Havoline? - Page 4

EcSTSatic · #46 (**permalink**) 01-07-07, 10:02 PM

Are you referring to the ILSAC GF-4 rating on Havoline?

codewize · #47 (**permalink**) 01-07-07, 10:51 PM

Yes, that's what I saw. What does that mean? Apparently not group 4

Quote:

Originally Posted by EcSTSatic

Are you referring to the ILSAC GF-4 rating on Havoline?

C66 Racing · #48 (**permalink**) 01-08-07, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by codewize

Yes, that's what I saw. What does that mean? Apparently not group 4

ISLAC GF-4 is a recent oil specification. It was developed in close conjunction with the API SM specification. These standards, while raising the minimum requirements for automotive oils, also put very restrictive standards in place to help improve fuel economy and protect emissions systems. This is a pretty good writeup on the GF-4 standard by an oil company (hopefully the mods will allow this link to help educate the forum members on the relatively new GF-4 spec):
http://www.northamericanlubricants.c...s/gf4specs.htm

EcSTSatic · #49 (**permalink**) 01-09-07, 10:10 AM

Thanks C66. You said it better than I could have. I'm glad the brand I've used for the past 20 years or so is keeping up with technology.

clarkz71 · #50 (**permalink**) 01-09-07, 10:16 AM

C66, good link for the GF-4 info.

GreenMachine · #51 (**permalink**) 01-09-07, 10:51 AM

thanks for the article, what stood out to me, which pertains to the Northstar engine is the following lines:

Quote:

Originally Posted by North American Lubricants, CO.

GF-4 products will have Sulfur and Phosphorus maximums that are lower than GF-3/SL oils but that are higher at 0.08 maximum (0.06 minimum) for Phosphorus than the automakers originally wanted. Additionally, the automakers also gave some on Sulfur agreeing to accept 0.07 for 10WXX grades but staying with the requested 0.05 for 0WXX and 5WXX grades.

and this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by North American Lubricants, CO.

If the Oil Companies have their way, they will retain the right to manufacture oil that meets many of the GF-4 requirements yet deviates in the areas of Sulfur and Phosphorus content. The oil companies want to set SM oil requirements at 0.10 maximum for Phosphorus versus the GF-4 maximum of 0.08 and Sulfur maximums of 0.1% versus the GF-4 maximums of 0.07% for 10WXX oils and 0.05% for 0WXX and 5WXX oils.

We just had a thread on here about Flat Tappet pre-2000 Northstars and the reasoning for 10w-30 and the Roller Cam Followers on the post-2000 Northstars reasoning behind 5w-30 (or more like the 2000+ Northstars preparing for the future of oil).

Might just be a coincidence, I don't know, but its interesting that the sulfer/phosphorus liking pre-2000s are speced for 10w-30 and the post 2000's which really couldn't car less about sulfer/phosphorus, are speced for 5w-30.

Just kinda gets those gears in ones head turning.

Since that article is from 2004 has there been any finalizations as to what is the GF-4 rating?

codewize · #52 (**permalink**) 01-09-07, 11:12 AM

To confusing. I'll stick with the plan of switching to Amsoil. I shouldn't have to think this much to lubricate my car

C66 Racing · #53 (**permalink**) 01-09-07, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Since that article is from 2004 has there been any finalizations as to what is the GF-4 rating?

I too like that article because it clearly explains the EPA and automotive industry reasons behind the more restrictive standards. The standards were approved as written in that ariticle as far as I have been able to determine. Here is a link with what I believe is a complete listing of the final standards (again would appreciate it if the mods left this link for educational purposes):
http://www.ilma.org/resources/ilsac_finalstd011404.pdf

As you can see the phosphorus limit was set at 0.08% (or 800 ppm) which does limit the amount of ZDDP anti-wear additives of the GF-4/SM oils. How the oil companies have responded to this has varied. For the original poster, I'm not sure how Havoline has modified its oil other than limiting the amount of ZDDP to comply with the new standard.

For those such as "codewize" who are considering AMSOIL, it appears based on used oil analysis that AMSOIL has increased the amount of other anti-wear additives such as Molybdenum and added more esters (a Group V basestock) to compensate for the loss of the ZDDP. They are also running very high amounts of Calcium, a detergent/dispersant. The result is an oil that hasn't lost any performance as indicated in the wear results on this very recent 5,000 oil sample on one of my customer's Corvette:
Corvette C5 Used Oil Analysis Report – AMSOIL SAE Synthetic 10w30

MUGSANDLUKE · #54 (**permalink**) 01-12-07, 07:45 PM

Does anyone else find it hard to believe there are six pages on this topic? Buy a good brand oil, change it often with a new filter and that's it. You'll never have an oil related problem. If I had to think this much about oil I'd buy a horse and worry about what kind of hay I was feeding him. It would be a lot easier and would not require 6 pages of blah blah blah blah blah ......................................

**Ranger** · #55 (**permalink**) 01-12-07, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MUGSANDLUKE

Does anyone else find it hard to believe there are six pages on this topic? Buy a good brand oil, change it often with a new filter and that's it. You'll never have an oil related problem. If I had to think this much about oil I'd buy a horse and worry about what kind of hay I was feeding him. It would be a lot easier and would not require 6 pages of blah blah blah blah blah ......................................

Not at all. Just ask what is the best oil or gas, and stand back, but I agree with you. I've been saying that til I am blue in the face.

codewize · #56 (**permalink**) 01-12-07, 09:57 PM

Fine that's it. I'm filling the crankcase with extra virgin olive oil. That's it. I'm going to tape a coffee filter to the filter housing and let it roll.

There are you guys happy now LOL The problem is we want to know. We want to know whats best for our engines but we don't want opinions we want hard facts. You can't blame people for that. I see the validity of your statements but also understand why we ask.

**Ranger** · #57 (**permalink**) 01-12-07, 10:35 PM

The point is that any one is "best" for your engine. It will run just as long no matter what oil you use. It's all marketing, to get your dollar.

Flynn · #58 (**permalink**) 01-12-07, 10:49 PM

Undoubtably different oils have different performance parameters at extremes of conditions. Other than racing, who is ever going to be operating a car under such conditions? I figure regular Pennzoil, Valvoline, Castrol, etc. will cover all conditions perfectly well. So why pay twice the price for a synthetic? If I lived in Arctic conditions year round having to cold-start at 20below every day, I'd pay for synthetic, otherwise....