Nothing wrong with Castrol GTX as dino oils go. There must be some explanation why it's not on this particular list. I would not jump to any hasty conclusions about the inferiority or poor quality of GTX based on this one observation without some more digging as to why it's not on the list.
Castrol GTX fails GM6094M spec
- Thread starter LoneRanger
- Start date
- Status
Don't see AMSOIL on the list either
Just got done with a freezer test of a quart of GTX 5w30. I really expected it to be stiff as a board, but to my suprise it was quite pourable. I used my IR temp thermometer to check to temp of the bottle as I pulled it out and it was -13f.
It was able to be pumped, I believe, although a GRP IV would probably do better. Having said that, the last M1 5w30 I checked in the freezer didn't exactly flow like water..
It was able to be pumped, I believe, although a GRP IV would probably do better. Having said that, the last M1 5w30 I checked in the freezer didn't exactly flow like water..
No Royal Purple on the list either...I imagine they are in the same boat as Red Line and Amsoil
I saw this list the same day I changed my oil with 5 qts of GTX 5W30...1K mile later my engine has not blown up or anything in the like...in fact some noise I had with Valvoline A/C in the sump is gone...might just be a coincidence with the break in of the engine though
Goose
Goose
I saw this list the same day I changed my oil with 5 qts of GTX 5W30...1K mile later my engine has not blown up or anything in the like...in fact some noise I had with Valvoline A/C in the sump is gone...might just be a coincidence with the break in of the engine though
Goose
Goose
I wrote Castrol concerning this issue and they are going over the results with GM.Joe
Castrol is BP operated now, isnt it?
Is that bad?
BP has owned Castrol for as long as I can remember. They have good oils, but I hate the Gasoline. My bias against their gas has steered me away from the oil, even though I know it is good. It must be a mental block or something.
I thought this standard was a GM patch that was applicable before SM/GF4 standards were in place. Seems like there was quite a bit of discussion on the subject when GF3 was still being introduced. Is this a resurrection of a two year old bulletin?
In other words, maybe the 6094M spec is inherent in all SM/GF4 oils.
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000098055.cfm
In other words, maybe the 6094M spec is inherent in all SM/GF4 oils.
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000098055.cfm
I meant GF4 was being introduced and GF3 was in place.
I'm thinking maybe "panzerman" has hit the nail on the head. When I first read the topic of this thread, the very first thing that came to my mind was emissions. GTX is one of the few remaining dino's that still has acceptable levels of Zn and P, essential for older cars with flat tappet valvetrains. Yet the new SM/CJ-4 requirements are forcing oil manuf's. to remove these additives, sometimes in favor of Boron , other additives, or nothing at all. They say Zn and P cause premature cat. conv. failures, but personally I think it's the EPA holding us hostage to their "going green"-mania. GM is probably being forced to remove GTX from their approved list because of the level of these additives.
It's pumpability. See my previous link...
"Speaking before ILMA meeting here, GM’s Roy Fewkes said the automaker has decided that since the introduction of GF-4 oils has been delayed, it needs to reactivate the GM 6094M low-temperature pumpability requirement. The old GM 6094M specification was dropped when API initiated the engine oil licensing and certification system and began identifying qualified oils with the starburst symbol in the early 1990s."
"Speaking before ILMA meeting here, GM’s Roy Fewkes said the automaker has decided that since the introduction of GF-4 oils has been delayed, it needs to reactivate the GM 6094M low-temperature pumpability requirement. The old GM 6094M specification was dropped when API initiated the engine oil licensing and certification system and began identifying qualified oils with the starburst symbol in the early 1990s."
Dont knock S-K. I read somewhere that rerefining is a costly process.. Never mind, AC has -39C pourpoint so I see why its on the list.
http://www.ac-rerefined.com/AC_Passenger_Car_Motor_Oilsb_SM.pdf
Bigger question I have is why the heck is formulashell 5w20 not on the list? Also, where is pennzoil dino 5w20 in that list?
Post deleted...
Last edited:
Interesting that both Castrol Syntec and Valvoline SynPower do not make the list for the 4918m standard (Corvette). Both the Valvo and Castrol Websites say they DO meet the standard.
Duh...4718m
Click on the Castrol banner.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 5,293
I did. What am I looking for?
- Status