Amsoil 0W30 or 5W30 for new Pontiac G8 GT?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Exxon Mobil - GM relationship is strictly financial. It's not about the BEST oil for each engine. This is NOT a slight on either product, it's a business relationship - sure neither would tolerate oil related failure, but it's also about the lowest amount on the GM purchase order and the advertising buck.


I disagree. Sure part of it is that, but Mobil 1 is still considered the "Gold Standard" in synthetics all things considered.
 
Originally Posted By: 1992B4C
Quote:
So does it state in the manual or on the oil cap that Mobil 1 is recommended for this model?


No mention of Mobil 1 anywhere on my car or in the manual. They did not come from the factory with Mobil 1. Nor did any other LSx car EXCEPT Vette and CTS-V. Manual states oil meeting GM standard GM6094M. So, does M1 and Amsoil SSO meet this?


I don't know if SSO actually MEETS the GM6094M standard or if it's one of those "recommended for" situations. Perhaps one of the local Amsoil guys could chime in on that one?
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Exxon Mobil - GM relationship is strictly financial. It's not about the BEST oil for each engine. This is NOT a slight on either product, it's a business relationship - sure neither would tolerate oil related failure, but it's also about the lowest amount on the GM purchase order and the advertising buck.


I disagree. Sure part of it is that, but Mobil 1 is still considered the "Gold Standard" in synthetics all things considered.


To some extent you are correct - the average joe may consideer M1 the gold standard.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: 1992B4C
Quote:
So does it state in the manual or on the oil cap that Mobil 1 is recommended for this model?


No mention of Mobil 1 anywhere on my car or in the manual. They did not come from the factory with Mobil 1. Nor did any other LSx car EXCEPT Vette and CTS-V. Manual states oil meeting GM standard GM6094M. So, does M1 and Amsoil SSO meet this?


I don't know if SSO actually MEETS the GM6094M standard or if it's one of those "recommended for" situations. Perhaps one of the local Amsoil guys could chime in on that one?


Amsoil knows what it takes to pass GM6094M, but there is no way in heck they will bow down to GM.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: 1992B4C
Quote:
So does it state in the manual or on the oil cap that Mobil 1 is recommended for this model?


No mention of Mobil 1 anywhere on my car or in the manual. They did not come from the factory with Mobil 1. Nor did any other LSx car EXCEPT Vette and CTS-V. Manual states oil meeting GM standard GM6094M. So, does M1 and Amsoil SSO meet this?


I don't know if SSO actually MEETS the GM6094M standard or if it's one of those "recommended for" situations. Perhaps one of the local Amsoil guys could chime in on that one?


Amsoil knows what it takes to pass GM6094M, but there is no way in heck they will bow down to GM.


I'm not quite sure how to take this? I understand this means that they have not paid to get the "official approval" from GM, but I'm not quite understanding the "tone" of your post?

EDIT: Just want to elaborate. I have had some great luck with AMSOIL products in the applications I have used them in. My understanding of them not going out and paying for every approval under the sun like EM does is simply for financial reasons; EM is a MASSIVE company with insane financial resources and paying for those approvals/certs is nothing for them. AMSOIL is a much smaller company with a VERY FINE product who simply cannot justify paying out the outrageous fees to have their product "officially approved" for every new spec that pops up.

This being said, I don't understand the (perceived) animosity toward companies who provide the specs/certs, as they are providing a service in which an oil is tested to meet their spec and there is obviously a cost (and I am sure some profit) associated with that. I see no problem with that.... It is AMSOIL's CHOICE to get tested and approved in this situation and they have made the choice not to. No harm, no foul. Hence the reason they use the "recommended for" moniker in this situation, correct?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


I'm not quite sure how to take this? I understand this means that they have not paid to get the "official approval" from GM, but I'm not quite understanding the "tone" of your post?

EDIT: Just want to elaborate. I have had some great luck with AMSOIL products in the applications I have used them in. My understanding of them not going out and paying for every approval under the sun like EM does is simply for financial reasons; EM is a MASSIVE company with insane financial resources and paying for those approvals/certs is nothing for them. AMSOIL is a much smaller company with a VERY FINE product who simply cannot justify paying out the outrageous fees to have their product "officially approved" for every new spec that pops up.

This being said, I don't understand the (perceived) animosity toward companies who provide the specs/certs, as they are providing a service in which an oil is tested to meet their spec and there is obviously a cost (and I am sure some profit) associated with that. I see no problem with that.... It is AMSOIL's CHOICE to get tested and approved in this situation and they have made the choice not to. No harm, no foul. Hence the reason they use the "recommended for" moniker in this situation, correct?


Sorry for my tone. There is obviously some history with GM. Yes. I think over the years it got to the point where Amsoil would simply would not submit to GM even if they were a multi-billion dollar company.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: 9c1lt1
Originally Posted By: Pablo
SSO for sure



Exactly what I was thinking Pablo, will this be fine in the Arizona heat?



You mean because of the 0W? Or because it's a 30? 0W is just it's rated flow at cold temps. The car calls for a 30 so it will be fine.



Because it is a 0W. Should be fine from what you say. Thanks!
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


I'm not quite sure how to take this? I understand this means that they have not paid to get the "official approval" from GM, but I'm not quite understanding the "tone" of your post?

EDIT: Just want to elaborate. I have had some great luck with AMSOIL products in the applications I have used them in. My understanding of them not going out and paying for every approval under the sun like EM does is simply for financial reasons; EM is a MASSIVE company with insane financial resources and paying for those approvals/certs is nothing for them. AMSOIL is a much smaller company with a VERY FINE product who simply cannot justify paying out the outrageous fees to have their product "officially approved" for every new spec that pops up.

This being said, I don't understand the (perceived) animosity toward companies who provide the specs/certs, as they are providing a service in which an oil is tested to meet their spec and there is obviously a cost (and I am sure some profit) associated with that. I see no problem with that.... It is AMSOIL's CHOICE to get tested and approved in this situation and they have made the choice not to. No harm, no foul. Hence the reason they use the "recommended for" moniker in this situation, correct?


Sorry for my tone. There is obviously some history with GM. Yes. I think over the years it got to the point where Amsoil would simply would not submit to GM even if they were a multi-billion dollar company.


I am unfamiliar with that history. I know VERY little about Amsoil comparatively, because I am a long-time M1 user and have never really had a reason to switch....

I have used AMSOIL where there was not the proper EM product to fit the scenario. This includes grease, diff fluid, 15w40 oil for John Deere diesel lawn tractors as well as their hydraulic fluid for those same tractors. In every instance, the product's performance has been noteworthy.
 
I think it stemmed mainly from some perceived unfair bidding practices when GM was asking for bids and looking to qualify synthetic oils for the Corvette. I don't know all the details, but the GM-Mobil relationship was a bit tight. Amsoil must always tread lightly, because they get some base oils from Exxon-Mobil. The item that PO'd Amsoil was something along the lines of some false statements that Amsoil failed the testing, which was not true at all - I don't know who was actually saying this, but it got Al Amatuzio quite angry, so I've heard. To this day he calls M1 "panther [censored]" (whizz)
 
Quote:
as they are providing a service in which an oil is tested to meet their spec and there is obviously a cost (and I am sure some profit) associated with that. I see no problem with that....


It's a road block that requires an ante. Much like a college education. It doesn't necessarily mean much ..but it sure costs you to find out. It's more of a filter than a validation modality. Those who pay get to wear the badge. It's not like it's rocket science to determine the spec's and performance requirements ..and meet or beat them.

Only the OEM manufacturer knows the OEM spec's of the assembly line oil filter on your car. Anyone else who offers a fitment is meeting or exceeding those requirements.

Do you think twice about a PureOne, Wix, or other top tier filter? Do you have any idea who made the OEM filter on any of the many cars that you've owned?

Now surely oils are quite a bit more complex in construction/formulation ..but the basic template still fits.
 
Originally Posted By: 9c1lt1
Acquired a new Pontiac G8 GT with the L76 6.0L engine


Very nice! Sounds like a souped of version of the GTO?
Have you had it timed in the 1/4 yet?
Post a picture if you can. I'd love to see that beast!

Rob
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
as they are providing a service in which an oil is tested to meet their spec and there is obviously a cost (and I am sure some profit) associated with that. I see no problem with that....


It's a road block that requires an ante. Much like a college education. It doesn't necessarily mean much ..but it sure costs you to find out. It's more of a filter than a validation modality. Those who pay get to wear the badge. It's not like it's rocket science to determine the spec's and performance requirements ..and meet or beat them.

Only the OEM manufacturer knows the OEM spec's of the assembly line oil filter on your car. Anyone else who offers a fitment is meeting or exceeding those requirements.

Do you think twice about a PureOne, Wix, or other top tier filter? Do you have any idea who made the OEM filter on any of the many cars that you've owned?

Now surely oils are quite a bit more complex in construction/formulation ..but the basic template still fits.


I've only owned Ford's (except for one Oldsmobile back in the '90s from my parents for a short stint and a 74 Cutlass Supreme that I never drove), and they've all taken the FL-1A
wink.gif
I've used K&N, Purolator, WIX and the Motorcraft FL-1A, which up here is made by WIX, so to answer your question, no, I've never thought twice about it but I do always use what I perceive to be the "BEST" filter available to me, which at this time has been the PureONE. I previously could not get those which was why I was using the K&N ones. Prior to their availability I was using the OEM Ford ones. I used one WIX because we didn't have the PureONE filters in yet, they were on order and I knew they (WIX) were good quality.

I began using M1 because that's what my auto mechanics teacher had used in his Jetta TDI's, the 1st which was retired after rolling 1,000,000 miles. He attributed much of the longevity of the engine to the lubricant, which he used with OEM VW filters. This was the same man who showed us that the FRAM filters had cardboard end-caps, after our textbooks (FRAM) showed METAL end-caps. He was NOT a FRAM fan.
 
Buying a brand new car and then going for extended oil drains is silly before the warranty is expired. The cost of a few more oil changes is well worth not having a hassle if there are any warranty issues.
 
Quote:
Very nice! Sounds like a souped of version of the GTO?
Have you had it timed in the 1/4 yet?
Post a picture if you can. I'd love to see that beast!

Ran 13.81 @ 100.9 with 602 miles on it at the end of April out here in Phoenix.
DSCN0152.JPG


Quote:
Buying a brand new car and then going for extended oil drains is silly before the warranty is expired. The cost of a few more oil changes is well worth not having a hassle if there are any warranty issues.

Actually the manual says to use the on board computer for oil change intervals. It even goes on to say that it might not indicate that it needs an oil change for over a year but you must at least change it once a year and at that time the oil change monitor reset. Hence the synthetic change and extend oil change interval question. I will be doing exactly what the manual says for me to do.
 
Originally Posted By: wgtoys
Buying a brand new car and then going for extended oil drains is silly before the warranty is expired. The cost of a few more oil changes is well worth not having a hassle if there are any warranty issues.



Warranty is 5/100k on the powertrain. I don't think it will hurt it?

Sean
 
1992B4C said:
Quote:
Very nice! Sounds like a souped of version of the GTO?
Have you had it timed in the 1/4 yet?
Post a picture if you can. I'd love to see that beast!

Ran 13.81 @ 100.9 with 602 miles on it at the end of April out here in Phoenix.
DSCN0152.JPG


Nice ride you got there! 6.0L power!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
2017 Ram Hemi 5w20 to 5w30?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
Plumb Bob
M
5w30 vs 5w40 for 2012 supercharged c6 GS
2
Replies
21
Views
643
mlguerrero06
Patman
Why so few extended life 0w30s?
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
3K
gasman556
silversport
Reasons NOT to use Kirkland 0w-20 or 5W-30 Synthetic...?
5 6 7
Replies
139
Views
9K
Glenda W.
C
Can I use Mobil 1 0w30 ESP in a 2024 Toyota Corolla?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
6K
TimeFlies
Back
Top Bottom