Automakers have requested that ILSAC GF-8 be developed fast enough for commercial licensing to begin in the third quarter of 2028 — two years after the ILSAC starburst mandates GF-7 quality oils.
While for most consumers this is confusing or meaningless, for industry stakeholders it’s very important. It comes at a significant cost of resources and potential investment in new technology and formal approvals. It also comes with a lot of questions. Is the schedule realistic and can it be achieved? How meaningful are the improvements and what is driving the changes?
GF-7 was meant to be a bridge to GF-8 and be done before existing tests reached the end of their life. It delivered additional engine protection, via more stringent performance limits and the addition of the aged oil low-speed pre-ignition test. It also added more aggressive … economy limits. What was not fully expected were for existing engine tests that define GF-7 would be depleted sooner than originally predicted.
Historically, EPA regulations drive engine hardware and lubricants improvements, but often the need to replace engine tests and maintain the ability to license products has a major impact. Readiness of new replacement engines is what truly drives industry timing!
Infineum’s Angela Willis, who chairs the Passenger Car Engine Oil Classification Panel, sounded an alarm over the schedule at the December ASTM meeting. She noted that decisions need to be made very quickly if there is any chance of meeting the date that ILSAC requested. Industry knew the Sequence VH needed replacement, and it was diligently being worked by Ford and the engine test labs. A team led by the independent test labs was also working on a replacement for the Sequence VIE and VIF fuel economy test, but they were recently informed by ILSAC that the test being developed did not meet modern engine designs and did not provide adequate fuel economy discrimination. How this impacts the timeline for this test is an open question.
The biggest surprise of all was the announcement that Sequence IIIH will run out of engines and needs significant work to be extended or replaced a lot sooner than originally predicted. This seemed to take everyone by surprise.
“The original ILSAC GF-8 timeline was … based on the anticipated life of key engine test hardware for the Sequence VH,” said Brent Calcut, Afton’s director of the Americas OEM relationship team. “Industry stakeholders are now actively engaged in developing replacement tests for Sequence VH, Sequence VIE, Sequence VIF and now the Sequence IIIH engine re-build. Test development remains the most complex and challenging component of specification development.”
Infineum’s head of industry liaison Dan Pridemore added, “The development of quality engine tests is challenging. These programs take great effort and time to deliver a successful outcome. The industry will undertake replacement work on three key engine tests — Seq IIIH, Seq VH and Seq VIE/VIF — to ensure continued availability with engine rebuilds for life extension, new hardware and updated test fuel options being evaluated.”
History suggests that the current timeline may be optimistic and that delays are possible. For example, when industry moved from leaded to unleaded fuel to define ILSAC GF-3, all tests had to be replaced, and the specification was two years late. For GF-6, industry needed both new and replacement tests, and development dragged on for almost 10 years due to delays in engine test development. API SN plus had to be implemented as a stopgap in 2018 to introduce the Sequence IX LSPI test to ensure protection of neecharged gasoline direct injection engines.
“While supportive of GF-8 being introduced in a timely manner, we believe it will be very difficult for these new tests to be ready in time for the GF-8 Technology Demonstration Period, which would need to start by Q3 2026 to meet the desired first licensing date of Q3 2028,” Pridemore said.
“GF 8 has been in development for more than a year and is encountering challenges consistent with those experienced in prior category launches,” Calcut said. “As a result, the originally planned and still officially shown GF 8 timeline is no longer achievable without concessions to the [American Chemistry Council] technology demonstration or API waiting period.
With no timeline for when the new engine tests will be fully validated and available, a delay until 2029 is probable, Calcut said.
As to the status of the new tests, quality test development is never easy. “These programs require significant industry commitment, cost, resources and time to deliver a successful outcome. Each is in the early to middle stages of the development process with hardware selection, procedure validation and oil discrimination activities underway. The Seq IIIH is on a critical path with hardware expected to run out in 1Q 2027,” Pridemore said.
For lubricant improvements, the usual desire is there to enhance engine protection, improve fuel efficiency and lower emissions to meet the latest EPA regulations, which could impact OEM needs, which may be impacted by revised EPA targets. The current administration is backtracking on previous electrification policies, which require no engine lubricants. The changes by EPA will allow ICE vehicles and hybrids to retain a significant portion of the car park for well into the future, so this likely lessens impact on the lubricant. It’s too early to predict detailed requirements.
Special needs for hybrids — which would potentially include grades below SAE 0W-16 — do not appear to be a concern for ILSAC. API will continue to allow S category durability claims on SAE 0W-8 and 12. API also continues to advocate for a special hybrid designation for engine oil protection, but OEMs have said that basic ILSAC oils are suitable for their needs going forward and to protect existing hybrids. At the last hybrid discussion, no OEM stakeholder was pushing to create a new hybrid designation.
The Toyota Priys is the most popular hybrid in North America, even though the RAV4 is Toyota’s current best seller. Other popular hybrids are the Ford Escape, Honda CR-V and Accord and Hyundai Ioniq 6. Despite large growth, hybrids still represent only around 11%-15% of the North American car park, but over 20% of new car sales. Except for Toyota’s Camry, most of the hybrids I researched use SAE 0W-20 or SAE 0W-16 engine oils, except the Toyota Camry Hybrid, which recommends SAE 0W-8.
Another open question is the timing for the next generation dexos1 specification from General Motors. It is currently scheduled to come to market in the fourth quarter of 2027, and its timing appears to be independent of ILSAC GF-8, although GM uses some of the ILSAC tests and all the dexos1 products I am aware of also have the latest ILSAC specification.
“If GM releases the next generation dexos1 before the Sequence VH, VIE and VIF replacement engine tests and equivalency limits are finalized, they would likely continue to use the current tests, significantly increasing test demand and hardware consumption,” Calcut said. “If Sequence VH, VIE or VIF become unavailable even sooner, then formulators will be unable to qualify either GF-7 or dexos1 engine oils.”
Pridemore said GM’s dexos1 qualification is a significant requirement in the North America market as many leading oils carry both the ILSAC GF-X and the GM dexos1 claim. This allows installers — instant oil change shops, dealerships and workshops — to stock one oil to service most vehicles coming into their shops. The industry benefits from alignment of the ILSAC GF-X and GM dexos1 specifications to ensure the specifications are compatible and can be delivered in a cost-effective manner. Aligned timing allows product label updates and market launches to also occur in the same period.
When engine tests become obsolete, there can be significant unintended consequences as the older tests define past API quality levels that ensure back serviceability. As tests become obsolete or unavailable for whatever reason, API standards can also become obsolete unless there is an approved alternative to maintain the category and allow a path to formally complete an engine test program for licensing purposes.
API must ensure that anyone who wants to develop a product has a way to do so to compete in the marketplace. If not, the specification will be declared obsolete and phased out. In North America, normally the latest category is fully backward serviceable, and this would not be an issue, but for the rest of the world, older quality oils are still widely used, especially for diesel engines.
The process to maintain an older quality level isn’t simple and doesn’t happen overnight. Industry has time to manage this.
The Category Life Oversight Group, of which Calcut is chairman, evaluates available data to propose equivalency limits for replacement tests, typically to support continued licensing of existing categories. Clog is currently identifying suitable options to replace Sequence IVA and VIII that impact many existing categories. “The key challenge will be to identify appropriate replacement tests, then generating comparison data to propose equivalency limits,” Calcut said.
“When GF-8 test developments are finalized, CLOG may be tasked to propose equivalency limits for the Sequence VJ and VIG tests as well. We expect to have data from the precision matrixes, making the task a bit easier.”
Test obsolescence for gasoline engines will impact categories ranging from API SJ to the current twin categories of ILSAC GF-7 and API-SQ. Concerns for API SJ through API SN would relatively short term since the Sequence IVA has only a couple dozen remaining tests and no formal replacement available. Diesel categories API CH-4 through the current PC-11 categories of API CK-4 and API FA-4 will be impacted by the future obsolescence of several tests.
“The Mack T-8E, T-11 and T-12 engine tests are anticipated to become unavailable sometime within the next five years,” Calcut said. “All existing API C categories depend on these tests. The Cummins ISB Viscosity test is expected to replace the T-8E and T-11, although comparison data between the T-8E and ISB Viscosity need to be generated. Industry funding is currently being requested for this activity. Identifying a replacement for the Mack T-12 is another major challenge. CLOG has discussed options but has yet to identify a viable option.”
The heavy lifting began in earnest in February. Lubes’n’Greases will be following these developments. PC-12 was just completed, but there is no time for a break as industry moves to the next specification.
Steve Haffner is president of SGH Consulting LLC. He has over 40 years of experience in the chemical industry, primarily with Exxon Chemicals Paramins and Infineum USA. Contact him at sghaffn2015@gmail.com or 908-672-8012.