API SN vs. A3/B4

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OilUzer

Joined
Aug 1, 2017
Messages
2,909
Location
WA
Why is it that you can still find oils with API SL? For example Castrol Edge 5Wx30 A3/B4 is SL. Isn't SL 10+ years old?

Is it because the specs are incompatible ? For example A3/B4 (higher hths) can never meet SN resource conserving requirements ... Just guessing.
 
Mmmm, Castrol Edge 0w-40 is A3/B4 AND is SN rated. And it's thicker than 5w-30 and according to you should not be SN rated due to 'never meeting resource conserving requirements'...
 
Here in Spain SL oils are still widely sold and very very common, a very common spec for a middle of the road ( in price ) gasoline PCMO would be for example SL/CF, A3/B3

With Diesel HDEOs, pretty much all of the ones that are sold are still API CI-4, although the ACEA specs such as E5, E7 and E9 are more up to date.
 
Originally Posted by OilUzer
Why is it that you can still find oils with API SL? For example Castrol Edge 5Wx30 A3/B4 is SL. Isn't SL 10+ years old?

Is it because the specs are incompatible ? For example A3/B4 (higher hths) can never meet SN resource conserving requirements ... Just guessing.


You absolutely can have an oil that is API SN and ACEA A3/B4 at the same time.
 
Likely older additive and base oil package that can be sourced locally.

If your customers are not demanding the latest, and spec 10w40, you can probably spec SL for that locally instead of shipping additives from North America and base from Qatar.

The same reason they spec 0w12 in Japan but barely started to spec 0w16 in the US while most still use 0w20 or thicker.
 
Intetesting. The oil dubber01 listed (edge 0Wx40 - black jug) meets more European specs and a Ford spec and it is API SN but it's cheaper than 5Wx30 I listed (gold jug) on Amazon!
 
Last edited:
API SL is still relatively common because it's about as high as you can go with sulphur containing, Group I mineral base stocks. You can get to SM by piling in on antioxidant but the cost is generally considered to be prohibitively high.

The US has been on its Group II kick for the last couple of decades but the rest of the world was much slower to adopt them. The process economics show that Group II is cheaper to make that Group I (because of the better yield structure). However you still have to spend a tonne of money building a brand new plant & not everyone wants to go down that route given that most Group I plants have been fully amortised over the last 30 years. Also bear in mind that there are things you lose when you make the Group I -> II transition (eg Bright Stock & Slack Wax).

SL may be old but it's unfair to label it as being skanky. Couple it up to A3/B3 (or B4) & you have an oil that contains more ZDDP, AO, overbased detergent & ashless dispersant than your bog-standard American grot. It will also be significantly less aggressive to seals.
 
Thanks SonofJoe, this 5Wx30 a3/b4 SL is $40 for 5 qt. on Amazon. Same brand 0Wx40 a3/b4 SN and meeting more European spec is $30 per 5 qt.
As you mentioned, it must not be that skanky after all. I like the seal friendly thing. Didn't know about it. Was looking for a high hths 5Wx30 with European spec that is not super expensive and found this.
 
Originally Posted by FordCapriDriver
You absolutely can have an oil that is API SN and ACEA A3/B4 at the same time.

Yes. And, in addition to what SonofJoe posted, any 5w-30 (or 0w-30) A3/B4 must meet ILSAC phosphorus limits if it is to be SM or SN. Hence, we only see the SM or SN A3/B4 varieties in things like 0w-40 and 5w-40, or any grade not considered a so-called ILSAC grade by API rules. The same rule has now hit HDEOs, where 0w-30, 5w-30, and 10w-30 HDEOs must follow ILSAC limits if they are licensing SN alongside CK-4.
 
yes, I was just doing a search and found a pdf (data sheet) that Shannow had posted few years ago about the same oil:

"Passes all engine test performance requirements of API SN and SM but exceeds Phosphorus limits of those classifications."

iirc, too much phosphorous is bad for CAT? Is that right?
 
Originally Posted by OilUzer
yes, I was just doing a search and found a pdf (data sheet) that Shannow had posted few years ago about the same oil:

"Passes all engine test performance requirements of API SN and SM but exceeds Phosphorus limits of those classifications."

iirc, too much phosphorous is bad for CAT? Is that right?


Only if your engine is burning oil and I think it takes a lot of it if I understand to whole zddp thing correctly.
 
Castrol seems to be the only one to label their A3/B4 SL down here, everyone else does A3/B4 SN. Too honest ?
 
Originally Posted by Duffyjr
Originally Posted by OilUzer
yes, I was just doing a search and found a pdf (data sheet) that Shannow had posted few years ago about the same oil:

"Passes all engine test performance requirements of API SN and SM but exceeds Phosphorus limits of those classifications."

iirc, too much phosphorous is bad for CAT? Is that right?


Only if your engine is burning oil and I think it takes a lot of it if I understand to whole zddp thing correctly.


To understand the Phosphorus limit & the drive to Group II thing, you gave to go back in time. Back in the day, US engine oils were mostly all Group I based. At a time when 15W40s & 20W50s were the norm in Europe, 10W30 was the norm in The US (to cope with the colder winters). As a consequence, oils tended to have higher volatilities (I have a recollection that there was a permissable Noack limit of 24% max at one time?).

So US engines 'institutionally' tended to burn their oil. When cats first came along, they wouldn't have liked this & it would have put pressure on the oil companies to mitigate the problem. At the time, reducing the level of ZDDP would have been easier than moving away from Group I. I suspect many of today's US oils, especially the low Noack synthetics, don't poison cats but the reduced Phos limit persists.
 
Originally Posted by FordCapriDriver
I was just looking at Total 7000 10W-40 yesterday, it's SN/CF, A3/B4 , and has 1300ppm of Zinc according to several UOA/VOA i have seen, surprising.



10W40 is considered to be a non-ILSAC grade. This means there's no maximum Phos limit, only a minimum limit of 600 ppm.

There is however an API SN Sulphur limit of 0.6% max that applies to 10W40s so you know this Total oil is NOT Group I based (at a guess, I'd say it's a Group II/III blend).
 
Originally Posted by Silk
Castrol seems to be the only one to label their A3/B4 SL down here, everyone else does A3/B4 SN. Too honest ?

Do you get Elf nf900 5w40 there?
 
Originally Posted by SonofJoe

SL may be old but it's unfair to label it as being skanky. Couple it up to A3/B3 (or B4) & you have an oil that contains more ZDDP, AO, overbased detergent & ashless dispersant than your bog-standard American grot. It will also be significantly less aggressive to seals.


I just hardly ever see it for sale
 
In Oz we get full synthetic Castrol Edge 5W30 A3/B4 which is ACEA A3/B4, API SL/CF, BMW Longlife-01, MB-Approval 229.3/ 229.5, VW 502 00/ 505 00.

We also get full synthetic Castrol Magnatec Stop-Start 5W30 which is ACEA A3/B4 and API SN.

Both are full synthetics (Group III) but the Edge has elevated ZDDP (about 1000 ppm Phos I hear) while the Magnatec has norm ILSAC levels of ZDDP (probably about 800 ppm Phos). It's all in the Phos levels which are restricted for ILSAC-RC viscosity grades (e.g. 0W20, 5W30, etc) in API SN, but not for thicker oils (e.g. 0W40, 5W40, 20W50, etc), and not for API SL.

Hence M1 or Edge 0W40 can have 1000ppm Phos and 1100 ppm Zinc and be A3/B4 and API SN, while the same quality oil with the same ZDDP levels in Edge 5W30 must be A3/B4 and API SL.




Castrol says about their Edge 5W30 A3/B4 "Passes all engine test performance requirements of API SN and SM but exceeds Phosphorus limits of those classifications." Unfortunately this wording has been removed from their most recent PDS, but I saved a copy of the old PDS, and that is a direct cut & paste quote from Castrol.
 
Last edited:
Having that extra bit of ZDDP can, from a formulator's point of view, be very useful in heavier, Group II based oils.

Group II, by most measures, is way better than Group I. The fact that it's cheaper to make from a given amount of VGO feedstock makes it very compelling. However it has an Achilles Heel in that it has far worse inherent solvency, especially in the heavier base oils.

This manifests itself in the TEOST MHT-4 deposit test. Group II 20W50 TEOSTs can be very problematic. However you can usually fix the problem with anything that contains aromatic rings (like Phenylene Diamine AO) or appreciable amounts of Sulphur (like ZDDP). SN is more flexible on Phos levels which can give you an important edge when putting an oil together.
 
Its funny to see statement at Mobil1 5w40 TDT...it is suitable for DPF equiped vehicles...and yet it has 1100/1300 P/Zn
smile.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mdocod
Keep using A3/B4 or?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
6K
mdocod
F
3.6 Pentastar Edge vs Helix Ultra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Kalle.J
Y
ACEA A3/B4 oils still relevant in 2024 for Turbo GDI 'High performance' Engines? - Hyundai ElantraN
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
edyvw
M
Oil for 2022 Kona N - LSPI or wear?
Replies
9
Views
2K
bhvrdr
J
A3/B4 in 2GR-FE
Replies
14
Views
1K
Georgiey22
Back
Top