What GF-5 is all about

Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,859
Location
Texas
 Originally Posted By: Ken2
  • Better turbocharger protection
  • Better sludge protection
  • Better emission system durability
  • Better fuel economy
What's not to like???
That all depends on whether the "no change in performance" for wear protection applies to the conditions inside your particular engine or not. For the vast majority of engines on the road, GF-5 is probably a great thing. For some particular older design features... maybe not so much. Maybe fine. The Sequence IVa test is ridiculously mild. Come on, a little 4-cylinder Nissan economy engine for the cam wear test? Try that test with a 426 Hemi or a Ford 427 and if the cam wear is within spec, then I'll have no complaint. Beyond that I have a bit of a philosophical problem with the whole GF5.com website. Its a company promoting a regulation because they "have the solution" and want to tout it. It distills down to the flowchart at the top of the "why GF-5?" page. I DO NOT believe that regulation should ever drive design. End of story.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
888
Location
Ohio
There is a bunch of information available on the GF-5 website link above. If you take the time to study it, you will be answering questions on BITOG rather than asking them. The first licenses for GF-5 are anticipated for 3Q 2010, with availabilty shortly thereafter.On the link, you may enter your email address to get updated with progress reports as they have their meetings. FWIW---Old tommy
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
34,633
Location
NJ
There are some concerns with some manufacturers of high moly oils and turbos.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,998
Location
Milwaukee, WI
One thing that is interesting... the differences between the two specs are the perceived weaknesses in the current oils we're using (or value added features with zero cost, which I doubt exist). Interesting that there is focus on cleanliness and dispersants, and none on anti-wear. This validates the attitude around here that any oil will properly lubricate your vehicle, but the extended OCI's with "better oils" are basically due to their ability to keep your engine clean and free of deposits (and not turn acidic, of course).
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
34,633
Location
NJ
 Quote:
nteresting that there is focus on cleanliness and dispersants, and none on anti-wear. This validates the attitude around here that any oil will properly lubricate your vehicle, but the extended OCI's with "better oils" are basically due to their ability to keep your engine clean and free of deposits (and not turn acidic, of course).
My thoughts exactly. Really are no wear issues with modern engines and oils. Which suggests that most of what we discuss here is all an obsession with many people. Arguing over ppm of wear. etc.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
I really want to know where they came up with the spiderweb visual aid. Setting aside the notion that Arachnia may be running things ...that just doesn't make it for me in some Gestalt way. Very odd way of expressing something.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
34,633
Location
NJ
What's wrong with it? Just curious. Infineum has their little GF-5 thing going on. Similar layout.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
8,756
Location
RI
It should narrow down the difference between full synth and mineral oils. Or, its just going to make cheap oil more expensive as it approaches the synth price and then becomes a synth. I have nothing against the usage of better base stocks and newer additive technologies.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
7,256
Location
Michigan
The oil manufacturers are going to have a hard time making this standard and they have said so. Trying to improve one thing many times affects another in a negative way.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
36,240
Location
NY
The way I see it, at least for my 3 vehicle fleet, is I'm better off stock piling more oil. No increase in wear protection, maybe a little more cleaning? A-rx or MMO can fix that. E-85 protection, I don't use the stuff. Probably a big price increase, maybe its just me but I see little value for my current fleet.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
25,051
Location
ON, Canada eh?
 Originally Posted By: demarpaint
The way I see it, at least for my 3 vehicle fleet, is I'm better off stock piling more oil. No increase in wear protection, maybe a little more cleaning? A-rx or MMO can fix that. E-85 protection, I don't use the stuff. Probably a big price increase, maybe its just me but I see little value for my current fleet.
90% of vehicles on the road if run with regular & proper OCI's shouldn't need "extra cleaning" and those that do generally run a synthetic with a more robust additive package anyways. I see this as a big price increase and nothing more... Stock up on GF4 oils people... Just another way to part consumers from their hard earned cash IMO!
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
 Originally Posted By: buster
What's wrong with it? Just curious. Infineum has their little GF-5 thing going on. Similar layout.
A bar graph would simply show where things stay the same or have been augmented/improved. You've got all these tangents that do little beyond connecting dots. You've also got 5 tiers ..which one would assume that each represents each GF evolution ..while GF4 protrudes into GF5 .and GF5 idles in GF4 (assuming that the divisions mean anything at all). Inverting the would look just as strange to me. If simple rays were used with circle for divisions it would seem more sensible. Skip the connecting lines ..skip the web. The creator must have had a childhood romance with "connect the dots" in some radial persuasion. Again, it's a Gestalt thing. My visual perception features/defects/lacking/peculiarity. You don't have a problem integrating the depiction ..and I don't either ..after a fashion, but I wonder what inspired it. It would have never entered my head to do it this way. If you were responsible for creating a visual aid to depict the GF evolutions ..with no prior influence/direction infused into the mix, would you have chosen this manner to do it? In short, it's alien to 99.44% of the ways I've ever seen progress or differences graphically shown. That's all Edit: This has similarities to ..hmm..something like M1 0w-40 to me. I see the stuff shearing routinely ..I butt into the conversation where all the marvels of it are being discussed ..and I poke my head in and say "Hey .ahh..guys ..why is shearing a good thing here ..while every other oil it's a defect" ..and the group pauses for a moment ..I get a look of "what's he talking about? " and a reply of "Oh that ..it's nothing of importance" ..and am summarily dismissed as the conversation returns to its previously interrupted point.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
1,083
Location
Texas urban DESERT 9/12 months
 Originally Posted By: Ken2
The truth about GF-5
  • Better turbocharger protection
  • Better sludge protection
  • Better emission system durability
  • Better fuel economy
What's not to like???
Good stuff. A better question will be how will GF-5 affect the best oils in the business or more specifically the brew and not just the designation of GF-5 by itself?? Also too, if under a current system, an oil is not energy conserving (ML), does that mean they will try to re certify for GF4 *and* energy conserving or would the GF4 automatically include energy conserving status?
 
Last edited:
Top