So far what is the consensus on how clean GC is?

[Chris B.]

Any solid info on German Castrol's ability to keep an engine clean in the long run...say as good as M1?

 

[TR3-2001SE]

I think it will take a long time to really asses this as we have only had this oil 1-2 years at most.

 

[Audi Junkie]

Here we go again. What makes you so sure Mobil 1 is so great at "cleaning"? There is at least one current post reporting how Mobil 1 left lots of sludge behind that was flushed into the filter by a HDEO. I am on my 3rd change of GC, 6 months per change. Don't feel like pulling my v/c to see how it looks, but from under the filler cap, it is clean.

 

[haley10]

Access

 

[Patman]

I've been running GC longer than just about anyone on here and I've seen no issues yet. You guys are welcome to fly up here and tear down my motor and have a look at it's "guts" if you really want to see how it's doing! By the way, I'm going to post another UOA from my Firebird tonight (running GC of course) This UOA only will have 3k on it though. I decided to change it early due to my problems starting my car a few weeks back, and the possibility that a lot of fuel got into the oil. Plus I know it spent a lot of time idling at the dealership when they changed the coil and coil wire. I also wanted to change it so I could have a steady run of this oil from May until September, so there would be no sub 50F starts on it. And last but not least, I made 8 dyno runs on Saturday too, and discovered an air leak, so now that this problem is solved, my wear numbers should come down even lower! We were forced to run the car on the dyno without an air filter for a few runs too, so I'm sure more dirt got sucked in then too. So even though 3k sounds like a short interval, based on all of the above reasons, I'm sure even the most die hard "3k hater" would agree with me that the oil needed changing. The UOA will be interesting!

 

[Primus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman: You guys are welcome to fly up here and tear down my motor and have a look at it's "guts" if you really want to see how it's doing!

---

No doubts that a purist who makes a flush before flushing will have it clean with any oil.

 

[novadude]

What kind of dyno numbers did you see?

 

[ekpolk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman: I've been running GC longer than just about anyone on here and I've seen no issues yet. You guys are welcome to fly up here and tear down my motor and have a look at it's "guts" if you really want to see how it's doing! By the way, I'm going to post another UOA from my Firebird tonight (running GC of course) This UOA only will have 3k on it though. I decided to change it early due to my problems starting my car a few weeks back, and the possibility that a lot of fuel got into the oil. Plus I know it spent a lot of time idling at the dealership when they changed the coil and coil wire. I also wanted to change it so I could have a steady run of this oil from May until September, so there would be no sub 50F starts on it. And last but not least, I made 8 dyno runs on Saturday too, and discovered an air leak, so now that this problem is solved, my wear numbers should come down even lower! We were forced to run the car on the dyno without an air filter for a few runs too, so I'm sure more dirt got sucked in then too. So even though 3k sounds like a short interval, based on all of the above reasons, I'm sure even the most die hard "3k hater" would agree with me that the oil needed changing. The UOA will be interesting!

---

Your 3k change seems quite reasonable under the circumstances. I'm on my first run of GC right now, and I remain a bit puzzled by the stuff, although not as concerned as I was at first. I still seem to have some higher RPM harshness/raspiness that was not present with the prior fill of Amsoil ASL 5w-30. It does seem to be diminishing with time. I now have about 750 miles on the oil. Entirely apart from what the UOAs say, have you noticed any subjective "symptoms" that seem to be traceable to the GC? My engine is a DOHC, variable valve timing Toyota 3.0L V-6. EDIT: to clarify, I did see your "no issues" comment. I read that as referring to cleanliness. I'm asking about operating performance. [ May 18, 2004, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: ekpolk ]

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by novadude: What kind of dyno numbers did you see?

---

I started out the day at 254rwhp, mine is a stock LT1, with automatic trans and with just a catback as the only modification. That first dyno run was with a 14:1 a/f ratio. Then with some tweaking we got it to 265rwhp, but more importantly we flattened the torque curve a lot and picked up 30 foot pounds in the midrange. The final a/f ratio was 12.5:1. We ran out of time but I'm going to go back once I get new plugs and we'll squeeze another 5rwhp out of it and hopefully a bit more torque down low too. The engine feels considerably stronger now, it races to the redline much quicker and really snaps you back in the seat on the shifts. Easily a 2-3 tenths improvement in the quarter. As far as GC goes, I definitely noticed my engine had more spunk down low and in the midrange after switching to it. I noticed the same in my wife's Honda too. I wish I was able to report my UOA tonight, but it isn't ready yet. This morning when I left for work, I saw that they only had one test left to perform on my sample, the fuel dilution test. Well, they got that done, but didn't finalize the test and release the numbers for viewing yet. Perhaps they are double checking one of the values. Most of the time when I drop my samples off at this lab directly, I get the results the next afternoon, but occasionally it takes an extra day like this. Kinda disappointing, but in reality that is still a super quick turnaround time!

 

[Patman]

I was checking my sample status again this morning before I left for work, and noticed that even though I can't view the results yet, it does have a color code to show if there are any "issues" with either Wear, Contamination or Fuel. Under fuel, it shows a yellow code. So I'm expecting to find more than 2% fuel in that oil (but probably not too much more, since it's not been given the danger "orange" code). I've had as much as 1% fuel in my reports in the past and it still showed the "green light" under the Fuel category. So now more than ever I'm glad I changed the oil instead of letting it go to 6k.

 

[jsharp]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Audi Junkie: Here we go again. What makes you so sure Mobil 1 is so great at "cleaning"? There is at least one current post reporting how Mobil 1 left lots of sludge behind that was flushed into the filter by a HDEO. I am on my 3rd change of GC, 6 months per change. Don't feel like pulling my v/c to see how it looks, but from under the filler cap, it is clean.

---

A single event doesn't make a trend. Considering the portion of the synthetic oil market held by M1, if there were widespread sludging issues with it I think we'd all know about it. Castrol otoh, removed at least one 0W-30 formulation from the market because of these issues and that was mentioned by the Australian posters on this board. Given this, I think it's a legitimate question...

 

[Audi Junkie]

quote:

---

removed at least one 0W-30 formulation from the market because of these issues and that was mentioned by the Australian posters

---

So, if I ask Castrol why they dropped 0w-30 they will say "because of those Austrailian posters"? I don't imagine 0w-30 being too popular there anyway, replaced by 0w-40 perhaps. Maybe it is a legit question if there was not a comparison to M1.

quote:

---

A single event doesn't make a trend

---

If the guy used M1 the whole life of the car and had sludge, that tells me something.

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Audi Junkie: If the guy used M1 the whole life of the car and had sludge, that tells me something.

---

That tells me that there might be something wrong with the engine, not the oil.

 

[Motorbike]

The SLX 0w-30 is still available in the UK . http://www.castrol.co.uk/eng/product_data_sheets.shtml It's good oil , not to worry IMO

 

[Quattro Pete]

In Poland, the SLX recently got replaced by SLX LongTec. The official reason was that some car manufacturers (mainly Toyota) claimed that SLX caused sludge deposits in Toyota engines when ran for 15k km (Toyota's standard OCI in Europe). Castrol responded by saying that it was the poor gasoline quality in Poland (which is true - frequently the gas gets dilluted with water or other cheap crap by dishonest distributors and gas station owners) that somehow (how ) reacted with the oil and formed deposits. So, they changed the formulation, and it is now called SLX LongTec, and Toyota Poland uses it to service its cars. However, it's been out for nearly a year now, and Castrol still hasn't provided any specs of this new formulation to the public. And who knows what the real reason for this formulation change was...

 

[Motorbike]

Interesting , imagine esters along with moisture and how well they may or may not play together

 

[jsharp]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Audi Junkie:

quote:

---

removed at least one 0W-30 formulation from the market because of these issues and that was mentioned by the Australian posters

---

So, if I ask Castrol why they dropped 0w-30 they will say "because of those Austrailian posters"? I don't imagine 0w-30 being too popular there anyway, replaced by 0w-40 perhaps. Maybe it is a legit question if there was not a comparison to M1.

quote:

---

A single event doesn't make a trend

---

If the guy used M1 the whole life of the car and had sludge, that tells me something.

---

Again, this engine doesn't make a trend no matter if it was the only oil ever used. I don't think anyone has said that M1 or anything else will always, without fail, everytime keep an engine sludge free. The point is, M1 has a proven track record of doing an adequate job in this area most of the time. The other point and the subject of the thread originally is, GC does not have a track record in this area. And given that at least one version of Castrol 0W-30 was known to have sludging problems when it was being sold in Australia, I think the original posters question is still valid. Honestly, I don't understand why people get so brand defensive. Right now I have GC in my good truck, Rotella T synthetic in my son's truck, Pennzoil in my car for the Auto-R/X rinse, and every one had M1 in them before the current oil. Who knows what I'll be running in them next year. It's likely it'll be whatever I think will work best, and I won't care a bit about the color of the bottle or the name on it...

 

[jsharp]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Motorbike: Interesting , imagine esters along with moisture and how well they may or may not play together

---

Yes. As I recall, some of the early 80's Klotz MC oils had corrosion problems because of this very thing... [ May 19, 2004, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: jsharp ]

 

[Audi Junkie]

jsharp, you are right. Maybe the original post itself was contraversial. I am brand-blind, but the only Mobil I am using is M1 SUV. I am objective, and not totally attached to one brand. That is what makes me not want to hear the anti-Castrol retoric, it's not really very intelligent. I doubt that Audi, one of the finest mass-producton cars, would pick a bad oil for their original fill. Anyone in the US can justify GC as a top otc oil, best of all, it is imported. I would not be surprised to see Motul and Audi together in the future. More on that later.

 

[ekpolk]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Audi Junkie: jsharp, you are right. Maybe the original post itself was contraversial. I am brand-blind, but the only Mobil I am using is M1 SUV. I am objective, and not totally attached to one brand. That is what makes me not want to hear the anti-Castrol retoric, it's not really very intelligent. I doubt that Audi, one of the finest mass-producton cars, would pick a bad oil for their original fill. Anyone in the US can justify GC as a top otc oil, best of all, it is imported. I would not be surprised to see Motul and Audi together in the future. More on that later.

---

Well now, that comment is guaranteed to calm the Castrol critics right down. . . Please tell me, what's less intelligent: 1) Objecting to sneaky marketing tactics and actually questioning a company's product quality and pricing, or 2) the blatant internal inconsistency in claiming first to be "brand-blind", and then five lines later heaping sugary praise on the "Acceleration Under Demonic Influence" car company??? Yes, yes, I know they were cleared of that little scandal, give me some leeway, I'm having fun here... Seriously though, what specifically is unintelligent about having a problem with a company's less-than-candid tactics? If you think I've singled out Castrol, I can name some other business bad guys too, and some good solid players too. Pardon me for sounding like a smarta@@, but if you're that intelligent and astute, how have you missed the fact, which I've stated several times here, that I presently have five quarts of German Castrol Syntec in my car at this very moment??? I don't irrationally "hate" Castrol, but I will throw the BS flag when I believe it deserves to be thrown. And guys, please stop taking all this so personally. This is a great forum, we should have fun with this. None of us are going to die if we disagree over an oil choice or our philosophy of doing business. Have a nice evening.