Originally Posted By: UltrafanUK
You might be thinking of the year specific Acea specs, as you can list a 3 spec series with dashes to the last 2 parts of the year concerned. That's format is used by most major brand oil companies for defining Acea specs.
Which "major brand oil companies" do this? Links please?
If you took the time to read
and understand the ACEA oil specification document you wouldn't be making such ill-informed statements. In fact, the year suffix is specifically
not included in product labelling, as defined by ACEA, who say (my highlighting):
Originally Posted By: ACEA
Where claims are made that oil performance meets the requirements of the ACEA Oil Sequences (e.g. product literature, packaging, labels) they must specify the ACEA Class and Category (see Nomenclature & ACEA Process for definitions).
The YEAR numbers for ACEA Sequence is intended
only for industry use and indicates the year of implementation of that severity level for the particular category. A new year number will indicate, for example, that a new test, parameter or limit has been incorporated in the category to meet new / upgraded performance requirements whilst remaining compatible with existing applications. An update must always satisfy the applications of the previous issue. If this is not the case, then a new category is required.
This means that within the industry, the year might be important and used but for sales and marketing purposes, only the class and category letter(s) and number(s) are used,
without the year. Hence. "most major brand oil companies" do not include the year suffix, and any that do are usually doing it to show they meet an older version of the spec, which is also forbidden.
Originally Posted By: UltrafanUK
I sure know about how Acea approvals are obtained...The clowns at Acea just take the money and sent the certificates. I doubt if they have ever checked a VOA or even looked at the required SAE test reports that are supposed to be filed with the application.
If that is your understanding of the ACEA specifications, then you sure do not know how ACEA approvals [sic] are obtained, because nearly every word of your explanation is wrong. The question is then, where does your belief come from, because it isn't from ACEA and anyone working closely with oils would also not get that wrong, but you have a quite specific and detailed version of what you think happens, which either someone else has told you wrong, or you have simply invented.
Again, let us see what ACEA have to say about it:
Originally Posted By: ACEA
ACEA requires that any claims for Oil performance to meet these Oil Sequences must be based on credible data and controlled tests in accredited test laboratories.
ACEA requires that engine performance testing used to support a claim of compliance with these ACEA Oil Sequences should be generated according to the European Engine Lubricants Quality Management System, EELQMS (available at
www.eelqms.eu), but ACEA reserves the right to define alternatives in exceptional cases.
EELQMS addresses product development testing and product performance documentation, and involves the registration of all candidate and reference oil testing and defines the compliance process. Compliance with the ATIEL Code of Practice, which forms part of the EELQMS, is mandatory for any claim to meet the requirements of this issue of the ACEA sequences. Therefore, ACEA requires that claims against the ACEA Oil Sequences can only be made by oil companies or oil distributors who have signed the EELQMS oil marketers’ Letter of Conformance (for details:
www.atiel.org).
What this means essentially is that oil companies must use registered test facilities and the running of the tests must be registered, along with their results. Also, to make an ACEA claim, the oil seller must be signed up to the ATIEL code of practice. Note, there is no "money", no "certificates", no "SAE reports" and no "application".
You're just guessing.
