SP GF-6 vs Dexos

[Gene K]

I'm curious of how the relative capability (drain length) of oils that meet various common specs. For instance how would a basic SP GF-6 compare to a basic Dexos 1 Gen 2 Oil.

The lowest cost brand name that meets those specs at the local Walmart is Havoline.

Havoline Synthetic Blend 5W-30 SP GF-6
$16.97 per 6 qt of 5W-30.

Havoline Pro DS Lifelong Synthetic D1.2
$19.65 per 6 qt of 5W-30.

How much longer drain (if any) would you expect the D1.2 oil to be capable of?

I'm asking an opinion. I know the proper way is with analysis of the vehicle, driving habits and lubricants involved.

Disclaimer: This isn't a question about whether you drain your oils at 1,000 mi or 40,000 mi. If your answer is zero that's fine.

 

[kschachn]

No one can answer that question for several reasons. First off there is no "minimum miles usage" criteria or requirement for either of those licenses. Yes they have minimum TBN values but that is related to my next point. Second (and most important) it is highly dependent on the specific engine under specific operating conditions.

Despite this if you want to use a motor oil with an interval guaranteed by the manufacturer then several are available.

 

[Bill_W]

GM dexos1

360.lubrizol.com

 

[Gene K]

No one can answer that question for several reasons. First off there is no "minimum miles usage" criteria or requirement for either of those licenses. And second (and most important) it is highly dependent on the specific engine under specific operating conditions.

Despite this if you want to use a motor oil with an interval guaranteed by the manufacturer then several are available.

That's why it's called an opinion.

I will mark you down for the no opinion column.

I was under the impression GM developed Dexos because some oils meeting API ILSAC certification were not adequate at the drain intervals the IOLM was suggesting.

 

[kschachn]

GM was primarily concerned about deposit formation. dexos piggybacked off of earlier GM specifications.

General Motors Oil Specifications - oilspecifications.org

www.oilspecifications.org

 

[Bill_W]

Spider charts are misleading but here is some info.

passenger car motor oils | Chevron Oronite (Global)

www.oronite.com

 

[slacktide_bitog]

d1g2 is still worth it, and it's only $3 more to get full synthetic rather than the blend

 

[Johnmpb]

No one can answer that question for several reasons. First off there is no "minimum miles usage" criteria or requirement for either of those licenses. Yes they have minimum TBN values but that is related to my next point. Second (and most important) it is highly dependent on the specific engine under specific operating conditions.

Despite this if you want to use a motor oil with an interval guaranteed by the manufacturer then several are available.

Exactly this. Some manufacturers spec SP for 5k, some for 7.5k. Driving style can influence this too. A UOA is the only way to make sure.

This thread is like asking “how much longer will I live if I eat a cup of blueberries everyday for life vs eating a banana for life.”

 

[Gene K]

Exactly this. Some manufacturers spec SP for 5k, some for 7.5k. Driving style can influence this too. A UOA is the only way to make sure.

This thread is like asking “how much longer will I live if I eat a cup of blueberries everyday for life vs eating a banana for life.”

No. This thread is asking if you have an opinion on that and what that opinion is.

 

[Johnmpb]

No. This thread is asking if you have an opinion on that and what that opinion is.

Facts over opinions Gene

 

[ZeeOSix]

Spider charts are misleading but here is some info.

passenger car motor oils | Chevron Oronite (Global)

www.oronite.com

The Spider chart shows that all versions of dexos1 have better performance parameters in some areas than ILSAC GF-6, and that dexos1 G3 is better than G2, and G2 is better than G1.

A UOA may tell you how long you could push an OCI, can't really guess about it. I'd think most new GMs would have a recommended OCI around 10K miles for non-severe service. How far are you planning on pushing the OCI?

 

[Bill_W]

The Spider chart shows that all versions of dexos1 have better performance parameters in some areas than ILSAC GF-6, and that dexos1 G3 is better than G2, and G2 is better than G1.

A UOA may tell you how long you could push an OCI, can't really guess about it. I'd think most new GMs would have a recommended OCI around 10K miles for non-severe service. How far are you planning on pushing the OCI?

And here is the problem with spider charts. They are not comparing the 15 tests of GF-6, they are using the Dexos1 gen 3 tests to compare Gen 1 to 2. Kinda wrong to apply one standard to another that have similar tests but different. It is not what any oil actually will test but the minimum standard required. Zero means nothing…

 

[ZeeOSix]

Double post ... deleted.

 

[ZeeOSix]

And here is the problem with spider charts. They are not comparing the 15 tests of GF-6, they are using the Dexos1 gen 3 tests to compare Gen 1 to 2. Kinda wrong to apply one standard to another that have similar tests but different. It is not what any oil actually will test but the minimum standard required. Zero means nothing…

The OP was asking about dexos1 compared to GF-6. That spider chart, even though based on dexos1 test parameters, shows that dexos1 has more benifits than GF-6 in the areas shown.

So what GF-6 tests not covered by GM dexos1 tests will show that GF-6 is better than dexos1 Gen 2 or Gen 3? Can anyone list an oil that meets dexos1 Gen 2 but not GF-6?

How about just getting an oil that meets both GF-6 and dexos1 Gen 2 if those are sought after specs. There are many oils that meet both.

 

[Bill_W]

My point is the oils are not actually tested. It only shows the minimum required to meet. And what scale do they use? It seems like just another marketing tool to deceive without actually showing real oil test results. Just throwing my view in. It scares me when someone shows me a Librizol spider chart and claiming a VW 504 regulation 20 years old to fix issues with one car in a area that uses low sulphur fuel is designed better than a GF-6 for US.

I am happy that API has designed for our fuels.

 

[ZeeOSix]

My point is the oils are not actually tested. It only shows the minimum required to meet. And what scale do they use? It seems like just another marketing tool to deceive without actually showing real oil test results. Just throwing my view in. It scares me when someone shows me a Librizol spider chart and claiming a VW 504 regulation 20 years old to fix issues with one car in a area that uses low sulphur fuel is designed better than a GF-6 for US.

If the oils aren't tested, then how do they get the GF-6 and/or dexos1 Gen 2 spec on the bottle?

 

[OVERKILL]

And here is the problem with spider charts. They are not comparing the 15 tests of GF-6, they are using the Dexos1 gen 3 tests to compare Gen 1 to 2. Kinda wrong to apply one standard to another that have similar tests but different. It is not what any oil actually will test but the minimum standard required. Zero means nothing…

These are focus areas for the specifications, not "tests".

If you want to see how the Dexos approvals improve over the basic GF-6/API SP stuff, you have to lookup the limits for each of the testing protocols that overlap.

The Ford approvals for example, which aren't as stringent as Dexos, take the basic API approvals, and then tighten the limits in a few key areas. This is also how many of the European approvals work over the ACEA stuff, with the addition of their own test protocols on top.

Think of the API stuff as foundational. It forms the basis for the manufacturer approvals which then impose either stricter limits on the same tests, add additional test protocols on top, or both.

 

[Bill_W]

If the oils aren't tested, then how do they get the GF-6 and/or dexos1 Gen 2 spec on the bottle?

Suppose I had a turbocharger, I would want to review my oil choice. But right now I am warm and fuzzy with my choice and changing oil every 6 months. Chasing anything else does not make sense to me. If my car was older my choice would be different, if my car burned oil it would be different.

 

[kschachn]

My point is the oils are not actually tested. It only shows the minimum required to meet. And what scale do they use? It seems like just another marketing tool to deceive without actually showing real oil test results. Just throwing my view in. It scares me when someone shows me a Librizol spider chart and claiming a VW 504 regulation 20 years old to fix issues with one car in a area that uses low sulphur fuel is designed better than a GF-6 for US.

Actually it’s not showing that either. The charts are entirely qualitative and more importantly, relative in regards to another license or approval.

Since all of the developed world is running nearly exclusively on low sulfur fuel, what is the problem with sulfur? I’m not sure what issues one is fixing with oil to be honest.

 

[Bill_W]

Low SAPS or high SAPS debate. I do not know enough as you guys are smarter than me but throw the low SAPS and everyone without a spec of oil thinking would want low SAPS. (equals IVD?) Does that have other considerations, like the fuels used in the area targeted for the requirement? SAPS are used for piston rings and valve seat.