OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, I've made similar observations from some of the XOM blending guide examples, wondering if this is how they've blended specific oils in the past.
Questions for the “only oils with approvals!” crowd- API vs good oil engineering
- Thread starter SubieRubyRoo
- Start date
- Status
you gotta trust someone when it comes down to it
All good points. The core of the development is done on the additive company side. The very large companies, like XOM/Shell/BP etc. and even Amsoil will take market ready packages and test them, tweak them, in-house and or develop on their own (XOM). XOM went outside the norm for Triple apparently as they stated in that video (Lubrication Explained) tapping into the cosmetics industry. I assume this is also what others do.
What I found interesting in that Gale Banks Amsoil video was when Dan Peterson said they had to have a dewpoint-controlled room to get the deposit chemistry correct. That's an interesting piece of information IMO. It shows you how precise some things have to be. Quite complex concoctions.
You can get some sense of validation in videos like this and the Engineering Explained videos where they show the testing being carried out. I read one time that Mobil tests up to 500 blends per month. That has to be very valuable.
What I found interesting in that Gale Banks Amsoil video was when Dan Peterson said they had to have a dewpoint-controlled room to get the deposit chemistry correct. That's an interesting piece of information IMO. It shows you how precise some things have to be. Quite complex concoctions.
You can get some sense of validation in videos like this and the Engineering Explained videos where they show the testing being carried out. I read one time that Mobil tests up to 500 blends per month. That has to be very valuable.
Last edited:
I am just glad HPL has never been treated with the hate Royal Purple was. RP had all the approvals and certifications, but was still called a "junk oil" and worse. I can not even imagine what would have happened if RP didn't have all the approvals and certifications then. Unfathomable.
Last edited:
That's the irony in all this LOL.
Such as?? API? Various OE approvals? You're joking right? Not every batch is submitted for testing. The assumption that the customer makes is that the current product on the shelf meets the performance metrics under the approvals on the label. The consumer is making the same leap of faith that the product will perform as advertised. Note I said advertised. As for your "utterance from a representative". I think you're mistaking a salesperson/marketing head with someone who's working in the lab.
Well we are relying on experts within the field. This is not a laboratory, we're not trying to validate every white paper which comes through the site. Are you saying for example that we should not trust what XOM has said regarding the performance of AN's simply because we haven't been able to validate the results ourselves? That's a sad way to go through life my friend.
Well yes. It is less expensive.
Last edited:
That was implied in several of his posts. You are NOT buying a certified batch/lot. You are buying an approved formulation. I mean some approvals, there isn't even testing of the finished formulation. It's like the whole thing is being tumbled together.
When buying a product for a regulated industry, the supplier may/must send a COA (certificate of analysis) with each batch/lot. That documentation shall cover everything in the delivery. I worked aerospace for many years. Rockwell International at the time for example almost NEVER actually believed the COA. For some items/materials it was analyzed upon receipt. Aerojet, we trusted some, analyzed some. Depended on the material and criticality. I have some interesting stories over the years of escapes. IMHO there is no comparisons to the automotive lubricant purchase by the consumer unless you are overly nuts. You have to trust the oil blender, formulation approval or not.
I know for a fact Amsoil analyzes incoming materials.
Last edited:
Yes we agree not every "batch" is submitted for testing. Every single formulation must be certified though if it carries the certification.
Yes you are "trusting" the oil in the bottle meets the certification on the bottle.
...with a non certified oil you do not even have to trust that....there's no certification.
This is the assumption. That's literally why certifications exist. I 100 percent agree that no industry is perfect...but that being said if the product that is certified does not meet the certification you now have recourse. The second purpose of certification
Depends on the laboratory. Again I only suggest to assign a weight to each information source. Would I possibly assign a different weight to a written document from a third party laboratory employee than a verbal utterance from an oil company lab employee? Of course.
Right. Usually less expensive, generally easier to obtain. And carries the certifications.
I just don't see that as LESS practical.
Last edited:
A very valid point. We're not trying to keep planes in the air here. The great majority of folks will be FULLY warranty compliant, spend less money, and have less difficulty obtaining even the least expensive certified oil....and have no lubrication related issues.
Those that absolutely must go out of their way to obtain and spend more on a boutique oil for their daily driver will likely see no real life benefit not likely any real life detriment (unless doing something like putting a high calcium oil in a small displacement tgdi engine or some other misapplication).
Last edited:
Not totally erasing the testing validity, but very possibly changing the performance characteristics, positively or negatively. Additives respond differently in different base oils which can lead to surprises, some of which may not show up except in controlled engine tests. This is why the certifications are only valid in the specified base oils.
For example, changing from Group III to PAO can affect the solubility of some additives, and adding a polar base oil could compete with the effectiveness of polar additives. There is a lot of chemistry going on in an engine, influenced by fuel by-products, metallurgy, temperatures and loads. Bench tests attempt to isolate and measure specific properties under specific conditions such as wear or volatility or cleanliness, but a carefully controlled engine creates the total environment the oil will see and is better at catching interactions and formulation surprises. And surprises do happen, which is why there are millions of patents.
An experienced formulator will likely be able to predict the effects of changing a formulation, and be able to look for likely problems in appropriate bench tests, but there is still some risk and therefore still a matter of trust. The more experienced the formulator, the less the risk, but not zero. Even with certification the risk is not zero, but lower than not certified because the complete finished formulation has been through a variety of controlled and severe engine tests. Certification limits negative surprises, but also positive ones, so each individual needs to determine their personal balance.
I have altered formulations for my car and used oils altered by others because in those circumstances I knew enough about the changes to accept the risk. Without that knowledge I would have had to reassess my risk tolerance.
The presence of a certification doesn't give you recourse it's the claim on the bottle which gives you recourse. The consumer isn't expected to validate the claims. A couple of months ago someone got in a tizzy because a M1 PDS stated that the product met SP but it didn't appear on the API website. M1 pulling a fast one on consumers was the suggestion. A ridiculous claim.
We do have UOA's and VOA's.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, I assume that the base oil blends that Infineum lists compatibility for with a given additive package, while reasonably flexible, aren't anything approaching all encompassing. I'd assume perhaps Yubase, Mobil's EHC, perhaps Pearl GTL...etc. The wild card there is bio-based bases, which I found quite interesting, and wasn't expecting.
Now, if you've got the guy who developed tri-syn for example, I think one would expect he's got a reasonable handle on how a specific additive package might work with that concert of bases I mentioned, as that was Mobil's main formulation approach for many years.
If we look at an XOM blending guide example, Infineum P5069 (which I'm sure is long obsolete now, given the age of this example, but there's likely a replacement), is used with SpectraSyn PAO and Synesstic AN:
Would be interesting to see the base oils that additive package is compatible with.
Last edited:
The certifications absolutely do give you recourse. Many happen to be required to be on the bottle like API as well...
... but in the case of actual mamufarer certifications each oil formulation is issued a certificate number and whether on the bottle or not that formulation must meet the certificate issued.
Examples...
https://www.gmdexos.com/brands/dexos2/index.html
And...
My point is that when it comes to consumer recourse it's irrelevant as to whether there's a formal cert. It's what's on the label that matters. That's why wording on labels is so important. It's why not every oil with an API label is in the API database.
And I was hoping to clarify to you that certifications absolutely are NOT irrelevant when it comes to recourse. One of the two reasons for certifications are oversight...recourse.
Heck, if there are no certifications at all then you're not putting certifications on the bottle are you? I'd hope not. There's also a big liability difference between putting a false claim on a bottle versus intentionally selling a product that doesnt meet its performance certifications.
of course. yet another different source of information that should be given a certain weight based on the information it provides vs omits, the source laboratory, etc.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Were you formerly NHHEMI?
The Synerlec oils were not approved, their street oils were, but remember, those were referred to as "purple Valvoline" lol
RP didn't have the owner come on here and extensively answer technical questions, a lot of them providing far more detail than required. Yes, that has a considerable impact on how a company is perceived.
Recourse between whom? I'm talking the consumer and the manufacture. Is proof of cert helpful? Of course, but it's not required for a consumer to obtain compensation. Also we're talking about certifications/approvals rather than marketing claims.
Calcium too. I saw a VOA on here a while ago for a euro diesel oil that was very non api approved. It had over 4,000ppm calcium.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
