AMSOIL Signatures Series 5w-30 Phosphorus Levels

[The Critic]

Many say AMSOIL chooses not to seek API licensing. There is a difference between choosing not to seek API licensing and not being able to meet API licensing requirements.

They change formulations often enough that the situation is somewhat fluid.

With that said, not being able to meet API standards isn't always a bad thing. API is arguably, a pretty low bar that was designed to please everyone. It is a balance of wear protection, deposit control and emission system protection. If one wanted to maximize performance in wear protection and deposit control, you may need to compromise emission system protection to some extent. If your engine doesn't consume significant amounts of oil and the formulation isn't too wild, the compromise is unlikely to make a material difference in the catalyst lifespan.

 

[Glenda W.]

The way it was explained to me, was in order to create the best possible oil you can’t have approval, license, or cost restraints. (I’ve spoken with HPL, Torco, Amsoil)

These companies understand not everyone is the right fit for their top end products. Amsoil actually offers OE for such customers.

 

[Bill7]

A few years ago I was running AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30. I was mistakenly under the impression that it met API SP. When I found out it did not, I called AMSOIL technical support to find out why. Tech support told me without equivocation that AMSOIL strongly disagreed with the API on certain parameters and max phosphorus (ZDDP) was one such parameter. They told me they didn’t believe an oil could provide adequate protection at the current levels, so they had more anti wear additive than allowed, hence no API cert. Sounds good right? Well, those phosphorus levels were set to protect against catalytic converter poisoning, so maybe not on a holistic level. Now I have seen AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30 VOA’s all over the place the last few years, in terms of phosphorus. Some show phosphorus in the 630 ppm range and some in the 850+ ppm range. Does anyone know what the testing for API consists of in regards to max phosphorus? Is the manufacturer required to submit so many random samples for analysis, etc.? Has anyone else received the same info from AMSOIL tech support?

To give you a baseline on phosphorus / zinc levels on a highly regarded and extremely low priced API SP rated
5W-30 Full Synthetic (SuperTech): $18.64 for a 5 quart jug:

Phosphorous = 769
Zinc = 868

Which can be considered generous amounts of both anti-wear additives. So if Amsoil has lower amounts of phosphorous and zinc, and doesn't pass API SP, it's possible (but unknown) if Amsoil is providing lower wear through their better base oil stock and doesn't need the extra levels of phosphorous and zinc. It would be tempting to make this assumption to justify the Amsoil's high price.

Super Tech High Mileage Full Synthetic SAE 5W-30 Motor Oil | The Petroleum Quality Institute of America

pqia.org

 

[Tom NJ]

Signature Series has never been a licensed oil as it has always exceeded the chemical restricted limits.

Which chemical restrictions are they? Sincere question - the only API chemical restrictions I recall are phosphorus and sulfur content, but I could be missing something.

 

[buster]

Which chemical restrictions are they? Sincere question - the only API chemical restrictions I recall are phosphorus and sulfur content, but I could be missing something.

I think you're right Tom, especially for API. I was thinking more along the lines of dexos (SA) and some of the Euro specs.

 

[cptbarkey]

Many say AMSOIL chooses not to seek API licensing. There is a difference between choosing not to seek API licensing and not being able to meet API licensing requirements.

Did you find the part in the documentation about licensing fees? Did you consider that perhaps it’s expensive for little benefit for a boutique company?

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

A few years ago I was running AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30. I was mistakenly under the impression that it met API SP. When I found out it did not, I called AMSOIL technical support to find out why. Tech support told me without equivocation that AMSOIL strongly disagreed with the API on certain parameters and max phosphorus (ZDDP) was one such parameter. They told me they didn’t believe an oil could provide adequate protection at the current levels, so they had more anti wear additive than allowed, hence no API cert. Sounds good right? Well, those phosphorus levels were set to protect against catalytic converter poisoning, so maybe not on a holistic level. Now I have seen AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30 VOA’s all over the place the last few years, in terms of phosphorus. Some show phosphorus in the 630 ppm range and some in the 850+ ppm range. Does anyone know what the testing for API consists of in regards to max phosphorus? Is the manufacturer required to submit so many random samples for analysis, etc.? Has anyone else received the same info from AMSOIL tech support?

I’m still trying to understand how your inability to read the internet and the product label before you buy or use an item is somehow that manufacturer’s fault & leads to multiple different threads questioning a well-established company, with a proven track record of performance.

Especially when you bring up the point of using certified labs for verification, all the while using data from uncertified labs as the impetus for your apparent witch hunt.

How is this Amsoil’s fault?

 

[Tom NJ]

The way it was explained to me, was in order to create the best possible oil you can’t have approval, license, or cost restraints.

This is true for some specifications and applications, but not so much for API SP. Other than the chemical restrictions on phosphorus and sulfur (i.e. ZDDP content), there is nothing in the API SP specification that would inhibit one from making a higher performance product, only a lower performance product. As for approval costs, once you pass all of the specification tests, the cost of API certification is rather small and most companies have no problem absorbing these costs or passing them along.

 

[MolaKule]

So you are saying their final formulation could not meet API licensing requirements?

Why would you assume a blender, any blender, with formulators having advanced degrees in lubrication chemistry, could not meet API licensing requirements?

Not choosing to meet the the API licensing (for whatever their internal reasons) for a specific product does not mean they could not meet the API requirements. Do you recognize the difference?

 

[Glenda W.]

This is quoted from Dave (HPL):

“What you get with a cookbook formula is an oil that is much like the other oils on the market. The improvements we make carry us outside of the chemically restrained box of licenseability. Because we make oils for extended drains and severe service we do not produce commodity level products. The license process was originally intended to isolate inferior products. Once ceilings of chemistry came into play it now limits what one can do to improve performance.

I do not foresee a time that we would lower the performance level of our products to have a doughnut on the bottle.”

David

 

[dkryan]

This is quoted from Dave (HPL):

“……….I do not foresee a time that we would lower the performance level of our products to have a doughnut on the bottle.”

David

Cha-Ching!

 

[cptbarkey]

I was impressed, guns ablaze with a crusade for how long? Two years? Buy some SP oil and pay the API dues if it is so important.

 

[Pablo]

A few years ago I was running AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30. I was mistakenly under the impression that it met API SP. When I found out it did not, I called AMSOIL technical support to find out why. Tech support told me without equivocation that AMSOIL strongly disagreed with the API on certain parameters and max phosphorus (ZDDP) was one such parameter. They told me they didn’t believe an oil could provide adequate protection at the current levels, so they had more anti wear additive than allowed, hence no API cert. Sounds good right? Well, those phosphorus levels were set to protect against catalytic converter poisoning, so maybe not on a holistic level. Now I have seen AMSOIL Signature Series 5w-30 VOA’s all over the place the last few years, in terms of phosphorus. Some show phosphorus in the 630 ppm range and some in the 850+ ppm range. Does anyone know what the testing for API consists of in regards to max phosphorus? Is the manufacturer required to submit so many random samples for analysis, etc.? Has anyone else received the same info from AMSOIL tech support?

Can you give a better ballpark on the date this exchange occurred?

Amsoil SS has been compliant on P levels for a decent while now - basically since inception of the product line. Yes the older 0W-30 and the HDD 5W-30 were high ZDDP.

I've never heard of anyone having a response like that from TS/CS, nor I have they ever gave info like that to me - responding to my regular questions in my 25+ years.

Further information, just as a talking point - even at 1200 ppm P there is no automatic damage to the actual catalyst metals (poisoning) - even with healthy amount of oil consumption. Perhaps a real oil burner, yes the cat going to choke

So as for relying on $25 UOA's for P levels - absolutely the margin of error is HUGE. Not being a metal, P is not the easiest in most all low cost analysis methods to get within 100ppm, so as others have mentioned - this is a terrible way to determine if an oil is compliant with an as blended specification limit.

 

[oil pan 4]

Had Amsoil swapped the 1289 Calcium numbers with the 960 Magnesium numbers, I would then call the Formula the most Bestest, Grandeur Amsoil Oil ever put together.
Dr. Frankenblend said so anyways.

The ZDDP level is very good and plenty safe enough for the Cat Converters.

Yeah SH, SG and SJ oil all ran in catalytic converter cars for decades.
Not that long ago oil additive packages commonly looked Iike what you can now only find in something like mobil1 v-twin 20w-50 with something to the tune of 2,200ca and 1,900zn

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Can you give a better ballpark on date this exchange occurred?

Amsoil has been compliant on P levels for a decent while now.

I've never heard of anyone having a response like that from TS/CS, nor I have they ever in my 25 years.

Further information, just as a talking point - even at 1200 ppm P there is no automatic damage to the actual catalyst metals (poisoning) - even with healthy amount of oil consumption. Perhaps a real oil burner, yes the cat going to choke

So as for relying on $25 UOA's for P levels - absolutely the margin of error is HUGE. Not being a metal P is not the easiest in most all low cost analysis methods, so as others have mentioned. That is a completely crazy way to determine if an oil is compliant with an as blended specification limit.

That’s a more PC response than the one I deleted. I have the same, if not more disdain for the “well they have to be verified by a certified lab” and then resorts to using data from uncertified labs to cast shade on a well-established, proven company.

API standards are hardly anywhere near the pinnacle of engine component protection, and I’m waiting to see even just a tiny handful of cats from engines that failed at less than the 80k federal emissions warranty due to API SL or SM P levels.

 

[kschachn]

Well, those phosphorus levels were set to protect against catalytic converter poisoning, so maybe not on a holistic level.

Which in most every case is a red herring of an issue. The one and only time I ever saw a catalyst efficiency code from oil consumption was in an old car that consumed in excess of 1 quart per 500 miles. And the guy was using an HDEO with high phosphorus, likely higher than 1000 ppm. On that car his catalyst performance was one of his lesser concerns.

How much oil is your old beater consuming that you worry about an 850 ppm level?

 

[cvd537]

I’m still trying to understand how your inability to read the internet and the product label before you buy or use an item is somehow that manufacturer’s fault & leads to multiple different threads questioning a well-established company, with a proven track record of performance.

Especially when you bring up the point of using certified labs for verification, all the while using data from uncertified labs as the impetus for your apparent witch hunt.

How is this Amsoil’s fault?

What are you rambling about here? It’s completely incoherent. I think you are upset that the truth is getting out that AMSOIL doesn’t always shoot straight. They try to say they meet API spec in their own literature for SS, but their own tech support admitted they could not meet spec with signature series (as of a few years ago). I never said it was bad, but they are not always/often forthcoming about their situation. It doesn’t matter how many of your types have used their oil and your engine did not blow up. This post is about why they don’t have API certification, specifically as it relates to phosphorus levels.

 

[cptbarkey]

What are you rambling about here? It’s completely incoherent. I think you are upset that the truth is getting out that AMSOIL doesn’t always shoot straight. They try to say they meet API spec in their own literature for SS, but their own tech support admitted they could not meet spec with signature series (as of a few years ago). I never said it was bad, but they are not always/often forthcoming about their situation. It doesn’t matter how many of your types have used their oil and your engine did not blow up. This post is about why they don’t have API certification, specifically as it relates to phosphorus levels.

This is the part where I call you a troll.

 

[cvd537]

So here we have HPL saying essentially the same thing I am saying AMSOIL told me, and everyone applauds HPL and questions me. This is textbook cognitive dissonance. This is not about AMSOIL’s product. This is about all their marketing.

 

[userfriendly]

What are you rambling about here? It’s completely incoherent. I think you are upset that the truth is getting out that AMSOIL doesn’t always shoot straight. They try to say they meet API spec in their own literature for SS, but their own tech support admitted they could not meet spec with signature series (as of a few years ago). I never said it was bad, but they are not always/often forthcoming about their situation. It doesn’t matter how many of your types have used their oil and your engine did not blow up. This post is about why they don’t have API certification, specifically as it relates to phosphorus

So what?

What are you rambling about here? It’s completely incoherent. I think you are upset that the truth is getting out that AMSOIL doesn’t always shoot straight. They try to say they meet API spec in their own literature for SS, but their own tech support admitted they could not meet spec with signature series (as of a few years ago). I never said it was bad, but they are not always/often forthcoming about their situation. It doesn’t matter how many of your types have used their oil and your engine did not blow up. This post is about why they don’t have API certification, specifically as it relates to phosphorus levels.

Who cares?