Delvac been around for a long time no need to switch if it's working for you.
Hotshots oil vs schaeffers
- Thread starter YPM2020
- Start date
The same ones that will never be happy and never accept any data in any form.
Somewhere there's a sour person on a forum that self-labels themself superior about knives, shoves, and screwdrivers that's suggesting he needs to stick to doing oils.
Fellow Missourian
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2025
- Messages
- 194
Hall Monitors and keyboard commandos, with questionable credentials, need a safe space to lash out, and be tough, without getting wedgies and swirlies.
Last edited:
I actually contacted HSS about this a few years ago. Their SDS didn’t list PAO even though it has a CAS # and the Pour Point also suggested there was little to no PAO in their “100% PAO” oils. The response I got was very convoluted and did not answer my questions.
I also posted this same question on Amazon (back when you could do that) and the response I got from a “satisfied customer” was basically trust me bro, it’s great oil.
Trust me bro?
HSS does guerilla advertising on forums so it’s hard to get an unbiased opinion on their oils and additives from real people. Personally I would not buy anything from this company as the oil analysis I’ve seen have not been great and some have actually been bad.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2026
- Messages
- 181
Sure his tests are not ASTM level but that does not make his data wrong. The data he generates is still valid data. How do you thing ASTM became a thing? You think this testing body poped up one day as it is today fully formed with all of it's standards in place? You guys are the same types that would poop on the origanal lathe that built the world if PF presented it. Ignorance is bliss but to outright poop on his show and data is just wrong. Sure his methods are primitive by todays standards but 70 years ago most of you would poop on just about everything and everyone that has got us to where we are today. If your not dong it better than PF is why are you even putting him down?
You guys have no historical footing in science and all need to take a hike back in time to the GIANTS whos backs we stand upon like Hertz, Tesla, Marconi, Bell, Volta, Newton, Nobel, etc........According to the standards of you lot these guys would be laughed at and their ideas and primitive equipment pooped on! If you get your education and science briefs from Youtube the problem is you not the content creators on YT! YT is for entertainment. If you are watching Project Farm channel on Youtube for anything other than entertainment purposes that is on you not him! You know MIT and many other Universities and Colleges have free courses online you can sign up and take. You do not get credit for them but they are educational. It is just like paying $50 to audit a class in real life if that is still a thing. You get no credit for the class but you get the education on the cheap and only take what you are intersted in! Learn the difference between entertainment and education! Next we will be attacking clowns and circuses becaue they make it look like anyone with big feet and bad makeup can ride a unicycle and juggle at the same time.
You guys have no historical footing in science and all need to take a hike back in time to the GIANTS whos backs we stand upon like Hertz, Tesla, Marconi, Bell, Volta, Newton, Nobel, etc........According to the standards of you lot these guys would be laughed at and their ideas and primitive equipment pooped on! If you get your education and science briefs from Youtube the problem is you not the content creators on YT! YT is for entertainment. If you are watching Project Farm channel on Youtube for anything other than entertainment purposes that is on you not him! You know MIT and many other Universities and Colleges have free courses online you can sign up and take. You do not get credit for them but they are educational. It is just like paying $50 to audit a class in real life if that is still a thing. You get no credit for the class but you get the education on the cheap and only take what you are intersted in! Learn the difference between entertainment and education! Next we will be attacking clowns and circuses becaue they make it look like anyone with big feet and bad makeup can ride a unicycle and juggle at the same time.
I’m not sure I could pick between HSS and Schaefers without a tried and true wear scar test to supplement the VOA.
Nor would that be of any help. Talk about a worthless test for motor oil, not only isn't it representative for that application it has extremely high variability in results - in fact so high that no oil yields a result that is statistically different than any other.
I daresay you'd be better off with a random spectrographic test.
Nah, I take that back. Both are equally useless to discriminate relative oil quality.
What a complete lack of even the most basic understanding of what constitutes reliable data and what does not.
It was a joke.
I kinda wondered
CleanSump
Site Donor 2026
Amsoil used to put the 4-ball test in all their PDS and website data. I always wondered how many people thought it was meaningful for motor oil.
Oil composition won’t tell you a darn thing about what engines & specifications it will be able to protect. Only a tiny fraction of what’s in an oil shows up in an OA, and even then only things that are <~7microns.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, and I firmly believe it was pushback from consumers, particularly on forums like this one, that moved them away from that. Mobil also had a note about its use on their site, which probably helped.
And there is a version of the test that can be used for additive screening, and is used early on in product development/testing for that purpose, but it's not an official test sequence for finished lubes like it is for gear oils and greases where EP performance is an area of significant focus.
I'm not sure I follow your rant. Just about when I think I understand, but absolutely don't agree, with your line of thought, you swing a different direction. Then you contradict yourself. Are you just trying to cover every base possible in defending PF?
Is his data valid? Or is he nothing more than entertainment? Or his he the next Newton?
There are well established motor oil testing methods, that are recognized by labs. That is what ASTM is for. I've done my fair share of participating in reviewing ASTM standards, to make improvements to them, and I've had my labs do inter-lab studies. These are meaningful tools for giving customers data that can be compared, one lab to another, so I'm a believer in using a standardized test method where they are available, for what you want to know. Standardized motor oil test methods are well established. But even relatively recently, there are methods that have been discarded in the industry, as they have been found to be bad test methods. Some have been found to have absolutely no correlation to motor oil performance in an engine. Others have so much variation that they are meaningless. These are some of the methods PF uses.
Considering that the lubrication industry has discarded these methods, do you still want to stand by your claim that his data is valid? Or is it entertainment?
Similar threads
