I just looked up the specs for Dexos 1 Gen 2 and Dexos 2 and Dexos 2 is superior so this would be a good choice over the Signature series which is just Dexos 1 Gen 2.
Anyone using the Amsoil Euro AEL?
- Thread starter StevieC
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by StevieC
So with the new PentaStar I'm going to test 30wt oils along with the 20wt it's called for because the manual says using a 5w30 is acceptable.
The engine was originally spec'ed for a 30wt so it's part of the reason I want to see if it tends to prefer this over the 20wt.
TIA
How are you going to accomplish this, in a meaningful way?
You would need to do some very in depth research,
along with pushing each oil to the VERY MAX LIMIT of it's ability to protect the engine,
before you get any real or useful data.
So with the new PentaStar I'm going to test 30wt oils along with the 20wt it's called for because the manual says using a 5w30 is acceptable.
The engine was originally spec'ed for a 30wt so it's part of the reason I want to see if it tends to prefer this over the 20wt.
TIA
How are you going to accomplish this, in a meaningful way?
You would need to do some very in depth research,
along with pushing each oil to the VERY MAX LIMIT of it's ability to protect the engine,
before you get any real or useful data.
Whatever I can see in a UOA is really it. Would love to dissemble the engine to take measurements and inspect but that's not going to happen.
I am running Mobil 1 ESP 5w-30 in a new turbo car and it is Dexos 2 and has 1,000 calcium and 5ppm (very very low) sodium so it technically is a LSPI oil. Mobil said it can be used in gas and a diesel cars and trucks. Plus add all those high anti-wear certs from all the top premium car makers is a plus. Just plan API SN or SN+, non impressive as an anti-wear, anti-piston deposits, anti-oxidative thickening, and anti-soot, cert.
5W-30
Specifications and approvals
Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 has the following builder approvals:
MB-Approval 229.31
MB-Approval 229.51
MB-Approval 229.52
VW 504 00
VW 507 00
GM dexos2â„¢
Porsche C30
PSA B71 2290
Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 meets or exceeds the requirements of:
API SN, SM, SL, SJ
ACEA C2-16, C3-26
According to ExxonMobil, Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 is of the following quality level:
API CF
Volkswagen (Gasoline) 502 00, 503 00, 503 01
Volkswagen (Diesel) 505 00, 506 00
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...obil-1-esp-formula-5w-30-voa#Post4898886
.
5W-30
Specifications and approvals
Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 has the following builder approvals:
MB-Approval 229.31
MB-Approval 229.51
MB-Approval 229.52
VW 504 00
VW 507 00
GM dexos2â„¢
Porsche C30
PSA B71 2290
Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 meets or exceeds the requirements of:
API SN, SM, SL, SJ
ACEA C2-16, C3-26
According to ExxonMobil, Mobil 1 ESP 5W-30 is of the following quality level:
API CF
Volkswagen (Gasoline) 502 00, 503 00, 503 01
Volkswagen (Diesel) 505 00, 506 00
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...obil-1-esp-formula-5w-30-voa#Post4898886
.
Originally Posted by StevieC
Whatever I can see in a UOA is really it. Would love to dissemble the engine to take measurements and inspect but that's not going to happen.
Your desire to tear down and engine explains why it is important to use a certified oil that was formally tested using all the proper protocols and methodologies. The certification reports have standards for wear and deposit weights. Here are the ACEA standards:
https://www.acea.be/uploads/news_documents/ACEA_European_oil_sequences_2016.pdf
When a blender makes ambiguous claims that their oil "meets" or is "suitable", they most certainly have not followed all the proper testing protocols and methodologies.
Scott
PS StevieC, in another thread you said you sell machines worth more than a house. In my long, 30 career I mathematically modeled and tested the performance of large, very expensive, mission critical, mainframe computers during their development process. "Cooking numbers" to overlook deficiencies was a common temptation for a variety of reasons - technical obstacles and shortcomings of the system being tested, project deadlines, internal political pressure (!!!), industry pressure, etc. It is my belief that blenders of "uncertified" oils cook numbers for the very same reasons. It's the only way they can get their oil to "pass". In my business, thank God we didn't have organizations like the ACEA overseeing our work. In many cases the performance of our systems would never have been fully "approved" or "certified" because there were areas where the performance goals were not met.
Whatever I can see in a UOA is really it. Would love to dissemble the engine to take measurements and inspect but that's not going to happen.
Your desire to tear down and engine explains why it is important to use a certified oil that was formally tested using all the proper protocols and methodologies. The certification reports have standards for wear and deposit weights. Here are the ACEA standards:
https://www.acea.be/uploads/news_documents/ACEA_European_oil_sequences_2016.pdf
When a blender makes ambiguous claims that their oil "meets" or is "suitable", they most certainly have not followed all the proper testing protocols and methodologies.
Scott
PS StevieC, in another thread you said you sell machines worth more than a house. In my long, 30 career I mathematically modeled and tested the performance of large, very expensive, mission critical, mainframe computers during their development process. "Cooking numbers" to overlook deficiencies was a common temptation for a variety of reasons - technical obstacles and shortcomings of the system being tested, project deadlines, internal political pressure (!!!), industry pressure, etc. It is my belief that blenders of "uncertified" oils cook numbers for the very same reasons. It's the only way they can get their oil to "pass". In my business, thank God we didn't have organizations like the ACEA overseeing our work. In many cases the performance of our systems would never have been fully "approved" or "certified" because there were areas where the performance goals were not met.
This has been discussed on here before, Dexos 2 certification requires an LSPI test to pass. Dexos 2 is interchangeable with D1G2 and is factory fill in 0w40 flavor on the new corvette.
Originally Posted by SLO_Town
Originally Posted by StevieC
Whatever I can see in a UOA is really it. Would love to dissemble the engine to take measurements and inspect but that's not going to happen.
Your desire to tear down and engine explains why it is important to use a certified oil that was formally tested using all the proper protocols and methodologies. The certification reports have standards for wear and deposit weights. Here are the ACEA standards:
https://www.acea.be/uploads/news_documents/ACEA_European_oil_sequences_2016.pdf
When a blender makes ambiguous claims that their oil "meets" or is "suitable", they most certainly have not followed all the proper testing protocols and methodologies.
Scott
PS StevieC, in another thread you said you sell machines worth more than a house. In my long, 30 career I mathematically modeled and tested the performance of large, very expensive, mission critical, mainframe computers during their development process. "Cooking numbers" to overlook deficiencies was a common temptation for a variety of reasons - technical obstacles and shortcomings of the system being tested, project deadlines, internal political pressure (!!!), industry pressure, etc. It is my belief that blenders of "uncertified" oils cook numbers for the very same reasons. It's the only way they can get their oil to "pass". In my business, thank God we didn't have organizations like the ACEA overseeing our work. In many cases the performance of our systems would never have been fully "approved" or "certified" because there were areas where the performance goals were not met.
Scott- that is part of my current job, but in my case it is for a large cloud provider. I have had numerous cases where our internal organization or the vendor "certified" that it would meet certain performance goals, only to find out in QA testing that it cannot meet those goals. In looking back at the certification, I find that they either fudged the numbers, or the test was accidentally run under slightly different criteria that does not match our use case. Sort of like claiming that your car can hit 200 in a full speed test run, only to find out that they meant 200 kph when you needed 200 mph.
Originally Posted by StevieC
Whatever I can see in a UOA is really it. Would love to dissemble the engine to take measurements and inspect but that's not going to happen.
Your desire to tear down and engine explains why it is important to use a certified oil that was formally tested using all the proper protocols and methodologies. The certification reports have standards for wear and deposit weights. Here are the ACEA standards:
https://www.acea.be/uploads/news_documents/ACEA_European_oil_sequences_2016.pdf
When a blender makes ambiguous claims that their oil "meets" or is "suitable", they most certainly have not followed all the proper testing protocols and methodologies.
Scott
PS StevieC, in another thread you said you sell machines worth more than a house. In my long, 30 career I mathematically modeled and tested the performance of large, very expensive, mission critical, mainframe computers during their development process. "Cooking numbers" to overlook deficiencies was a common temptation for a variety of reasons - technical obstacles and shortcomings of the system being tested, project deadlines, internal political pressure (!!!), industry pressure, etc. It is my belief that blenders of "uncertified" oils cook numbers for the very same reasons. It's the only way they can get their oil to "pass". In my business, thank God we didn't have organizations like the ACEA overseeing our work. In many cases the performance of our systems would never have been fully "approved" or "certified" because there were areas where the performance goals were not met.
Scott- that is part of my current job, but in my case it is for a large cloud provider. I have had numerous cases where our internal organization or the vendor "certified" that it would meet certain performance goals, only to find out in QA testing that it cannot meet those goals. In looking back at the certification, I find that they either fudged the numbers, or the test was accidentally run under slightly different criteria that does not match our use case. Sort of like claiming that your car can hit 200 in a full speed test run, only to find out that they meant 200 kph when you needed 200 mph.
I have used Amsoil for over a decade. I run it in 6 vehicles 3 of which have high mileage OCI's done yearly and these vehicles are all up there in their mileage counts. 0 problems. Then there is my personal experience with my Santa Fe (see signature). None of these vehicles have had sludge problems or consumed / consume oil. That is enough proof for me to trust that if Amsoil says it meets the specification then it does.
So much so that I could care less that I'm using a non API certified oil in my application.
Further even if I did have to tear apart the engine or rebuild it, it's something I'm capable of with some help for things my back cant do and I have access to shop equipment and the proper tools to do so. I have literally been rebuilding engines and transmissions with my dad for almost 2 decades. So I'm also not worried in the REMOTE chance it would happen because my warranty was denied by using a non API oil. (If it were to happen which is so remote it's ridiculous)
More to that... If a dealer opens up an engine to do repair and it's clean inside they never care what oil was used. If there was heavy varnish or sludge or it looks like neglect took place then for sure they would ask which isn't going to happen in anything I own so this whole boogie man fear culture of having to absolutely must use an API licensed oil is really getting tiring especially in places like the US with the Moss Magnuson act. (Yes I know this doesn't apply to Canada)
I'm going to finish up the 0w20 / 5w20 SSO I have in stock and then give this 5w30 AEL a try because I like what Dexos 2 has to offer according to the Lubrizol specification tool. All the other fraidy-cats can run their "API licensed" shelf oils while I'm out here not following the "I'm part of the herd" crowd hoping the wolf won't get me.
So much so that I could care less that I'm using a non API certified oil in my application.
Further even if I did have to tear apart the engine or rebuild it, it's something I'm capable of with some help for things my back cant do and I have access to shop equipment and the proper tools to do so. I have literally been rebuilding engines and transmissions with my dad for almost 2 decades. So I'm also not worried in the REMOTE chance it would happen because my warranty was denied by using a non API oil. (If it were to happen which is so remote it's ridiculous)
More to that... If a dealer opens up an engine to do repair and it's clean inside they never care what oil was used. If there was heavy varnish or sludge or it looks like neglect took place then for sure they would ask which isn't going to happen in anything I own so this whole boogie man fear culture of having to absolutely must use an API licensed oil is really getting tiring especially in places like the US with the Moss Magnuson act. (Yes I know this doesn't apply to Canada)
I'm going to finish up the 0w20 / 5w20 SSO I have in stock and then give this 5w30 AEL a try because I like what Dexos 2 has to offer according to the Lubrizol specification tool. All the other fraidy-cats can run their "API licensed" shelf oils while I'm out here not following the "I'm part of the herd" crowd hoping the wolf won't get me.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by PimTac
The perception could change if you had skin in the game.
I did it with my Santa Fe to and that was on my dime.
The perception could change if you had skin in the game.
I did it with my Santa Fe to and that was on my dime.
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
Originally Posted by Bailes1992
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
Why do you doubt that it's Group 4?
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
Why do you doubt that it's Group 4?
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by Bailes1992
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
Why do you doubt that it's Group 4?
Probably because it actually has the official 504/507 builder approval, which means it had to pass VW's PV1481 test for intake valve deposits... (since GroupIV oils tend to result in more intake deposits than GIII in DI cars).
Seriously, are people still hung up on the G IV thing? The AEL has the formal 504/507 approval, which--at least based on the Lubrizol tool--is the most rigorous spec out there.
Originally Posted by Bailes1992
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
Why do you doubt that it's Group 4?
Probably because it actually has the official 504/507 builder approval, which means it had to pass VW's PV1481 test for intake valve deposits... (since GroupIV oils tend to result in more intake deposits than GIII in DI cars).
Seriously, are people still hung up on the G IV thing? The AEL has the formal 504/507 approval, which--at least based on the Lubrizol tool--is the most rigorous spec out there.
JOD, if that is why Bailes1992 said it, it's an assumption that no one can confirm because Amsoil doesn't release this information. (That's why I wanted to know how he knew for sure)
I have said in other threads (and this isn't aimed at you), that I could care less if Amsoil made their oils out of Group III or unicorn tears and spam so long as it performs well. I don't know why folks get so hung up on basestock today when we are relying less and less on them and more on additive packages. I mean if it was the 1970's sure, but we have made waves of change from decades ago.
for the reply.
I have said in other threads (and this isn't aimed at you), that I could care less if Amsoil made their oils out of Group III or unicorn tears and spam so long as it performs well. I don't know why folks get so hung up on basestock today when we are relying less and less on them and more on additive packages. I mean if it was the 1970's sure, but we have made waves of change from decades ago.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Bailes1992
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
That oil is NOT available in the North America.
If low SAPS and a higher HTHS is what your after why not save some money and go for Castrol Edge 0w30 Dexos 2.
It's a group 4 synthetic, which I doubt the Amsoil is and carries some nice approvals like BMW LL04, 502/505.01, Dexos 2 etc.
That oil is NOT available in the North America.
Originally Posted by StevieC
I didn't know they were different and that is really stupid of GM to have a Dexos 1 Gen 2 and a Dexos 2.
This. Just keep them current. You're either currently licensed for dexos1 or you're not. Since dexos1 first generation is obsolete, none of this should matter. All new oil will be licensed to the current spec. Keep it ongoing and current, just like the Euro specs.
I didn't know they were different and that is really stupid of GM to have a Dexos 1 Gen 2 and a Dexos 2.
This. Just keep them current. You're either currently licensed for dexos1 or you're not. Since dexos1 first generation is obsolete, none of this should matter. All new oil will be licensed to the current spec. Keep it ongoing and current, just like the Euro specs.
Originally Posted by BTLew81
Pennzoil euro L is another great alternative and similar specs to AEL. Lower price too. I'm thinking of running in my Accord. Should combat fuel dilution well and has some good certs.
Euro L will not combat dilution very well as additive pack is not that strong. Euro L is primarily made for diesel applications in the US.
You should go with Mobil1 0W40 FS if you want Euro oil as it is not that thick and it is SAPS is really high.
Pennzoil euro L is another great alternative and similar specs to AEL. Lower price too. I'm thinking of running in my Accord. Should combat fuel dilution well and has some good certs.
Euro L will not combat dilution very well as additive pack is not that strong. Euro L is primarily made for diesel applications in the US.
You should go with Mobil1 0W40 FS if you want Euro oil as it is not that thick and it is SAPS is really high.
I wish I could find a 0w30 Euro oil Dexos 2. or a Porsche approved A30 in 0w30.
Last edited:
Edit: C30 not A30. My bad.
- Status
Similar threads
