epolk,
First of all good measured response. We are not far from the same page. Some specific comments:
It is beyond debate that it includes the G-I/II oils (though yes, G-I is probably all but gone from modern API/ILSAC oils). It is equally clear that G-IV/V are not members of the dino club. Only G-III's genetics generate debate as to whether it's a dino, a syn, or perhaps both at the same time. . ."
There is some debate of course as to whether dino's even existed, but assuming the obvious carbon life form origins (Spock be honoured), coal, gas, and crude oil in my view is the stock of Goups I-III. That is why GTL's should be III's as they are made from these sources.
"You're overlooking the fact that complying with the minimum standards can actually interfere with making an oil with certain desirable properties. For example, SM oils are severely restricted (relative to older oils) in how much of certain antiwear compounds they can contain (the zinc-phosphorous chemicals, often ZDDP). If you want or need this type of AW chemistry, you won't find it in an SM oil."
Slightly possible, but is there a chance that Group IV's have more of a need for ZDDP's than Group III's? And, in the end as Buster says isn't performance the real issue? GF-4 and SM have wear performance standards, and shouldn't all the legitimate oils need to perform to these?
"API and ILSAC don't force the majors to make a "bad product"; you're extending the argument too far trying to make your point. But again, the standards CAN interefere with making the best possible product."
Can you elaborate? If these are minimun standards are these really not just givens?
"I don't see a conspiracy either (though you can't deny it would be nice for Mobil, Castrol, Valvo, etc, if Amsoil and Redline went away...). On the other hand, why should Redline or Amsoil spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to certify a product when they don't really need to."
I suspect because of sales volumes the big guys don't care about the likes of Amsoil, Redline, and Royal Purple. Moble 1 and Castrol yes of course they do. Mobil 1 obviously have stepped in line and qualifed their oils and are no issue. You just have to look at their performance and cost. Castrol (and I have to be careful as they are a sponsor), have chosen to post vague specs on their oil. Suggest buyer beware here and to look at their specs carefully. They make some good oils.
"Can you point to any known deficiency in a Redline or Amsoil product that wouldn't exist if they complied with API or ILSAC standards?"
I'm sure the regulars are aware of my view, but my thoughts are that Redline is not likely to meet any kind of GF standard if they keep their HTHS viscosity so high. I suggesgt this borders on false advertising as they would like everyone to believe they can save gas, increase HP, and prevent engine wear. My thoughts are that two of these are mutually exclusive to the other one. And even that "one" is open for debate.
Anyway, I respect your views and I suspect we are not really that far apart.
