning a six-cylinder engine over an eight-cylinder model was that it did not burn as much gasoline as the bigger power-plant. One could still punch the accelerator of a six-cylinder and it would respond, while saving gasoline in comparison to an eight-cylinder engine.

For the past 10 years, the number of light vehicles (i.e., passenger cars and light trucks) sold with eight-cylinder engines has flattened out, and began this year to dip. Vehicles with six-cylinder engines grew in popularity. Consumers understood that they would be able to realize acceleration power and save on gasoline. Another focus group participant lamented his heavy-weight eight-cylinder purchase, saying, I loved my Ford Excursion, it passed everything on the road except gas stations! So I had to trade it in, because I just couldnt afford the gas anymore.

The Four-bore Pitch

Soaring gasoline prices, coupled with the introduction of some appealing, sporty high-performance four-cylinder options (like the Saab 95Aero, Chevy HHR, the Mini-Cooper, the Ford Focus and others) have caused consumers now to move from six-cylinders to four-cylinder models.

Marshall Brain, author of the How Stuff Works series, recently observed that, With rising gas prices and greater public environmental awareness, Detroit seems to be reevaluating the four-cylinder engine for its fuel efficiency and lower emissions. Current V-6 models have been greatly improved, too, he added, to where many can nearly match the mileage and emissions standards of their smaller brethren. For many drivers, then, the choice may boil down to initial cost. In models that are available with either type of engine, the four-cylinder version can run up to $1,000 cheaper than the V-6, Brain noted. So regardless of what kind of performance youre looking to get out of your car, the four-cylinder will always be the budget buy.

According to the automotive research firm R.L. Polk & Co., Southfield, Mich., the latest new car and light truck registration data indicates that four-cylinder vehicles increased their U.S. market share from around 31 percent in 2005 and 2006, to 38 percent in the first three quarters of 2007. It appears that more consumers are evaluating how much their vehicles are saving them at the gasoline pump, selling off the gas-guzzlers, and turning to fuel-sipping four-cylinder models.

Plenty of Downsides

The immediate impact of the shift is that consumers purchasing these cool new high-performance four-cylinder engine vehicles are seeing savings at the gasoline pump. The downside of smaller four-cylinder engines is that they need greater lubrication protection, because they are smaller and have to work harder than six- and eight-cylinder engines. Moreover, former owners of six- and eight-cylinder engines have not changed their driving behaviors – they likely drive as they always have. In doing so, they are putting more and more stress on their smaller engines, making them work even harder.

The hard-working four-cylinder models also are running hotter than six- and eight-cylinder engines. These engines look to motor oils and gasolines to help to dissipate that heat and stress, because these smaller engines need greater protection to run at peak performance and have long and happy lives.

Meanwhile, the trend regarding oil change intervals continues to favor extending. The average number of annual oil changes per vehicle was 3.54 in 2002. Strategic Resources Inc. projects this will decrease to an average 3.11 changes per vehicle per year in 2008, due to fewer miles driven per vehicle – another result of drivers trying to economize on fuel.

Additionally, four-cylinder engines tend to have smaller oil capacities. According to R.L. Polk, the average crankcase capacity for eight-cylinder engines, not including the filter, is 4.6 quarts, and six-cylinders average 4.1 quarts. By contrast, four-cylinder crankcase capacity averages just 3.9 quarts – that is, 5 percent less per oil change than six-cylinder models, and 15 percent less than V-8s. For oil marketers, these snugger volumes are not exactly healthy.

And how do these two trends work for four-cylinder engines? They dont. If consumers are extending oil change intervals and four-cylinder crankcase capacities are smaller, the oil inside these engines has to be working harder. It is cooling down less between cycles, and is at risk of breaking down sooner.

Looking for Upsides

What marketing opportunities are created by the rise of smaller engines?

The first opportunity may be to create a motor oil specifically for harder-working four-cylinder engines. Readers may be thinking, Whoa! Isnt there a motor oil that claims to do that? The answer is no, there is not right now. Currently, no major motor oil brand is addressing this position.

Here are the market stances for each major national brand, from promotional material and websites:

Castrol GTX: Anti-sludge technology that provides superior protection against sludge build-up.

Mobil Clean 5000: Proven protection of critical engine parts for 5,000 miles or six months.

Pennzoil: Formulated to perform under everyday harsh driving conditions including stop-and-go traffic.

Quaker State Peak Performance: Formulated against friction and thermal breakdown.

Valvoline: Formulated for all-climates. Keeps engine clean. Reduces volatility. Resists thickening. Improves gas mileage.

Oh, yeah. The answer to your question is Castrol. During the 1980s and 90s, Castrol was positioned as the brand for smaller, harder-working engines. As shown above, though, superior protection against sludge build-up is this leading brands current position. Can Castrol quickly go back to its old campaign? Of course it can. However, it seems that there is opportunity for someone to claim a position not currently at the forefront of anyones marketing stance.

This opportunity may also bring spillover in the form of buyers who have downsized to six-cylinder engines. Drivers who own smaller six-cylinder engines, or who perceive their six-cylinder model to be a smaller engine, may be receptive to a product offering added protection. Their attitude would be, Heck, if a motor oil, gasoline or automotive chemical provides added protection to a four-cylinder engine, it would provide added protection my smaller six-cylinder engine. Ill try it. Spillover usage could make this position even more attractive to marketers.

The second opportunity may be on the gasoline front. There could be room to develop gasolines to help keep smaller four-cylinder engines cooler and running more efficiently. Would consumers who own vehicles with smaller four-cylinder engines flock to such a product? The answer is not clear; however, it surely is a researchable proposition, and one that could be further explored.

A third opportunity may come on the automotive chemical front. If gasoline manufacturers are not quick to react to smaller four-cylinder engine needs, fuel additives could be offered to help ease smaller-engine heat and stress. You might also see oil additives promising to help existing motor oils better lubricate smaller engines.

When the market shifts, it creates opportunity. Developing products for vehicles with smaller engines has worked in the marketplace in the past. It seems its time has come again. The first motor oil, gasoline or automotive chemical company that recognizes that the market has shifted and sees opportunity here will be the first to reap its rewards.