Comments on Dexos 1 G2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
14,981
Location
SE British Columbia, Canada
In the usual OCD Bitogger fashion I decided to make a spreadsheet of VOA’s for synthetic oils that are in my stash or are readily avaiable with discounts in my area. I had seven oils displayed. They where all pretty similar but four of them seemed to have low concentrations of certain components. The components were Molybdenum, Boron and Magnesium and the oils had low levels in various combinations such as all three or maybe just one. The remaining oils did have significant amounts of these components plus the usual amounts of all the others. They also had a small amount of Titanium.

So, I thought why not have the full load. Who has “the full load “? The Dexos 1 G 2 oils do. They have all the goodies. The full meal deal. The big enchalada. The super sized fries. All the toppings. Why not have it all?

banana2.gif

SF
 
Last edited:
Some people here on BITOG used to hammer GM and the DEXOS rating pretty bad but after the dust settled most everyone has come to the conclusion that DEXOS1 Gen2 is a worthwhile certification to look at even if you don't have a GM car.
 
Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
So, I thought why not have the full load. Who has “the full load “? The Dexos 1 G 2 oils do. They have all the goodies. The full meal deal. The big enchalada. The super sized fries. All the toppings. Why not have it all?

So I should stop using Castrol 0W-40? It is inferior?
 
I think we focus on additives too much here on BITOG. All additives are not created equal, and it’s nearly impossible to translate additive levels to wear performance. If it were me, I would spend my time in the UOA section to see which had consistently good reports.
 
The slam against Dexos wasn't the quality or
composition of the oil, (thought most synthetics surpassed the original specs
)it was the marketing hype and the profit center for GM.
The old standby motto: "Meets or exceeds all major manufacturers
specifications" suddenly isn't good enough anymore.

My 2¢
 
You act like a really great defense attorney..

And at the end of the day you are right
MB 229.5, Porsche A40 are quite a bit tougher standards to be satisfied. Dexos gen 2 is a good specification. Tougher than API SN ILSAC GF-5 and not as tough as MB 229.5 and Porsche A40.
 
Originally Posted By: BobsArmory
Some people here on BITOG used to hammer GM and the DEXOS rating pretty bad but after the dust settled most everyone has come to the conclusion that DEXOS1 Gen2 is a worthwhile certification to look at even if you don't have a GM car.


I think there's also the greater likelihood on here that the conversation continually veers from the Dexos spec in and of itself to marketing and who does and doesn't want to pay the licensing fee, etc. It takes awhile for the empirical reality of the spec to settle back into the conversation. You'll still have those that only view it as an outcropping of "Government Motors" and others who look at it for what it is...
 
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
I think we focus on additives too much here on BITOG. All additives are not created equal, and it’s nearly impossible to translate additive levels to wear performance. If it were me, I would spend my time in the UOA section to see which had consistently good reports.


And even then, who knows for sure if low wear numbers in UOAs really do prove that one oil will make the engine last longer than another oil? What if one oil shows much lower wear numbers but doesn't keep the engine as clean as another oil for instance?
 
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
A40 is the list to look at for me. The others are somewhat relevant, but not as tough
laugh.gif



I’d take it a step further and say the list to look at is A40 + 229.5 + LL-01

Having 229.5 ensures NOACK is
 
Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
I think we focus on additives too much here on BITOG. All additives are not created equal, and it’s nearly impossible to translate additive levels to wear performance. If it were me, I would spend my time in the UOA section to see which had consistently good reports.


And even then, who knows for sure if low wear numbers in UOAs really do prove that one oil will make the engine last longer than another oil? What if one oil shows much lower wear numbers but doesn't keep the engine as clean as another oil for instance?


Could you show us one oil that proves your point?
 
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
A40 is the list to look at for me. The others are somewhat relevant, but not as tough
laugh.gif



I’d take it a step further and say the list to look at is A40 + 229.5 + LL-01

Having 229.5 ensures NOACK is


Does 229.5, A40 or LL-01 consider LSPI or other issues D1G2 addresses?
 
Originally Posted By: Eddie
So where is your list Snagglefoot?


Here it is. I couldn’t load a PDF so I took a shot with my camera with the internally dirty lense. Don’t shoot the messanger. I need more Dex 1 G 2 data points. All the data comes from samples from the VOA section of our forum and all are brands are from my stash or oils I can get on discount in my area. This data is like eating at an all-you-can eat smorgasbord. We’re talking about selection, not quality. Lower concentrations are marked in yellow. Enjoy. Flame suit on.

 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BobsArmory
Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
I think we focus on additives too much here on BITOG. All additives are not created equal, and it’s nearly impossible to translate additive levels to wear performance. If it were me, I would spend my time in the UOA section to see which had consistently good reports.


And even then, who knows for sure if low wear numbers in UOAs really do prove that one oil will make the engine last longer than another oil? What if one oil shows much lower wear numbers but doesn't keep the engine as clean as another oil for instance?


Could you show us one oil that proves your point?


No, I can't, because as I said in my post: "what if"

I'm not trying to pass it off as a fact, I'm just pondering...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top