API SN / ILSAC GF-5. Taking a shellacking

[wemay]

There has been a lot of discussion where SN/GF-5 has taken a beating here lately:

-"High Mileage oils have been dumbed down now that they are Resource Conserving (GF-5), i.e. not as thick before."

-"GF-5 Synthetics should not be used in late model Subaru WRX (and other turbo applications) due to HTHS not being stout enough."

-"SN/GF-5 limits Zinc so it doesn't protect as well as past engine oil categories."

...and others, etc.

How is this category an improvement if at every turn here, it is seen as inferior for anything other than a grocery getter?

 

[440Magnum]

Depends on how much credit you give those opinions. SM limited zinc/phosphorous before SN did, anyway.

 

[fdcg27]

There's always a lot of discussion on here about how inferior current API specs are to those of the past.
There's also a lot of discussion in which dark conspiracy theories about the widespread recommendations of the 0W-20 grade are set forth.
As I see it, engine builders, oil formulators and API techs know more about oil and what an engine requires than I do, so I wouldn't feel too badly about following their recommendations.
Those who do can always use something like M1 0W-40 instead.
It checks all of the boxes some consider vital and it's widely available and fairly cheap.
We're free to use what we'd like.
We aren't free to substitute opinions for facts.
Well, I guess that we are, but we shouldn't expect to be taken very seriously when we do.

 

[widman]

Rule number 1 here is realize that a lot of things posted are opinions or observations. Over time you figure out who knows what he is talking about.

It is free speech. Just because it is posted doesn't make it true.

 

[BigD1]

Just as long as Mobil keeps making Mobil 1 high mileage SL rating I will be happy. Got a jug of the 10w-30 going in soon, and the HTHS is 3.5.

 

[Garak]

I see no problems with SN/GF-5 for appropriate applications. I used a lot of PYB in SN/GF-5 in my G37, for probably half its life. I have more of a problem with regular retail pricing here, but that's another matter.

My grousing about thickness is mainly because certain vehicles on the road (i.e. those targeted by products like Defy) called for a 30 grade with a little higher HTHS than what we currently see with ILSAC 30s. The can easily be solved with a 10w-30 HDEO, but that's not ideal in a Saskatchewan winter.

I don't have a huge issue with reduced phosphorus limits, either. Much of the issue is overblown. Guys with high spring pressures and flat tappets have concerns, but that's not my biggest issue, and there are alternatives for those who really want them - and are willing to pay. However, when high mileage oils have traditionally been uncertified (or used older certifications) and advertised themselves as being a bit thicker and having higher additive levels, and then suddenly that changes, it makes people wonder.

As for Subarus and so forth, I suppose people wonder because of thicker oil recommendations with similar engines in the past.

Really, I have no issue with using an ILSAC rated lube where specified. I've done it before, and I'll be doing it again.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: wemay
There has been a lot of discussion where SN/GF-5 has taken a beating here lately:

-"High Mileage oils have been dumbed down now that they are Resource Conserving (GF-5), i.e. not as thick before."

-"GF-5 Synthetics should not be used in late model Subaru WRX (and other turbo applications) due to HTHS not being stout enough."

-"SN/GF-5 limits Zinc so it doesn't protect as well as past engine oil categories."

...and others, etc.

How is this category an improvement if at every turn here, it is seen as inferior for anything other than a grocery getter?


All oil specs are compromised in some direction...A3/B4 use more fuel, and aren't ideal for exhaust gas treatment.

ILSAC oils have a different target area for performance, and cause compromises in other areas. Joe90_guy brought to the table that the specs encourage less shear stable polymers as an example...

Doesn't make them "bad" per se, but if I've got a friend who needs a 30, and there's an ILSAC oil next to an A3/B4, or C3, I'll steer them towards the ACEA brew.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted By: widman
Rule number 1 here is realize that a lot of things posted are opinions or observations. Over time you figure out who knows what he is talking about.

It is free speech. Just because it is posted doesn't make it true.
Very diplomatic!!!

 

[Joe90_guy]

The question asked by the OP is 'Is GF-5 fit for purpose'?
The better question to ask is 'Whose purpose does GF-5 serve'?

The answer to the first question is, 'No, not always'.
The answer to the second question is, 'Not yours'.

 

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted By: Garak

As for Subarus and so forth, I suppose people wonder because of thicker oil recommendations with similar engines in the past.

Good point. Not only that, but Subaru of Japan currently recommends 5W40 in the WRX and the BRZ in spirited driving, while the latter is specced for 0W20 in N. America.

I do believe that GF5 5W30's work very well in many turbocharged Subaru applications, but I just do not believe these oils are one size fits all regardless of driving conditions. This is my opinion based on the older EJ engine. So far, the new FA DIT engines seem to be doing fairly well (stock) on 2-5% fuel dilution and 20 grade operational viscosity.

Although there's not many high mileage cars out there yet.

xW40's may also provide some extra protection from the nut behind the wheel.

 

[Scum_Frog]

What's the saying?..."opinions are like [censored]holes, everybody has got one"

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted By: Joe90_guy
The question asked by the OP is 'Is GF-5 fit for purpose'?
The better question to ask is 'Whose purpose does GF-5 serve'?

The answer to the first question is, 'No, not always'.
The answer to the second question is, 'Not yours'.


+1

Unlike GF-5 , A3B4 does serve you I suppose.

 

[BrocLuno]

Hey, I'm the nut behind the wheel and I've owned a string of turbo'd cars - still have one as a daily driver. I buy them because when I want to accelerate, I want the extra go. If I'm just cruising no penalty... And they do well in the Sierra's at 8,000 feet

I'd never try to make a blown motor of any kind live on XW-20. It might do it for a while, but not as long as I want it to live... OTOH, there are a bazillion turbo'd diesels out there making some big number manifold pressures (30 psi ...) with turbo's lasting 100 of thousands of miles on 15W-40 ...

If you have bought a turbo due to failure and were lucky enough not to have to buy the motor too, you will not want to face that scenario again. Thicker more stable oil is cheap. These parts, not so much

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Good point. Not only that, but Subaru of Japan currently recommends 5W40 in the WRX and the BRZ in spirited driving, while the latter is specced for 0W20 in N. America.

I don't doubt there are many times it could work fine. I take my time and am not hard on a vehicle. But, when a manufacturer makes a vehicle that people like to flog on at least once in a while (and some far more regularly than that), consideration might be warranted.

My other beef with SN/GF-5 is just its ubiquity. If I go to Walmart, there will be more SN/GF-5 products than I can count. If I find three A3/B3 A3/B4 examples (M1 0w-40, Castrol 0w-30 and 0w-40), I'd be lucky. There might be a couple monogrades in there, too.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't need eight different 5w-30 SN/GF-5 choices all from Shell on the same shelf.

 

[53' Stude]

Sir Garak: thank you for your info on this subject as I enjoy learning new stuff from you and other knowledgeable folks here

 

[SR5]

Originally Posted By: Garak

My other beef with SN/GF-5 is just its ubiquity. If I go to Walmart, there will be more SN/GF-5 products than I can count. If I find three A3/B3 A3/B4 examples (M1 0w-40, Castrol 0w-30 and 0w-40), I'd be lucky. There might be a couple monogrades in there, too.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't need eight different 5w-30 SN/GF-5 choices all from Shell on the same shelf.


In Oz A3/B4 & A3/B3 are the easy oils to find. Close your eyes and grab a jug....it's probably A3.

I would probably have a better selection of synthetic Porsche A40 oils than of synthetic ILSAC GF-5 oils at my local auto store. But it would be close, and the ratio has changed a bit even in the last 6 months. Few more light ones around now.

 

[Garak]

I was wandering a Walmart yesterday for some inexplicable reason, and saw a labeling gaffe on some of their older 5w-40 stuff. I don't know if it's changed since, but this was an old bottle and looked odd.

Normally, 0w-30 A3/B4, 0w-40 A3/B4, and 5w-30 A3/B4 are labeled as such. I'm pretty sure 5w-40 was as well. The ILSAC stuff is always labeled as 5w-30 U.S., to differentiate it. The 5w-40 had 5w-40 U.S. on it, with the European approvals on the back. I thought that was a bit odd. But, as I mentioned in another thread, that Walmart had a royal mess going on in the oil aisle, and I didn't see any new type Castrol labels, except for some GTX.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: Garak


Normally, 0w-30 A3/B4, 0w-40 A3/B4, and 5w-30 A3/B4 are labeled as such. I'm pretty sure 5w-40 was as well. The ILSAC stuff is always labeled as 5w-30 U.S., to differentiate it. The 5w-40 had 5w-40 U.S. on it, with the European approvals on the back. I thought that was a bit odd. But, as I mentioned in another thread, that Walmart had a royal mess going on in the oil aisle, and I didn't see any new type Castrol labels, except for some GTX.


It would be nice if our shelves made the same distinctions. It'd teach people that there's more to motor oil than viscosity and marketing.

 

[Garak]

Well, I think that's more Castrol's label system than anything else. What does it say on your guys' "normal" Castrol 5w-30 synthetic down there? I kind of like it saying "U.S." or "A3/B4" as the case may be. While that's not exactly the whole picture, it sure can help a person distinguish if they're in a bit of a hurry and aren't completely up on the specs. Being able to distinguish at a glance between the U.S. 0w-30 and the 0w-30 A3/B4 might have been helpful to some in years past, and when you have 5w-30 U.S., 5w-30 A3/B4, and 5w-30 C3 all on the same shelf, it's nice to have that distinction right up front. Of course, the U.S. will have the Starburst, but the other two would otherwise require a bit more caution, specifically if they just said 5w-30 Euro or something similarly vague.

It's times like these that I wish I had taken more pictures of oil labels over the years. Then again, we BITOGers are already nuts enough, and a photo collection of oil labels won't help that perception.

 

[wemay]

I'm sorry, i misunderstood. I thought you were describing WMart's labeling of oils, not Castrol's.

Yes, Castrol labels here say 'European, North American' etc., too.