Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sougi is very deceptive, it looks like regular $5 XMP (XTR whatever) shite. I've been running Sougi S6000 full synth in my GTR for acouple weeks and for all intents and purposes it feels like just like my old oil (Motul X-Cess 5w-40) but interested to see the condition of the oil is (compared to the Motul changes) when it comes to changing the oil.

Totally agree. GW's marketing department are muppets. Sougi S6000 is quite possibly the best oil around after Motul 300V Chrono, yet it was bottled and labeled just like all their $5-10 plain vanilla 20w50 crap. Even still their cheap stuff is incredibly good, but the perception is that this is all the company makes. They make a whole range of incredible products. Their synthetic trans fluid is as good as Castrol Transmax for half the price. Sougi M5000, Syn-X are fantastic products as well.

At the end of the day however GW is a company who produce products to stock workshops, mechanics, the mining industry etc. The retail part of it is a joke and it shows. But it's not their main focus or from what Birds mentioned in the past a significant revenue earner.

I just did my oil change with this. feels the same as the 5w40 but $10 cheaper :)

That's awesome to hear :). And it came in a 5L, not 4L bottle right?

rehab, that is one oil I have in mind to try one day when my Sougi stocks run out. It looks decent to me, but after using HPR10 I was pretty much put off Penrite for good.

ahhh - I just did a check of my oil, and personally I don't think I'll be using Penrite ever again.

Oil after 800kms should not look all black and be smelling like its burning. I'm gonna drop that oil ASAP - try using something else. Car didn't use any oil but I'm not happy how it looks after such a short period, and this was with a filter change too

My oil pressures also goes up and down with this oil, not sure if its oil related, but when I start the car up oil pressure gauge sits around 6kg/cm2, and when I'm driivng its around 3, then goes around 2.5 - pretty low. When I'm on the gas it goes up to 4 or just under. Not sure if the gauge is stuffed, they are apparently known to be pretty inaccurate.

Reason why I got this Penrite Everyday 10W-40 was that it said fully synth and it was pretty cheap, 50bucks or bit less I think. Guess its definitely a case of "you get what you pay for" with this oil.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Penrite oil rehab. A good synthetic oil will turn black quickly, but it's not because it has broken down, it's most likely because the oil gave your engine a clean out that the previous oil didn't. I have no doubts this will be responsible for the burnt smell too. Oil pressure instability is also a characteristic of using low viscosity oils like the 10w40, it's no biggie. What you want to keep an eye out for is sludgy oil, rather than black...the former being a sign of it breaking down. RB engines produce a lot of carbon buildup too, so I think it's something you will find with all good oils.

Yeah the new Commodores and Falcons are, many specify a 10w30. But what I meant is that I wouldn't use something like a 10w60 in anything small displacement unless it's an absolute oil burner. It's much better used in, say, a Buick engined Commy of the 90's.

castrol edge 10w60 is the oil racepace use in EVERY rb... even new builds

castrol edge 10w60 is the oil racepace use in EVERY rb... even new builds

Not going to argue with their choice of oil because every application is different...for example, high HP engines need to sacrifice the benefits of low viscosity for the protection of a thicker oil and new builds are supposed to run-in on a heavy viscosity. But I sure don't believe in running the same uniform oil in every engine, even of the same type. No matter how good a workshop is with their speciality, it doesn't mean they get something like oil completely right. Evidence of this is that every good workshop will use a different oil to the other. I've seen plenty of it when I used to oil rep - oil is a speciality field in itself and not something a lot of mechanics take the time to learn about. I'm sure Athid would agree. And you'd be surprised how many workshops are using recycled oil just because it's cheap!

Yeah they frequently do it as a loss leader, i.e. Autobarn used to buy it for something like $7-8 a bottle and sell for $5, hence the limits on bottles per customer. They do it from time to time with the poverty oils from other brands too. You should try some Sougi on your next fill Hamish ;)

UOA completed for German Castrol 0w30

Before everyone jumps on it and says its too thin, the car never saw above 85degrees on water/oil, except one really hot day where I think it might have hit 90degrees.

post-13527-0-10940500-1300790513_thumb.jpg

You should try some Sougi on your next fill Hamish ;)

Oi, keep those last boxes for me Birds. lol.

How anyone can compare Sougi to the crap safeway and supercrap sell I don't know. GW have no idea how to market a product.

I see you finally found a test Gareth, how much did it cost?

I'm trying to keep them Scotty lol, they're lasting surprisingly long but slowly disappearing...would you believe a non-Stagea owner is buying some off me tonight :)

I see you finally found a test Gareth, how much did it cost?

I'm trying to keep them Scotty lol, they're lasting surprisingly long but slowly disappearing...would you believe a non-Stagea owner is buying some off me tonight :)

only because you forgot to bring them home last night.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Penrite oil rehab. A good synthetic oil will turn black quickly, but it's not because it has broken down, it's most likely because the oil gave your engine a clean out that the previous oil didn't. I have no doubts this will be responsible for the burnt smell too. Oil pressure instability is also a characteristic of using low viscosity oils like the 10w40, it's no biggie. What you want to keep an eye out for is sludgy oil, rather than black...the former being a sign of it breaking down. RB engines produce a lot of carbon buildup too, so I think it's something you will find with all good oils.

Well, now knowing that my gearbox had ATF in it I don't even wanna know what kind of oil was used in the engine. I'll drop the oil after 3,500kms and then keep a look on it. There is definitely no sludge build up that I can see, which is a good sign.

About Racepace using 10W-60 - I would compare that with race teams using 75W-140 in diffs instead of 75W-90 - racing and street driving are two different things. I'm sure 60 will do a great job for engines used for racing, but that doesn't mean you should use it in your daily driver.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...