PQIA: RAVENOL DXG FULLSYNTH 5W-30

Messages
4,672
Location
MN
Originally Posted By: Garak
PQIA does follow a chain of custody procedure in their testing. Note that this bottle was purchased almost three months ago. I'm sure I could still find dexos1 Generation 1 oils on the shelves here without too much trouble.
Fine, true, yet what kind of future does an oil have that has already been out-of-production for 9 months? So PQIA gives us a VOA on an oil with no future. Real Brainiacs working over there at PQIA. They've done this twice now.
 
Messages
28,129
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
The PQIA is here to ensure that on oil on the shelf is nominally compliant with the API service category and that it falls within the viscosity norms of SAE J300 for the grade on the label. They are not in operation to provide free VOAs for BITOG entertainment, as much as we appreciate them. They're also not here to ensure dexos1 compliance. That's the job of General Motors. From a PQIA perspective, this is fine. If Ravenol can make an SN/GF-5 dexos1 product, I'm sure the SN/GF-5 dexos1 Generation 2 product replacing it will still be SN/GF-5 compliant and within grade, which is PQIA's mandate. If you ask me, from a nitpicking standpoint, PQIA shouldn't be testing ANY dexos1 licensed products. Any officially licensed dexos1 product will already be well within SN/GF-5 and fall within grade, and GM took responsibility for policing this when they took on royalty fees.
 
Messages
23
Location
AL
Originally Posted By: Garak
PQIA does follow a chain of custody procedure in their testing. Note that this bottle was purchased almost three months ago. I'm sure I could still find dexos1 Generation 1 oils on the shelves here without too much trouble.
I would agree. I purchased the 7 liters(3 containers) I have less than three weeks ago online and received them less than two weeks ago. All 3 bottles have 2017 manufacture date and show Dexos1(original first generation) mark. I'm good with that. I think DXG will work well for my use, either Dexos1 or Dexos1 gen2. I would also think the differences in DXG formulation between meeting Dexos1 and Dexos1 gen2 would be slight. If I understand correctly, DXG's Dexos1(original first generation) approval expired 31.08.17(per Ravenol's web catalog) so would have to be renewed anyway.
 
Last edited:
Messages
28,129
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
I believe dexos1 Gen 1 is obsolete in any event. Whether the differences in Ravenol's formulation between Gen 1 and 2 are big or small, being an actual licensed product would mean it's going to be just fine. Ravenol isn't in the position to be playing silly games given what it's trying to accomplish over the next couple years.
 
Messages
2,046
Location
Oregon
Originally Posted By: Garak
Ravenol isn't in the position to be playing silly games given what it's trying to accomplish over the next couple years.
Curious, what is it?
 
Messages
4,672
Location
MN
Originally Posted By: two4spooky
I would agree. I purchased the 7 liters(3 containers) I have less than three weeks ago online and received them less than two weeks ago. All 3 bottles have 2017 manufacture date and show Dexos1(original first generation) mark. I'm good with that. I think DXG will work well for my use, either Dexos1 or Dexos1 gen2. I would also think the differences in DXG formulation between meeting Dexos1 and Dexos1 gen2 would be slight. If I understand correctly, DXG's Dexos1(original first generation) approval expired 31.08.17(per Ravenol's web catalog) so would have to be renewed anyway.
The new old-stock (NOS) Ravenol DXG dexos1 Gen1 oil you got is fine for non-Turbo-GDI engines. Great stuff actually. A lot of online retailers actually buy old left-over stock and sell it online. I really think they should divulge that, but thats an ethics issue some are not on-board with. Selling old oil is not generally any safety issue, like when TireRack has 4 year old overstock tires on sale, they divulge it right on the website, and that would be a bigger problem than old oil. The Gen1 formula has too much calcium and sodium, which makes it a bad choice to pass the new dexos1 Gen2 LSPI tests, that's all. Not a problem for many engines out there. Of course the presence of at least some POE in the old Ravenol does help lower LSPI events, although probably not enough to overcome the Ca+Na problem. You can bet the Ravenol DXG formula has changed, due to LSPI pressure alone.
 
Messages
1,292
Location
Douglas County, Colorado
The "offsetting" effect of the zinc and moly doesn't even come close to negating the LSPI causation effect of the calcium and sodium. LSPI is real, and calcium and sodium are major culprits. The way to negate LSPI is get rid of the sodium and calcium, not add zinc and moly. That is exactly what the oil manufacturers have done.
 
Last edited:
So why is LSPI only seeming to be an issue on DIT engines in North America? Europe and the rest of the world don't seem to suffer LSPI and Euro/Australian formula oils that I've seen PDS or VOA/UOA for generally have much more calcium than Dexos or SN formulae?
 
Messages
1,188
Location
WA
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
So why is LSPI only seeming to be an issue on DIT engines in North America? Europe and the rest of the world don't seem to suffer LSPI and Euro/Australian formula oils that I've seen PDS or VOA/UOA for generally have much more calcium than Dexos or SN formulae?
Our gas has 10% ethanol? Transmission programs aimed at delayed downshifts for CAFE standards?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Brigadier
Our gas has 10% ethanol? Transmission programs aimed at delayed downshifts for CAFE standards?
Brig, that was my point. Because of the clowns making emissions and CAFE requirements, the chemistries of the oils are having to change, and are very different than what has worked in the past. Europe has higher detergent levels to help better protect (I think most here at BITOG would run an A3/B4 oil long before an SN/Dexos oil if it met vehicle specs... because it is more robust. Market demand should drive innovation and new technologies, not regulations and restrictions.
 
Messages
4,672
Location
MN
Originally Posted By: SubieRubyRoo
Originally Posted By: Brigadier
Our gas has 10% ethanol? Transmission programs aimed at delayed downshifts for CAFE standards?
Brig, that was my point. Because of the clowns making emissions and CAFE requirements, the chemistries of the oils are having to change, and are very different than what has worked in the past. Market demand should drive innovation and new technologies, not regulations and restrictions.
We'll mark you down as disliking clean air and conservation of resources. Ridiculous.... The oil is there to serve the needs of the engine and performance requirements, not the other way around.
 
oil_film, would you not agree that Europe has a much higher population per square mile, in general, than the US? I would: [img]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density#/media/File:Countries_by_population_density.svg[/img] If things were like you said, Europe should have much worse smog, but I haven't seen any pictures lately of the Alps shrouded in a brown haze...
 
Messages
841
Location
Upper midwest
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
oil_film, would you not agree that Europe has a much higher population per square mile, in general, than the US? I would: [img]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density#/media/File:Countries_by_population_density.svg[/img] If things were like you said, Europe should have much worse smog, but I haven't seen any pictures lately of the Alps shrouded in a brown haze...
Good point, and Old Movies you remember here in Minnesota when we completely wasted our tax payer money for automotive testing stations and 5 years later and unbelievable thing happened in our progressive state, "THEY" were pragmatic that the testing stations are a waste of money and closed them down. Thank God. There is still some hope for this extreme liberal state.
 
Top