Chevron and Citgo conventional oil specs

[bluedevils]

I pulled the data sheets off the web sites today and I'm trying to match up Citgo's terminology with Chevron's to compare their 5W30 and 10W30 conventional oils.

Chevron lists "Pour Point" in degrees C and F. Citgo doesn't list a "Pour Point." Is their "Low-Temperature Pumping, ASTM D 4684" the same thing? In this section, Citgo has values for Temp (C and F), Viscosity in cP, and Yield Stress in Pa.

I was disappointed to see Chevron include some data that Citgo doesn't, and vice versa. This makes a virgin comparison a bit tougher.

 

[bluedevils]

A little help? Anybody? If you don't feel like explaining it, I'd take a link to something I can read myself.

 

[widman]

Chevron Supreme is a Group II+ product with very good cold temp properties. Last I knew Citgo was Group I with pour point depresants.
Yes, it would be nice if everyone listed all characteristics.

 

[Al]

Until better information comes along. Depending on which method is used to measure pour point or stable pour point. Pour point can between 3 degrees F amd 19 degrees F lower than pumping limit. This also depends on the type (syn, non syn, GroupII, Group II, etc, etc). If you are picking an oil-Chevron has put up some good numbers in wear analysis

 

[bluedevils]

Some folks have explained to me that Citgo SuperGard contains some II or II+. Don't remember their sources.

I currently have a stock of both Citgo SuperGard and Chevron Supreme. I was leaning toward going with Supreme for the foreseeable future, but the recent VOA of SuperGard (can't recall the weight - think was 10W30) posted here indicated a good dose of moly. I took that as a good sign, and Chevron Supreme does not have moly - right?

 

[GROUCHO MARX]

From the used oil analysis on Chevron and Terry Dyson's comments, no moly. Good oil.

 

[68redlines73]

On the Citgo sheet, they list both ASTM 4684 (better known as the Mini-Rotary Viscometer or MRV) and ASTM 5293 (better known as the Cold Cranking Simulator). On the Chevron sheet, they only list the "Viscosity, Cold Crank". Thus, the only comparison you could make would be on the "Low Temperature Cranking" data from Citgo and the "Viscosity, Cold Crank" from Chevron. You would have to contact Chevron about their MRV data to do that comparison.

I agree...it would be nice if all engine oil manufacturers would publish similar specs for comparison purposes.

 

[bluedevils]

redlines, thanks for the that helpful clarification.

 

[Cressida]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bluedevils:
Some folks have explained to me that Citgo SuperGard contains some II or II+. Don't remember their sources.

---

I'm told that the Citgo Supergard contains both Group I and Group II blended together. I thought that a base oil was either a Group I or Group II and although they would be compatible if added together in an engine, that they wouldn't be blended together in the original bottle.

Guess I was wrong with that assumption.

Does anyone know more about the practice of blending the Group I and II's together? Any problems foreseen , except for the lower specs. of the Group I base oil?

Is this a common practice ?

[ March 03, 2003, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: Cressida ]