Other euro oil manufacturers. PennGrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Crobinson16
Has anyone looked at the PennGrade euro oils. Thoughts. Compared to the Mobil FS 0-40 and Castrol.


Well it actually carries none of the specifications listed so that makes it inferior from that standpoint.

Lots of weasel wording on those PDS in regards to certifications, as is typical of Brad Penn racing oils.
 
Originally Posted By: Crobinson16
Where do you get that it doesn't Cary any of the certifications. Looks to me like there is an x bedside all but two

Read the heading. It says "typical applications." Don't confuse it with actual manufacturer approval.

One example is the MB spec. If an oil has an actual 229.5 approval, it'll be listed on this official MB site:
http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolisten...ent_action=show

I don't see PennGrade on this list.

I'm not saying PennGrade oil is bad, but I would not use it if I was still under warranty and needed an oil meeting one of these mfg specs. That is the difference between it and M1 0w-40, for example.
 
For MB specs, look here. You'll note not a single "PennGrade" oil is listed under any MB approval. Also, what is "Daimler V2009.1"? Also what is "Opel LL-A-025-B"? Regardless, the LL-x-025 specs are obsolete, superseded by Dexos1/2.

Aside from that you mean?
 
Originally Posted By: Crobinson16
Where do you get that it doesn't Cary any of the certifications. Looks to me like there is an x bedside all but two


They could put an "X" by anything. Some of their other grades are indeed API as stated "API licensed for service category...." However, this one says "while supporting the performance requirements of", and says "typical applications" for the European specifications. Apparently this particular oil carries no specs whatsoever.

Not to pick on you but this question comes up a lot on here. Critical reading of (sometimes intentionally deceptive) PDS sheets is needed to determine the actual facts. Compare that to what ExxonMobil states for their FS 0W-40 product:

Quote:
Mobil 1 FS 0W-40 has the following builder approvals:
MB-Approval 229.3
MB-Approval 229.5
VW 502 00/505 00
PORSCHE A40
 
OK I understand now, I guess I didn't take notice to the " typical" wording, for now I guess I will stay with the Mobil FS 0-40 in my 2011 Silverado 6.2 .
 
Originally Posted By: Crobinson16
OK I understand now, I guess I didn't take notice to the " typical" wording, for now I guess I will stay with the Mobil FS 0-40 in my 2011 Silverado 6.2 .

If it does not say "approved," it is marketing gimmick.
Plus, cst of 14.2 and HTHS of 3.75? Oils with 14.2cst have HTHS 3.8-4.0.
 
Originally Posted By: Crobinson16
Where do you get that it doesn't Cary any of the certifications. Looks to me like there is an x bedside all but two

"Typical Applications" is not synonymous with "Formal Approvals." Take a look at some data sheets from Exxon-Mobil and you'll see how they appropriately differentiate between a specification where formal approvals don't exist (i.e. ACEA), where formal approvals do exist (i.e. the European OEM specs), and where recommending something for a specification without actually being approved (generally with weird HDEO viscosities, or when claiming an obsolete spec through backwards compatibility).

There are plenty of times when a "recommended for" lubricant is just fine. We just have to be able to distinguish the difference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top