Why is Mobil 1 ESP Formula is not SN PLUS?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw
Do not bother around API SN+ in Euro oils. Those manufacturers specifications far exceed anything API.

My issue with the Euro specs is that they had not addressed LSPI yet...I understand this is coming in the future with A7/A8 (or something like that) and other standards.
I suspect that A3/B4 oils are likely to be OK for LSPI as they have high ZDDP...but I don't know for sure that is really the case.
I take LSPI seriously because my car was actually recalled for it...
I am sticking with d1G2/SN+ for now until the other standards catch up...I was happy to find M1 10W30 HM is now SN+ as well as HTHS=3.5, although it's sad to think my "new" FXT is a high mileage car already...
:^(

Mostly bcs Euro engines do not have issues with LSPI. If Mercedes turbo engines had an issue with LSPI, it would be addressed with internal specification. ACEA is irrelevant here and is not driver of what MB, BMW or VW will recommend.
Reason why ACEA is bringing LSPI test is Asian manufacturers that offer their turbo engines on European market (as that market will not tolerate V6 applications like NA market). Still, just because ACEA will address it, does not mean MB for example will fallow that.
This is where it is clear what means catching up with technology. Euro mfg are using small trubo's for more than two decades. As far as I know, Subaru does not have LSPI issue too (correct me if I am wrong though. I would not expect XT to have LSPI issue considering Subaru's experience with turbo applications, but you never know). You cannot jump into "downsizing" race one day and expect you will perform same as others who are in it for 20+ years. It is not working that way.

I think it is turning out that engine design has a lot to do with susceptibility to LSPI, beyond just being turbo with direct injection. I know that one LSPI test I read up on involved turning the injector in the cylinder that was being monitored such that it would wet the cylinder wall with fuel more than normal to increase LSPI occurrence, which was fascinating info for me. So, sure, it's quite possible that Euro players like MB and BMW had a handle on proper DIT engine design a long time ago. There are so many EcoBoosts out there without lots of LSPI stories that I think Ford must known what they were doing...GM had less luck with their 1.5l DIT that went through a major recall as well as the 2.0l that also had a TSB issued for LSPI.

Subaru has done turbos forever, but the DI portion was new to them when my car was designed. All 2014+ FXTs and 2015+ WRXs were recalled for LSPI in early 2016, at that point I was pretty happy that I had been using low Ca M1 5W30 for some time. Some people got new engines due to major LSPI damage and I guess degraded plug electrodes from LSPI were also pretty common...sounds like a lot of carbon fouling not related to LSPI was pretty common, too, and some folks got an intensive cleaning for free. The local techs told me my plugs were "OK", but I opted for new plugs at part cost with no labor charges anyway. Everybody got an ECU reprogramming that was supposed to address the LSPI issue, but I am very careful about what oil I use, anyway.
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw
Do not bother around API SN+ in Euro oils. Those manufacturers specifications far exceed anything API.

My issue with the Euro specs is that they had not addressed LSPI yet...I understand this is coming in the future with A7/A8 (or something like that) and other standards.
I suspect that A3/B4 oils are likely to be OK for LSPI as they have high ZDDP...but I don't know for sure that is really the case.
I take LSPI seriously because my car was actually recalled for it...
I am sticking with d1G2/SN+ for now until the other standards catch up...I was happy to find M1 10W30 HM is now SN+ as well as HTHS=3.5, although it's sad to think my "new" FXT is a high mileage car already...
:^(

Mostly bcs Euro engines do not have issues with LSPI. If Mercedes turbo engines had an issue with LSPI, it would be addressed with internal specification. ACEA is irrelevant here and is not driver of what MB, BMW or VW will recommend.
Reason why ACEA is bringing LSPI test is Asian manufacturers that offer their turbo engines on European market (as that market will not tolerate V6 applications like NA market). Still, just because ACEA will address it, does not mean MB for example will fallow that.
This is where it is clear what means catching up with technology. Euro mfg are using small trubo's for more than two decades. As far as I know, Subaru does not have LSPI issue too (correct me if I am wrong though. I would not expect XT to have LSPI issue considering Subaru's experience with turbo applications, but you never know). You cannot jump into "downsizing" race one day and expect you will perform same as others who are in it for 20+ years. It is not working that way.

I think it is turning out that engine design has a lot to do with susceptibility to LSPI, beyond just being turbo with direct injection. I know that one LSPI test I read up on involved turning the injector in the cylinder that was being monitored such that it would wet the cylinder wall with fuel more than normal to increase LSPI occurrence, which was fascinating info for me. So, sure, it's quite possible that Euro players like MB and BMW had a handle on proper DIT engine design a long time ago. There are so many EcoBoosts out there without lots of LSPI stories that I think Ford must known what they were doing...GM had less luck with their 1.5l DIT that went through a major recall as well as the 2.0l that also had a TSB issued for LSPI.

Subaru has done turbos forever, but the DI portion was new to them when my car was designed. All 2014+ FXTs and 2015+ WRXs were recalled for LSPI in early 2016, at that point I was pretty happy that I had been using low Ca M1 5W30 for some time. Some people got new engines due to major LSPI damage and I guess degraded plug electrodes from LSPI were also pretty common...sounds like a lot of carbon fouling not related to LSPI was pretty common, too, and some folks got an intensive cleaning for free. The local techs told me my plugs were "OK", but I opted for new plugs at part cost with no labor charges anyway. Everybody got an ECU reprogramming that was supposed to address the LSPI issue, but I am very careful about what oil I use, anyway.

To be honest, I would not expect LSPI issue in Subaru. DI technology is always new first time. It was new to everyone at one point. The question is who jumped into the downsizing race early. VW is offering turbo engines as mainstream offer since 1995, regardless that they were not DI. They played with DI technology since 1997, offering TFSI in 2005. So it is bit surprising that Subaru was caught into that.
Also, there is maintenance issue. Buyers of appliance cars want to be able to do 10 minute, cheap oil changes. That plays major role in what engines manufacturers offer. For example, in Europe that is much more stringent and auto manufacturers can offer easier than here more complex engines and they have to, considering price of gas.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw

To be honest, I would not expect LSPI issue in Subaru. DI technology is always new first time. It was new to everyone at one point. The question is who jumped into the downsizing race early. VW is offering turbo engines as mainstream offer since 1995, regardless that they were not DI. They played with DI technology since 1997, offering TFSI in 2005. So it is bit surprising that Subaru was caught into that.
Also, there is maintenance issue. Buyers of appliance cars want to be able to do 10 minute, cheap oil changes. That plays major role in what engines manufacturers offer. For example, in Europe that is much more stringent and auto manufacturers can offer easier than here more complex engines and they have to, considering price of gas.

I think one thing that may have helped lead to the Subaru LSPI problems was their push to raise the gas mileage in their vehicles...they have long had a reputation for poor mileage in the US and surely offering a mostly AWD lineup contributed to that. I had a '96 Outback that featured truly lackluster performance as well as terrible gas mileage...what made it worthwhile was the sterling winter capabilities.
Subaru went big with CVT trannies and they publish much more competitive gas mileage results than before for auto equipped vehicles. IDK what happened with their manual transmission vehicles, but surely those are a tiny portion of their sales in the US.
A big part of the strategy for good mileage with CVTs is to keep the RPMs as low as possible...I habitually put my car in S(port) mode to make it more responsive than the default I(intelligent) mode, but it will still tend to use boost when I am climbing a hill, say, rather than raise the RPMs...unless I really stand on it or force a shift down with a paddle (which I do A LOT).
Raising boost while keep RPMs low puts us right in the LSPI wheelhouse, doesn't it?
Now, the 2014-8 FXT didn't have a manual option...the WRX with a similar FA20DIT engine did. I wouldn't be surprised one bit if it turned out the CVT WRXs had a much higher occurrence of LSPI damage pre-recall than the manual ones...honestly, someone who buys a stick WRX is probably going to be at high revs a lot, right?
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw

To be honest, I would not expect LSPI issue in Subaru. DI technology is always new first time. It was new to everyone at one point. The question is who jumped into the downsizing race early. VW is offering turbo engines as mainstream offer since 1995, regardless that they were not DI. They played with DI technology since 1997, offering TFSI in 2005. So it is bit surprising that Subaru was caught into that.
Also, there is maintenance issue. Buyers of appliance cars want to be able to do 10 minute, cheap oil changes. That plays major role in what engines manufacturers offer. For example, in Europe that is much more stringent and auto manufacturers can offer easier than here more complex engines and they have to, considering price of gas.

I think one thing that may have helped lead to the Subaru LSPI problems was their push to raise the gas mileage in their vehicles...they have long had a reputation for poor mileage in the US and surely offering a mostly AWD lineup contributed to that. I had a '96 Outback that featured truly lackluster performance as well as terrible gas mileage...what made it worthwhile was the sterling winter capabilities.
Subaru went big with CVT trannies and they publish much more competitive gas mileage results than before for auto equipped vehicles. IDK what happened with their manual transmission vehicles, but surely those are a tiny portion of their sales in the US.
A big part of the strategy for good mileage with CVTs is to keep the RPMs as low as possible...I habitually put my car in S(port) mode to make it more responsive than the default I(intelligent) mode, but it will still tend to use boost when I am climbing a hill, say, rather than raise the RPMs...unless I really stand on it or force a shift down with a paddle (which I do A LOT).
Raising boost while keep RPMs low puts us right in the LSPI wheelhouse, doesn't it?
Now, the 2014-8 FXT didn't have a manual option...the WRX with a similar FA20DIT engine did. I wouldn't be surprised one bit if it turned out the CVT WRXs had a much higher occurrence of LSPI damage pre-recall than the manual ones...honestly, someone who buys a stick WRX is probably going to be at high revs a lot, right?

Yep, I think you have a point here.
In my VW Tiguan, as soon as power is needed it shifts 1 or two gears down. But then, my Tiguan for its size has truly abysmal mpg. Partly it is some weird programing of Aisin 6-speed. But no doubt it will downshift and slightest need of power.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw

Yep, I think you have a point here.
In my VW Tiguan, as soon as power is needed it shifts 1 or two gears down. But then, my Tiguan for its size has truly abysmal mpg. Partly it is some weird programing of Aisin 6-speed. But no doubt it will downshift and slightest need of power.

Sounds like your Tiguan is optimized more for a fun driving experience than mileage, which I would expect from a VW. I'm glad I have the paddles to stab at to make my FXT more fun.
I think that the FXT would downshift more readily on its own if I used S# mode, in which the CVT pretends it is an 8 speed conventional auto tranny...but the car is so herky-jerky in that mode that I never use it anymore.
I have been told that S# is great for windy mountain roads, but it is very rare for me find such a road where I can really cut loose. The highway from the interstate to my ski place is mostly a straight shot, usually has traffic, and always has small town cops hiding in speed traps waiting to make a profit on impatient Boston and Providence drivers... ;^)
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw

Yep, I think you have a point here.
In my VW Tiguan, as soon as power is needed it shifts 1 or two gears down. But then, my Tiguan for its size has truly abysmal mpg. Partly it is some weird programing of Aisin 6-speed. But no doubt it will downshift and slightest need of power.

Sounds like your Tiguan is optimized more for a fun driving experience than mileage, which I would expect from a VW. I'm glad I have the paddles to stab at to make my FXT more fun.
I think that the FXT would downshift more readily on its own if I used S# mode, in which the CVT pretends it is an 8 speed conventional auto tranny...but the car is so herky-jerky in that mode that I never use it anymore.
I have been told that S# is great for windy mountain roads, but it is very rare for me find such a road where I can really cut loose. The highway from the interstate to my ski place is mostly a straight shot, usually has traffic, and always has small town cops hiding in speed traps waiting to make a profit on impatient Boston and Providence drivers... ;^)

Tiguan is pretty nice to drive, I mean it is CUV, so "fun" part is in the eye of beholder, but my wife loves it. I on other hand am stuck with SIenna at least until next year when I plan to get myself BMW or Audi with stick. I have curvy road to ski resort, some 142 miles, great drive, but since I got Toyota, I am avoiding it. Did twice during snow storms as interstate becomes pile up of tourists with SUV's, and it is seriously challenging not to burn a car after driving it on such road.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw

Tiguan is pretty nice to drive, I mean it is CUV, so "fun" part is in the eye of beholder, but my wife loves it. I on other hand am stuck with SIenna at least until next year when I plan to get myself BMW or Audi with stick. I have curvy road to ski resort, some 142 miles, great drive, but since I got Toyota, I am avoiding it. Did twice during snow storms as interstate becomes pile up of tourists with SUV's, and it is seriously challenging not to burn a car after driving it on such road.


Were you headed up I70? I wont touch that highway at that time of year. Everyone wants to rush to the resorts and no one has the tires for it.
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
...I was happy to find M1 10W30 HM is now SN+ as well as HTHS=3.5

Yes M1 10W30 HM is a great oil, it's Euro ACEA A3/B3 as well as API SN Plus.

A 10Wx oil is good down to 0F (-18c), in fact the J300 cold pumping test is done at -30C (-22F).
 
Originally Posted by Env1ous
Originally Posted by edyvw

Tiguan is pretty nice to drive, I mean it is CUV, so "fun" part is in the eye of beholder, but my wife loves it. I on other hand am stuck with SIenna at least until next year when I plan to get myself BMW or Audi with stick. I have curvy road to ski resort, some 142 miles, great drive, but since I got Toyota, I am avoiding it. Did twice during snow storms as interstate becomes pile up of tourists with SUV's, and it is seriously challenging not to burn a car after driving it on such road.


Were you headed up I70? I wont touch that highway at that time of year. Everyone wants to rush to the resorts and no one has the tires for it.

Now that I have Toyota, yes I go I70 to A-Basin, twice a week. But I have very flexible job, so I can afford skiing Monday and usually Wednesday. So not bad traffic. Now, if it snows, I take HWY 24 through South park, Breckenridge to A-Basin (I now ski only at A-Basin).
But yes, I70 is a massacre if it snows.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw

Now that I have Toyota, yes I go I70 to A-Basin, twice a week. But I have very flexible job, so I can afford skiing Monday and usually Wednesday. So not bad traffic. Now, if it snows, I take HWY 24 through South park, Breckenridge to A-Basin (I now ski only at A-Basin).
But yes, I70 is a massacre if it snows.

Only skied at A-Basin once and it was quite an adventure!
Pretty impressive blizzard as we were heading there and signs kept warning that some pass up ahead was closed...I had no idea if the resort was before or after the pass.
Luckily it was just before the pass, but visibility was so poor that I could barely even figure out where to park!
Took a lift that went maybe midway up the mountain or a little higher and I just plain could not find my maybe 13 year old daughter right after we skied off the chair due to the heavy snow and wind...once I tracked her down, we agreed to stay lower on the mountain.
We spent the day in the trees down low where we could see each other and had lots of fun...our passes were comped, so we didn't feel like we had wasted money even though we missed the bowls.
A-Basin is one place we skied where I feel like I came away not knowing very much about the mountain...IIRC we headed off to a Denver area hotel that night and back to Boston the next morning.
First day at Vail was similar, mostly skied the back bowls in a blizzard and never really knew quite where we were. The next day was bluebird skies and a huge crowd showed up and made beelines for the bowls, it was so tough to get back there that we just stayed on the frontside and had an absolutely wonderful day feeling like we owned the place.
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw

Now that I have Toyota, yes I go I70 to A-Basin, twice a week. But I have very flexible job, so I can afford skiing Monday and usually Wednesday. So not bad traffic. Now, if it snows, I take HWY 24 through South park, Breckenridge to A-Basin (I now ski only at A-Basin).
But yes, I70 is a massacre if it snows.

Only skied at A-Basin once and it was quite an adventure!
Pretty impressive blizzard as we were heading there and signs kept warning that some pass up ahead was closed...I had no idea if the resort was before or after the pass.
Luckily it was just before the pass, but visibility was so poor that I could barely even figure out where to park!
Took a lift that went maybe midway up the mountain or a little higher and I just plain could not find my maybe 13 year old daughter right after we skied off the chair due to the heavy snow and wind...once I tracked her down, we agreed to stay lower on the mountain.
We spent the day in the trees down low where we could see each other and had lots of fun...our passes were comped, so we didn't feel like we had wasted money even though we missed the bowls.
A-Basin is one place we skied where I feel like I came away not knowing very much about the mountain...IIRC we headed off to a Denver area hotel that night and back to Boston the next morning.
First day at Vail was similar, mostly skied the back bowls in a blizzard and never really knew quite where we were. The next day was bluebird skies and a huge crowd showed up and made beelines for the bowls, it was so tough to get back there that we just stayed on the frontside and had an absolutely wonderful day feeling like we owned the place.

So, if you came from Keystone you hit A-Basin before Loveland Pass. That thing is beautiful drive, but in blizzard can be serious challenge without serious snow tires. Not to mention 2000ft drop on other side, so you can literally land on I-70.
A-Basin is challenging mountain. I learned hard way this March. And it's not like I did something stupid on EX terrain. It was blizzard and I love skiing in that weather. Went all the way up, did not see drop and lost balance, recovered, BUT, left ski caught deep snow, and since I did not have speed, ski stayed on. Pulled my left leg, twisted it. My knee still buckles back, and suffice to say, did not ski since then. They will do MRI next month. They thought it would heal itself as it seems that ligaments are not ACL, but that is what happens when "smart" idea is mixed with low visibility.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw

So, if you came from Keystone you hit A-Basin before Loveland Pass. That thing is beautiful drive, but in blizzard can be serious challenge without serious snow tires. Not to mention 2000ft drop on other side, so you can literally land on I-70.
A-Basin is challenging mountain. I learned hard way this March. And it's not like I did something stupid on EX terrain. It was blizzard and I love skiing in that weather. Went all the way up, did not see drop and lost balance, recovered, BUT, left ski caught deep snow, and since I did not have speed, ski stayed on. Pulled my left leg, twisted it. My knee still buckles back, and suffice to say, did not ski since then. They will do MRI next month. They thought it would heal itself as it seems that ligaments are not ACL, but that is what happens when "smart" idea is mixed with low visibility.

First of all, I'm very sorry to hear about your knee...hoping for the best there for you. I hurt my right knee doing leg press about two weeks before our last ski season started and was really worried about missing the season for maybe a week after that...ended up that the biggest problem was taking my boot off on that leg until maybe February, puling down on my foot was quite painful. My doc looked at it during a physical last week and said it was likely a partially torn meniscus, I elected to not go ahead with scans at this point.
I definitely know what you mean about getting a ski caught in deep snow without any speed, doesn't happen to me a lot in New England but it is a scary feeling.

You nailed it, we did ski at Keystone (great day) and stayed in that area before heading over to A-Basin. I wish we could have explored A-Basin more, the young lady who comped our passes told us we just had to see the bowls but it seemed like a terrible idea with near zero visibility on terrain we weren't familiar with...plus I don't know how I could have possibly explained to my wife that I made our early teen daughter ski hairy terrain when we couldn't see if something had happened.

Hope you heal up soon!
 
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by edyvw

So, if you came from Keystone you hit A-Basin before Loveland Pass. That thing is beautiful drive, but in blizzard can be serious challenge without serious snow tires. Not to mention 2000ft drop on other side, so you can literally land on I-70.
A-Basin is challenging mountain. I learned hard way this March. And it's not like I did something stupid on EX terrain. It was blizzard and I love skiing in that weather. Went all the way up, did not see drop and lost balance, recovered, BUT, left ski caught deep snow, and since I did not have speed, ski stayed on. Pulled my left leg, twisted it. My knee still buckles back, and suffice to say, did not ski since then. They will do MRI next month. They thought it would heal itself as it seems that ligaments are not ACL, but that is what happens when "smart" idea is mixed with low visibility.

First of all, I'm very sorry to hear about your knee...hoping for the best there for you. I hurt my right knee doing leg press about two weeks before our last ski season started and was really worried about missing the season for maybe a week after that...ended up that the biggest problem was taking my boot off on that leg until maybe February, puling down on my foot was quite painful. My doc looked at it during a physical last week and said it was likely a partially torn meniscus, I elected to not go ahead with scans at this point.
I definitely know what you mean about getting a ski caught in deep snow without any speed, doesn't happen to me a lot in New England but it is a scary feeling.

You nailed it, we did ski at Keystone (great day) and stayed in that area before heading over to A-Basin. I wish we could have explored A-Basin more, the young lady who comped our passes told us we just had to see the bowls but it seemed like a terrible idea with near zero visibility on terrain we weren't familiar with...plus I don't know how I could have possibly explained to my wife that I made our early teen daughter ski hairy terrain when we couldn't see if something had happened.

Hope you heal up soon!

Problem with Keystone is that it is black hole of Summit county.
Breckenridge will get foot of snow, A-Basin foot, and Keystone, although it is in the middle, will get an inch.
Though, Keystone has best night skiing in North America, but snow wise, A-Basin is way to go, plus they have best Bison Bratwurst you will ever have
smile.gif
 
I didn't see any new pictures but here is what I just picked up for my TDI in Quarts instead of Liters at Napa. It was produced August 2018 according to the date code.
[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
 
The formula changed about 18 months ago. Liter bottles were made in France and the quart bottles are made in USA. The formulation now has a little bit higher saps, very slightly lower viscosity and HTHS. Viscosity index is higher though, and most if not all approvals are the same.
 
Last edited:
Unless fuel quality has dramatically changed in Oman over the course of the past decade, I would steer clear of low SAPS oils. That is a very good oil, but with a sulfur content of 1,000 ppm in gasoline, I would be reluctant to run it for a full interval. Diesel fuel had a sulfur content of 500 ppm, but frequent oil changes will get expensive real fast.
 
Originally Posted by Falcon_LS
Unless fuel quality has dramatically changed in Oman over the course of the past decade, I would steer clear of low SAPS oils. That is a very good oil, but with a sulfur content of 1,000 ppm in gasoline, I would be reluctant to run it for a full interval. Diesel fuel had a sulfur content of 500 ppm, but frequent oil changes will get expensive real fast.

Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 is mid-SAPS, not low-SAPS. It has SA = 0.8 % and TBN = 8.6. Petro-Canada Duron HP 15W-40 CK-4/SN has SA = 1.0% and TBN = 9.8; so, there isn't much difference.
 
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 is mid-SAPS, not low-SAPS. It has SA = 0.8 % and TBN = 8.6. Petro-Canada Duron HP 15W-40 CK-4/SN has SA = 1.0% and TBN = 9.8; so, there isn't much difference.


Wasn't there a Russian VOA showing a TBN of 6 or thereabouts?

I'm running Euro V with a 10 ppm sulfur limit, so mid or even low SAPS is not really that big of a problem at my end.

Edit: Here's the VOA I was thinking of with a TBN of 6.46.
 
Last edited:
Now, we have a more definite answer to OP's question regarding API SN PLUS (LSPI tests) for ACEA oils.

Here are the upcoming ACEA 2020 sequences.

None of the legacy categories will have the three modern-engine tests: LSPI, chain wear, and turbocharger deposits. There are only two new categories for light-duty engines: A7/B7 and C6, which will have all three aforementioned modern-engine tests included.

It also looks like thick oils (HTHS ⥠3.5 cP) are beginning to be phased out in Europe as well, as their categories are not being replaced with newer categories and are becoming legacy categories as a result.

  • A3/B3 will be removed
  • A3/B4 will remain as a legacy category
  • A5/B5 will be removed
  • A7/B7 will be introduced (SAE xW-30 oils with HTHS ⤠3.5 cP, same performance spec as the new C6, LSPI, chain wear and turbocharger deposits included)
  • C1 will be removed
  • C2 will remain as a legacy category
  • C3 will remain as a legacy category
  • C4 will remain as a legacy category
  • C5 will remain as a legacy category, being phased out to be replaced with C6)
  • C6 will be introduced (SAE xW-20 oils, same performance spec as the new A7/B7, LSPI, chain wear and turbocharger deposits included)
  • SAE 0W-12 and SAE 0W-16 oils postponed to next ACEA update
  • E4 will remain for legacy engines
  • E6 will be removed
  • E7 will remain for legacy engines
  • E8 will be introduced (in line with API CK-4)
  • E9 will be removed
  • E11 will be introduced (in line with API CK-4)


Infineum automotive trends 2019 presentation (overwhelming info)

Lubrizol ACEA 2020 brief (quick summary of some of the changes to come)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top