MB, great so far. I have almost 5k miles on it. It started very well at 6F one morning. GC made my car a bit sluggish, the Amsoil feels a tad better. I will say though that in this engine it really doesn't matter what you run. I'll probably use Havoline 5w-20 next.
Amsoil - no longer commenting on Base Oils
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
You pay $10 a quart for AMSOIL synthetic plus shipping? Full MSRP for retail is $7 to $8. If you have a business or become a Preferred Customer you can get it for 20-30% less.
Premium oil is dead.
"You pay $10 a quart for AMSOIL synthetic plus shipping? Full MSRP for retail is $7 to $8. If you have a business or become a Preferred Customer you can get it for 20-30% less."
??? Like I said, rising retail Amsoil oil prices (Oct 2006): Series 2000 0W-30 is $9.95/qt. Series 3000 5w30 is $9.95/qt. Those are their premium oil product lines. OK, their regular 5w30 is $7.25, but Amsoil does push the other two. And, yes, add shipping to this - minimum $6+. Preferred customers/dealers pay about $30/year before ordering at discount, and that cost must be averaged in somewhere.
Amsoil has indicated they are just passing along their rapidly rising supply costs, which is certainly very likely.
??? Like I said, rising retail Amsoil oil prices (Oct 2006): Series 2000 0W-30 is $9.95/qt. Series 3000 5w30 is $9.95/qt. Those are their premium oil product lines. OK, their regular 5w30 is $7.25, but Amsoil does push the other two. And, yes, add shipping to this - minimum $6+. Preferred customers/dealers pay about $30/year before ordering at discount, and that cost must be averaged in somewhere.
Amsoil has indicated they are just passing along their rapidly rising supply costs, which is certainly very likely.
It can be hard to tell which part is best when used optimally. For instance a certain chip works better when faced with errors but another may actually be better when given a less jittered code. Good (expensive) power supplies and mechanical integrity is more important but I totally agree that it all has to be top quality to get top performance but looking at what parts are used is not the best way to determine the overall quality. Unfortunately most things aren't that simple.
Quote:
Premium oil is dead.
Half correct!
=====================================================
Well gosh, if our concerns seem trivial to you, I'm sure that somewhere else in the vast expanse of the internet, you'll be able to find a discussion of concerns which earn your seal of approval. Really, no need for you to waste any more of your time on us.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Buster
Brush-up on your German 101. We want you to call overseas about GC next.
Brush-up on your German 101. We want you to call overseas about GC next.
There is another side to this issue. There are some GII+ blenders that claim their oil is better than a GIII or GIV or GV. It's too bad there is not some real world method to test oils and rank them. That would make the base oil problem go away. Specs make for interesting reading but I wonder if specs are the end all for rating the performance of a product?
I know of someone testing the prototype Amsoil 0W-20. It is not group 3 and so far his results at 17K miles are terrific.
"Better ingredients make better pizza."
-- Papa John
-- Papa John
My bet is that "synthetic" or "premium" oils are no better then the good dinos. Can G-III Mobil 1 or PP actually achieve MUCH better results than Havoline DS or Motorcraft? How much sense does spending the extra money make? If Havoline can go 10k, what does that say about Clean 7500 or Mobil 1 EP? I don't know what that implies, but DIY changers can spend $10 on oil or 100%-200% more. Is it THAT important to go an extra 2000-3000 miles per interval? I can SAFELY change $2 oil at 6000-8000 miles. How far can we go on $6 oil? It costs 3x more...that would require >20,000 miles intervals to break even. That's JUST a break-even point. Noone here can convince me that those super-long synth ocis are BETTER for the engine, just better (easier) for the person doing the changes. That's fine and some people will pay extra not to have to do an OC, but a fair number of those people would actually choose a cleaner engine...if they knew that's what conventional oil offers. That it does, imo. UNfortunately, I AM one of the people who benefot from the ~slightly~ better ocis that synth offers. I drive 3000 a month. 2 months on dino would be no problem, but by the time I make it to my 3 month interval, I could have over 9000 miles and it is worth a little oci extention witht the synth. If I did not have the stash of synth, I'd more likely do 2 month dino ocis, retaining the filter to 4 months/2 ocis. That would be $60 in oil, 3 filter changes and a coupla quick extractor procedures. $60 would buy me 2 jugs of Mobil 1 EP....30k of protection. That same $60 gets me like 42,000-60,000 miles of cleaner protection. Do we even have any 15k M1 EP UOAs? I'll bet the dino runs cleaner and offers a LONGER amount of service for the same money.
So, what does synth oil actually offer...piece of mind? "Bragging rights"? Fear of the unknown?
So, what does synth oil actually offer...piece of mind? "Bragging rights"? Fear of the unknown?
Quote:
Quote:
Premium oil is dead.
Half correct!I'll bet that premium oil pricing will be undead for quite some time.
=====================================================
Well gosh, if our concerns seem trivial to you, I'm sure that somewhere else in the vast expanse of the internet, you'll be able to find a discussion of concerns which earn your seal of approval. Really, no need for you to waste any more of your time on us.
My point is real simple. There is conflicting data on both sides of the issue and really we know nothing. However, so many folks pick a side and rant about it. Why not get some data first?
I see evidence of grp III base stock oils performing at the same level as PAO formulations. It only makes sense that the most economical mfg process, that will produce the desired quality fluid, is going to be the route the mfg takes. Despite what the half baked perception the general public has about base stocks and such says.
Amsoil produces no base stock fluids. They are purchasing them...and most likely from Mobil. If Mobil is truely replacing base stock of their own top shelf brands, it only makes sense that those who depend on their fluids for their own formulation would go in that same direction.
And don't be surprized when much of the marketing mumbo jumbo, subscribed to by some of these oil formulators, doesn't start contradicting some of the previous selling points these companies once used and compelled their distributors to employ.
I'm certain this will burst some folks bubble.
And I agree...the free market will ultimately work it's magic, no matter what spin is placed.
Amsoil produces no base stock fluids. They are purchasing them...and most likely from Mobil. If Mobil is truely replacing base stock of their own top shelf brands, it only makes sense that those who depend on their fluids for their own formulation would go in that same direction.
And don't be surprized when much of the marketing mumbo jumbo, subscribed to by some of these oil formulators, doesn't start contradicting some of the previous selling points these companies once used and compelled their distributors to employ.
I'm certain this will burst some folks bubble.
And I agree...the free market will ultimately work it's magic, no matter what spin is placed.
If you compare the specs of Amsoils XL line, which is Group III based, to their high end PAO based products, you can see the latter have much lower pour points and Noack volatilities.
For example, even the Amsoil 5w-20/XL only has a PP of approx -45F, which is not even as good as their 10w-40 Marine oil/WCF, with a PP of -51F, and about the same as their PAO based 15w40/AME. Generally speaking, if you see a low viscosity, 0w-xx or 5w-xx full "synthetic" with a PP in the -40F to -45F range, it probably has at least some Group III stock in it.
The Noack volatilies of the 5w30/10w-30 XL line are 8.9%/6.7% respectively, compared to 5.4%/7.1% for their PAO based ASL/ATM formulations, both of which also have PP's of -58F, compared to -40F to -45F for the XL series.
As far as I can tell, all of the long drain Amsoil formulations, ie TSO/ASL/ATM/HDD/ACD/AME are PAO based, as are their new 10w-40/20w-50 Motorcycle oils and Four Stroke oils, ie AFF/WCT/WCF.
The only Group III based oils are their XL line, with perhaps some Group III stocks in their 15w40 blend (PCO) and maybe (pure speculation and labelled as such), their AFL and DEO, 5w-40 formulations. The main reason I'm speculating here is that the PP's and Noack volatilities of these latter two oils do not appear to be as good as the rest of the line AND these are not specifically long drain formulations.
As I've said previously, it' hard enough to make 25k and 35k oils using the best PAO/Ester stocks available. I haven't seen anybody attempt to do it with less capable Group III stocks and todays additive chemistries. The main issue is that Group III stocks require more stabilization with additives - specifically PP depressants and anti-oxidants. It would be very difficult to get the additive "treat" levels high enough with a Group III basestock to make a 25,000 mile/1 yr, Group III oil. So Amsoil doesn't have the luxury of going to cheaper basestocks since their entire market niche is greatly extended drains.
TD
For example, even the Amsoil 5w-20/XL only has a PP of approx -45F, which is not even as good as their 10w-40 Marine oil/WCF, with a PP of -51F, and about the same as their PAO based 15w40/AME. Generally speaking, if you see a low viscosity, 0w-xx or 5w-xx full "synthetic" with a PP in the -40F to -45F range, it probably has at least some Group III stock in it.
The Noack volatilies of the 5w30/10w-30 XL line are 8.9%/6.7% respectively, compared to 5.4%/7.1% for their PAO based ASL/ATM formulations, both of which also have PP's of -58F, compared to -40F to -45F for the XL series.
As far as I can tell, all of the long drain Amsoil formulations, ie TSO/ASL/ATM/HDD/ACD/AME are PAO based, as are their new 10w-40/20w-50 Motorcycle oils and Four Stroke oils, ie AFF/WCT/WCF.
The only Group III based oils are their XL line, with perhaps some Group III stocks in their 15w40 blend (PCO) and maybe (pure speculation and labelled as such), their AFL and DEO, 5w-40 formulations. The main reason I'm speculating here is that the PP's and Noack volatilities of these latter two oils do not appear to be as good as the rest of the line AND these are not specifically long drain formulations.
As I've said previously, it' hard enough to make 25k and 35k oils using the best PAO/Ester stocks available. I haven't seen anybody attempt to do it with less capable Group III stocks and todays additive chemistries. The main issue is that Group III stocks require more stabilization with additives - specifically PP depressants and anti-oxidants. It would be very difficult to get the additive "treat" levels high enough with a Group III basestock to make a 25,000 mile/1 yr, Group III oil. So Amsoil doesn't have the luxury of going to cheaper basestocks since their entire market niche is greatly extended drains.
TD
Quote:
. . . My point is real simple. There is conflicting data on both sides of the issue and really we know nothing. However, so many folks pick a side and rant about it. Why not get some data first?
OK, I see better where you're coming from. I'll readily agree that we have conflicting data. But I disagree that we "know nothing". Further, I'm willing to draw some tentative conclusions from the present shortage of info. In particular, Mobil's present silence, their affirmative unwillingness to answer simple questions (and I'm not talking about precise formula info) to me speaks volumes (but no, does not directly resolve the issue either). As noted in a parallel thread, Mobil used to openly trumpet the "85% PAO and 15% POE" backbone of M1. Now, at the same moment that data appears calling M1's compostion, XOM has started using the same doublespeak as the other brewers who've given in to the temptation to go G-III. In my opinion, much of the "ranting" on this topic is largely a result of Mobil's refusal to just be straight with their long-term customers who have questions. If nothing else, they've given the "ranters" enough fuel to keep this thing going for a very long time. The result should surprise no one.
EDIT: As to Amsoil, I'd say you're correct. At least I've seen no data to indicat that Amsoil has substituted G-III where they were previously using other base oils.
Last edited:
Ill continue to use it untill proven other wise.
- Status
Similar threads
