2026 Ford Bronco 2.3 MPC now has a GPF

Pennzoil motor oil
H

Harleydav91

Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Nevada
I am looking for advice on an appropriate motor oil.
With the addition of a Gasoline Particulate Filter on the new models, does this change the recommended oils?
The vehicle has a recommended viscosity of 5W-30. I currently use Valvoline Restore and Protect 5W-30 in my 2014 Jeep JKR, with the 3.6 engine.
But this is being traded for the 2026 Bronco, due in mid to late February. It has port and Direct injection combined.
I have read about the low to mid SAPS recommendations for European vehicles with this device.
Should I be looking at European approvals, such as LL-04, C3, and VW 504.xx? I will have an extended Ford warranty, so Ford approval concerns are an issue.
Thank you.
 
I thought just the F150 3.5 ecoboost in the US was getting the Gasoline Particulate Filter? Have not seen anything on the 2.3 ecoboost having it?
 
I am seeing it on jmcGarage on youtube, he is showing it on a 2025 Maverick 2.0 Ecoboost. I understand that it is on the 2026, all Ecoboost engines.
 
I've heard mention of GPFs for a few years now but don't know much about it.

According to some very brief AI-assisted research on the topic, GPFs:
  • Reduce particulate emissions significantly - 80-95% improvement
  • Only cost the automaker about $200/vehicle on a per unit cost
  • Should last the life of the vehicle (at least 150K miles) without any additional maintenance needed
  • Decrease MPG by 1-2%
  • Require the correct (low ash) oil to achieve that lifespan
So, now that I have learned a bit about it, a GPF wouldn't necessarily bother me. I'd be far more worried about DI engine timing chains or CVTs sending a car to the junkyard than the GPF killing it.
 
Lots of Mobil fan boys here, just go to Walmart and get a any name brand 5w-30 API , SQ ,GF7 oil, there is no real reason to use a Euro oil unless it is a Euro vehicle, or if the manufacture of the vehicle specifically indicated to use. Use proper OCI and filter change out.
 
dogememe said:
I've heard mention of GPFs for a few years now but don't know much about it.

According to some very brief AI-assisted research on the topic, GPFs:
  • Reduce particulate emissions significantly - 80-95% improvement
  • Only cost the automaker about $200/vehicle on a per unit cost
  • Should last the life of the vehicle (at least 150K miles) without any additional maintenance needed
  • Decrease MPG by 1-2%
  • Require the correct (low ash) oil to achieve that lifespan
So, now that I have learned a bit about it, a GPF wouldn't necessarily bother me. I'd be far more worried about DI engine timing chains or CVTs sending a car to the junkyard than the GPF killing it.
Click to expand...

Most of the engines seem to be losing about 10-20 Horsepower as a result of the GPF too.
 
The manufacturer appears to be quietly adding this device that increases backpressure, and decreases power and fuel mileage. Not confident that they would announce that you also need to use certain oils to keep it alive longer. Any oil would not plug it before the warranty is up.
 
Harleydav91 said:
The manufacturer appears to be quietly adding this device that increases backpressure, and decreases power and fuel mileage. Not confident that they would announce that you also need to use certain oils to keep it alive longer. Any oil would not plug it before the warranty is up.
Click to expand...

API SQ reduces the sulfated ash limit to 0.9% maximum from SP’s 1.0% in part to be compatible with GPF. ACEA C3 oils have an even lower 0.8% limit. So, any API SQ or ACEA C3 oil should work fine. That’s probably going to be about 90% of the oil in the Wal-Mart Shelf by this time next year, if it’s not already.

API SP or most anything is probably still going to be fine too unless you’re burning oil.
 
dogememe said:
I've heard mention of GPFs for a few years now but don't know much about it.

According to some very brief AI-assisted research on the topic, GPFs:
  • Reduce particulate emissions significantly - 80-95% improvement
  • Only cost the automaker about $200/vehicle on a per unit cost
  • Should last the life of the vehicle (at least 150K miles) without any additional maintenance needed
  • Decrease MPG by 1-2%
  • Require the correct (low ash) oil to achieve that lifespan
So, now that I have learned a bit about it, a GPF wouldn't necessarily bother me. I'd be far more worried about DI engine timing chains or CVTs sending a car to the junkyard than the GPF killing it.
Click to expand...
Something tells me we will be the field beta testers. Some how NA manufacturers will manage to fubar this as well.
 
Surprised they would do anything that decreases mpg and adds complication and cost. There must be a benefit to Ford I am not seeing. 🤷
 
BobsArmory said:
I wonder if these will have the same plugging issues that Diesels are having when owners do a lot of around town driving not allowing a full regen.
Click to expand...
The soot loading particulate filters experience in a gasoline application is not nearly the same magnitude as diesels. GPFs also don't regen that same way diesels do. In a gasoline application, the problem is the lack of oxygen in the exhaust, not the lack of temperature like diesels. So, GPFs regen every time you lift off throttle and fuel is cut to the engine.
 
2.7ecoboostFordBronco said:
Most of the engines seem to be losing about 10-20 Horsepower as a result of the GPF too.
Click to expand...
Harleydav91 said:
The manufacturer appears to be quietly adding this device that increases backpressure, and decreases power and fuel mileage. Not confident that they would announce that you also need to use certain oils to keep it alive longer. Any oil would not plug it before the warranty is up.
Click to expand...
From my understanding the loss of horsepower is typically from the temperature constraints of the particulate filters not typically the backpressure. Most particulate filters have a max temp of above 850C vs the normal flow through substrates being in the 950C-1000C range. So they have to better manage exhaust temps to now crack the substrates.
 
Does FORD now also put a carbon trap in the intake like on the NA Coyote? I read that was a big HP killer.

My '23 Maverick 2L turbo was pre Gas particulate filter spec. It made some really strong torque until I toasted the cat. I thought these things were durability tested WOT in cycles for hours. Can't take 7 seconds of WOT on the highway?! What gives FORD?
 
Harleydav91 said:
I am looking for advice on an appropriate motor oil.
With the addition of a Gasoline Particulate Filter on the new models, does this change the recommended oils?
The vehicle has a recommended viscosity of 5W-30. I currently use Valvoline Restore and Protect 5W-30 in my 2014 Jeep JKR, with the 3.6 engine.
But this is being traded for the 2026 Bronco, due in mid to late February. It has port and Direct injection combined.
I have read about the low to mid SAPS recommendations for European vehicles with this device.
Should I be looking at European approvals, such as LL-04, C3, and VW 504.xx? I will have an extended Ford warranty, so Ford approval concerns are an issue.
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Does this mean that these vehicles, so equipped, have to use a gasoline version of DEF?
 
Big O Dave said:
Does this mean that these vehicles, so equipped, have to use a gasoline version of DEF?
Click to expand...
DEF is for SCR, not GPF. :)

Selective Catalyst Reduction - Turns NOX into......something else, Nitrogen and something else from my poor memory.

Gas engines make far less NOX than their oil burning brethren so they don't use SCR......yet
.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Extended Interval HPL Oils For a 2.3L MPC Bronco?
2
Replies
20
Views
734
Hohn
J
A single oil for all these cars?
Replies
5
Views
757
jtay2024
M
Same HTHS mid SAPS v full SAPS
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
OVERKILL
A
XW-40 oil approval for STJLR.03.5007
Replies
3
Views
553
altaylar
wwillson
  • Sticky
Pennzoil Q&A - Engine Operation and Motor Oil Performance - Answers
Replies
15
Views
5K
alaskanseminole
Back
Top Bottom