Well, if it means anything, I still love 'ya Mola!
redline and easy driven cars
- Thread starter JHZR2
- Start date
- Status
The ACEA (Association des Constructeurs Européens d' Automobiles) is the European body of thirteen
European car, truck and bus manufacturers:
http://www.acea.be/
I haven't been impressed that they're privy to anything the Japanese and American manufacturers are not.
If you build Ferraris, you assume your customers can afford to pay Shell $29 a quart for a 0W-60 speciality motor oil.
If you build Toyota Echos, Kia Rios, and Chevrolet Cavaliers that's probably not going to be a valid assumption.
Nothing prevented GM from adding additional specifications over and above the API starburst for the Corvette.
The topic is "easy driven cars".
I would not try to make the argument that an oil suitable for "easy driven cars" means it's the oil of choice for next spring's Indianapolis 500 entry you're working on.
On the other hand, I don't disparage the API specification because I can't use it to pick an oil for my Ferrari.
So if it meets several recognized specs but not API, what does that mean? The API spec is not the "mother" of all specs. Like mentioned before, the oil companies have to pay to have the API label on their product. That does not mean that product won't pass the API tests. It just means they didn't pay for API to say they passed. [/QB][/QUOTE]The specs you quoted means it's most likely a good a oil and the people who make it think enough of it and their customers to get it certified, unlike the botique oils. You picked an oil the represents a small percentage on the non-API oils in the US. Most US non-API oils are botique oils that are not certified to meet any recognized standards. But I said that before, and you choose to ignore it. Which botique oil to you sell? [/QB][/QUOTE]
I do not sell any oils. I don't sell anything at all. I just use them. However, I do not use just the ones that have the API starburst. The ones that I do use with the starbusrt I use because of other reasons than the API spec. There are plenty of other specs out there that are more meaningful than the API. (IMO)
Here is a great link about API service ratings and approval. I want to especially point out the statement below:
The API Certification Mark
The API Certification Mark "starburst" is designed to identify engine oils recommended for a specific application (such as gasoline service). An oil may be licensed to display the starburst only if the oil satisfies the most current requirements of the International Lubricant Standardization and Approval Committee (ILSAC) minimum performance standard for this application (currently GF-2 for passenger cars).
That's telling me that the API approval is only met if an oil satisfies someone elses (ILSAC) standards.
heres lhe link: http://www.bullittarchive.com/Maintenance/Oil/
The API Certification Mark
The API Certification Mark "starburst" is designed to identify engine oils recommended for a specific application (such as gasoline service). An oil may be licensed to display the starburst only if the oil satisfies the most current requirements of the International Lubricant Standardization and Approval Committee (ILSAC) minimum performance standard for this application (currently GF-2 for passenger cars).
That's telling me that the API approval is only met if an oil satisfies someone elses (ILSAC) standards.
heres lhe link: http://www.bullittarchive.com/Maintenance/Oil/
Not really.
Unlike the ACEA (Association des Constructeurs Européens d' Automobiles), the API has made a real effort to coordinate standards. There are a number of reasons for this.
In the U.S., a good part of the aftermarket is either independent or do-it-yourself. In Europe the major part of the aftermarket is new car dealers and manufacturer-certified garages.
For Europeans an oddball spec for just VW TDI engines, then, doesn't cause the problems it would in the U.S.. The manufacturer "pushes" the special spec oil into its dealers and approved garages. You, the consumer, don't walk into Le AutoZone and expect to buy VW TDI motor oil.
Recent examples of oddball specs and problems in the U.S. market include the Aisin-Warner transmission ATF specs, the Chrysler ATF-4 specs, the VW TDI spec just mentioned, and the various incompatible coolants. You either buy it from the dealer or go fish.
I think the Europeans are heading in the wrong direction. Their sales in the US seem to indicate the same thing.
The International Lubricant Standardization and Approval Committee (ILSAC) was formed as a cooperative venture between the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), the American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA), and the Japanese Automobile Standards Organization (JASO). The ACEA has been invited to join and declined more than once. The idea was to coordinate standards worldwide so that international trade in the sale and repair of motor vehicles - and aftermarket parts - would be enhanced.
ILSAC and its founders then formed the Engine Oil Licensing and Certification System (EOLCS). The EOLCS licenses oils approved through the ILSAC. The API provides the overall administration of the EOLCS system.
ILSAC issued the first standards, GF-1 in 1996. The API SH specification was coordinated with that. In 1997 GF-2 and API SJ were released tightening requirements for phosphorus content, low temperature operation, high temperature deposits and foam control.
GF-3 and API-SL were issued July, 2001. They dealt with long-term emission system durability and improved fuel economy and tightened requirements for volatility, deposit control, viscosity retention, and additive depletion over the oil service life.
The ILSAC GF-4 specification may be out right now - I haven't been paying much attention.
But it strikes me the Europeans are going to wind up with multiple oddball specifications that are car-specific.
You stated yourself that GM added another spec beyond the API specs. Ford and Chrysler are also doing this. Seems they are heading in the same direction the Europeans are headed.
Oil companies have the right to indicate API rating even if its oil is not certified by API. But API has the right to check its conformity to declared performance and suspend sales. No more. Starburs is different, it's necessary to be qualified by API. As for European oils, API is just a base to start qualification for ACEA and the latter, in its turn, the base for OEM approval. So, if the oil gets ACEA level, it means that it also meets required API level.
As for workshop products like Motul Specific, the products are destinated for exact makes and being approved by an OEM the oil is naturally specified on the list of each authorized service. Then who cares whether or not it's qualified to API or ACEA ?
As for workshop products like Motul Specific, the products are destinated for exact makes and being approved by an OEM the oil is naturally specified on the list of each authorized service. Then who cares whether or not it's qualified to API or ACEA ?
I think the ACEA A3 rating and BMW LL-01 are the two best ratings for everyday pcmo right now.
The Corvette spec was substantially incorporated into the next ILSAC and API standard.
Ford and Chrysler issued specifications in anticipation of pending changes in the ILSAC and API standards. In the case of Ford (and Honda) they had specific fuel mileage and pollution standards they had to fleet certify.
The European situation is much more fragmented.
There is no indication, for example, that the VW TDI specs are going to be incorporated into some future general specification for all European makers.
Maybe the next ACEA rating?
if red line isnt api certified, why do they list a service class? this is an honest question, not being an *** or anything
http://www.redlineoil.com/pdf/4.pdf
http://www.redlineoil.com/pdf/4.pdf
Read this link: http://www.bullittarchive.com/Maintenance/Oil/
Basically, an oil can "meet" API service specs but not be API "approved". I thinks it's basically a bunch of political hooey (for lack of a better word).
Next time you are in the parts store look at the different oils on the shelf. Almost all of them will say "meets" or "exceeds" or "recommended for". Then look and see which ones have the actual API starburst, not the doughnut but the actual starburst. The ones with a starburst on the label are API approved. A fine example of this is the Castol Syntec 10w-40 off the top of my head. If you read the specs it meets, there are a whole slew of them, including API SL. However, it is not API Approved. The Syntec 10w-30, 5w-30, and 5w-20, and the 0w-30 are all API Approved (with a starburst) but do not meet nearly as many other specs as the 10w-40.
I guess a more appropriate word for the starbust would be Certified, since that is exactly what is says on the starburst.
http://www.geosc.com/mainpage.cfm?category_level_id=253&content_id=292&channel_id=1
"Trimethylolethane (TME) is a high performance polyol containing three primary hydroxyl groups. Its compact neopentyl structure provides high hydroxyl content and excellent resistance to the effects of heat, light, hydrolyses, and oxidation. Typical TRIMET applications include premium quality alkyd and polyester resins for paints, powder coating resins, polyol ester synthetic lubricants, plasticizers, stabilizers for plastics, and titanium dioxide pigment coatings. The nitrate ester is used in explosives and propellants. TME may also be used as a solid phase heat storage medium. Resins prepared with trimethylolethane are noted for their superior weatherability and excellent color, heat and alkali resistance."
"TME is available in two grades: Technical and Pure and in two forms: briquettes and granular. TME Tech is most often supplied in cake resistant briquettes. Granular TME Tech can be shipped on request. TME Pure is available in granular form only."
So, it appears to be a useful additive.
Trimethylpropane (TMP)and pentaerithyritol (PE, DiPE) are what I see mentioned in motor lubricant references. It appears that pentaerithyritol is incompatible with elastomers of acrylonitrile-butadiene, hydrogenated nitrile, fluorocarbon, SBR, and polyacrylate.
I don't have anything on trimethylpropane.
Yes, it's some kind of a guarantee for us, but 1). approved oils are not 100 % esters, 2). we always want to use the best one, and that's why are here
I agree. RL/Motul are not 100% ester. We need to keep in mind that their are over 300 different esters or something like that. So what RL is using might be different then Motul etc. I go by UOAs on BITOG for my choices.
[ August 06, 2004, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
- Status
Similar threads
