I was looking at some Shell Formula 5w30 and 10w30 the other day and noticed it said meets GF4 but only had SL (no SM) on the label. I emailed Shell and they said that was correct...that this was a batch of oil that was produced in between the time frame when the oi met GF4 but still not SM. Now it meets both. So what is the difference in the two?
GF4 vs SM
- Thread starter Doc Holiday
- Start date
- Status
It is an SM formulation it was simply produced pror to the date that SM was licensed to be put on the label.
If its ILSAC-GF-4 it is API SM.
Just prior to the official November 30, 2004 release date for "SM" oils, a number of formulators labled their upcoming "SM" formulations as ILSAC GF-4, (which was sanctioned by ILSAC) but designated them as SL in the API doughnut due to API product release protocols. (The API caved to the bottom-feeder independent blenders who'd been whining that they needed extra time to get with the program and would be at a competitive disadvantage if "SM" labled oils were released before they were ready. Boo-hoo. The funny thing was that several major blenders got around the hobbled labeling issue by stating in the product description on the back labeling that their oil fully met "SM" standards, but still obediently plastered "SL" in the doughnut to meet API's requirements.)
Are you saying that these two standards are identical, or are you saying that ILSAC GF-4 exceeeds API SM?
The GF-4 *implies* SM, they're not the same standards. No one could slap the SM label on their API donut until about Dec 1, 2004. Thus why we see GF-4 / SL labeled bottles....
I'm sure that no oil company upgraded to GF-4 without meeting SM as well. Why go through the development expenses more than once?
- Status
