Amsoil & Certifications

[buster]

Quote:
Recently on another forum a retired sex therapist claimed that buster was molested by an Amsoil sales rep many years ago. I can't confirm this is true, but found it interesting.

So , what is buster hiding ? I'm guessing sexual attraction to Amsoil labeling, deeply repressed.

And don't blame me! I'm just asking the question!

See how that works ?


That's a pretty gross thought. LOL

 

[buster]

I think it's just their independent, non conformist nature of the company. I don't have a problem with a niche product. I'm more interested in why they don't just say Meets Spec xyz..

 

[ltslimjim]

^They claim it's better.

Prove or show their products are lacking and causing outright performance problems across any board for an app; then they are 'deceptively' conning people out of their money for inferior products while being 'recommended' for a vehicle with a certain 'recommended' spec.

I just don't see that jump...

 

[ltslimjim]

...and for a time. Perhaps group III/+ had more of a gap in performance quality in some aspects as far as 'the best'. However, as a blender by definition, and the perceptively increased quality of group III or III+ base oils; perhaps Amsoil isn't "so proud" to change.

Of course, their marketing is essentially a non-factor in their product performance; at least in terms of what base oils they claim to use or not.

So, current AMSOIL(not talking about their "dealers"), using old or out dated information; in whatever 'relative' sense or spin you want to put on it, really just boils down to marketing. Context applied?

 

[buster]

I think so, but the consumer shouldn't have to prove anything.

Again, though I am more interested in what makes the SS line different from the XL.

Maybe SA?

 

[ltslimjim]

^Does the consumer need to prove anything, OTOH? I think it depends on who is using their SS oils, from some technical standpoints. However, one would be hard pressed to prove the lube was the problem. More likely a mechanical defect or 'most' likely a maintenance failure on the part of the owner.

XL and OE meet the specs/have the certs now, so if that's the concern use those products from that company if that is what matters most. Follow the manual, OLM, etc depending on the app. They obviously believe their SS oils are better than their OE and XL lineup.

SA?

 

[yonyon]

Originally Posted By: buster
Quote:
Recently on another forum a retired sex therapist claimed that buster was molested by an Amsoil sales rep many years ago. I can't confirm this is true, but found it interesting.

So , what is buster hiding ? I'm guessing sexual attraction to Amsoil labeling, deeply repressed.

And don't blame me! I'm just asking the question!

See how that works ?


That's a pretty gross thought. LOL



Wait, we don't know who this mysterious Amsoil rep is yet. For all any of us know (buster is no exception because he's repressing the memory) the Amsoil sales rep. could be one of those pharmaceutical reps we all know and love doing the Amsoil thing on the side for a little extra spending money.

/Pics or it didn't happen.
//I want to believe.
///Unless it's Pablo, of course.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
Does the consumer need to prove anything, OTOH? I think it depends on who is using their SS oils, from some technical standpoints.


They're proving their insanity if they're using the high end stuff for 3,000 mile OCIs under warranty.

I don't know if I mentioned it before, but I came across some Amsoil up here at a retail location, albeit mostly 15w-40, and I was relatively impressed by the price. It was no worse than the average retail RP price, and not ridiculously more than, say, M1 TDT.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
Their sales strategy still baffles me. If their oil is as good as they say, why not make it available in stores? Why can't they just go head to head with all the other motor oils out there and let their superior quality do the talking?



Some time ago I met a lady named S.G. at a ILMA Lubrication Conference. In speaking with her, I found out she was the one that suggested to Al that they use a modified MLM marketing strategy. That is, train dealers and let the dealer network sell the product for you while the individual dealers get a percentage of their sales. This was way before Internet Selling made it's appearance. She said Al already had the oil, the API 10W40 diester oil, ready to go to market (later found out Hatco was the formulation partner) but no way to really get exposure for it. So, for better or worse, MLM is the marketing strategy they adopted. While MLM has it's advantages and disadvantages, it does afford individuals a business opportunity and a way to get those products at a discount for their own use.

It is my understanding that it is up to the individual dealer to obtain Retail and Commercial accounts. Pablo may be able to correct me if my information is incorrect.

 

[hattaresguy]

Part of the reason I don't really use Amsoil is that it doesn't carry at lot of the latest manufacture specs.

To me that's just lazy on their part, plenty of other oil companies make the effort to get them.

Also I refuse to hunt it out and order it when I can just go down to the local auto parts store and buy any other good synthetic I want. Its not magical, and its not any better than say Mobil 1 ESP to be worth ordering, heck it doesn't even have DEXOS, VW, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, etc ratings either so it could void a warranty...

Amoil will claim they will cover it all day long, but when an engine does let go and fingers start pointing I can't imagine they are very forth coming with the check book. Also at that point it becomes my problem, where as if I use an oil that meets the manufactures specs its the dealers problem.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
as you are very aware buster this topic was well covered on here nearly a decade ago. The same to and fro exists in this Forum

I'm sure that Amsoil's latest products are much better than back then

This is a comment from a major engine Manufacturer

"Beware that some marketers may indicate that their products "meet" API requirements. This is not adequate. Although the licensing process does not gaurantee good oil performance, the marketer must be able to show support data and follow eswtablished testing guidelines to substantiate that the service classification is met. Only oils licensed by API should be used in (our) engines"

That said I'm sure the likes of Pablo is highly skilled in their products - and that the products are of good quality

They chose a marketing stategy and I suppose they must wear Forum comments such as we see here in good faith - I'm sure they do

 

[ltslimjim]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Part of the reason I don't really use Amsoil is that it doesn't carry at lot of the latest manufacture specs.

To me that's just lazy on their part, plenty of other oil companies make the effort to get them.

Also I refuse to hunt it out and order it when I can just go down to the local auto parts store and buy any other good synthetic I want. Its not magical, and its not any better than say Mobil 1 ESP to be worth ordering, heck it doesn't even have DEXOS, VW, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, etc ratings either so it could void a warranty...

Amoil will claim they will cover it all day long, but when an engine does let go and fingers start pointing I can't imagine they are very forth coming with the check book. Also at that point it becomes my problem, where as if I use an oil that meets the manufactures specs its the dealers problem.


That's a pretty lame vehicle you got to have to engine fall to pieces despite 'your' good service records. Again, prove lubricant failure.

Warranty void if you don't use an oil that is 'certified' or is it only a recommendation?

Meh, never had a new car so I'm not that privileged. I'm just an oil guy.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary


This is a comment from a major engine Manufacturer

"Beware that some marketers may indicate that their products "meet" API requirements. This is not adequate. Although the licensing process does not gaurantee good oil performance, the marketer must be able to show support data and follow eswtablished testing guidelines to substantiate that the service classification is met. Only oils licensed by API should be used in (our) engines"



Great point as always Doug! This should make your choice as to using any non certified products in an engine under a warranty pretty easy. Ask yourself: Do you have "faith" the company will back you up "if" you have an engine failure that was related to the oil? Do you have "faith" you can prove the oil caused the failure? If all else fails, do you have "faith" in the dealer who sold you the oil? If you can answer yes to those questions, by all means go for it. As long as you have "faith" it's really pretty easy isn't it???

 

[SteveSRT8]

It's that 'faith' part that bothers me.

I have no 'faith' that Mobil 1 will even hear my voice when an engine blows. You're going to need some SERIOUS proof, or you're getting nothing.

I have lost 'faith' in all oil manufacturers. I have to go to the High Holy House of Oil and be restored!

 

[Shannow]

The other side of faith is that if you can prove that you used an API approved oil during the warranty period, the boot is then on the car manufacturer's foot to "prove" that either you messed up, or the oil manufacturer messed up.

I don't think that receipts for non-API oil are going to get you across that line with an OEM, which leaves the customer arguing with the (minor) oil company as to whether their oil caused the failure or not.

Which gets back to the Amsoil guarantee...they make the best oil, recommend it for your application, and guarantee it. Why then do they need to even reference API standards, even try to meet or exceed, mention the Magnusson Moss Act,and try to bring the OEM in on something that's a dead done deal ? ... Buy the appropriate Amsoil for your vehicle, use it per Amsoil's recommendation, and they will look after you.

It's that easy...

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
The other side of faith is that if you can prove that you used an API approved oil during the warranty period, the boot is then on the car manufacturer's foot to "prove" that either you messed up, or the oil manufacturer messed up.

I don't think that receipts for non-API oil are going to get you across that line with an OEM, which leaves the customer arguing with the (minor) oil company as to whether their oil caused the failure or not.

Which gets back to the Amsoil guarantee...they make the best oil, recommend it for your application, and guarantee it. Why then do they need to even reference API standards, even try to meet or exceed, mention the Magnusson Moss Act,and try to bring the OEM in on something that's a dead done deal ? ... Buy the appropriate Amsoil for your vehicle, use it per Amsoil's recommendation, and they will look after you.

It's that easy...


It's that easy... Maybe as long as you have "faith". Or do you feel lucky? Take your pick. Me I'd don't have faith in any oil company either, but I do I faith that if I follow the owners manual, use what they suggest, can prove it, I have a much better chance if a problem arises.

 

[Tom NJ]

Personally I feel that any company that lists official industry specifications on their labels should have run and passed all of the tests required under those specifications. Otherwise, consumers who where guided by their owner's manual to look for those specifications on the labels may be deceived. In my opinion it is not good enough to run only some of the tests and then assume the formulation would pass the rest.

If a company does run and pass all of the required specification tests, why would they not clearly state that the oil meets these specifications? Even if they choose, for whatever reason, to not certify the oil, if they spent all that money to fully test the oil at least be clear that the oil does meet the specifications. Wiggle words like "recommended for..." or "suitable for..." or "formulated to meet..." indicate to me that the oil was not fully tested or did not fully pass. Most consumers would not notice or appreciate the subtle difference in wording - they just want to see the specification listed on the label, and therefore may be mislead.

If a company hasn't verified through testing that their formulation does indeed pass all of the official specification requirements, then they shouldn't list the specification on the label. Just my opinion.

Tom NJ

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Personally I feel that any company that lists official industry specifications on their labels should have run and passed all of the tests required under those specifications. Otherwise, consumers who where guided by their owner's manual to look for those specifications on the labels may be deceived. In my opinion it is not good enough to run only some of the tests and then assume the formulation would pass the rest.

If a company does run and pass all of the required specification tests, why would they not clearly state that the oil meets these specifications? Even if they choose, for whatever reason, to not certify the oil, if they spent all that money to fully test the oil at least be clear that the oil does meet the specifications. Wiggle words like "recommended for..." or "suitable for..." or "formulated to meet..." indicate to me that the oil was not fully tested or did not fully pass. Most consumers would not notice or appreciate the subtle difference in wording - they just want to see the specification listed on the label, and therefore may be mislead.

If a company hasn't verified through testing that their formulation does indeed pass all of the official specification requirements, then they shouldn't list the specification on the label. Just my opinion.

Tom NJ


Great points Tom! It is a shame such deceptive tactics exist, but they do, and through proper choice of words companies can get away with it. Most of us here know more than the average consumer. It was these tactics, and a meaningless test that were just two of many reasons I decided to no longer use their products.

 

[virginoil]

"....the marketer must be able to show support data and follow established testing guidelines to substantiate that the service classification is met. Only oils licensed by ............."

So in the absence of formal approvals every oil company has no excuses for not providing supporting data to demonstrate their claims ?

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Shannow
The other side of faith is that if you can prove that you used an API approved oil during the warranty period, the boot is then on the car manufacturer's foot to "prove" that either you messed up, or the oil manufacturer messed up.

I don't think that receipts for non-API oil are going to get you across that line with an OEM, which leaves the customer arguing with the (minor) oil company as to whether their oil caused the failure or not.

Which gets back to the Amsoil guarantee...they make the best oil, recommend it for your application, and guarantee it. Why then do they need to even reference API standards, even try to meet or exceed, mention the Magnusson Moss Act,and try to bring the OEM in on something that's a dead done deal ? ... Buy the appropriate Amsoil for your vehicle, use it per Amsoil's recommendation, and they will look after you.

It's that easy...


It's that easy... Maybe as long as you have "faith". Or do you feel lucky? Take your pick. Me I'd don't have faith in any oil company either, but I do I faith that if I follow the owners manual, use what they suggest, can prove it, I have a much better chance if a problem arises.



Exactly. Call me jadded but I have no faith.

But I do know if I have say a BMW and I use Mobil 1 0w40 which meets all of BMW's specs and according to both Mobil 1 and BMW will work, and I'm one of the unlucky few that has an engine failure. At that point its very hard for BMW to point their finger at me.

OTOH if I'm running an oil that doesn't carry this, like Amsoil, well than BMW has a good way to get out of a warranty claim. Now the burden of proof falls on me.

Oh and [censored] does happen, engine failures do happen. Build enough of anything and you will get some failures.