Possibly. Will see what turns out to be. I wonder if Porsche updated approval too?
MOTUL 8100 X-MAX 0W-40 Lost Porsche A40 in latest API SP version
- Thread starter marinerbc
- Start date
but it already has been this month reformulated and hasn't lost Porsche A40:
Last edited:
is x-cess gen 2 easily found on US market.
in europe is very rare to find and sold at top self price , about the same with mobil 1. i think in europe we will be waiting for a long time to see x-cess gen 2 as it happens with all new motul oils. even if they said that x-cess gen 2 will eventually replace gen 1 and gen 1 will phase out sometime. its been 2 years since the announcement and we still see more gen 1 than 2 here.
in europe is very rare to find and sold at top self price , about the same with mobil 1. i think in europe we will be waiting for a long time to see x-cess gen 2 as it happens with all new motul oils. even if they said that x-cess gen 2 will eventually replace gen 1 and gen 1 will phase out sometime. its been 2 years since the announcement and we still see more gen 1 than 2 here.
Introducing 8100 X-cess 5W40 gen 2 and X-clean 5W40 gen2
Motul - News/ The Drum - Introducing 8100 X-cess 5W40 gen 2 and X-clean 5W40 gen2
www.motul.com
and saps 1.07 , interesting!
Interesting, I clicked that link last night and it was still an API SN PDS.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2021
- Messages
- 17
Our 0w-40 doesn’t carry the approval either because it’s PAO. It’s a tough trade off sometimes deciding between approvals an offering a quality PAO for certain weights.
What is the constraint with A40 using PAO?
I'm not clear either, because Castrol has a brand new Edge 0W-40 PA that looks to have high PAO content based on the PDS / MSDS.
I think the rep is speaking about SP not A40.
ROWE RS 0w40 is advertised as PAO with A40 / API SN.
ROWE Racing 0w40 is also advertised as PAO but w/Ester. No approvals.
Yeah no idea. I like the look of those oils though, the RS has among the highest HTHS for a 0w-40 other than Driven DI40. Would probably run it if it was SN+ or SP.
The first one doesn't have any approvals either.
Good catch
I went back to ROWE's website and only their HC lines contains the official A40 approval. Perhaps he really is talking about A40.
Motor oils | ROWE
ROWE can provide a wide range of engine or transmission oils, coolants, antifreeze and other winter chemicals as well as other lubricants for all types of vehicles for private customers.
www.rowe-oil.com
Ravenol OTOH is does use PAO for A40 approved oil.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2021
- Messages
- 17
It could also be the % of PAO vs HC base oils in their oils. I am curious myself, so I am going to ask my product management team in Germany for their input here.
I have always been taught that our PAO oils are too high % of PAO to obtain the factory approvals needed, because it's outside of the window for test results to "match" the original formulation. The same reason our 10w-60 for the M cars doesnt carry a factory approval from BMW.
Find out which specific approval requirements are being violated by using PAO in the base stock.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2021
- Messages
- 17
I sent an email. Our facility in Germany is closed for holiday tomorrow and Friday, so I should hear back early next week!
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2021
- Messages
- 17
So i received a reply from my product managers and it basically states that most PAO's COULD get a factory approval, because the approvals aren't reliant on a fixed number, it's within a certain range.
"Every manufacturer standard has certain parameters that you have to adhere to.
However, these parameters are usually not fixed parameters – they are more like ranges. In the case of an HTHS value, for example, this can mean that it must be > 3.5. The "HC synthesis" product then has a HTHS of 3.6 and the fully synthetic product (PAO) may have a HTHS of 4.0. So it still meets the specification and can be approved.
The problem in this case is that the approval costs are too high compared to the sales generated by such a product.
The reason is because the most people aren’t like you and me. They don’t want to have the expensive oil which can run their intervals. They want to have an oil which is cheap and can run the same intervals. That’s the economic crux of this story…."
In other words, there are solutions here so that manufacturer specifications can also be claimed with fully synthetic products without to violate the requirements, but most companies chose to forgo the approvals because of a cost factor. The majority of the population won't understand the difference and just see a price tag. That's the answer I received from my team in Germany regarding that.
Makes a little more sense for myself as well. We as a collective group are still far and away the minority when it comes to this. If I tried to walk into a repair shop and sell a PAO drum at 40% higher cost vs the Group III alternative, I would be sitting on a lot of unsold PAO drums.
Hope that answers it for you?
Thanks!
Ken Mooney
President - ROWE USA/Canada
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it.
As for the cost to obtain approvals, well that goes both ways. For me it's more significant to have the approval than saving a few cents on a purchase. But perhaps not everyone is that way.
As for the cost to obtain approvals, well that goes both ways. For me it's more significant to have the approval than saving a few cents on a purchase. But perhaps not everyone is that way.
well when i went to my local oil shop to ask for new gen(2) motul and there wasn't any ,the owner said exactly that:
the majority of owners probably thinks the same way, i guess..
Similar threads
