GOV/Oil Specs

[Bullwinkle007]

The oil companies do not give much data on the specs of the oil. I feel that the oil companies should be all required to disclose a VOA, and also disclose all specs including HTHS,NOACK. We as consumers should know exactly what we are getting. HPL/Redline will tell you most things you want to know with a simple phone call. RL has it too on their website. I feel the educated consumer that wants know has the right to know. How do you guys feel about that?

 

[dkryan]

I could care less about VOA data.

As for HTHS and Noack data, yes, that would be nice to see.

But, the reality is 99.98% of the “we as consumers” have no idea what those acronyms mean and even if they did, they wouldn’t care.

That same 99.98% of car owners cannot tell you what brand oil filter is on the engine nor tell you its filtering efficiency. Likewise, they don’t have a clue as to what brand and viscosity of oil is in their crankcase nor the oil capacity of their engine.

Heck, most would be lucky just to locate the oil dipstick, assuming they could even figure out how to open the hood.

In short, they don’t care!

And you want another mandate forced upon businesses to satisfy the other 00.02% of us?

 

[radiometer]

I would really like to know the HTHS and NOACK but I don't think that's going to be revealed. It would make it so much easier to make an oil selection that I really want for my cars.

 

[facility1]

The oil companies do not give much data on the specs of the oil. I feel that the oil companies should be all required to disclose a VOA, and also disclose all specs including HTHS,NOACK. We as consumers should know exactly what we are getting. HPL/Redline will tell you most things you want to know with a simple phone call. RL has it too on their website. I feel the educated consumer that wants know has the right to know. How do you guys feel about that?

totally agree, why can't the lubricant manufactures be more Transparent (quote) on the specifications of their products, personally i will not purchase a product if the specs & license are not listed,Amsoil,Schaeffers,HPL to name a few are good on informing the consumer of the specs of the oils ,many popular brands give rather sketchy info, why? because they know it will still sell,or just resting on their reputation as its always what i always i used in past,,is the product still good??,,some people are brand loyal but need to be more informed of what else is out on the market that maybe better ,,hopefully manufactures can be more upfront on the current (2024) product specs, license, compositions, product data etc.

 

[kschachn]

I could care less about VOA data.

As for HTHS and Noack data, yes, that would be nice to see.

But, the reality is 99.98% of the “we as consumers” have no idea what those acronyms mean and even if they did, they wouldn’t care.

That same 99.98% of car owners cannot tell you what brand oil filter is on the engine nor tell you its filtering efficiency. Likewise, they don’t have a clue as to what brand and viscosity of oil is in their crankcase nor the oil capacity of their engine.

Heck, most would be lucky just to locate the oil dipstick, assuming they could even figure out how to open the hood.

In short, they don’t care!

And you want another mandate forced upon businesses to satisfy the other 00.02% of us?

Same here. The companies do disclose what licenses, approvals and specifications the oil meets and does not meet. Or at least they should. The ones that try to obfuscate which ones they have or do not have are the ones people should be railing against.

Approvals, licenses and specifications are the true measure of the performance of the oil. VOA and spec sheets with typical data (if even that) are not.

One observation I’ve made is that the vast majority of people who endlessly complain about these “hidden specs” are the ones that are least able to interpret what they see. At least based on my reading of their other posts on the board.

 

[Jetronic]

Same here. The companies do disclose what licenses, approvals and specifications the oil meets and does not meet. Or at least they should. The ones that try to obfuscate which ones they have or do not have are the ones people should be railing against.

Approvals, licenses and specifications are the true measure of the performance of the oil. VOA and spec sheets with typical data (if even that) are not.

One observation I’ve made is that the vast majority of people who endlessly complain about these “hidden specs” are the ones that are least able to interpret what they see. At least based on my reading of their other posts on the board.

I don't really need to see HTHS or Noack figures, I'm pretty sure I can determine if it's high or low anyway from the data they do usually publish.

I don't care if one oil is better against wear than another either, I've never been able to wear out an engine anyway. So that shifted my focus a few years ago to oils that keep the engine cleaner.

 

[Bullwinkle007]

I could care less about VOA data.

As for HTHS and Noack data, yes, that would be nice to see.

But, the reality is 99.98% of the “we as consumers” have no idea what those acronyms mean and even if they did, they wouldn’t care.

That same 99.98% of car owners cannot tell you what brand oil filter is on the engine nor tell you its filtering efficiency. Likewise, they don’t have a clue as to what brand and viscosity of oil is in their crankcase nor the oil capacity of their engine.

Heck, most would be lucky just to locate the oil dipstick, assuming they could even figure out how to open the hood.

In short, they don’t care!

And you want another mandate forced upon businesses to satisfy the other 00.02% of us?

The oil company already knows the data. They choose not to share bc they don’t want their secrets released. Then you have companies like HPL/RL that are very transparent

 

[Plum Bob]

One observation I’ve made is that the vast majority of people who endlessly complain about these “hidden specs” are the ones that are least able to interpret what they see.

It's a consequence of not being able to interpret, or at least understand what approvals are.
All they can complain about is particles count.

I'd call it a hobby.

 

[Snagglefoot]

If it meets API SP, or any of the Euro specs the consumers are protected and most don’t care anyway.