Would this be ok to use in a new(er) low mileage engine?quote:
Originally posted by TallPaul:
For a really killer Citgo, try Citgo Superguard Ultralife (high mileage version).
Would this be ok to use in a new(er) low mileage engine?quote:
Originally posted by TallPaul:
For a really killer Citgo, try Citgo Superguard Ultralife (high mileage version).
In my opinion, the HM oils are better since they do not always cater to CAFE driven things like starburst and "energy conserving" ratings. Some have gone SM on us, including Maxlife, though I see the addition of 290 ppm moly in the Maxlife SM presumably to make up for reduced levels of zddp in SM.quote:
Originally posted by bighead:
They are, in general, more robust, and well suited for short trip driving, no?
Yeah, I couldn't say whether Citgo is any better than Chevron Supreme or Havoline. All good oils.quote:
Originally posted by GROUCHO MARX:
I just think it's hard to argue against Havoline or Chevron Supreme.
Yes, the 5W-30 has a strong additive package and is most likely a Grp II+/ Grp I formulation. As we learned here, Lubrizol introduced a 300 ppm Moly additive package to increase oxidation resistance. This appears to be the add pack that Citgo uses.quote:
Originally posted by pmt:
To: Blue99
I'm assuming that these both are SM, GF-4 oils. If so, Citgo getting GF-4 performance using Group I base stock is pretty impressive - due to strong additive package? I can remember when some on this forum believed that the only way a dino oil could meet GF-4 was to use Group II or higher base stock. More than one way the skin the SM/GF-4 cat.
I ran Citgo 5W-30 in my 2003 GMC last Fall for awhile (2100 mi) and Blackstone said the UOA wear rates were barely above typical VOA numbers. Guess Group I isn't so bad afer all.