Not sure I want to use OEM approved oil

[BMWTurboDzl]

That's incorrect, at least for the API/ACEA sequences which are required to be run on any product that states it meets or exceeds the requirements and carries the API starburst*

As I noted, Mobil and probably all of the big boys, are able to run all of those sequences in-house without involving a third party lab. Other smaller blenders that don't want to just buy pre-approved additive packages from one of the large addco's will need to utilize a 3rd party lab able to run those sequences in order to claim compliance and use the API starburst.


(*Somewhat of an exception to this is the procurement of a pre-approved additive package, which, it is my understanding, can be blended with one of the approved base oil blend combos and yield and approved product without the sequences having to be run, but these were of course already tested and approved prior to being offered)

IIRC "meets or exceeds" is not an official approval with regards to automaker certs. In fact I doubt they run the tests because the OE certs for the product are more stringent. Compliance is inferred. ACEA is self-certify.

 

[OVERKILL]

IIRC "meets or exceeds" is not an official approval with regards to automaker certs. In fact I doubt they run the tests because the OE certs for the product are more stringent. Compliance is inferred. ACEA is self-certify.

The only automaker approval I regularly see Mobil toss under the meets or exceeds category along with the stuff they can self-certify for (API/ACEA) is as a I noted, Ford. And my understanding of most of the Ford approvals is that they are just stricter limits on the existing API sequences, so it somewhat makes sense that Mobil puts them under that heading and may perhaps be able to self-certify for them.

 

[wpod]

The question we need to ask but never do is will the super duper oil make my engine last longer? Will we ever see the benefits if the super duper oil does actually make my engine last longer? I seem to be the only one dumb enough to put a $6,000.00 transmission in a vehicle only worth $4,000.00 because it is 20 years old and has 375,000 miles on it.

 

[kschachn]

IIRC "meets or exceeds" is not an official approval with regards to automaker certs. In fact I doubt they run the tests because the OE certs for the product are more stringent. Compliance is inferred. ACEA is self-certify.

It's correct for certifications and licenses but not for approvals. There's a difference between the three.

 

[jhs914]

Yes, exactly.

In the case of XOM and I assume the other large blenders, they are able to run all of the API and ACEA sequences in-house. Both the API approval and the ACEA sequences lay out a series of parameters/requirements for the lubricant that it must, at minimum, meet. So there are limits on all of the sequences and the oil must at worst, meet the limits imposed. Of course it can exceed the requirements (perform better than the limit allows).

These are of course organizational requirements/approvals, not OEM.

Now, some of the OEM testing, like Ford's, is just a stricter set of limits based on the API sequences, and so you'll see the Ford approvals fall under the same category. I am unsure whether they are able to self-certify for the Ford approvals or not.

When we get down to approvals with actual license numbers and sequences run by the OEM's themselves (like Porsche A40 for example, BMW LL-01...etc) Mobil puts these under the Approvals category, as they are not running these in-house and they cannot self-certify, the product needs to be approved by the OEM.

On the fox guarding the hen house remark, while Mobil is able to run all of the sequences for API/ACEA in house, many of the smaller blenders will just buy pre-approved additive packages from Infineum, Lubrizol...etc and blend it with one of the approved base oil combos to generate an approved product. So this product may not be formally tested, or not tested the way Mobil/Shell/BP would test it, at all depending on the scale of the operation in question and their resources. Since Mobil/Shell own Infineum and also produce a lot of the base stocks, it does really come down to whether you trust these orgs to QC their own products and if you do, then there's no reason to doubt their self-certification for API/ACEA either.

Thanks for that. After all of the back and forth arguments in this thread (including the many ad hominen attacks), your explanation is the most clear and concise one yet of the oil approval process.

 

[OilUzer]

@OVERKILL
Great info. Thanks!

Now that you explained it, I like the M1 details better.

question regarding smaller blenders. If I understand you correctly, the smaller companies can mix or blend as follow:

approved base + pre-approved additive package = approved? final product.

Is that a universally accepted practice/process?

can't different chemicals neutralize each other or have an unexpected reaction or major side effects short of a final test?

 

[OVERKILL]

@OVERKILL
Great info. Thanks!

Now that you explained it, I like the M1 details better.

question regarding smaller blenders. If I understand you correctly, the smaller companies can mix or blend as follow:

approved base + pre-approved additive package = approved? final product.

Is that a universally accepted practice/process?

can't different chemicals neutralize each other or have an unexpected reaction or major side effects short of a final test?

The approved DI packages would have a list of (tested) base oil blends they can be mixed with in order to yield an approved final product. I'm limited by what I have on-hand here, but Mobil provides some examples in their blending guide:

Infineum provides both the API and ACEA sequences, so you can see what are involved in them:

https://www.infineum.com/media/w5kpot0y/api-engine-oil-classifications-brochure2.pdf

https://www.infineum.com/media/s12asmoq/acea-2016_oil-sequences.pdf

If you watch the little video on the PCMO section of their website:

Infineum | Passenger Car Motor Oils

www.infineum.com

These two statements stand-out:

The first touching on those "turn key" packages for creating an approved product, the 2nd touching on the versatility of their offerings in being able to be used in conjunction with a multitude/diverse selection of bases.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

That's incorrect, at least for the API/ACEA sequences which are required to be run on any product that states it meets or exceeds the requirements and carries the API starburst*

I was under the impression the thread was for OEM approvals... Hence the thread title.

 

[userfriendly]

Not sure if you want to use OEM approved oil? Don't then.

 

[OVERKILL]

I was under the impression the thread was for OEM approvals... Hence the thread title.

The Ford approval, at least with XOM, falls under that heading, but it is based on the API sequences, which means they've all been run.

Typically, the language you'll see here is "recommended for" with respect to OEM applications where no formal approval has been obtained (see the Mobil PDS I posted as an example) but some of the blenders don't break it out as well as Mobil does.

Some of examples of this from blenders who do not obtain formal approvals would be Redline:

AMSOIL:

Whereas Ravenol, a formally approved product, uses similar language to Mobil, differentiating between approvals and recommendations: