(Difference between pages)
gdb>SSSQUID |
gdb>SSSQUID |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| This page deals with Motul brand oils
| |
|
| |
|
| =Introduction=
| |
| Coming soon...
| |
|
| |
| =Legend=
| |
| N/A = NO ADDITIVES
| |
|
| |
| M# = SQUID INK ADDITIVE MIX VARIATION
| |
|
| |
| C# = CUSTOM MIX, SEE UNDER CHARTS FOR MORE DETAILS
| |
|
| |
| =Results=
| |
|
| |
| ==X-Cess Gen 2 5W40==
| |
| [[File:Motul x-cess gen 2 5w40.jpg|thumb|right|200px]]
| |
|
| |
| Recommended blend: '''M8''' or '''M22'''
| |
|
| |
| SLR Scoring ---
| |
|
| |
| * N/A: 82.51
| |
| * M8: 89.69
| |
| * M11: 87.92
| |
| * M15: 80.71
| |
| * M22: 88.43
| |
|
| |
| While Motul X-Cess Gen 2 produced minimal scarring -- less than any oil tested as of this posting -- it's high required power and high temperatures caused its score to sink. The recommended use-case for this oil would be in heavy-duty applications that have superior oil cooling setups and that do not need to output maximum power or economy. It is not recommended to use this oil in vehicles where economy or power is the absolute most important aspect, or in vehicles without optimal oil cooling.
| |
|
| |
| [[File:MOTUL X-CESS GEN 2 5W40 GRAPH.png|center|Motul X-Cess Gen 2 5W40]]
| |
|
| |
| [[File:MOTUL X-CESS GEN 2 5W40 COMPARISON.png|center|Motul X-Cess Gen 2 5W40 N/A vs w/ SQUID INK comparison]]
| |
|
| |
| ===Scars===
| |
| Coming soon...
| |
|
| |
| <gallery>
| |
| File:coming_soon.jpg|Coming Soon
| |
| </gallery>
| |
Revision as of 16:44, 28 August 2021
