GC HT/HS now 2.9?

[GMorg]

When did this happen? HT/HS 2.9 and pour point down to -65F. These numbers do not look anything like the GC that I knew.

http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/pds_syntec_usa.pdf

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: GMorg
When did this happen? HT/HS 2.9 and pour point down to -65F. These numbers do not look anything like the GC that I knew.

http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp_internet/castrol/castrol_usa/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/p,q/pds_syntec_usa.pdf

No it's still 3.5cP, the 2.9cP is the minimum spec' for a SAE 30wt oil.

 

[Drew99GT]

If you look closely, it's still ACEA A3 rated, so it in fact has a HT/HS viscosity of 3.5 or higher. Castrol lists max and min for each spec. Their data sheets are essentially worthless. The numbers are not the actual tested numbers for their products.

 

[GMorg]

I don't recall the low pour point either.

 

[rshunter]

Imagine that. The folks that pioneered non-synthetic synthetic oil, now bring you the non-data product data sheet...

 

[Jeffs2006EvoIX]

Originally Posted By: rshunter
Imagine that. The folks that pioneered non-synthetic synthetic oil, now bring you the non-data product data sheet...


In the GC case it would be this. Folks that pioneered non-synthetic called it synthetic then made a synthetic and put it in a bottle with a non synthetic name, haha. Wow say that 3 times fast...Go CASTROL!!! haha. Geeze. GC should be under the "Edge" line and call it a day. What a shame to have such a good oil and call it "Syntec" what a joke. Feel sorry for GC it deserves better.

 

[chubbs1]

Originally Posted By: rshunter
Imagine that. The folks that pioneered non-synthetic synthetic oil, now bring you the non-data product data sheet...


LOL...

 

[CATERHAM]

The Green GC was special but not any more.
And with a VI of only 167, M1 0W-40 is actually lighter at all temp's below 25C and as much a 10% at 0C.
I've used it in the past but there are better choices today.

 

[GMorg]

I think that fresh GC and fresh M1 0w40 cross viscosity paths somewhere around 21C. In any case, after a thousand miles or so, M1 0w40 appears to be lower viscosity than GC at most all temperatures except the negative fifties(C). M1 0w40 appears to be a great oil, but I like the idea of staying in grade.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: GMorg
I think that fresh GC and fresh M1 0w40 cross viscosity paths somewhere around 21C. In any case, after a thousand miles or so, M1 0w40 appears to be lower viscosity than GC at most all temperatures except the negative fifties(C). M1 0w40 appears to be a great oil, but I like the idea of staying in grade.


It has always stayed in grade for me. It depends on the application. A Ford Modular doesn't shear it.

 

[CATERHAM]

I don't believe there has been a UOA on the latest M1 0W-40 reformulation.

 

[glxpassat]

The US Castrol site is lame, you have to look at a foreign site to find the complete specs - http://www.ils.co.nz/B1WebTools/assets/downloads/SKU TDS/118911.pdf

 

[dparm]

I find this line interesting (from the above PDS), despite being marked as SL.


Meets the engine test
requirements of API SM

 

[glxpassat]

Though it meets the engine wear specs, it probably doesn't meet the sulfated ash/phosphorus requirements for SM for 30 weight oil.