I believe it is an out of date spec, so anything that is GF-4 and SM should meet the requirement.
Here is some light reading:
6. The Ford Specification for Engine Oil Initial and Service Fill - WSS-M2C913-A (the "'913 Specification ")
It is this specification upon which Pennzoil relies to establish that its multimedia advertising campaign is not literally false, but rather, literally true. The '913 Specification issued by Ford requires that engine motor oil meet all the requirements of the "ILSAC Minimum Performance Standard for Passenger Car Engine Oils GF-2, " "ACEA European Oil Sequences A1-98 and B1-98, " and additional Ford requirements.
The '913 Specification requires an oil to pass an ASTM sequence IIIE test conducted at double length for 128 hours. Supplement A of the specification provides under "performance requirements " a Sequence IIIE (ASTM D 5533), double length test. Another performance requirement listed is a certain level of oil consumption.
The importance of oil consumption and its role in a given test depends upon whether it is regarded as a validity criterion or a performance parameter. If oil consumption is a validity criterion and a given motor oil fails to meet the oil consumption level as specified, then the total test is deemed invalid as if no test had been performed. If, on the other hand, oil consumption is deemed as a performance parameter, then the test is regarded as a valid test, even though the motor oil may have failed the test.
Castrol argues that under the Ford specification, regardless of its designation as a performance parameter, oil consumption in fact functions as a validity criterion. Pennzoil insists that it is a performance factor. If Castrol is correct and all competing motor oils failed oil consumption, then the commercial is literally false when it refers to a series of 128-hour tests. If Pennzoil is right, then the concept of test, at least as it pertains to oil consumption, is not literally false.
http://www.riker.com/casedecisions/index.php?id=11059
