Amsoil, what group?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:


Quote:


Some of the old formulations did, especially if the car had emissions issues. The interesting thing, this thickening never seems to effect wear rates.



Viscosity change indicates physical property of the oil has changed. UOA, as good as it is, captures partial information on oil, for example, it does not reveal how much mpg lost due to oil thickening.




True enough - but the very slight thickening from a HEAVY 30 (as the oils used to be) to a LOW 40, probably didn't change MPG all that much. People used to love to use and abuse this characteristic. It bothered me a lot too. But in 99.9% of the cases it really wasn't a bother to the engine in extended OCI's. In 10K or less OCI's the issue was a non-starter.

But Amsoil listened, and changed the formula. I think to this day is it was a well know phenomena and Amsoil's suppliers (Mobil in this case) probably weren't of much help. (AND NO I DID NOT JUST SAY MOBIL SUPPLIES ALL AMSOIL'S BASE OIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nono.gif
) Because they don't.
 
It is tough enough to run 15,000-25,000 mile OCI's with the best PAO/Ester basestocks, much less with hydro-isomerized or even GTL stocks.

I don't see Amsoil changing over to less capable basestocks anytime soon, since their market niche is extended drain intervals. In fact it has been necessary to continually improve the quality of their basestock blends and additive chemistries, to keep up with the increased specific output and hotter running temps of todays engines.
 
ARE they hotter? I know the oil companies tell us this, but there are more and more cars coming out with 180F thermostats, rollerized cams, fewer pushrod engines. The story is, today's engines aren't stressing the oil as much. Part of that is surely lower temps?

ARE cars running hotter where the oil is concerned?
 
Quote:


ARE they hotter? I know the oil companies tell us this, but there are more and more cars coming out with 180F thermostats, rollerized cams, fewer pushrod engines. The story is, today's engines aren't stressing the oil as much. Part of that is surely lower temps?

ARE cars running hotter where the oil is concerned?




Good questions...I have often wondered why cars would be running hotter. Some say because the cars are so aero-dynamic that the air moves around the car not past the drive-train. TeeDub is also right...which troubles me a bit about the 25 to 35 K OCI statements...we often don't see them anymore and they are hard to acheive.

I think we are just going to accept "at this point" that 12K is a nice round number for an OCI...even with the best synthetic oils of today.
 
Hopefully Amsoil doens't go the same route as Mobil and start blending Group III's into the mix with IV and V base oils. As a boutique blender, they should be striving to make the best not the cheapest product.
 
Quote:


Hopefully Amsoil doens't go the same route as Mobil and start blending Group III's into the mix with IV and V base oils. "As a boutique blender, they should be striving to make the best not the cheapest product".



Buster.....I believe that AMSOIL has a pretty good history of doing just that.
 
The below is a quote from an Oil thread I started afew days ago, it seems a harsh comment towards Amsoil.

"Now Amsoil advertises that their oil is the 'extended drain interval' oil. They do this by pumping up the additive package. They can have as much as 3 times as many additives as Mobil 1, so in theory it can take more 'shearing', lasting longer. More additives means less actual oil in the mix, resulting in less lubrication, less cooling, more wear and tear...you know the rest. The oil may last longer, but at what price? Your engine?"
 
Quote:


Well, as far as I concerned first real full synthetic oil (no crude oil used) was developed by Germans during World War 2




I believe that was for jet aircraft. Just try to run a car on jet oil.
 
Pablo, I'm not badmouthin the product, I use it. Some people who read the article thinks it was well written, I was surprise no one notice.

O'K I know,
feedtroll.gif
 
Quote:


Pablo, I'm not badmouthin the product, I use it. Some people who read the article thinks it was well written, I was surprise no one notice.

O'K I know,
feedtroll.gif





daGame – I didn’t think you were slamming the product, but that so called expert is. Let’s break this down

"Now Amsoil advertises that their oil is the 'extended drain interval' oil. They do this by pumping up the additive package.”

While Amsoil in general has a strong additive package, there is only so much that can be done to an oil to beef it up with additives. No, Amsoil takes a holistic approach by combining a good additive package with good base oils. This is the only way to make an extended drain oil.

“They can have as much as 3 times as many additives as Mobil 1, so in theory it can take more 'shearing', lasting longer.”

This is the biggest crock of hooey I’ve read in a while. Again Amsoil has some more additives than M1 (some less, too!) “3 times as many”? What the heck?? And worse of all – these additives allow the oil to “take” more shearing? This just makes so little sense it’s hard to comment on. Sure in some lubrication systems FM’s have some effect on the effective shear rates, and some adds have a real effect on oxidation - the additives in motor oil don’t make the oil more resistant to shearing.

“More additives means less actual oil in the mix, resulting in less lubrication, less cooling, more wear and tear...you know the rest. The oil may last longer, but at what price? Your engine?”

And his data is where? Increasing an additive from 100ppm to 300ppm (or whatever) certainly would have less “actual oil in the mix” but the change is effectively tiny and would not provide “less lubrication, less cooling, more wear and tear”. That’s the same as saying I better not put ANY ZDDP, or any other normal additive because it will cause more wear…..

I concluded before that guy was a hack. I don’t need to keep re-hashing it.
 
Well, Pabbs, I tell ya, three times more moly than M1 wouldn't be much anyway. But 3X the calcium, boron and zddp I wouldn't want, that's for sure. imagine 2000PPM zinc, 5000PPM calcium, etc., etc..

THAT would be a brew, eh? These things are obviously ridiculous (even to me), and in evidence in the VOA section for those who are curious. "Three times the additive" is such an inane comment that it just barely warrants clarification..
spankme.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom