Ca is a good thing if you want someting to resist heat. Ca is Not only used in motor oils. Its used in many diffrent industrys
Mobil talks about LSPI
- Thread starter njohnson
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
As far as GM having some kind of business relationship with the Mobil 1 team, yes, they have collaborated in the past.
'Team collaboration' is a euphemistic way to say commercial business partnership. They have had deals in the past, and they continue to currently.
Truth is all the oil majors have an automaker in their pocket (or vice versa if you will). Castrol, Shell both have deals with OEMs and they all each have imperative suggestions to use their partner's product. Some of these partnerships are synergistic, where manufacturers and blenders work together to economize their products simultaneously; ie the cheapest way to get sufficient performance for future specs. We get it.
OTOH It's disingenuous to try and integrate PR into the actual specification literature, as though there were a good reason to mention an already superceded product that's no longer made like D1G1 M1; no practical reason other than a PR opportunity. Was it effective? Check the thread... Works like a CHARM. It makes no sense otherwise, to reference a product no longer being made at the time of the manual's editing, apart from sneaky advertising about their partner's suggested prescience. It's obviously intended, regardless of context, to coerce the user into purchasing Mobil products and as a consumer, I'd rather reserve my right to decide for myself without undue influence. Just tell me the specification, and I'll take it from there thanks.
As far as GM having some kind of business relationship with the Mobil 1 team, yes, they have collaborated in the past.
'Team collaboration' is a euphemistic way to say commercial business partnership. They have had deals in the past, and they continue to currently.
Truth is all the oil majors have an automaker in their pocket (or vice versa if you will). Castrol, Shell both have deals with OEMs and they all each have imperative suggestions to use their partner's product. Some of these partnerships are synergistic, where manufacturers and blenders work together to economize their products simultaneously; ie the cheapest way to get sufficient performance for future specs. We get it.
OTOH It's disingenuous to try and integrate PR into the actual specification literature, as though there were a good reason to mention an already superceded product that's no longer made like D1G1 M1; no practical reason other than a PR opportunity. Was it effective? Check the thread... Works like a CHARM. It makes no sense otherwise, to reference a product no longer being made at the time of the manual's editing, apart from sneaky advertising about their partner's suggested prescience. It's obviously intended, regardless of context, to coerce the user into purchasing Mobil products and as a consumer, I'd rather reserve my right to decide for myself without undue influence. Just tell me the specification, and I'll take it from there thanks.
Speaking of deception, what I like most is the word craftsmanship. Back in the days, there was “knocking” and “detonations” (denoting a most severe form of knocking). These days we renamed “detonations” to “LSPI”, and pretend that they are some inevitable things to happen in all engine designs, and that they can’t be addressed other than “reducing their probability” through some miraculous, advanced oil formulation.
I just turn my distributor back the opposite way. Problem solved lol.
On the Torino anyway....
The Optima does this [censored]. I even dumped a bottle of NOS octane booster with MMT in the tank as an experiment, in a tank of premium. Guess what? The ECU still cranks the timing to the point of audible knock with 96 octane in the tank. There is no way to prove the octane other than the claim on the octane booster that it will raise octane 30 points in 15 gallons, but it’s got converter poisoning MMT in it, so I kind of believe the label.
Before I turn the car in for the end of its lease, I’m VERY tempted to put 5 or 10 gallons of Cam2 110 octane leaded in it, just to see if it quits the pre-ignition. There is a Speedway gas station on my way to work with a Cam2 pump. A mere $7.50 a gallon. My gut is that if you can fly under the radar of the knock sensor it will max-map the timing and even feel faster. Until the converters are clogged solid with lead additive anyway. Who cares it’s a lease. Would be a $35-$70 experiment, and maybe worth the knowledge gleaned.
Also have a jug of Pennzoil Platinum 0W-40 on the shelf, so dump that in and a few bucks worth of race gas and let ‘er rip tater chip!
(Right before the end of the lease)
On the Torino anyway....
The Optima does this [censored]. I even dumped a bottle of NOS octane booster with MMT in the tank as an experiment, in a tank of premium. Guess what? The ECU still cranks the timing to the point of audible knock with 96 octane in the tank. There is no way to prove the octane other than the claim on the octane booster that it will raise octane 30 points in 15 gallons, but it’s got converter poisoning MMT in it, so I kind of believe the label.
Before I turn the car in for the end of its lease, I’m VERY tempted to put 5 or 10 gallons of Cam2 110 octane leaded in it, just to see if it quits the pre-ignition. There is a Speedway gas station on my way to work with a Cam2 pump. A mere $7.50 a gallon. My gut is that if you can fly under the radar of the knock sensor it will max-map the timing and even feel faster. Until the converters are clogged solid with lead additive anyway. Who cares it’s a lease. Would be a $35-$70 experiment, and maybe worth the knowledge gleaned.
Also have a jug of Pennzoil Platinum 0W-40 on the shelf, so dump that in and a few bucks worth of race gas and let ‘er rip tater chip!
(Right before the end of the lease)
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: nap
Speaking of deception, what I like most is the word craftsmanship. Back in the days, there was “knocking” and “detonations” (denoting a most severe form of knocking). These days we renamed “detonations” to “LSPI”, and pretend that they are some inevitable things to happen in all engine designs, and that they can’t be addressed other than “reducing their probability” through some miraculous, advanced oil formulation.
Looks like LSPI isn't your "father's Oldsmobile". Its more high-amplitude, catastrophic. The old pinging was more of a rattling. This appears to be sudden and not as predictable with timing & compression. It caught some engineers by surprise because they knew where pinging would happen, and this happened once in a while and when they didn't expect problems.
Speaking of deception, what I like most is the word craftsmanship. Back in the days, there was “knocking” and “detonations” (denoting a most severe form of knocking). These days we renamed “detonations” to “LSPI”, and pretend that they are some inevitable things to happen in all engine designs, and that they can’t be addressed other than “reducing their probability” through some miraculous, advanced oil formulation.
Looks like LSPI isn't your "father's Oldsmobile". Its more high-amplitude, catastrophic. The old pinging was more of a rattling. This appears to be sudden and not as predictable with timing & compression. It caught some engineers by surprise because they knew where pinging would happen, and this happened once in a while and when they didn't expect problems.
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: nap
Speaking of deception, what I like most is the word craftsmanship. Back in the days, there was “knocking” and “detonations” (denoting a most severe form of knocking). These days we renamed “detonations” to “LSPI”, and pretend that they are some inevitable things to happen in all engine designs, and that they can’t be addressed other than “reducing their probability” through some miraculous, advanced oil formulation.
Looks like LSPI isn't your "father's Oldsmobile". Its more high-amplitude, catastrophic. The old pinging was more of a rattling. This appears to be sudden and not as predictable with timing & compression. It caught some engineers by surprise because they knew where pinging would happen, and this happened once in a while and when they didn't expect problems.
This is spot on. Any of us who are old timers will remember the pinging of some cars. It was constant for some like Chrysler’s lean burn engines way back. Knocking was common for cars under load by people who didn’t shift into the right gear.
LSPI is happening under some pretty innocuous circumstances like coming off a freeway on the off ramp and the engine lets go. It took engineers a while to recreate then find solutions which are ongoing.
Originally Posted By: nap
Speaking of deception, what I like most is the word craftsmanship. Back in the days, there was “knocking” and “detonations” (denoting a most severe form of knocking). These days we renamed “detonations” to “LSPI”, and pretend that they are some inevitable things to happen in all engine designs, and that they can’t be addressed other than “reducing their probability” through some miraculous, advanced oil formulation.
Looks like LSPI isn't your "father's Oldsmobile". Its more high-amplitude, catastrophic. The old pinging was more of a rattling. This appears to be sudden and not as predictable with timing & compression. It caught some engineers by surprise because they knew where pinging would happen, and this happened once in a while and when they didn't expect problems.
This is spot on. Any of us who are old timers will remember the pinging of some cars. It was constant for some like Chrysler’s lean burn engines way back. Knocking was common for cars under load by people who didn’t shift into the right gear.
LSPI is happening under some pretty innocuous circumstances like coming off a freeway on the off ramp and the engine lets go. It took engineers a while to recreate then find solutions which are ongoing.
And then there were the really nasty, catastrophic detonations, back in the ‘70, during the oil crisis, when there were no knock sensors and some brave people experimented with some fuels there were not exactly automotive gasoline.... Some were lucky and got away with it, some weren’t.... Took us 45 years and EPA to get back there lol....
I'm still a believer in the fact that 90% of this "LSPI" can be fixed with the use of Premium fuel. I just can't believe all these manufacturers are turning out these high compression, Direct injected turbocharged engines and telling the user its OK on 87 (junk) fuel!! Knock sensors and ECU's can only respond so fast, once "knock" is audible, its too late, its doing damage.
I would bet a paycheck that the strict use of top tier, 93 octane fuels would solve a majority of these failures.
I would bet a paycheck that the strict use of top tier, 93 octane fuels would solve a majority of these failures.
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
Literally 5 seconds on Google:
http://www.velosterturbo.org/forum/velos...rbo-motors.html
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/
From the second link:
Quote:
Addressing LSPI sooner than later is top of mind for manufacturers. At the most recent JSAE/SAE Powertrains, Fuels and Lubricants International Meeting held in September 2015 in Kyoto, Japan, LSPI was one of the primary agenda topics. Attendees recognized that advanced downsized and boosted engines now spend much more time in a low-speed high-torque regime that easily leads to LSPI.
Quote:
“LSPI is not a simple problem,” explained Thomas Briggs, Jr., manager of engine systems research and development at Southwest Research Institute (SWRI) in San Antonio, TX. Briggs led SWRI’s Pre-ignition Prevention Program team that includes industry partners (GM, Ford, Honda, Infineum International, Afton Chemical and others) that began investigating LSPI in 2011.
So yes, Toyota and Honda are both involved in dealing with LSPI.
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
Literally 5 seconds on Google:
http://www.velosterturbo.org/forum/velos...rbo-motors.html
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/
From the second link:
Quote:
Addressing LSPI sooner than later is top of mind for manufacturers. At the most recent JSAE/SAE Powertrains, Fuels and Lubricants International Meeting held in September 2015 in Kyoto, Japan, LSPI was one of the primary agenda topics. Attendees recognized that advanced downsized and boosted engines now spend much more time in a low-speed high-torque regime that easily leads to LSPI.
Quote:
“LSPI is not a simple problem,” explained Thomas Briggs, Jr., manager of engine systems research and development at Southwest Research Institute (SWRI) in San Antonio, TX. Briggs led SWRI’s Pre-ignition Prevention Program team that includes industry partners (GM, Ford, Honda, Infineum International, Afton Chemical and others) that began investigating LSPI in 2011.
So yes, Toyota and Honda are both involved in dealing with LSPI.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
Most recent UOA here
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...a_7#Post4741052
still shows > 2000 ppm Calcium
Do you have anything more recent, showing a change?
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
Most recent UOA here
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...a_7#Post4741052
still shows > 2000 ppm Calcium
Do you have anything more recent, showing a change?
Originally Posted By: nap
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
Most recent UOA here
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...a_7#Post4741052
still shows > 2000 ppm Calcium
Do you have anything more recent, showing a change?
Here ya go.
http://pqiadata.org/Toyota_0W20.html
I suspect your oil was the previous batch.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
The makers of Toyota oil are doing the same thing everyone else has. Formulas change.
Most recent UOA here
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ub...a_7#Post4741052
still shows > 2000 ppm Calcium
Do you have anything more recent, showing a change?
Here ya go.
http://pqiadata.org/Toyota_0W20.html
I suspect your oil was the previous batch.
Originally Posted By: nap
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
"Toyota Genuine Motor Oil SAE 0W-20 for Direct Injection Turbo Gasoline, engines” is used in your Lexus vehicle, motor Oil SAE 0W-20 for Direct Injection Turbo Gasoline Engines”, equivalent to satisfy the following grade viscosity.
Oil grade: Toyota Genuine Motor Oil SAE 0W-20 Direct Injection Turbo, gasoline Engines” or ILSAC GF-5 multigrade engine oil, good fuel economy and good starting cold weather, must be replaced with SAE 0W-20."
https://carmanuals2.com/lexus/nx200t-2015-specifications-38948
They don't explicitly say that it has to be used throughout the life of the car, but Toyota/Lexus did develop a LSPI-resistant oil for their 2.0l DIT.
Honda and Toyota are pretty late to the DIT game...I know Honda's 1.5l is having serious fuel dilution problems, haven't heard if they are struggling with LSPI.
My bet is engine design. Honda & Toyota seem to be unfazed by this LSPI thing, they don’t even bother recommending Dexos oil, nor have they reduced calcium in their house brand oil.
"Toyota Genuine Motor Oil SAE 0W-20 for Direct Injection Turbo Gasoline, engines” is used in your Lexus vehicle, motor Oil SAE 0W-20 for Direct Injection Turbo Gasoline Engines”, equivalent to satisfy the following grade viscosity.
Oil grade: Toyota Genuine Motor Oil SAE 0W-20 Direct Injection Turbo, gasoline Engines” or ILSAC GF-5 multigrade engine oil, good fuel economy and good starting cold weather, must be replaced with SAE 0W-20."
https://carmanuals2.com/lexus/nx200t-2015-specifications-38948
They don't explicitly say that it has to be used throughout the life of the car, but Toyota/Lexus did develop a LSPI-resistant oil for their 2.0l DIT.
Honda and Toyota are pretty late to the DIT game...I know Honda's 1.5l is having serious fuel dilution problems, haven't heard if they are struggling with LSPI.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
[...]
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/
[...]
So yes, Toyota and Honda are both involved in dealing with LSPI.
Of course they are, the difference is that they do not expect the oil alone to be their savior.
As per the link you posted, the solution has to be "holistic". I will venture to say that in order to be so, it also has to involve EPA. If their demands prove to be unreasonable for the current state of science / technology, and the effect of enforcing them on the auto industry includes reducing the passengers safety, they should definitely revise their position. (and yes, getting in the ditch on a side road in the Canadian winter because LSPI, because CAFE, *is* a safety issue).
[...]
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summary/resolving-low-speed-pre-ignition/
[...]
So yes, Toyota and Honda are both involved in dealing with LSPI.
Of course they are, the difference is that they do not expect the oil alone to be their savior.
As per the link you posted, the solution has to be "holistic". I will venture to say that in order to be so, it also has to involve EPA. If their demands prove to be unreasonable for the current state of science / technology, and the effect of enforcing them on the auto industry includes reducing the passengers safety, they should definitely revise their position. (and yes, getting in the ditch on a side road in the Canadian winter because LSPI, because CAFE, *is* a safety issue).
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
.[....] I know Honda's 1.5l is having serious fuel dilution problems, haven't heard if they are struggling with LSPI.
Thank you for the Toyota info. Honda seems indeed to have fuel dilution on the GDI engines, including the naturally aspirated ones. The Civic / Accord forums do debate LSPI, however no actual occurence was documented there. Or at least I couldn’t find any.
.[....] I know Honda's 1.5l is having serious fuel dilution problems, haven't heard if they are struggling with LSPI.
Thank you for the Toyota info. Honda seems indeed to have fuel dilution on the GDI engines, including the naturally aspirated ones. The Civic / Accord forums do debate LSPI, however no actual occurence was documented there. Or at least I couldn’t find any.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: nap
Of course they are, the difference is that they do not expect the oil alone to be their savior.
No, of course not, none of them do. That's why they have formed these research groups and are working on the problem. Oil, or rather, high calcium in oil, has proven to at least be a significant contributor to the phenomenon occurring, which is why that, being low-hanging fruit, has already been pursued by those developing these engines for their OEM lubricant products and why it is part of GF-6 as well as certain OEM approval regimens.
Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford...etc are all taking the same approach. Ford's engine is part of the GF-6 testing protocol, GM rolled the test into their licensing program. Toyota has revised their OEM lubricant to be low calcium and we'll likely, if we have no already, see the same from Honda. They do not need to develop their own approvals, as there is likely adequate coverage for the issue under GF-6. Since GM has their own approval process in place already, them including their own version of the test (in addition to the GF-6 one) also seems like a logical move.
Of course they are, the difference is that they do not expect the oil alone to be their savior.
No, of course not, none of them do. That's why they have formed these research groups and are working on the problem. Oil, or rather, high calcium in oil, has proven to at least be a significant contributor to the phenomenon occurring, which is why that, being low-hanging fruit, has already been pursued by those developing these engines for their OEM lubricant products and why it is part of GF-6 as well as certain OEM approval regimens.
Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford...etc are all taking the same approach. Ford's engine is part of the GF-6 testing protocol, GM rolled the test into their licensing program. Toyota has revised their OEM lubricant to be low calcium and we'll likely, if we have no already, see the same from Honda. They do not need to develop their own approvals, as there is likely adequate coverage for the issue under GF-6. Since GM has their own approval process in place already, them including their own version of the test (in addition to the GF-6 one) also seems like a logical move.
Havent heard of this LSPI issue over here. VW have made many years DI turbo engines and havent had this issue. Can it be fuel related issue? Or is it the oil that is just bad for tubo engines?
And honda 1.5 havent have any problems with fuel diluted issues over here.
Funny is that honda civic type r recommends 0w-20 in us and in eu its a5 or a3 of viscosity xx-30 or hihger
And honda 1.5 havent have any problems with fuel diluted issues over here.
Funny is that honda civic type r recommends 0w-20 in us and in eu its a5 or a3 of viscosity xx-30 or hihger
- Status
Similar threads
