Group 3 Oil Is Better?

[Bob The Builder]

Sorry guys. It just dawned on me that I don't know what SL and SM stand for. Can someone enlighten me please?

One more thing. I have read on this board that some oil mfg's are finding it easier to create their oil GF-4 approved more easily using Group 3 oils. If this is true, then it would explain partly, why Mobil is having a difficult time getting GF-4 approved. (fully)

Next question is this. If this is all true, would this indicate that a properly fortified Group 3 oil that meets GF-4 would be a better oil than a Mobil type oil price difference aside, as long as you aren't after an extened drain oil?

BtB


"Neato! I can go back to Castrol Syntec now and not feel guilty!"

 

[Geoff]

I have read some good things about Group III. The properties are very similar to PAO, especially in high temps. The severe hydrocracking also removes all of the sludge producing wax commonly found in mineral oil. For those reasons I had gone to gone Mobil1 in the past.

While Mobil 1 is a great oil, I believe I am getting similar results with Shell Rotella Synthetic, a Group III with a nice additive pack that costs about half as much. It used to be that a PAO was the only alternative to mineral oils.

Also, you gotta wonder why Mobil 1 needs as much or more ZDDP and moly versus plain $.99 mineral oils if the base oil is so good. And what about those iron numbers?

 

[haley10]

Bob, Mobil 1 synthetics do not use any Group III! Mobil Clean 5000 does and it meets GF-4, so does regular Mobil 1 (pao). M1 EP, the extended drain oil (15K) currently doesn't, but I'm sure this is just around the corner.

SM/GF-4 requires reduced zddp under 800 ppm phosphorus, so extended drain oils will take a little more doing.

I think maybe you have confused that with the Group III vs. Gp IV issue.

Anyone can meet GF-4 now. It's just doing it with extended drains that takes a bit more work.

 

[csandste]

"Sorry guys. It just dawned on me that I don't know what SL and SM stand for."

Off the top of my head--too lazy to look it up, I think S stands for Service-- or maybe it's severe, dating back to the old MS oils--motor severe? I think M stands for nothing except that it comes after L. Sometimes they skip letters-- i.e. SK is a Korean old company, hence we skipped from SJ to SL.

 

[brianl703]

S is "Spark"

C (as in CH-4, CF, etc) is "Compression".

 

[buster]

quote:

---

Anyone can meet GF-4 now. It's just doing it with extended drains that takes a bit more work.

---

Right on. It's being worked on now actually.

 

[Bob The Builder]

So what I am hearing from you haley10 is this;

quote:

---

Bob, Mobil 1 synthetics do not use any Group III! Mobil Clean 5000 does and it meets GF-4, so does regular Mobil 1 (pao). M1 EP, the extended drain oil (15K) currently doesn't, but I'm sure this is just around the corner.

---

Does this mean that you think Mobil will eventually be adding Group 3 oil to their mix? Wouldn't that make it similiar to Castrol then? (well, besides the extended drain additives.)

BtB

 

[TomJones76]

For philosophical and historical reasons, I would submit that the highest-priced group III passenger car oil we're likely to see from Mobil will be Mobil Clean 5000 or similar.
Mobil 1 has been on a "group III is fake synthetic" kinda' crusade since before I was old enough to shave, and I'll bet you they'll keep that up until I'm driving cars that don't run on petroleum products.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob The Builder:


Next question is this. If this is all true, would this indicate that a properly fortified Group 3 oil that meets GF-4 would be a better oil than a Mobil type oil price difference aside, as long as you aren't after

---

Perhaps, but only a UOA provides the Yes or No answer for that specific engine.

As you said, for non-extended drains any GF-4 oil will provide very good service. For extended drains, PAO is the best way to go IMO...

 

[csandste]

Spark or Service... OK I'm a librarian and get driven up the wall by trivia. I have read that "S" stands for spark and "C" for compression. However, when I checked on Valvoline's site I got this---

"API Numbers

Shortly after WWII, the American Petroleum Institute (API) developed a system that established three basic types of engine oils: regular, premium and heavy-duty. Naturally, three oil classifications could never hope to cover all of the different applications ranging from conventional passenger cars to heavy-duty trucks. The API eventually realized that other variables had to be considered, such as the type of engine and its usage. In 1952, the API launched the service classifications system.

The API system revolves around two general classification: S for Service (typical passenger cars and light trucks) and C for commercial applications (typical diesel equipment). The breakdown of "S" varieties is as follows:

SA: This is a plain mineral oil that doesn't contain additives common in today's high-tech lubricants. This oil was primarily used in the 1920s and is obsolete today.

SB: Lubes that contain anti-wear and oxidation inhibitors as well as corrosion inhibitors. This oil was primarily in use prior to 1964, was created for vehicles that saw moderate conditions and is obsolete today.

SC: This classification was originally recommended for use in 1964-67 vehicles. It contains additives that control rust, wear, corrosion and engine deposits. It too is now obsolete.

SD: SD lubes were recommended for use in 1968-70 vehicles as well as certain post-1970 passenger cars. This oil contains the same additive packages as the SC class and can be used in place of it. SD is obsolete today.

SE: This category was recommended for certain 1971 vehicles as well as most 1972 vehicles. This classification offered more protection than the SD group of lubricants and was suitable for severe-duty applications. This classification is used in place of SD oils, but it is now obsolete.

SF: Recommended with 1988 and older passenger vehicles. This oil has superior anti-wear properties and enhanced oxidation stability over SE lubricants. It too is obsolete today.

SG: The SG rating was introduced in 1989 and combined the performance properties of the commercial rating CC (lubricants designed for use in supercharged/turbocharged diesel applications in moderate to severe service). Its designated use is for 1993 and older engines, and is also obsolete.

SH: Now obsolete, SH was designed for 1996 and older engines.

SJ: Introduced in 1996, this rating is for all automotive engines, early 2001 and older and is still current.

SL: This rating is for all gasoline engines currently in use. SL oils are manufactured for better high-temperature deposit control and lower oil consumption. Some SL oils also qualify as "Energy Conserving." SL is the most current of all categories. Look shortly for the soon-to-be-announced SM category."

http://www.valvoline.com/carcare/articleviewer.asp?pg=ccr20040601ov&section=hm&print=true

So-- Spark and compression or Service and Commercial? I suspect that Valvoline might be wrong on this.