quote:How so? Ford's 5w20 and 5w30 specs have tighter requirements in some areas than do the requirements to meet SM/GF4.
Originally posted by Ray H: That's the impression of a few around here. Ford obviously has its "WSS-M2C929-A" 5W-30, "WSS-M2C930-A" 5W-20, and "WSS-M2C205" 10w-30 specifications, but it can be argued those specs. are merely re-caps of the API SM specifications for those viscosities ...
quote:How, then, do other blenders claim to meet the Ford motor oil specifications in their product cata sheets? Ford's doubled time in certain test sequences were promoted by Ford to the API during the development phase for the API SM spec and became part of the testing. In other words, if it's licensed as "SM", it fully meets Ford's original, extended engineering requirements, too. Someone would have to offer me independently researched, verified, and notorized data that Motorcraft (formulated by ConocoPhillips in the U.S. - Ford does not blend or formulate motor oils.) SM 5W-20 is demonstrably superior to TropArtic, Pennzoil, Castrol, Valvoline, or even SuperTech SM 5W-20 motor oils in protecting current Ford engines in controlled and repeatable extended testing before I would retract my position. There's no "magic" in Motorcraft oil, here. Ford opened up its own can of worms when its extended test sequences were accepted and accomodated by the API before actual testing of formulae commenced. That very fact assured that competing brands not only could, but would be required to meet those standards because they became the de facto stadards for every member of the API to market SM qualified product without fear of sanctions. The blenders took "yes" for an answer. Why can't BITOGers?
Originally posted by Bryanccfshr: Isn't the sequence double the time for Ford or something like that? Having the Ford Spec is a good indicator of quality IMO and I don't even have a Ford.