GF-6 delayed again

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
146
Location
MO
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article002788089.cfm?x=bmM3gHT,bpcHqJDR

Getting a robust new engine oil category, but it is taking a lot longer than expected...

Thoughts?
 
I didn't realize how many new tests were being developed for GF-6. And with new tests being developed for PC-11, no wonder things are stretching out. I wonder if this will affect introduction of the 16-weight?
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
I didn't realize how many new tests were being developed for GF-6. And with new tests being developed for PC-11, no wonder things are stretching out. I wonder if this will affect introduction of the 16-weight?



Unsure. The weighting is an SAE thing so there's technically nothing stopping them from offering it. We already have a few 0w15s.
 
SAE already approved the 0W-16, but I am not sure that many marketers/OEMs are going to be jumping out there with SAE 0W-16 grades until there is a lot of data on the new engine test stands. The rumor I have heard from industry folks is that the 0W-16 is being met with a lot of skepticism from all but one or two OEMs
 
We are all "just" getting used to 0W-20...introducing 0W-16 so soon may be premature.

Related question: Since we all accept that these new "thinner' oils were introduced for fuel economy, how much improvement can be squeezed from using ever-thinner oils?

Please note: I am not claiming 5W-20 et. al. have no value other than fuel economy. I accept that it's been proven they are good oils, I just don't know how much more improvement there is to be had from 0W-16? Are we destined to spend $500 more per engine in redesign costs to save 0.01% in fuel costs?
 
Originally Posted By: RF Overlord
We are all "just" getting used to 0W-20...introducing 0W-16 so soon may be premature.

Related question: Since we all accept that these new "thinner' oils were introduced for fuel economy, how much improvement can be squeezed from using ever-thinner oils?

Please note: I am not claiming 5W-20 et. al. have no value other than fuel economy. I accept that it's been proven they are good oils, I just don't know how much more improvement there is to be had from 0W-16? Are we destined to spend $500 more per engine in redesign costs to save 0.01% in fuel costs?



what about 0 w 5

or 0 w 0

is that even possible?

0 w 0

?????????????
 
Originally Posted By: David1



what about 0 w 5

or 0 w 0

is that even possible?

0 w 0

?????????????

The "weights" are standards classified by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). SAE 16 is the thinnest and most recent standard. There are no official SAE standards below this. So it's certainly possible to make a thinner oil, it wouldn't have an official SAE number.
 
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
Originally Posted By: David1



what about 0 w 5

or 0 w 0

is that even possible?

0 w 0

?????????????

The "weights" are standards classified by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). SAE 16 is the thinnest and most recent standard. There are no official SAE standards below this. So it's certainly possible to make a thinner oil, it wouldn't have an official SAE number.


Indeed, anything lighter than an SAE 16 is not really classified as a multi-grade oil. For instance an oil with a KV@100C of 4.5 would just be labeled as whatever winter-grade number the cold-flow properties dictate (e.g. SAE 0W)
 
SAE papers published by big name formulators last year showed very serious durability issues with 16wt, 5-6 times the wear in IVA compared to 20wt.
 
I am in total agreement on the accelerated wear issue. What good is an increase of <1mpg if it significantly shortens the life of the engine?... then again, if I was in the business of selling new engines I may sing a different tune.
 
Originally Posted By: jake88
I am in total agreement on the accelerated wear issue. What good is an increase of div>

That
Subaru is having consumption issues with the new Forester and Impreza engines that spec 0W-20. I've been reading about engine replacements, re-ring jobs on 2014's, lemon law buy-backs, etc. I guess Subaru/Fuji Heavy still has some work to do on building engines that run on thin oils (although the Euro sub 2.0 engines have specced 0W-20 for years).

I hope GF-6 is delayed or revised to remove 0W-16.

-Dennis
 
Last edited:
I guess SoA saw my rant above.

http://techinfo.subaru.com/static/whatsNew.html

02-145-13 Technical Service Bulletin Surface Treatment Change To Oil Control Piston Rings (2012-2013MY Impreza and 2013MY XV Crosstrek) Sep 25, 2013 [View PDF]

02-144-13 Technical Service Bulletin Surface Treatment Change To Oil Control Piston Rings (2012-2014MY Forester) Sep 25, 2013 [View PDF]

Bring on the 0W-16?
laugh.gif


-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
Honda is biggest proponent I think. Even if it comes through doesn't mean the other OEM's will adopt it.


VIDEO: "Honda Voices Need for Ultra-Low Viscosity Engine Oils"
http://www.pceo.com/node/227

Yeah, OEMs are certainly taking the <1mpg very seriously because it means serious business for them in terms of CAFE requirements. For the average consumer <1mpg is meaningless.
 
Originally Posted By: jake88
Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
Honda is biggest proponent I think. Even if it comes through doesn't mean the other OEM's will adopt it.


VIDEO: "Honda Voices Need for Ultra-Low Viscosity Engine Oils"
http://www.pceo.com/node/227

Yeah, OEMs are certainly taking the div>


yea for consumers but think of the big picture.. If all the cars on the road can save 1 MPG and just say there are 1 BILLON cars on the earth.... well think about how many gallons that is.

Sorta reminds me in Washington the COAL Companies said they would donate 1 penny per TON of COAD they export via Washinton to Washington schools.

well at the end of the year they paid out nearly 800 Thousand US $
 
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
I guess SoA saw my rant above.

http://techinfo.subaru.com/static/whatsNew.html

02-145-13 Technical Service Bulletin Surface Treatment Change To Oil Control Piston Rings (2012-2013MY Impreza and 2013MY XV Crosstrek) Sep 25, 2013 [View PDF]

02-144-13 Technical Service Bulletin Surface Treatment Change To Oil Control Piston Rings (2012-2014MY Forester) Sep 25, 2013 [View PDF]

Bring on the 0W-16?
laugh.gif


-Dennis



Not sure that has any correlation with the weight of the oil, looks like a mechanical issue to me. If they had engineered the correct rings in the first place all this chatter about 20w oils being an issue would be muted.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Delayed till Jan 2017, my current GF-5 stash will be gone by then.


Mine won't.
I'd better buy a couple more cars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top