API finds nearly half of certified oils have issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
Too bad we don't have the actual data. It sounds like a lot of the discrepancies would not prevent the oil from meeting the specification, but they may have changed test values from their original reported values at the time of certification. Also, it would be nice to have these broken down by country. It would be easy to believe that oil purchased in Indonesia or Pakistan would be more likely to be non-compliant.
 
sloinker said:
Does the API publish the names of the oils that were not in compliance and why? That would be some good reading.
Click to expand...
The API is a trade organization and as such looks out for the interest of their oil company members in addition to consumers. They work behind the scenes with those who violate the rules to correct the problem, and then monitor them more closely. Naming and potentially ruining the reputation of a company who simply made a correctable error isn't right. Companies that don't correct their quality problems may lose membership. Those who use the certification marks for uncertified oils are often taken to court and their names have been released in the past.

While this article doesn't go into detail, I suspect from the wording that most of the problems were minor, and that most were overseas. I believe The API is fast to act with domestic violations.
 
what ever happened to PQIA,this site seems rather outdated recently,they have some good information until?,,are they still active ??
 
Tom NJ said:
The API is a trade organization and as such looks out for the interest of their oil company members in addition to consumers. They work behind the scenes with those who violate the rules to correct the problem, and then monitor them more closely. Naming and potentially ruining the reputation of a company who simply made a correctable error isn't right. Companies that don't correct their quality problems may lose membership. Those who use the certification marks for uncertified oils are often taken to court and their names have been released in the past.

While this article doesn't go into detail, I suspect from the wording that most of the problems were minor, and that most were overseas. I believe The API is fast to act with domestic violations.
Click to expand...
I can see both sides of this issue. If a counterfeited oil is not in compliance it would be unfair to advertise the name of a legitimate company. On the other hand, if a producer distributes substandard product knowing there won't be any consumer backlash, it nullifies any incentive for that producer to skip the rules from time to time. As a consumer it would benefit me to know if there are manufacturers that regularly/periodically are non-compliant so I can utilize my funds in an appropriate manner.
 
Tom NJ said:
The API has over 27,000 products licensed globally and analyzes over 1,000 samples annually to assure compliance. Recent results found that 46% of these samples had issues ranging from minor discrepancies to more serious viscosity and NOACK inconsistencies. Some 15% of the samples had "questionable additives" indicating a divergence from the original chemical fingerprints established during licensing.

API finds almost half of tested oils have issues
Click to expand...
I doubt the issue are very wide spread in the US and other developed nations.
We have the PQIA and tons of individuals having their oils analyzed here in the US. I’d think it would be caught here.
 
Tom NJ said:
The API is a trade organization and as such looks out for the interest of their oil company members in addition to consumers. They work behind the scenes with those who violate the rules to correct the problem, and then monitor them more closely. Naming and potentially ruining the reputation of a company who simply made a correctable error isn't right. Companies that don't correct their quality problems may lose membership. Those who use the certification marks for uncertified oils are often taken to court and their names have been released in the past.

While this article doesn't go into detail, I suspect from the wording that most of the problems were minor, and that most were overseas. I believe The API is fast to act with domestic violations.
Click to expand...
That is very good insight, thank you for that.

I believe that reputation is everything in the lubrication business.
 
Invisible said:
That is very good insight, thank you for that.

I believe that reputation is everything in the lubrication business.
Click to expand...
So you would think, with the more well-known brands, such as Mobil, Pennzoil, Quaker State, Valvoline. ETC.. their reputation would be on the line.. vs let's say super tech, STP oil, Presidential oil?
 
Pablo said:
Proof?
Click to expand...

Posted it in other threads.

I can get pricing for non-licensed, off spec products by the end of today probably. Off the top of my head I know of at least 3 blenders that make it, that everyone here would go “really?” Yeah. Really.

It sells. There’s huge markets for it. BITOG and, your amsoil world, are unfortunately seeing the lubricants world with blinders on.

When you start dealing with millions, tens of millions of gallons of product. The game changes a lot. And there’s a lot of people willing to do scammy stuff for a few cents.
 
Last edited:
Without specifics, no manufacturer or blender can be singled out. Like @Tom NJ said, probably mostly overseas companies, not domestic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wwillson
  • Locked
Pennzoil API SN Plus & 0W-16 Q&A - Answers
Replies
17
Views
17K
Barn01
D
  • Locked
Capacity / Film Strength Oil Test 48 Oils.
Replies
18
Views
27K
yvon_la
The Critic
  • Locked
GM Introduces Dexos I and Dexos II
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
127K
wgtoys
B
  • Locked
Canola Based Motor Oil Paper
Replies
0
Views
5K
BBDartCA
Falcon_LS
  • Locked
Engineer's "opinion" on synthetics
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
67K
SubieHo
Back
Top Bottom