Euro Spec Oil in GM Vehicle?

I run Mobil 1 FS European 0W-40 in my 2016 Chevy SS Sport Sedan 6.2ltr LS3 V8. The owners manual specs Dexos 1 but the LS 3 ran in Corvettes for 3 years or so before Dexos was a “thing”…2011 was first Dexos I think

I sleep well
 
Last edited:
I run Mobil 1 FS European 0W-40 in my 2016 Chevy SS Sport Sedan 6.2ltr LS3 V8. The owners manual specs Dexos 1 but the LS 3 ran in Corvettes for 3 years or so before Dexos was a “thing”.

I sleep well
I've got it in my 2018 2500 6.0l too. :devilish:
 
Thanks everyone! I know I'm overthinking this but I'll probably stick with a licensed Dexos1-Gen3 oil during the warranty period just in case something happens to the engine. I can picture GM doing an oil analysis and finding ways to wiggle out of the warranty work...even though we all know these oils will be fine.

For what its worth ACDelco Full Synthetic Dexos1-Gen3 (P/N: 19432351) can be had for $5.50/qt online from GM dealerships. And the ACDelco Gold UPF66R is easily found also. I do my own oil changes so I sort of need to play by their rules until the warranty is up.
 
We only know that Mercedes has a LSPI test for THEIR engines. We don't know whether it's more stringent than the test under API SP (ACEA A7/B7, C6)
API does testing on the FORD EcoBoost engine that does not have LSPI issues. They also do timing chain tests on an engine that does not have timing chan issues (Toyota).
I do not understand how is API test better than Mercedes. Mercedes in general has all tests far, far more stringent than anything API.
 
API does testing on the FORD EcoBoost engine that does not have LSPI issues. They also do timing chain tests on an engine that does not have timing chan issues (Toyota).
I do not understand how is API test better than Mercedes. Mercedes in general has all tests far, far more stringent than anything API.
Unfortunately we just don't know what constitutes pass/fail with regards to Mercedes so it's difficult to compare to the published API/ACEA limits. @OVERKILL posted some info from Ashton but it's dated and listed the limits of the LSPI test as tbd.

On an aside I don't think the type of engine used in the bench test really matters being that the test is designed to to create conditions which are conducive to generating a LSPI event. I imagine these conditions could be created using any TGDI and that the Ford unit was chosen for cost reasons.
 
Unfortunately we just don't know what constitutes pass/fail with regards to Mercedes so it's difficult to compare to the published API/ACEA limits. @OVERKILL posted some info from Ashton but it's dated and listed the limits of the LSPI test as tbd.

On an aside I don't think the type of engine used in the bench test really matters being that the test is designed to to create conditions which are conducive to generating a LSPI event. I imagine these conditions could be created using any TGDI and that the Ford unit was chosen for cost reasons.
Agree, but I highly doubt suddenly API became the benchmark for anything.
 
I'm not sure what the ESP 5w30 offers over the Mobil 1 EP oils other than a higher HT/HS and different approvals. It's likely the top tier within the Mobil/Castrol/Pennzoil line would equal the Euro oils in wear/high temperature performance.
 
I'm not sure what the ESP 5w30 offers over the Mobil 1 EP oils other than a higher HT/HS and different approvals. It's likely the top tier within the Mobil/Castrol/Pennzoil line would equal the Euro oils in wear/high temperature performance.
Lower Noack, deposits etc.
It is not likely, it is their top tier product. Those different approvals have more stringent (this is understatement) limits than API or Dexos 1.
 
Lower Noack, deposits etc.
It is not likely, it is their top tier product. Those different approvals have more stringent (this is understatement) limits than API or Dexos 1.
I'm not sure I agree. EP is rated for up to 20k miles and has excellent Noack and deposit control. I think they're both good, but formulated differently. ESP line is great, I'm not doubting that.

Also, EP greatly exceeds dexos, IVA, IIIH etc.

"This technologically advanced formulation provides 20X better** internal engine heat protection than industry standards." - Based on IIIH vs Industry standards.
 
I'm not sure I agree. EP is rated for up to 20k miles and has excellent Noack and deposit control. I think they're both good, but formulated differently. ESP line is great, I'm not doubting that.

Also, EP greatly exceeds dexos, IVA, IIIH etc.

"This technologically advanced formulation provides 20X better** internal engine heat protection than industry standards." - Based on IIIH vs Industry standards.
On the other hand I would not interpret that to mean the oil meets or exceeds the demonstrated requirements of VW 504 00 approval. ESP has demonstrated it has what it takes to achieve that level of performance.
 
On the other hand I would not interpret that to mean the oil meets or exceeds the demonstrated requirements of VW 504 00 approval. ESP has demonstrated it has what it takes to achieve that level of performance.
True. We don't know unless it was tested against those specs. My guess is it would do well, but I'm speculating.
 
I'm not sure I agree. EP is rated for up to 20k miles and has excellent Noack and deposit control. I think they're both good, but formulated differently. ESP line is great, I'm not doubting that.

Also, EP greatly exceeds dexos, IVA, IIIH etc.

"This technologically advanced formulation provides 20X better** internal engine heat protection than industry standards." - Based on IIIH vs Industry standards.
What is Noack in EP? ESP 5W30 Noack is 7.1%. In EP is not below 10%.
You are quoting marketing language. It is irrelevant.
 
What is Noack in EP? ESP 5W30 Noack is 7.1%. In EP is not below 10%.
You are quoting marketing language. It is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant. All synthetic oils meet the bare min dexos 1 gen 3. There are tiers within the line.

EP and most of the top tier oils trounce the IVA/IIIH and have top notch oxidation resistance for longer drains AND were tested as we've seen in XOM's videos for 20k mile drains. That says something.
 
It's not irrelevant. All synthetic oils meet the bare min dexos 1 gen 3. There are tiers within the line.

EP and most of the top tier oils trounce the IVA/IIIH and have top notch oxidation resistance for longer drains AND were tested as we've seen in XOM's videos for 20k mile drains. That says something.
20k in what? That is difference between Mobil1 test and actual approvals. Is that why Mobil1 has warning to follow manufacturer recommendations? Again, it is marketing as owners of Honda 1.5T or Subaru 2.4T would strongly disagree.
When oil is approved for VW504.00 for example, that means it is guaranteed to operate in engines requiring that approval as manufacturer wants.
Mobil1 can claim whatever they want. What ACTUALLY matters is what engine manufacturer says, and Mobil1 actually tells that on their box.

Top notch doesn’t mean much. Don’t get me wrong, I used M1 EP 5W30 in my Toyota. Only that oil. But, it is not on par ESP line up.
 
That is first time I hear 8.5%. Who did that test?
That was what Mobil told me. It was also tested on PQIA, and I think Amsoil. Also the Russian Oil club.

Take for example EP 0w20 and ESP 0w20:
"The main difference between the two is the ZDDP content. ACEA C5 requires a 700 ppm phosphorus minimum, whereas the non-Euro Mobil 1 0W-XX varieties (excluding high-mileage and racing) are for some reason (to decrease the coefficient of friction and improve the fuel economy?) skimpy on ZDPP with 650 ppm phosphorus. M1 ESP x2 0W-20 probably has 800 ppm phosphorus, which would be 23% higher than the non-Euro M1 0W-XX oils'. The other difference is the VII content. M1 ESP x2 0W-20 has a lower VII content, which is typical of ACEA C5 0W-20 oils, which are more focused on reducing wear than improving the fuel economy. They also tend to have a thicker base oil but M1 ESP x2 0W-20 doesn't have a particularly thick base oil for a 0W-20. However, M1 EP 0W-20 has a PAO base oil and probably more antioxidant, which should allow longer OCI's than M1 ESP x2 0W-20. The final difference is in the lubricity base stock. Non-Euro M1 varieties use Group V alkylated naphthalene (AN) as the lubricity base stock, whereas Euro (ESP and FS) varieties use Group V polyol ester (POE). While POE cleans better than AN, which may perhaps be useful for the European passenger-car diesel engines, it increases the engine wear as it competes with the AW/EP/FM additives, but for the 5-7% POE content used in the Euro M1 oils, the effect is small. Given the price and availability, I think to go with M1 EP 0W-20 is no-brainer."
 
20k in what? That is difference between Mobil1 test and actual approvals. Is that why Mobil1 has warning to follow manufacturer recommendations? Again, it is marketing as owners of Honda 1.5T or Subaru 2.4T would strongly disagree.
When oil is approved for VW504.00 for example, that means it is guaranteed to operate in engines requiring that approval as manufacturer wants.
Mobil1 can claim whatever they want. What ACTUALLY matters is what engine manufacturer says, and Mobil1 actually tells that on their box.
I'm aware. My point is the ESP line is not significantly better than their top tier full syn PCMO. The EP line is their top of the line as is ESP. Different formulations. XOM tested the **** out of the EP line in severe service in multiple taxi fleets and Mass. State Police. They're using EP not ESP.
 
That was what Mobil told me. It was also tested on PQIA, and I think Amsoil. Also the Russian Oil club.

Take for example EP 0w20 and ESP 0w20:
"The main difference between the two is the ZDDP content. ACEA C5 requires a 700 ppm phosphorus minimum, whereas the non-Euro Mobil 1 0W-XX varieties (excluding high-mileage and racing) are for some reason (to decrease the coefficient of friction and improve the fuel economy?) skimpy on ZDPP with 650 ppm phosphorus. M1 ESP x2 0W-20 probably has 800 ppm phosphorus, which would be 23% higher than the non-Euro M1 0W-XX oils'. The other difference is the VII content. M1 ESP x2 0W-20 has a lower VII content, which is typical of ACEA C5 0W-20 oils, which are more focused on reducing wear than improving the fuel economy. They also tend to have a thicker base oil but M1 ESP x2 0W-20 doesn't have a particularly thick base oil for a 0W-20. However, M1 EP 0W-20 has a PAO base oil and probably more antioxidant, which should allow longer OCI's than M1 ESP x2 0W-20. The final difference is in the lubricity base stock. Non-Euro M1 varieties use Group V alkylated naphthalene (AN) as the lubricity base stock, whereas Euro (ESP and FS) varieties use Group V polyol ester (POE). While POE cleans better than AN, which may perhaps be useful for the European passenger-car diesel engines, it increases the engine wear as it competes with the AW/EP/FM additives, but for the 5-7% POE content used in the Euro M1 oils, the effect is small. Given the price and availability, I think to go with M1 EP 0W-20 is no-brainer."
Nothing here says how oil will perform in the end.
Everything is “should,” “would.” We discussed this long time ago, final product is the only thing that matters. ESP use various base stocks including POE, PAO and GTL.
 
Back
Top