Bought some hpl 5w40

HPL isn't worried about customers who worry about approvals - like many other higher end manufacturers...Redline, Amsoil, etc. Even Liquimoly does the "recommended for" thing with their Molygen line. The only trick here is that some here on BITOG have to be careful with their rhetoric w/r to HPL and not have folks go back and find where they were giving advice to stick with approvals or were bad-mouthing oils that were only "recommended for" but now it's ok.....

Edit. Approvals are good. Approvals give the consumer confidence that the oil meets the manufacturer's requirements. For most folks, this is the way.
 
Last edited:
The quality of any is dependent on the quality of the bottler and their people..
 
HPL isn't worried about customers who worry about approvals - like many other higher end manufacturers...Redline, Amsoil, etc. Even Liquimoly does the "recommended for" thing with their Molygen line. The only trick here is that some here on BITOG have to be careful with their rhetoric w/r to HPL and not have folks go back and find where they were giving advice to stick with approvals or were bad-mouthing oils that were only "recommended for" but now it's ok.....

Edit. Approvals are good. Approvals give the consumer confidence that the oil meets the manufacturer's requirements. For most folks, this is the way.
I don't have a problem with blender who states that the oil meets or is recommended for certain spec. if oil meets the limits of physical and chemical requirements of given spec. If I am out of warranty I wouldn't mind but I still prefer to use approved oil.

What I have a problem with when they say it exceeds the performance spec. How am I suppose to interpret that? Is such oil superior to actual spec? Or the oil go beyond the limits of given spec for physical and chemical requirements and therefore performs better than oil specified in owners manual?
 
I don't have a problem with blender who states that the oil meets or is recommended for certain spec. if oil meets the limits of physical and chemical requirements of given spec. If I am out of warranty I wouldn't mind but I still prefer to use approved oil.

What I have a problem with when they say it exceeds the performance spec. How am I suppose to interpret that? Is such oil superior to actual spec? Or the oil go beyond the limits of given spec for physical and chemical requirements and therefore performs better than oil specified in owners manual?
Here's the specific language HPL uses for their Euro 5W40:
Capture2.webp
 
HPL isn't worried about customers who worry about approvals - like many other higher end manufacturers...Redline, Amsoil, etc. Even Liquimoly does the "recommended for" thing with their Molygen line. The only trick here is that some here on BITOG have to be careful with their rhetoric w/r to HPL and not have folks go back and find where they were giving advice to stick with approvals or were bad-mouthing oils that were only "recommended for" but now it's ok.....

Edit. Approvals are good. Approvals give the consumer confidence that the oil meets the manufacturer's requirements. For most folks, this is the way.
Liqui Moly and HPL are two different things.
Liqui Moly is trying to approve all their oils bcs. their primary market is EU and things work differently there when it comes to legal issues that bound service shops, dealerships etc.
Philosophy behind HPL and Liqui Moly is different. Company I worked for had regional focus in Europe, and without approvals they wouldn’t be able to sell anything. Oil itself was mediocre at best among those approved oils.
The fact that Liqui Moly doesn’t have approvals for some of their oils or they dance around questions (0W40 is specific A40 oil) tells a lot. But, that is Liqui Moly since existence.
 
You are comparing two different grades. Not applicable as HTHS in 0W20 cannot provide the same protection.
From that standpoint, yes. But is it possible that the engine wear tests were performed under the same environment for both specs?
 
Back
Top Bottom