Est first use date for API SN Plus - May/June '18

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, me too. I'm not up to speed on what tests must be passed to meet SN Plus.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
Yeah, me too. I'm not up to speed on what tests must be passed to meet SN Plus.


SN Plus will include all the current GF-5 tests plus a couple of new ones:

Ford LSPI test (Sequence IX) which was developed for GF-6
Chain wear test (not sure the number of that one...) also developed for GF-6
Sequence VIE protocol will replace sequence VID becasue VID is no longer able to be run (the industry ran out of parts) - this is the fuel economy test for resource conserving designation on ILSAC grades.

Dexos1 is a completely different set of tests and isn't the same. That said most Dexos1:2015 oils should be able to meet SN Plus.
Take a look at this announcement from Shell:
Link
 
Solarent,
what's the reference viscosity for the economy tests ?

Is it something remotely reasonable, or still something (like) 15W30 ?
 
I can't directly copy the PDF links to this post but you should be able to Google the info for yourselves (if someone does know how to copy the links, please add them)...

Okay, I see that last December, Afton launched two new PCMO DI packages. You can find the two product data sheets freely available to read on their website.

Hitec®11145 is a GF-5/SN pack that has demonstrated performance on TGDI engines (both Ford & GM). Although it's not specifically stated, one might assume that this product is good for GF-5+. It has a treat rate of 8.5%.

Hitec®11180 is a DI pack which as well as meeting GF-5/SN, also meets the requirements of GM dexos 1™ Gen 2. The DI treats at 10.1%.

Both product data sheets provide data on Pre-ignition (GM SPI, Ford LPSI), Wear (Seq IVB, Ford Timing Chain Wear...both future GF-6 tests) & Cleanliness (GM Oxidation, GM Deposits). The test results are suitably obfuscated and are shown as '% of spec limit'. You should note that the Hitec®11180 data sheet provides a result for GM Turbo Cleanliness whereas the Hitec®11145 datasheet doesn't. One can never be sure but one might infer that this is because the latter doesn't actually pass the GM Turbo test (which is why there's no result).

Neither PDF provides any information on the types of base oil or VII used to generate the test data. Nor is it stated whether Hitec®11180 is Hitec®11145 with a 1.6% boost of 'something' added on top. No information on whether the Detergent is calcium or magnesium based is provided.

Hitec®11145 has a quoted TBN of 86 which would imply a finished oil with a TBN of 7.3. No TBN data is provided for Hitec®11180.

It's something of a fool's errand to contrast the data provided in the two data sheets. These could have been generated with different base oils & even different viscocity grades. However, if like me, you err towards the foolish, you might note that the higher treat rate product is...

- the same on GM SPI (both are zero%)
- better on Ford LSPI (60% vs 70%)
- better on Sea IVB wear (50% vs 84%)
- similar on Ford Timing Chain Wear (80% vs 75%)
- similar on GM Oxidation (25% vs 21%)
- similar on GM Deposits (85% vs 81%)
- only Hitec®11180 has a GM Turbo Cleanliness result (25%)

My one big take from this is the info on LSPI. I have long argued that LSPI was a problem that had been massively exaggerated & over-hyped by certain overly neurotic US OEMs. This info suggests that a relatively low treat rate DI pack can zap LSPI dead in its tracks on GM TGDI engines and control it in Ford TGDI engines. I freely accept that this might require oils to be fully (or predominantly) Group III based but if this is the case, why didn't they just come out with it and says so in the first place?
 
I have been using the new spec 0W-30 oil for over 10,000 miles (Amsoil) and compared to

the old type (also 0W-30), I have seen a increase of 3 MPG.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Solarent,
what's the reference viscosity for the economy tests ?

Is it something remotely reasonable, or still something (like) 15W30 ?


The baseline oil for the VID was a 20W30 - with the FEI measured against that. I think it is the same for the VIE.
However there are reference oils that are used to calibrate the engines for 0W20, 5W20, 5W30 which were used to help set up the suitability of the VIE as a substitute for the VID for SN+
 
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
why didn't they just come out with it and says so in the first place?


Then they would have to admit to the public that there was an issue and deal with the mass hysteria demanding recalled vehicles or fee oil changes for life!
 
Originally Posted By: Solarent
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Solarent,
what's the reference viscosity for the economy tests ?

Is it something remotely reasonable, or still something (like) 15W30 ?


The baseline oil for the VID was a 20W30 - with the FEI measured against that. I think it is the same for the VIE.
However there are reference oils that are used to calibrate the engines for 0W20, 5W20, 5W30 which were used to help set up the suitability of the VIE as a substitute for the VID for SN+


Thanks.

I get having a baseline that you can actually measure from, but it then fuels silly things like Mobil's AFE claims of 0.3 to 2.3% economy improvement...leading people to believe that swapping one ILSAC with AFE will get them that.

(same with the IVA claims about wear protection that are everywhere these days...half the wear of the competitors, when it's half the allowable on the test.)
 
At least the HDEO sheets are a little more honest. The 5w-30 E6 sheets I've all seen mention fuel economy improvements, but they specifically mention as measured versus a 15w-40. I'm sure the FA-4 sheets do similarly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top