PDS Rant

Joined
Feb 7, 2025
Messages
30
Why do oil brands not have standardized PDS? Some brands have them, some don't. Those who do are incredibly inconsistent with what they show (sometimes show HTHS, sometimes don't within same brand but different oil for example or even different viscosity grades). What's the point in being so secretive and inconsistent? It's just leaves us consumers guesstimating and speculating this or that about oils. I get that people who care about oil properties and test results are probably the top one-percenters out there but would it hurt to at least have consistency? Either you do your PDS all the same across different oils within the same brand or you don't...

Here's an example of that:

Valvoline Euro 5W-30
Screenshot 2025-02-16 at 12.53.32 PM.webp


Valvoline Euro XL-III 5W-30
1739732136524.webp


The former mentions nothing about noack and the latter mentions noack. Don't even get me started on the vague "<15.0" percent loss on the noack either. What's even the point of it being on there at that point...? Insanity. You might as well tell me that a banana is yellow.
 
I assume they know the few weirdos like us that look at oil PDS's might choose another brand over theirs because of one data point. NOACK is definitley one of those data points old nerds can be picky about. It is also one of the data points harder to make a precise "typical properties" number on when they change base oils, so Valvoline likes to use the <15.0 as a cop out.
 
I assume they know the few weirdos like us that look at oil PDS's might choose another brand over theirs because of one data point. NOACK is definitley one of those data points old nerds can be picky about. It is also one of the data points harder to make a precise "typical properties" number on when they change base oils, so Valvoline likes to use the <15.0 as a cop out.
I definitely think that is the case. Mobil removed VI from their PDS shortly around the time a former member came up with his BOQI. I don't think it was coincidental.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAG
I definitely think that is the case. Mobil removed VI from their PDS shortly around the time a former member came up with his BOQI. I don't think it was coincidental.
Let me guess. Username starts with a G and ends with an N? Curious about what happened...
 
there are many oil producers that don't include much info on their pds including name brands, its hard to recommend or use them, noticed other lesser known brands give much needed info like Schaeffers,Amsoil,HPL etc,, though good popular oil brands like Mobil, Valvoline etc,very little or vague transparency on printed pds specs (and sds ), even when you call or E-mail them some give info and some are pretty tight lipped on their products when asked , I choose a manufacture that can at least tell me the specs asked for or I won't use their product . most so called general published claims are just marketing.
 
Valvoline and Castrol to their credit will tell you things like HTHS if it’s not on the sheet. Heck Valvoline gave me a really detailed list of into about the oil they make for NAPA. They’re cool.

Mobil and Pennzoil/Quaker State/Shell will tell you absolutely nothing which is significantly less cool especially for HTHS because I’ve yet to find a lab that’s willing to test that unless I’m sending in some bulk set of 20+ samples.
 
I love mag 1 pds's. They're almost VOA's because they include almost everything even sulfur, nitrogen, and tan. Only thing It doesn't include are ppm values that are normally 0/trace so not worth putting in. The mag 1 15w-40 10qt is cheaper per quart than supertech 15w-40 so i'm using it. Just for giving me so much info on the pds I'm going to keep buying from mag 1.

https://mag1.com/products/72/pds/

But yes I wish there was a standardized format and there should be a lot more transparency and force them to include more values as some are sparse. Every bottle should have a qr code to quickly see all online info about it on one page.
 
Last edited:
I love mag 1 pds's. They're almost VOA's because they include almost everything even sulfur, nitrogen, and tan. Only thing is doesn't include are ppm values that are normally 0/trace so not worth putting in. The mag 1 15w-40 10qt is cheaper per quart than supertech 15w-40 so i'm using it. Just for giving me so much info on the pds I'm going to keep buying from mag 1.

https://mag1.com/products/72/pds/

But yes I wish there was a standardized format and there should be a lot more transparency and force them to include more values as some are sparse. Every bottle should have a qr code to quickly see all online info about it on one page.
Wow was looking at that sample Mag1 PDS and it's the most detailed one I've seen yet.
 
Schaeffer's has great printed information (even talked to a actual formulator in detail) &, had a nice informative discussion with a tech adviser at Royal Purple also. Valvoline was a disappointment with a conversation, could not tell me even the mrv or ccs and other questions ,said only what is printed on the pds and nothing else he could say.
 
Last edited:
Meh. Any oil I use is going to have an approval that has defined minimum values for those properties. Besides, a PDS is going to be typical values anyway which aren’t indicative for any particular lot. And some blenders publish license limits rather than typical values that make them even less important.
 
Meh. Any oil I use is going to have an approval that has defined minimum values for those properties. Besides, a PDS is going to be typical values anyway which aren’t indicative for any particular lot. And some blenders publish license limits rather than typical values that make them even less important.
I think approvals are a good starting/reference point so I agree that it tells a good amount from that alone. However, it's just be nice to have PDS to make some general comparisons when the approvals that one is looking for are all the same. It will at least give us some markers even if they are typical values so we can make the best educated purchase when looking at similar oils.

When people play RPGs and they want to squeeze out the tiniest advantage because everyone is using meta builds, it's called min/maxing. Same concept to me here.
 
I love mag 1 pds's. They're almost VOA's because they include almost everything even sulfur, nitrogen, and tan. Only thing It doesn't include are ppm values that are normally 0/trace so not worth putting in. The mag 1 15w-40 10qt is cheaper per quart than supertech 15w-40 so i'm using it. Just for giving me so much info on the pds I'm going to keep buying from mag 1.

https://mag1.com/products/72/pds/

But yes I wish there was a standardized format and there should be a lot more transparency and force them to include more values as some are sparse. Every bottle should have a qr code to quickly see all online info about it on one page.
Where do you find Mag 1? I never see this stuff at the parts stores.
 
Well then you know a lot more than I do about how a 10 ppm of molybdenum affects the performance of the finished product.
Lol I certainly don't. But I at least want to know what I am buying right? Whether or not it plays out in real life the way I intend, I made the choice based on the given information.
 
Lol I certainly don't. But I at least want to know what I am buying right? Whether or not it plays out in real life the way I intend, I made the choice based on the given information.
Me too. I know (for example) what proven performance a VW 504 00 approval provides. I’m simply not capable of extrapolating what a PDS of those typical values gives me.

If I want something “more” then I would trust a reputable boutique blender provides.
 
Just countering that what is published isn’t of much value in real world usage. But if you do then motor on.
I think that's well agreed on both our parts as I did say, "whether or not it plays out in real life as I intend". Again, I think your perspective was already made clear before.
 
Back
Top Bottom