Originally Posted By: Mark888
A very large percentage of the people on this forum, who a fairly knowledgeable about motor oil compared to the general population,
have been deceived by RP....in their wording about certification.
1st of all a very large percentage of the people on this forum who are "supposed" to be knowledgable experts about oil may not be so smart. I think there is a lot of misrepresentation going on right here on these forums. A lot of "deceptive advertising & marketing" going on here at BITOG by some members.
For the record I do not claim to be one of those oil know-it-all people either. I know the base stuff and I have a lot of experience working in the automotive field so I do think of myself as knowledgable about some of this stuff as it relates to warranty. When it comes to the science behind it all though I am the 1st to admit I don't know much and that I couldn't begin to hold a candle to guys like Johnny and so many others who really are oil smart.
Many who are suposed to know so much here though, and tout themselves as such or are touted by others, let their personal biases influence what they tell people and it is not always based on rock steady reasoning and/or facts. I have seen so called experts on here trash RP( and other brands )when they have not even used it by their own admission. I admit I like RP and recommend it. I do so based on personal experience with it at least and I never misrepresent that fact( ie; I like it - look at my signature ). People at least know my motives behind my comments.
2nd. I am sorry but I have to call foul on this RP practices deceptive advertising/marketing. I have used that oil for 20 years, and dealt with the people from that company( as a consumer ONLY - I did sell it at one time at a parts store I worked at but no affiliation with the company itself )for almost as long, and I have never seen them be intentionally deceptive and try to fool anyone about their product(s). Please show me honest and irefutable proof that RP has claimed "actual certification status" they do not actually have or been dishonest/deceptive trying to make people think they are certified? What have they done that has fooled people by design in regards to certifications( let's not go into other claims - I am addressing your statement about certifications )?
I have seen them claim to "meet/exceed" a standard( mfg's or API )they are not certified as meeting. Yes, I have seen that. Seen it from other oil companies on a regular basis as well so if you condemn RP and Amsoil for that then please continue the list to include most every oil company who at one time or another used similar "deception". However, I have NEVER seen RP claim to actually be certified to anything they are not.
I saw mention of this in that BP/NAD fiasco and I completely question the claims against RP in that part of it. RP never claimed to actually be certified to the current highest standards as that article floating around says they were charged with. Never saw it on their site, in any of their literature I have/saw, nor on their bottles. A very select few of their oils they did claim to MEET the requirements of the highest API Service Level but that is 100% different than saying they actully were certified to meet them.
RP is actually certified to API SL in some of their weights and those are the ONLY oils they claim certification on. They use the API Donut on their bottles. No deception there, no saying certified to API SM, no real/fake API Starburst lookalike symbols, etc... On their site I have never seen actual claims of being certified on anything they are not either. MEET yes, certified no. Obviously I have not seen every single piece of advertising they have out out but I have seen a lot and I have not seen any of what they are accused of here and by others in regards to false certification claims.
As a matter of fact they seem to really stay on top of those things to try and stay honest. For a long time they had meets/exceeds requirements of GM4718M on their bottles of 5W-30 ( regular not racing ). GM did not change that standard for a long time so API SL would qualify. When GM updated the standard, and API SM became part of it, you saw the claims on RP's bottles go away. Granted it probably took a while for all the bottles with it on the label to disappear from the shelves but they stopped saying it once they no longer could meet the standard due to API Service Level issues.
I realize RP is the resident whipping post oil here that everyone loves to hate. I know what a joy it was to so many when this BP/NAD "B-S" hit the fan. You could hear Champagne corks popping all over BITOG.
That is fine. People do not have to like it or want to use it BUT please at least stick to accurate commnts about the company and their products when saying you don't like it/them.
Questionable performance gain "marketing claims" are arguable by the detractors but to say RP made false and misleading claims about certifications is just unture. At least in my long experience with them. They are one of the most honest oil companies out there when it comes to stuff like that. Going so far as to NOT recommend a product of theirs when it does not meet all requirements for warranty and such even if it would work fine. RP never puts the consumers best interest behind making money by selling their product at all costs. They have a right to market their product however, the same way ALL oil companies do and if that means saying their product MEETS a standard, even if not actually certified as meeting it, that does not mean the did anything deceptive or dishonest.
My :2cents: