Latest Valvoline Boutique Oil?

That's because I wasn't referencing DexOS when I suggested it. I was referencing API SP and GF6, like I posted. Also, why I said good to know about the DexOS info.
Ok, but this thread is about a specific Dexos certified Valvoline product which is why I mentioned it.
 
Man the Valvoline marketing department is on a swing and miss roll lately. Can anyone in all honestly say that this oil is better than VAS? The marketing language is very vague for this new oil. I’m sure it’s great oil, but so is VAS. Not sure many people will pay the price increase for something that essentially looks the same as the lower priced product.
 
Right? Why let the consumers know the actual information, screw them.

I get it. But from a business standpoint that happens ALL the time. If Valvoline thought NOACK would help them they would provide it.

For example: I’ve noticed you haven’t posted your home address on your profile - why aren’t you providing that information?

The reason you don’t is because a. It’s irrelevant, b. Posting it doesn’t affect the quality of your posts, and c. It would be far more likely to hurt you.
 
Last edited:
There were a couple of threads a while back that brought up the point that Noack testing was becoming more difficult and tests were showing widely varying results. I think that started happening after SN+ went into production.
 
Ok, but this thread is about a specific Dexos certified Valvoline product which is why I mentioned it.
It’s also about a specific SP/GF6 Product, which is why I mentioned them. I even said good to know on the Dexos info.
 
I get it. But from a business standpoint that happens ALL the time. If Valvoline thought NOACK would help them they would provide it.

For example: I’ve noticed you haven’t posted your home address on your profile - why aren’t you providing that information?

The reason you don’t is because a. It’s irrelevant, b. Posting it doesn’t affect the quality of your posts, and c. It would be far more likely to hurt you.
Noack info is not comparable to someone providing personal info of their house. What a weird comparison.

And yes, it happens a lot. That’s why I mentioned it. I personally find it stupid to not add it when they’re already adding everything else. To you, it’s irrelevant. To others, it may not be. That’s the beauty of having an opinion and/or being curious.
 
Noack info is not comparable to someone providing personal info of their house. What a weird comparison.

And yes, it happens a lot. That’s why I mentioned it. I personally find it stupid to not add it when they’re already adding everything else. To you, it’s irrelevant. To others, it may not be. That’s the beauty of having an opinion and/or being curious.
If knowing that parameter is key and critical to your purchasing decision on a product then I'd suggest you ask the company. If they won't provide it then buy something else from someone who will. I just don't see it as being that important, what I care about are approvals and licenses.
 
Noack info is not comparable to someone providing personal info of their house. What a weird comparison.

And yes, it happens a lot. That’s why I mentioned it. I personally find it stupid to not add it when they’re already adding everything else. To you, it’s irrelevant. To others, it may not be. That’s the beauty of having an opinion and/or being curious.

If you aren’t required to do something and it could potentially result in harm if you do - why would you do it?
 
If you aren’t required to do something and it could potentially result in harm if you do - why would you do it?
You mean harm as in showing it does not meet the required values for an approval or license? Otherwise what proof is there that anything within the required limits is more or less harmful than anything else?

You keep using that word harm but what does it mean?
 
If knowing that parameter is key and critical to your purchasing decision on a product then I'd suggest you ask the company. If they won't provide it then buy something else from someone who will. I just don't see it as being that important, what I care about are approvals and licenses.
Just because you don't care about it or see it being important doesn't mean other people don't. Whether its Noack, viscosity, HFCS or sugar in bread, the price of rice in China. Doesn't matter.

No one said it was important to buy a different brand. What happened to wanting to be an informed consumer? Why do you hate customers having knowledge?
 
If you aren’t required to do something and it could potentially result in harm if you do - why would you do it?
then why publish specs at all? What a terrible line of thinking you're going down right now.
 
Just because you don't care about it or see it being important doesn't mean other people don't. Whether its Noack, viscosity, HFCS or sugar in bread, the price of rice in China. Doesn't matter.

No one said it was important to buy a different brand. What happened to wanting to be an informed consumer? Why do you hate customers having knowledge?
Where did I ever indicate that I "hate customers having knowledge"?

Throwing around the old "hate" word again for no reason whatsoever. What nonsense.
 
Where did I ever indicate that I "hate customers having knowledge"?

Throwing around the old "hate" word again for no reason whatsoever. What nonsense.
Because you don't like customers being knowledgeable and you don't think it's important that they are. You either like customers being knowledgeable or you dislike/hate customers being knowledgeable. Your words here have shown that you don't like that so what other option(s) are people to think you're taking?

Also, I like how that's the only part of my post you focused on while ignoring customers wanting to be informed and knowledgeable. ;)
 
Because you don't like customers being knowledgeable and you don't think it's important that they are. You either like customers being knowledgeable or you dislike/hate customers being knowledgeable. Your words here have shown that you don't like that so what other option(s) are people to think you're taking?

Also, I like how that's the only part of my post you focused on while ignoring customers wanting to be informed and knowledgeable. ;)
Well I guess if NOACK is a big part of your oil choice decision matrix then you should send a sample for testing to make sure you get the info you need.
 
Well I guess if NOACK is a big part of your oil choice decision matrix then you should send a sample for testing to make sure you get the info you need.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But the option of knowing it as part of the overall specs/information, like viscosity, etc. would be nice.
 
Because you don't like customers being knowledgeable and you don't think it's important that they are. You either like customers being knowledgeable or you dislike/hate customers being knowledgeable. Your words here have shown that you don't like that so what other option(s) are people to think you're taking?

Also, I like how that's the only part of my post you focused on while ignoring customers wanting to be informed and knowledgeable. ;)
The one thing I do like as a customer is when blenders and manufacturers are clear about what approvals, specifications and licenses the oil has or does not have. That is the aspect of their literature that I definitely care about since it communicates the real-world performance of the oil. When unscrupulous blenders obfuscate that information to their customers it indicates to me that they are either unethical or careless.

For you to think those other things you wrote is laughable at best. But you're free to have your own imagination.
 
Companies starting pully Noack from their PDS's because I believe too many consumers were comparing oils by selectively isolating specific specifications, Noack being one of them.
I think it’s because manufacturers‘ oils have gotten more volatile as a result of the pursuit of fuel economy.

Thinner base oils and more viscosity modifiers almost always mean a more volatile oil.

Then they’re all, “Oh crap, we better not publish Noack because it’s gotten worse!” So well just say, oh, yeah, it’s under the limit.
 
The one thing I do like as a customer is when blenders and manufacturers are clear about what approvals, specifications and licenses the oil has or does not have. That is the aspect of their literature that I definitely care about since it communicates the real-world performance of the oil. When unscrupulous blenders obfuscate that information to their customers it indicates to me that they are either unethical or careless.

For you to think those other things you wrote is laughable at best. But you're free to have your own imagination.
You can think it's laughable but what else are people supposed to gather from your posts when you're the one writing the words? ;)

I love how this came about because a few people said they like seeing Noack numbers posted and wish manufacturers still posted them and this is what the conversation has devolved into lol.
 
You mean harm as in showing it does not meet the required values for an approval or license? Otherwise what proof is there that anything within the required limits is more or less harmful than anything else?

You keep using that word harm but what does it mean?
Wait, so what you’re saying is that as long as it’s within certain parameters within a certification it doesn’t matter?

Then what the heck are we here for? Why care one bit about any oil you purchase - as long as it has a certification - it does matter what’s in that bottle, in comparison to other brands. Why even have different brands? just have all the oil manufacturers melt all their bottles together and call it a day.

I mean, why have different car brands? As long as they all can go 0- the speed limit, it’s all the same, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom