Hyundai changes oil specs for 2016 2.0T SFSport

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gokhan

Synthetic is a result of ACEA's NOACK spec. Since 15W-xx has such a thick base oil, its NOACK is low even with Group II; so, it doesn't need to be synthetic.

It's the same with GM dexos. GM dexos oils end up being synthetic because of the NOACK spec, not because dexos (or ACEA) explicitly specify synthetic (they don't).

API puts it best: “Synthetic” is a marketing term, not a technical term.

So 7-11 5W30 must be a synthetic ?

http://www.pqiadata.org/7Eleven5W30.html

So, what does that prove? You found one 5W-xx oil sold as conventional out of dozens that has Group III NOACK.

Recent batches of PYB showed very low NOACKs, as low as 6%. That's because they are actually synthetic (surplus GTL). They are marketed as conventional despite legally qualifying as synthetic, which is API's point.

API allows Group III to be substituted for Group II without retesting and blenders do that when they have surplus Group III.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gokhan

Synthetic is a result of ACEA's NOACK spec. Since 15W-xx has such a thick base oil, its NOACK is low even with Group II; so, it doesn't need to be synthetic.

It's the same with GM dexos. GM dexos oils end up being synthetic because of the NOACK spec, not because dexos (or ACEA) explicitly specify synthetic (they don't).

API puts it best: “Synthetic” is a marketing term, not a technical term.

So 7-11 5W30 must be a synthetic ?

http://www.pqiadata.org/7Eleven5W30.html

So, what does that prove? You found one 5W-xx oil sold as conventional out of dozens that has Group III NOACK.

Recent batches of PYB showed very low NOACKs, as low as 6%. That's because they are actually synthetic (surplus GTL). They are marketed as conventional despite legally qualifying as synthetic, which is API's point.

API allows Group III to be substituted for Group II without retesting and blenders do that when they have surplus Group III.


Your statement was a blanket that to be an A5 it's a synthetic...OK, I found a (few, but only posted one) example.

Nothing in the ACEA A5 makes the use of synthetics a mandatory, unless you've got something more substantial than 13% NOACK...

Now for your next blanket statement, that they allow Group III to be substituted for Group II without retesting, here's the actual Appendix E.

http://www.api.org/~/media/Files/Certification/Engine-Oil-Diesel/Publications/AnnE-REV-03-25-15.pdf?la=en

You might want to rethink that blanket statement. Some tests they have a 30% substitution maximum, others a a mandatory retest (including substituting one GrIII for another), others a conditional retest.

I doubt that any blender is dumping excess GrIII into their minerals...without doing additional testing per the appendix E.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
It's the same with GM dexos. GM dexos oils end up being synthetic because of the NOACK spec, not because dexos (or ACEA) explicitly specify synthetic (they don't).


Do you mean that the Dexos end up being a syn blend as a minimum, or full syn ?

Or that syn blends that perform to dexos are really synthetic like they are in A5 ?

 

[Gokhan]

You are missing the big picture by cherry picking. Few Group II 0W-xx or 5W-xx base oils will satisfy 13% NOACK maximum limit.

Yes, it can be achieved by Group II/III blending.

So, OK, they need to retest for Sequence IIIx(x) out of all the various tests. There is probably some easy way around it as described in Appendix R, which I haven't seen.

In US, good luck finding any nonsynthetic ACEA oil. So, for general users, your cherry picking is a moot issue in small details that hardly matter at all.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
In US, good luck finding any nonsynthetic ACEA oil. So, for general users, your cherry picking is a moot issue in small details that hardly matter at all.


OK, you base your blanket statement that only synthetics can pass A5 on the fact that the only ACEA oils in the US market are premium synthetics...

your logic is flawed...if an oil can be "cherry picked", then your blanket statment is incorrect.

That, and there are 6+B people in other markets which aren't the US/API/ILSAC market.

 

[Garak]

That's why I always wondered about M1 and QSUD dropping ACEA specs. Was it because no one in North America really cares? I doubt that something changed in the formulations that they don't meet the specification, but running a bunch of tests on an oil for the privilege of listing A5/B5 on a North American market oil seems to be destined only to please BITOGers and receive zero notice from anyone else on the continent.

It's the same reason we don't see 15w-40 A3/B4 examples in North America. People buying 15w-40 want to see a CJ-4 on the jug, and the A3/B4 won't mean a lot

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: Garak
That's why I always wondered about M1 and QSUD dropping ACEA specs. Was it because no one in North America really cares? I doubt that something changed in the formulations that they don't meet the specification, but running a bunch of tests on an oil for the privilege of listing A5/B5 on a North American market oil seems to be destined only to please BITOGers and receive zero notice from anyone else on the continent.

It's the same reason we don't see 15w-40 A3/B4 examples in North America. People buying 15w-40 want to see a CJ-4 on the jug, and the A3/B4 won't mean a lot


Does anyone know what the cost is to run these tests?

 

[Garak]

I'm not sure of the costs; I'm sure someone here has a good idea. However, all the ACEA stuff is self-certifying. How do we look at it? Is Shell being honest and simply not listing ACEA specifications on QSUD because they no longer do the testing, being mainly a North American product? Or, does it no longer actually meet the spec? Cancelling testing and not listing the spec is probably more honest than listing long outdated ACEA specs, like some do.

 

[Shannow]

There was a post from one of our European members recently giving indicative costs of running an ACEA test programme, and IIRC (ca't find it yet), it wasn't hugely expensive.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
In US, good luck finding any nonsynthetic ACEA oil. So, for general users, your cherry picking is a moot issue in small details that hardly matter at all.

OK, you base your blanket statement that only synthetics can pass A5 on the fact that the only ACEA oils in the US market are premium synthetics...

your logic is flawed...if an oil can be "cherry picked", then your blanket statment is incorrect.

That, and there are 6+B people in other markets which aren't the US/API/ILSAC market.

You still haven't given any examples of conventional (Group II) ACEA A5/B5 5W-30 oils.

 

[bbhero]

I believe this is a true statement here in the US. I haven't seen a A5\B5 approved oil that isn't a full synthetic. I believe that even synthetic blends do not make this specification.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Gokhan
You still haven't given any examples of conventional (Group II) ACEA A5/B5 5W-30 oils.


The statement that I was countering was that A5 and Dexos automatically mean that the oil is synthetic...onus isn't on me to find a conventional...

Like previous statements that 0W20 have to be synthetic have been countered with the presence of synthetic blends.

Anyway, here's a blend...not a synthetic.
http://www.valvolineeurope.com/serbia/products/engine_oils/maxlife/cid(6365)/maxlife_fe_5w-30/product-information
Talked about here...
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3013521


As to Dexos, and automatically synthetic AC Delco's oils are blends...

 

[bbhero]

Hmmmm.... Even at the end of this thread it was noted that the A2/A5 standard was odd... And most likely not the latest specification for A/5B/5-10 or even 2012.. It appeared to be an earlier ACEA spec from 2002. I'm going to investigate into this further. Got me curious.

Well per latest spec sheet from Valvoline on 10/30/2015 the 5w30 is not listed for ACEA A5 approval. It obviously has the Dexos approval plus others from Ford etc. In fact it is in their MST versions only that have any ACEA approvals like ACEA A3B4..

 

[SR5]

The ACEA A3 or A5 standard is a great spec and a sign of a good quality oil. It's much harder to get than an API SN spec. It makes sense that most oil companies team up this high quality ACEA spec with their high quality full synthetic oils.

However ACEA doesn't have to mean full synthetic, just high quality. I have seen many semi-synthetics ACEA oils and a few full mineral ones too. However I acknowledge that in some markets the only commonly avaliable ACEA oils are full synthetics.

I also think just because an oil is full synthetic, that doesn't mean it's automatically of A3 or A5 quality. Yes, most are of that quality and are labeled so. Some are not labeled, and may be of that quality, just not tested because of the market they are going for. Yet still, some full synthetic oils (a minority) may not make the A5 or A3 grade. Being synthetic may not be enough if the add pack isn't up to A5 or A3 standard.

One thing may be the TBN, an A5 or A3 oil needs a TBN of 8 or more. A TBN of 10 or more if it's A3/B4. Checking out the PQIA synthetic oil test data, some of them have a TBN in the 7's. And only one of them had a TBN above 10.
http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/Marchsyntheticsallfinal.html

Also ACEA oils must pass a stay in grade shear stability test, this usually requires more expensive and shear stable VII like OCP and not the more shear prone PMA VII.

A full synthetic with low TBN and shear prone VII would not pass the ACEA standard. Just like a well designed mineral oil can pass the ACEA standard. Just speaking in general, most good ACEA oils are full synthetic. It all depends on which ACEA standard you are chasing (A3, C3, E4, etc) and which viscosity you want.

I think it's OK to talk about what oils are avaliable in different markets, as Hyundai's are sold around the world and this appears to be a world spec for them. I do acknowledge that the OP is from the USA, but many others will search for and read this thread, so I'm happy for it to be more widely useful without detracting from the OP's point.

My point. The statement "ACEA oil = synthetic oil " is not true from an engineering point of view. It may reflect the common products in a particular market, but it is not a general truth and may confuse some people and also not reflect the truth of some other markets.

 

[SR5]

Oh yeah, look at this full synthetic 5W-30 API SN oil.

http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/lucassynth.htm

It could not be a modern (2012) ACEA A5 rated oil as it's TBN is too low and it's NOACK is too high.

It does claim some outdated ACEA specs, but this isn't really allowed, as ACEA requires you to use only the most up to date specs, and not the older ones.

To their credit, Lucas does date the spec (2004), so at least you know they are claiming the older spec.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Gokhan
You still haven't given any examples of conventional (Group II) ACEA A5/B5 5W-30 oils.

The statement that I was countering was that A5 and Dexos automatically mean that the oil is synthetic...onus isn't on me to find a conventional...

Like previous statements that 0W20 have to be synthetic have been countered with the presence of synthetic blends.

Anyway, here's a blend...not a synthetic.
http://www.valvolineeurope.com/serbia/products/engine_oils/maxlife/cid(6365)/maxlife_fe_5w-30/product-information
Talked about here...

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3013521

As to Dexos, and automatically synthetic AC Delco's oils are blends...

Well, synthetic blend is poor man's synthetic or for those who (incorrectly) think that if it's full-synthetic, it could harm their engine.

So, I was right that synthetic is implicitly required now because of the ACEA A5/B5 spec, which is what you started contesting somehow.

 

[wemay]

UPATE

Just for follow up sake, I called Hyundai and finally got an answer today concerning back specing. They have advised no back specing will take place. This 2016 recommendation has more to do with world wide consistency than any issues using what's in my 2013 Santa Fe Sport 2.0T Owner's Manual (which incidentally is in the original post).

 

[Vuflanovsky]

So does that mean that I won't have to see the posts with screen shots of the Bolivian and Mongolian owner's manuals specing 5w-30 or 20w-50 anymore as indicative of the CAFE conspiracy?? Because quality of the fuel and climate wouldn't possibly have anything to do with it right??...Nahhhhh.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: Vuflanovsky
So does that mean that I won't have to see the posts with screen shots of the Bolivian and Mongolian owner's manuals specing 5w-30 or 20w-50 anymore as indicative of the CAFE conspiracy?? Because quality of the fuel and climate wouldn't possibly have anything to do with it right??...Nahhhhh.


We can only hope.

 

[crazyoildude]

Yup and if you called them 10 times you may get 7 different answers in the meantime i have been using 5w30 in my 2011 3.5 v6 because it says its ok in the om but the oil cap says 5w20...