For a while now, Infineum has been calling on the industry groups (SAE, API, EMA, ILSAC, and others) to consider the cost and time involved in developing new oil specifications.
Just take a look at this article from April which reports on Chris Locke's presentation at this years ICIS conference in Europe: Choking on Complexity - Lubes N Greases
Now Lubrizol has joined in with a presentation to the Detroit Automotive Council calling for similar changes.
Press Release from HDDEO.com
Lubrizol presentation as published by API
The main message here is that engine technology is developing at an amazingly rapid pace, but the oil certifications aren't developing fast enough and it takes to long to approve new testing methods and can be wickedly expensive to develop a certification program (In the Lubrizol presentation they claim $150 Million spent on CK-4/FA-4 programs). Lubrizol seems to think that this time and cost burden is stifling innovation and results in products that meet the lowest common denominator - which is what ends up as the API specifications.
With new engine technology being introduced every couple of years in the search for better fuel economy - it seems a little silly to be using an engine oil spec from 11 years ago. Not that it hasn't done a wonderful job protecting engines, but the pace of change in this industry is changing and engine oil needs to change with it.
For those that are interested the API has published all the presentations given at DAP where the theme was "Fuel Economy- How do we get there?" Some of them are really interesting and give a good feel for how all the major North American players are looking at the engineering challenges related to improving fuel economy:
http://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/auto-oil-forum
Just take a look at this article from April which reports on Chris Locke's presentation at this years ICIS conference in Europe: Choking on Complexity - Lubes N Greases
Now Lubrizol has joined in with a presentation to the Detroit Automotive Council calling for similar changes.
Press Release from HDDEO.com
Lubrizol presentation as published by API
The main message here is that engine technology is developing at an amazingly rapid pace, but the oil certifications aren't developing fast enough and it takes to long to approve new testing methods and can be wickedly expensive to develop a certification program (In the Lubrizol presentation they claim $150 Million spent on CK-4/FA-4 programs). Lubrizol seems to think that this time and cost burden is stifling innovation and results in products that meet the lowest common denominator - which is what ends up as the API specifications.
With new engine technology being introduced every couple of years in the search for better fuel economy - it seems a little silly to be using an engine oil spec from 11 years ago. Not that it hasn't done a wonderful job protecting engines, but the pace of change in this industry is changing and engine oil needs to change with it.
For those that are interested the API has published all the presentations given at DAP where the theme was "Fuel Economy- How do we get there?" Some of them are really interesting and give a good feel for how all the major North American players are looking at the engineering challenges related to improving fuel economy:
http://www.api.org/products-and-services/engine-oil/auto-oil-forum
