In about a million posts on this site, it is you doing the flapping. You pose as one with knowledge but your contributions here are actually quite meager in my opinion.
3. Good motor with a good oil ?There are two ways to read what was said:
I can understand taking issue with the second interpretation, but the fact there were two sentences implies to me #1 was the intention.
- Unremarkable oil analysis. Valvoline excellent. (Separate thoughts)
- Unremarkable oil analysis, therefore Valvoline excellent.
Interpretation #2 is less accurate and arguably a bit misguided but not absolutely incorrect, depending on how you define “excellent.” If that word means “just as capable as any other GF6A oil” then fine. One would indeed expect unremarkable UOA results with any “excellent” oil.
I see no reason to jump down anyone’s throat here.
And I thought you may respond like that as well. After all you also have indicated that you believe the self-same $30 spectrographic analysis is an alternative means of verifying compliance with a manufacturer approval.I thought you’d hide behind something like that. Look around… Maybe you’ll learn something new.
Yes that’s correct I forgot you were also including inapplicable wear scar “testing” in that analysis and conclusion of yours.No, that’s not what I’m saying, don’t put words in my mouth. You know I’m right about what I said about your work product here, so now you are trying to divert. I consider you a poseur.