Oil Quiz.
- Thread starter Chris-St Louis
- Start date
:banghead: :banghead:Ol'Drippy said:I use whatever Jiffy Lube puts in there
And
:banghead: for good measure.
Chris-St Louis said:
I have no clue whether it is or isn't! I'm gonna have to try to figure this out....
I woudl guess no. 20-50 usually is a grade 1 base...
javascriptpenMSDS("controller?module=com.chevron.lubes.msds.bus.BusPDSDetail&msdsNumber=&docNumber=203667&docDataId=205060&docFormat=PDF&isLoginPage=true®ion=NA")
Check it out, 20-50 doesnt meet any manufacture spec. Pretty weak.
Ugh, that was the shortcut.(
javascript
penMSDS("controller?module=com.chevron.lubes.msds.bus.BusPDSDetail&msdsNumber=&docNumber=203667&docDataId=205060&docFormat=PDF&isLoginPage=true®ion=NA")Check it out, 20-50 doesnt meet any manufacture spec. Pretty weak.
Ugh, that was the shortcut.
(
Last edited:
Im a river to my people. Actaully, I'm trying to head off some of the emails I get askign simialr questions.
Actaully, I'm trying to head off some of the emails I get askign simialr questions.When I bought my D2 I changed all engine & gear oil to Mobil 1 synthetic (with Mobil 1 filter). Then I realized that I'd have to produce certified mechanic receipts if I ever have a powertrain warranty claim so I just had my oil changed by an independent import shop that I trust. They used Castrol non-syn, I believe, and OEM filter, saying that it really doesn't matter if you change every 3K miles. But now I am noticing a bit more of a ticking from under the hood...might jump back to M1 at the next change and see if it makes a difference.
Take a look on the back of that Castrol GTX bottle, you will see a sqaure with the words "Not for sale outside of America".....Yikes. Again, pick a Mobil one with a ACEA a3/b3 rating.
Chris-St Louis said:
how come castol's site lists the ACEA ratings?
http://www.castrol.com/castrol/genericarticle.do?categoryId=82915470&contentId=6006933
Interesting information. I'll switch up, I can't see it hurting anything. How do you feel about the K&N oil filter? You think my logic holds?
Cheers,
Kennith
Cheers,
Kennith
Leslie said:
Well, Yes and No. API does mean that it’s wet and slippery, but API Sm is the weakest oil service rating in the industry today. API SM fails to meet the minimum requirement of most vehicles on the road in America today. SAE 20/30/40/etc, 10W-40, 20W-50 or even 15W-40 is a lower quality base stock than most 5W-30 and any 5W-20 products.
Every common brand makes a product that is ACEA A3/B3 approved. But, 90+% of the products made by each of those brands fails to meet ACEA A3/B3. That said, an API oil might give enough for a 50 horse Series. I don’t know what they asked for OE in the 50s?
Engines are designed with valve trains that complement crank bearing clearance, etc. Thicker oil increases the shear forces in bearings and journals at high speeds. An engine with a high shear force valve train that is expected to operate at high speed will tend to require a thicker oil to protect that valve train. But, it must also have crankshaft clearances that accommodate that oil or bearing problems will result. The thicker oil may also require modifications to pistons, rings and even connecting rods or oilers to insure appropriate oil flow for cooling and flushing of the piston & rings.
I n my opinion brand and weight mean very little compared to service ratings, of which there are 14 ACEA service ratings, a few pertinent API service ratings, two pertinent ILSAC ratings and at least a dozen proprietary service ratings that are generically important (and dozens that are less significant).
http://www.infineum.com/information...ar Engine Test Category For API SM - 2008.pdf
Here is a chart from 2007 that says what is needed for API, compare that with ACEA requirements. Or even Ford.
http://www.infineum.com/information/acea2007_gasolineanddiesel.pdf
http://www.ilma.org/resources/ford_2004_my.pdf
What you will find is that: The ASTM sequence IIIE is run 64 hours for API approval but must be run 128 hours for the Ford proprietary rating.
The ASTM sequence IIIF is run 80 hours for API approval but must be run 160 hours for the Ford proprietary rating.
Here is an example of the huge spread API offers.
BMW and Toyota Prius (depending on year and model) both require 5W-30, but there is no 5W-30 product that is approved for both. Any 5W-30 that is approved for the BMW
is not appropriate for the Toyota. Any 5W-30 that is appropriate for the Toyota is not approved for the BMW. But, both are API 5-30.
Once we understand the ratings a little better, we can identify the deception.
ILSAC, the GM ratings and several others include catalyst compatibility, O2 sensor compatibility and fuel efficiency requirements. When oil bears the statement: "Meets/exceeds engine protection requirements of ILSAC/etc" instead of” Meets all requirements of ILSAC/etc" it is a red flag that the other requirements were not met.
A product data sheet will often show the Sulfated ASH, Phosphorous and Sulfur (SAPS) content that are Catalyst/O2 compatibility requirements of ILSAC, GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc. And the API donut includes a specific spot that will show energy conservation requirements (or be empty when the product fails).
So, the labeling only succeeds in misleading us if we don't understand enough about the rating systems.
Since the OEMS all copy the ILSAC or ACEA SAPS limits, we don't have to memorize a different catalyst standard for each car.
ACEA has a whole bunch of different ratings that are either new or still used during a transition period, but they all follow a rating system that makes them easy enough to understand/remember.
The OEMS also follow patterns. Any VW ABC.01 rating is simply an improvement of a VW ABC.00/ABC. Any ford oil rating starts with WSS-M2C, so only the last three digits and suffix are significant. And they still follow patterns.
Most American OEM ratings simply duplicate API and ILSAC. And the Engine protection portion of ILSAC always duplicates API. So, the current GM 6094M is nothing more than the current ILSAC rating! But, the GM 4718M is the current ILSAC rating plus some much more stringent engine protection sequences. GM has been using the same rating number each year, but it is automatically updated as ILSAC and API change.
So, it is complicated, but not as complicated as it sounds on the surface and it is manageable.
Last edited:
kennith said:
I'm with ya. As far as K&N, I havent heard anything bad about them. It?s tough to get specs, but let me tell you the general of what makes filters different.
When you are comparing most company?s premium filter to the second/ (silver) line it is almost all about the paper. It cost too much to have different tooling to manufacture a completely unique filter line. There are many specs and the ones most in play in these first and second lines having to do with the filter media are as follows.
There is single pass effectiveness that rates the amount of contamination over a certain size removed from the oil as it flows through the element. That is the typical spec most
are saying they pass. Catch all the particles that are large enough to cause damage and you are in good shape. Two filters with different media can have the same rating here but there is still another factor to look at. Total capacity to trap contamination is the second factor to look at. Several factors come into play here. Total surface area of the
media and the design of the media. The more surface area the more it will catch. The better the properties of the media in depth the more you catch before the filter becomes clogged. Use a lot of high quality media and you have a filter with a bunch of reserve
capacity. That means it can effectively filter out more harmful particles and still flow oil. It also makes it cost much more. Once a filter reaches its capture capacity it will bypass to at least allow lube to flow but with all the dirt.
Brand can be a little silly. Picture 3 shows 2 filters from the same brand and level. As you can see, nothing is the same. Filter media, Bypass spring,etc
Filters have different thread manufacture (rolled vs cut)
Filters have different housing thicknesses (some feel like beer cans)
Filters have different media (some have paper, some cellulose, some have more pleats than others)
Filters have different methodology of attaching that media to the end cap (glued to paper/hardboard, crimped to steel, glued to steel, etc)
Filters have different anti drain valves (some silicone, some neoprene, some I've seen have excess "flash" which jams the valve itself, to create a backflow or leak on
shutdown)
Filters have different bypass valves (some use steel coil, others use disc type)
There are other differences that escape me at the moment...That said, Almost every economy line filter I've seen measures thinner canister gauge than their premium line. The valving is often cheesier too. Take a look at picture one and two. The vehicle was a 95 Isuzu FTR, the vehicle was only in for PM. The ruptured filter was cut apart, and found to be nearly free of dirt, the bypass valve inside impeccable. The filter was mechanically overpressurized to to a restricted outlet, which caused the rupture. A lesser filter would probably have split. Premium filter manufacturers not only guarantee the filter, they also guarantee the engine it destroyed.
Attachments
K&N is made by Mobil 1. Guess it depends on if you want to pay more for the little nut on the end of the can.kennith said:
Same filter as the Mobil 1, but not made by them. I do like that nut. Just in case things get too tight somehow, in a place where I REALLY need to swap a filter, it possibly gives me just a bit of extra edge. You just never know.
Looking at the page where the fellow tears them all down, I think it fared pretty well against the others. It has lots of surface area compared to most other filters, around twice as much in many instances, and only a couple have more, but to a possible detriment, according to the guy tearing them down.
I could get the Mobil 1 filter, but the K&N is always available around here, has the nut, and since they really only badge one type of filter, there is no danger of me grabbing an inferior product by mistake.
I haven't found a reason NOT to get this filter yet. There are better filters out there, but none I have seen that are obviously superior are approved to fit the DII.
Cheers,
Kennith
Looking at the page where the fellow tears them all down, I think it fared pretty well against the others. It has lots of surface area compared to most other filters, around twice as much in many instances, and only a couple have more, but to a possible detriment, according to the guy tearing them down.
I could get the Mobil 1 filter, but the K&N is always available around here, has the nut, and since they really only badge one type of filter, there is no danger of me grabbing an inferior product by mistake.
I haven't found a reason NOT to get this filter yet. There are better filters out there, but none I have seen that are obviously superior are approved to fit the DII.
Cheers,
Kennith
For a Series:
The charts I've attached list oils by weight (such as 20w-50), and by brand (Castrol GTX, Havoline, etc.).
I guess, if I'm *really* concerned, I need to figure out what British-Leyland's BLS.22.OL.02 says.....
I'm not *worried* about it, w/ the Series.... but, I will change about how I think about oil for the Sierra.... (an '07 GMC 5.3L V8 w/ AFM).
The charts I've attached list oils by weight (such as 20w-50), and by brand (Castrol GTX, Havoline, etc.).
I guess, if I'm *really* concerned, I need to figure out what British-Leyland's BLS.22.OL.02 says.....
I'm not *worried* about it, w/ the Series.... but, I will change about how I think about oil for the Sierra.... (an '07 GMC 5.3L V8 w/ AFM).
Attachments
Leslie said:
Interesting list. I havent look at it too hard, but noticed the oils that are avalible in teh US, seems to be mostly 15-40,wish requires a sheer rating of at least 3.5. Curious about the others.
The Seirra does need at least a 6049 oil, no biggie really...most of them are cheap and readily avalible.