Synthetic Oil vs API Service SL ILSAC GF 3

[jsleesi]

According to automobile technical information, the API Service SL ILSAC GF-3 is equally good oil as Synthetic oil????
If it is the case, why spend extra money on the oil? Can some one explain the pros and cons on the two types of oil?

Thanks

 

[Patman]

I'm a bit confused as to what you are asking because synthetics are also classified under the API SL and ILSAC GF3 regulations too.

The dino oil may have just barely passed the tests, while the synthetic could be considerably above it.

 

[widman]

if you read through all the threads on this board you will probably come to the conclusion that the SL oils are all very good, much better than others, with performance within the category improving as you increase the quality of the base oil (Group I to II, II to II+, II+ to III, and III to group IV & V blends; and lower the quantity of the VI improvers. Thus, one of the biggest advantages to group IV/V synthetics is in it's almost total lack of ability to shear down, and it's better pumpability at low temps.

 

[Pablo]

quote:

---

According to automobile technical information, the API Service SL ILSAC GF-3 is equally good oil as Synthetic oil????

---

I thinks we needs to see this " techinical information" you are talking about. While I think it is the underlying goal of API to improve motor oil with each revision, I think some nomenclature, middle logic and data got lost in translation here. As pointed out, synthetic oils can be SL as well.....API tests are just a minimum gate to pass.

[ November 10, 2002, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: Pablo ]

 

[impala_sc]

perhaps they were referring to the fuel economy test? The ILSAC fuel economy tests compare an ILSAC GF3 candidate to a certain PAO oil.

 

[Eiron]

quote:

---

Originally posted by impala_sc:
The ILSAC fuel economy tests compare an ILSAC GF3 candidate to a certain PAO oil.

---

I believe the Base Comparison oil is an oil which does NOT meet ILSAC specs. Both GF-2 & GF-3 specs require an *improvement* in fuel efficiency over the base oil.

jsleesi,
You're paying extra for even more durability. Yes, all GF-3/SL oils will be far superior to what was previously available, & if you can't get past the 3mo/3k mi change mentality, any SL oil is fantastic. Keep in mind that ILSAC tests are run for "normal" oil durations; their longest test is for 96 hrs, which is 2k-3k mi for me. I run my oil 3 to 5 times that, & the extra durability I get from ANY premium oil means:
1) I get better protection at the beginning of the oil's life
2) I get equal/better protection at the end of the oil's life
3) I spend less money overall
4) I spend less time changing oil
5) I dump out less oil (recycle, but it's still waste)
6) I get more cookies & beer 'cuz "all of the above"

Jeez... okay, now I can't get past #6

What's the specific application/duration you're using it in?

 

[impala_sc]

quote:

---

I believe the Base Comparison oil is an oil which does NOT meet ILSAC specs.

---

Correct. But the base comparison oil for the economy test is, I think, a PAO oil. That way the DINO ILSAC GF3 marketers could claim their oil "outperforms synthetic" aka PAO as long as they don't say how.