Castrol GTX has an ad out on their website where they claim "SUPERIOR SLUDGE PROTECTION, 57% BETTER THAN THE LEADING 5w30. TESTS PROVE IT." I looked all over their website and could not find any test results. Does anybody know where I can find it and is GTX really 57% better than the others?
Castrol GTX website ad, new claim!
- Thread starter bigalw
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
I'm sure it's along the lines of "90% of wear occurs during startup". They leave out the definition of startup
Remember, 90% of statistics can be made up on the spot ..50% of the time (is that how it went?).
Remember, 90% of statistics can be made up on the spot ..50% of the time (is that how it went?).
Don't believe anything you read on the interwebnet
gee, you mean castrol isn't the leading 5w30?
What's the "leading" 5w30 they speak of?
Actually it's 90% of statistics can be made to prove a pt 50% of the time.
Actually, I'm not sure how it goes either. Maybe we should stick with Gary Allan's.
Actually, I'm not sure how it goes either. Maybe we should stick with Gary Allan's.
Leading synthetic is Mobil 1, leading conventional is Pennzoil.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: bigalw
Castrol GTX has an ad out on their website where they claim "SUPERIOR SLUDGE PROTECTION, 57% BETTER THAN THE LEADING 5w30. TESTS PROVE IT." I looked all over their website and could not find any test results. Does anybody know where I can find it and is GTX really 57% better than the others?
Interesting, and then this quote from buster:
Originally Posted By: buster
Mobil 1 Extended Performance also scores 3.9 on the industry standard TEOST test (part of GF-4, SM, Ford and Chrysler specs) to evaluate tendency to form sludge and deposits (36% less than regular M1 which scored a 5.3, and 676% less than Syntec's 26.4)
So what exactly is Castrol scoring better than if their own Syntec is 676% more prone to creating sludge than Mobil 1 Extended Performance?
Castrol GTX has an ad out on their website where they claim "SUPERIOR SLUDGE PROTECTION, 57% BETTER THAN THE LEADING 5w30. TESTS PROVE IT." I looked all over their website and could not find any test results. Does anybody know where I can find it and is GTX really 57% better than the others?
Interesting, and then this quote from buster:
Originally Posted By: buster
Mobil 1 Extended Performance also scores 3.9 on the industry standard TEOST test (part of GF-4, SM, Ford and Chrysler specs) to evaluate tendency to form sludge and deposits (36% less than regular M1 which scored a 5.3, and 676% less than Syntec's 26.4)
So what exactly is Castrol scoring better than if their own Syntec is 676% more prone to creating sludge than Mobil 1 Extended Performance?
"90% of all statistics can be made to prove any point 50% of the time."
I used nothing but Castrol for many years. I started with Castrol when Kendall became hard to come by in my part of the world in around/about 1970-71.
I don't have any scientific proof such as a used oil analysis, but around/about 1990 I noticed that engines just didn't run as smoothe as they used to, the drained oil didn't look "right," and I didn't feel comfortable. I switched to Mobil 1 and have used Mobil 1 15W-50 ever since.
I used nothing but Castrol for many years. I started with Castrol when Kendall became hard to come by in my part of the world in around/about 1970-71.
I don't have any scientific proof such as a used oil analysis, but around/about 1990 I noticed that engines just didn't run as smoothe as they used to, the drained oil didn't look "right," and I didn't feel comfortable. I switched to Mobil 1 and have used Mobil 1 15W-50 ever since.
Does anyone know of a source(website) that test motor oils by brands and gives results? I saw some test results on the Amsoil site but it was dated 2003. I'm thinking that oils have improved over that time and the results maybe different. I know BITOG is a great resource with UOA results but I am looking for some side by side test.
Dyoel182
Pardon me for taking so long to reply as I lost track of this thread.
Several years ago, 85-88 around abouts, before the internet or at least before I knew anything about the internet, I, by accident of right place, right time, got to be part of a round table phone conference. This was started by someone that owned/operated a performance shop. The folk that I remember were a PHD type research engineer from the Univrsity of Michigan in Ann Arbour, and some kind of engineer from the Chevrolet division of General Motors. The PHD and GM said that you could buy a new car, go to the discount house and buy the cheapest 10w30 oil that met the S? of 1985, change the oil and filter every 3000 miles, and fully expect a true 100,000 service life. But, since very few people kept a vehicle for anything near 100,000 miles and changed oil and filter anything near 3000 miles, oil specifications was not that big of a deal. But, it was noted, that there are some people, like me, that think 250,000 to 300,000 should be the norm. For these folk that actually change the oil and filter and are more interested in engine(and transmission) life, the consensus from PHD and GM was a 10W-40 would be good Northern oil, 20W-40, and 20W-50 would be the oil of choice.
My bought new 1986 toyota pickup is coming up on 300,000 miles. It has had nothing but, Castrol 20W-50, then Castrol Syntec 5W-50, and finally Mobil 1 15W-50. It showed signs of break in up to about 25,000 miles(gas mileage still going up, engine ran smoother) and is still running great, no oil consumption, no engine noise.
About the same story for my 1999 Chevrolet Cavalier which now has 200,000+ miles, runs great , no oil consumption, 28-32 MPG.
I have not been able to convince myself, and I am really trying, if you read my posts on this and other forums, that the new 0W, 5W, 10W....20 or 30 oils are not strictly fuel economy based. I have not been able to convince myself that GM does not care more about their Corporate Average Fuel Economy than they do my going 250,000 trouble free miles. I am the exception and an extremely small minority. Most are not going to keep an engine/vehicle for over 100,000 miles so no real problem for GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc.
I fully accept that engine technology and oil technology has changed in the past 10 to 22 years. However, the V6 engine in my 2008 truck is not THAT much different from the V6 engine in my 1964 Buick, design wise. Possibly higher quality metals, better manufacturing specs, tighter tolerances.....
An engine man, no PHD no GM engineer, told me that there was no 0w20, 5w20, 10w20 or 10w30 oil that would protect an engine at an oil tepmerature of 225F or higher as the viscosity would drop below the magic "10" that GM engines require. He asked me to think of that as I was crossings Clingman's Dome, 85-90f outside temperature, all my camping equipment, oil tempereature running 240-245.
The only decision I have now is to take my truck back to the dealer and have an engine oil cooler and a transmission oil coolere installed. :^)
Pardon me for taking so long to reply as I lost track of this thread.
Several years ago, 85-88 around abouts, before the internet or at least before I knew anything about the internet, I, by accident of right place, right time, got to be part of a round table phone conference. This was started by someone that owned/operated a performance shop. The folk that I remember were a PHD type research engineer from the Univrsity of Michigan in Ann Arbour, and some kind of engineer from the Chevrolet division of General Motors. The PHD and GM said that you could buy a new car, go to the discount house and buy the cheapest 10w30 oil that met the S? of 1985, change the oil and filter every 3000 miles, and fully expect a true 100,000 service life. But, since very few people kept a vehicle for anything near 100,000 miles and changed oil and filter anything near 3000 miles, oil specifications was not that big of a deal. But, it was noted, that there are some people, like me, that think 250,000 to 300,000 should be the norm. For these folk that actually change the oil and filter and are more interested in engine(and transmission) life, the consensus from PHD and GM was a 10W-40 would be good Northern oil, 20W-40, and 20W-50 would be the oil of choice.
My bought new 1986 toyota pickup is coming up on 300,000 miles. It has had nothing but, Castrol 20W-50, then Castrol Syntec 5W-50, and finally Mobil 1 15W-50. It showed signs of break in up to about 25,000 miles(gas mileage still going up, engine ran smoother) and is still running great, no oil consumption, no engine noise.
About the same story for my 1999 Chevrolet Cavalier which now has 200,000+ miles, runs great , no oil consumption, 28-32 MPG.
I have not been able to convince myself, and I am really trying, if you read my posts on this and other forums, that the new 0W, 5W, 10W....20 or 30 oils are not strictly fuel economy based. I have not been able to convince myself that GM does not care more about their Corporate Average Fuel Economy than they do my going 250,000 trouble free miles. I am the exception and an extremely small minority. Most are not going to keep an engine/vehicle for over 100,000 miles so no real problem for GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc.
I fully accept that engine technology and oil technology has changed in the past 10 to 22 years. However, the V6 engine in my 2008 truck is not THAT much different from the V6 engine in my 1964 Buick, design wise. Possibly higher quality metals, better manufacturing specs, tighter tolerances.....
An engine man, no PHD no GM engineer, told me that there was no 0w20, 5w20, 10w20 or 10w30 oil that would protect an engine at an oil tepmerature of 225F or higher as the viscosity would drop below the magic "10" that GM engines require. He asked me to think of that as I was crossings Clingman's Dome, 85-90f outside temperature, all my camping equipment, oil tempereature running 240-245.
The only decision I have now is to take my truck back to the dealer and have an engine oil cooler and a transmission oil coolere installed. :^)
- Status
Similar threads
