Valvoline Maxlife Engine Protector and Synpower Oil Treatment sound better every time I read about the SM oils.
What's the deal. Greater wear with SM GF-4?
- Thread starter TallPaul
- Start date
- Status
Taul Pauls talk of CD2 oil treatment prompted me to mozy on over to Big Lots. Sure enough, there it was so I bought a bottle (or 2)
I think that stuff may be better than the Valvoline additives because it's not nearly as thick when you pour it. It actually pours! And you can shake the bottle. Has me much less concerned abotu using one of these additives in cold weather. Plus, you get more bang for the buck with the CD2 as it's $1.99 at Big Lots and the bottle's twice as big. Hopefully it'll lessen the valvetrain wear at 3500 rpm sustained highway with solid lifters in my car.
VSOT is around 80 cSt at 100C, is 15 oz and has about 1700 ppm zddp IIRC, but a lot of other goodies.
CD-2 Hi Perf. Oil Boost is about 28 cSt, is 16 oz (so about the same size).
CD-2 Hi Perf. Oil Boost is about 28 cSt, is 16 oz (so about the same size).
Valvoline states VSOTs' vis' @100C is 100 cSt.
I think it is equally important to know what the viscosity is of these additives at 40C to better determine the affect on CCS in the winter.
Any opinions; I'm guestimating 1000 cSt for VSOT?
Peter
I think it is equally important to know what the viscosity is of these additives at 40C to better determine the affect on CCS in the winter.
Any opinions; I'm guestimating 1000 cSt for VSOT?
Peter
Don't know the 40C of VSOT. Call Valvoline and you may get an answer.
True Valvoline says 100cSt for VSOT, but when Butler Catapillar Labs did the VOA back in March 05 (data on this site) it was reported to have a 100C viscosity of 75. I think some previous VSOT VOAs (also on this site) came up with other variations.
True Valvoline says 100cSt for VSOT, but when Butler Catapillar Labs did the VOA back in March 05 (data on this site) it was reported to have a 100C viscosity of 75. I think some previous VSOT VOAs (also on this site) came up with other variations.
Comparing Apples to Oranges 101
Paraphrased from an article in the October 12, 2004 issue of Lube Report authored by David McFall:
Development of the Sequence IIIG engine test for wear control was a central issue in GF-4's progress. It was time-consuming, difficult and very expensive. Bob Olree of General Motors, who also chaired the group during GF-4's development, stated that the Sequence IIIG is a big improvement over the IIIF in almost every area.
In attempting to assess the wear characteristics of SM/GF-4 oils, consider the possibility that the stated results of the older IIIF sequence were a bit overly optomistic. To expand: SL/GF-3 oils may have not have been superior at all in cam wear compared to SM/GF-4 oils . The less stringent IIIF sequence just may have made them appear to be. By extension, it's just possible that had the IIIG sequence been available during the development phase for SL/GF-3 oils, those candidate oils may have looked just as crappy as the currently available SM/GF-4 oils in numeric data for cam wear, if not more so.
Paraphrased from an article in the October 12, 2004 issue of Lube Report authored by David McFall:
Development of the Sequence IIIG engine test for wear control was a central issue in GF-4's progress. It was time-consuming, difficult and very expensive. Bob Olree of General Motors, who also chaired the group during GF-4's development, stated that the Sequence IIIG is a big improvement over the IIIF in almost every area.
In attempting to assess the wear characteristics of SM/GF-4 oils, consider the possibility that the stated results of the older IIIF sequence were a bit overly optomistic. To expand: SL/GF-3 oils may have not have been superior at all in cam wear compared to SM/GF-4 oils . The less stringent IIIF sequence just may have made them appear to be. By extension, it's just possible that had the IIIG sequence been available during the development phase for SL/GF-3 oils, those candidate oils may have looked just as crappy as the currently available SM/GF-4 oils in numeric data for cam wear, if not more so.
When I looked at the differences between GF-3 and GF-4, one thing that came to mind was that the cold start up wear was better on the newer spec but that hot temp wear was better on the GF-3.
Bob W.
Bob W.
This seems to bear on the issue at hand (just how I leave to the more knowledgable folks here):
David McFall, Lubes and Greases, Jan 06, page 12.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
