Of course you did. From the start of this discussion, you are speculating about approvals although people gave you evidence.The real strange thing is that I have not even been making any controversial statements (as I sometimes do ) but only stating the fact that all API-SP-certified oils have reduced calcium & added magnesium as far as from what we have seen in VOAs and UOAs to date.
But some turned this simple fact inside out and into a matter of pride for European oils not previously API-SP-certified and won't stop trying to prove 2 + 2 = 3, and they will keep saying that no, a European oil can be all-calcium/high-calcium even if it is API-SP-certified because—it is European and thus invincible.
By the way, most new LSPI-certified Euro oils also carry API-SP approval; so, it is a moot issue whether European-OEM LSPI approval alone without API-SP approval could/would/should change the oil composition.
I am looking forward to seeing VOAs/UOAs from European API-SP-rated oils that will show high calcium/all calcium, as some are claiming that there could/would/should be such oils. I don't know how the additive companies will succeed in doing it, but apparently they can because they are formulating additive packages for European oils as opposed to American/Japanese oils. OK, that's enough sarcasm.
So you started to question if MB test was good enough, did they give them a grace period, and other stuff that is pretty much absolute nonsense. MB introduced LSPI test in 2020. That is it.
I posted pds from 2016 that is same as the current API SP, just for you to answer: well Mobil1 pds is garbage. Sure, tell us more! Please, we beg for that garbage evidence.