Rotella Hysteria

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Unfortunately, (or maybe fortunately if you've had some of the experiences I've had with dealer service departments & warranty diesel work), Mercedes has taken the Sprinters back from Chrysler, therefore M-B is the point man for the Sprinter now. I can testify that the corporate Valvoline Instant Oil Change that changes my co.'s 6.0 Ford diesel's oil uses Premium Blue Extreme on several newer 3.0 diesel Sprinters w/DPF-I told him about the Synpower MST oil, but I don't think he can get it. I'm going to ask the 2 guys I work with that have them to see what the Dodge dealer is using in the Sprinters. Most Dodge dealers I've had my Cummins(es) at knew less about diesels than I did, if they worked on them at all. For instance, my buddy up in NW Ohio (Wapakoneta) had his '09 Sprinter at the dealer for 3 weeks before they figured out it was a fuel problem, not an engine/injector problem.


No sir this is straight from the OWNERS manual -- which at the time was Daimler Chrysler

The fact is that we have strayed way off topic -- back on topic for the OP sake.

Rottella oil is average at best and Shell is hiding what it is made off to prevent folks from seeing it
 
Originally Posted By: badnews

Wrong I use it in my Toyota Tacoma.
But I realize it is what it is .. a good mundane cheap priced oil .


Well if it is so mundane, average at best, and hiding everything, I suggest you remove it from your Toyota ASAP. Must be an Ohio thing because in the rest of the country it is a very good oil. Above average, one of the best.

Ask Schaeffer's where they get their mundane base stocks from and some of their mundane additives.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Must be an Ohio thing because in the rest of the country it is a very good oil. Above average, one of the best.


But Johnny, why settle for above average, ONE of the best?

According to Chevron, they are THE best. How can you argue with these "facts" (see last paragraph): http://www.whbreshears.com/account/2006/files/New Chevron Delo 400 LE.pdf

"As with past specification changes, Chevron technology sets the pace rather than follows.......Chevron’s products, people, processes, and overall customer value are second to none in our industry."
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: JAG
Said spec. says sulfated ash must be less x%, for some x that I can't recall off-hand. Schaeffer's product for #9000 SUPREME 9000 SAE 5W-40 data sheet says the sulfated ash (1.0%) of this oil is much greater than x%. You knew this not long ago.


For MB 229.51, x must be less than or equal to 0.8.
 
I've had issue with Schaeffer's since I purchased a case of their ATF awhile back. I expected the older licensed DEX III product based on their spec sheets, I was sent their 'modern' non licensed "ATF".

After digging, they have few products licenesed and many are very dated. Schaeffer has fallen into an almost Amsoil like mantra of the 'meets or exceeds' vs. approved.

I do see 9000 anywhere on the API list:
http://eolcs.api.org/DisplayLicenseInfo.asp?LicenseNo=0032

Did the ATF blow up my car, not at all, but I thought they were a better company interms of the 'meets' verbage which I HATE.
 
Originally Posted By: HondaMan
I've had issue with Schaeffer's since I purchased a case of their ATF awhile back. I expected the older licensed DEX III product based on their spec sheets, I was sent their 'modern' non licensed "ATF".

After digging, they have few products licenesed and many are very dated. Schaeffer has fallen into an almost Amsoil like mantra of the 'meets or exceeds' vs. approved.

I do see 9000 anywhere on the API list:
http://eolcs.api.org/DisplayLicenseInfo.asp?LicenseNo=0032

Did the ATF blow up my car, not at all, but I thought they were a better company interms of the 'meets' verbage which I HATE.


No such thing as Licensed Dex III. Sometimes you need to move away from preconceived prejudices to get quality products. Just because you "hate" something does not make it bad, wrong or inferior. Frankly Schaefer's and Amsoil are not lying.
 
As an after thought yesterday I did a flush and fill going from Chevron DEX III To Redline D4 atf that I had for the trans on my wifes Superduty manual trans . I can not tell any difference in shift performance etc . I always read about people changing the oil and noticeing a big difference the minute they drive off from the change. I wonder if the improvement is from the original oil being worn out?
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny

Well if it is so mundane, average at best, and hiding everything, I suggest you remove it from your Toyota ASAP. Must be an Ohio thing because in the rest of the country it is a very good oil.


Seems to be a fair amount of trollish/angry oil posting coming out of ohio these days (there is another ohioenerian(?) over in regular oil forum wagging his fingers about synthetics and used oil analysis). Sign of the apocalypse perhaps?
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny
Originally Posted By: badnews

Wrong I use it in my Toyota Tacoma.
But I realize it is what it is .. a good mundane cheap priced oil .


Well if it is so mundane, average at best, and hiding everything, I suggest you remove it from your Toyota ASAP. Must be an Ohio thing because in the rest of the country it is a very good oil. Above average, one of the best.

Ask Schaeffer's where they get their mundane base stocks from and some of their mundane additives.


Let me ask you this Johnny

why has Shell gone all over the web and removed all content as to what is in their oil ?
WEB PAGES all over no longer working because Shell has pulled them - what are they hiding ?

Don't give me that old line others do it ...
I am talking about Shell an industry leader why are they doing it ?


I understand you are retired and may not know and I am not jumping on you I enjoy your posts I really am just asking you this to bring it up.
 
My educated guess would be they have pulled the old information for now because they are updating everything. I know the product data sheets are down right now for the Pennzoil line for this reason. I figure everything should be up and running by October 1. But even then you will not get full exposure as to everything that is in the oil.

I might suggest that if you think Shell is up to something underhanded, that you email them directly and ask them. I guarantee you will get an answer.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: JAG
Said spec. says sulfated ash must be less x%, for some x that I can't recall off-hand. Schaeffer's product for #9000 SUPREME 9000 SAE 5W-40 data sheet says the sulfated ash (1.0%) of this oil is much greater than x%. You knew this not long ago.


For MB 229.51, x must be less than or equal to 0.8.


not more than 1.0
In fact Valvoline that makes a MB approved oil 5W40 syn power admits it oil will read between .77 to . 89 SA JFYI

MB specs are based totally on
ACEA A3 - B4- and C3
if an oil meets those specs it is ok to use in MBenz diesel engines even if it isn't on their approved oil list and oil does not have to be on their approved oil list it just needs to be able to meets the ACEA specifications
 
Originally Posted By: badnews
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: JAG
Said spec. says sulfated ash must be less x%, for some x that I can't recall off-hand. Schaeffer's product for #9000 SUPREME 9000 SAE 5W-40 data sheet says the sulfated ash (1.0%) of this oil is much greater than x%. You knew this not long ago.


For MB 229.51, x must be less than or equal to 0.8.


not more than 1.0
In fact Valvoline that makes a MB approved oil 5W40 syn power admits it oil will read between .77 to . 89 SA JFYI

MB specs are based totally on
ACEA A3 - B4- and C3
if an oil meets those specs it is ok to use in MBenz diesel engines even if it isn't on their approved oil list and oil does not have to be on their approved oil list it just needs to be able to meets the ACEA specifications


ACEA C3. http://www.lubrizol.com/EuropeanEngineOils/C308.html

Less than or equal to 0.8% SA.
 
Which is considered to be a mid saps oil
to argue about .2 percent saps is IMO anal and a waste of time. Especially in the USA

are you aware that MBenz states that in any country other than the USA or Europe MB spec 229.1 or 229.3 mineral, semi synthetic,or full synthetic can be used .... no doubt because of the law suit filed against them in the USA .( this is prior to 2007 )

Especially since manufacturing variances will result is differences that are in the range of what the above mentions.

The whole 229.51 MB spec is about oil change interval not saps alone
229.51 spec was 20,000 KM
229.31 spec was 15,000 KM and ok for DPF
228.51 was just called a long life oil and OK for DPF
228.31 was approved for MBenz engines OM611 and OM441LA and ok for DPF
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: badnews
to argue about .2 percent saps is IMO anal and a waste of time. Especially in the USA

Then stop arguing about it. You're not going to convince anyone that your opinion is worth more than those of the ACEA and Mercedes.
 
I just love it when some oil company says that they "exceed". I doubt very much that they sent the oil to the car maker to run the tests, and got a letter saying "Your oil is too good, we can't give it our approval."

I can claim to run a three minute mile. With my cane. So long as I don't submit to testing that claim, it stands up.
 
Ostensibly, what that statement means is that the oil company acquired the specs, tested their oil against them, and found that it passed with flying colors. I see no reason to believe that they are necessarily lying -- and even if they were, that wouldn't necessarily imply that the oil would be unsuitable for the application in question per se.

One thing of which you can be sure is that the OEMs will not go out of their way to disprove the claims because they have nothing to gain by doing so.

Assuming your car is out of warranty, it's simply a matter of whose word you want to take and what level of uncertainty you will tolerate. If you're willing to take the word of Schaeffer/Amsoil/Red Line, more power to you. It's just that an actual approval carries more weight since it is backed by the OEM and/or some standards agency (e.g. ACEA, API, etc.) as well as the oil company.
 
True, the OEM won't do that. Nothing to gain. Or any reason to do it.

Nothing against Redline/Amsoil/Schaeffer etc (Sinlube excepted). I'd rather use oil that has an actual approval rather than claims one. Doesn't make them bad, I just like a sure thing.

But there are a headache inducing array of quality oils to choose from. And that's a good thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wwillson
How complacency lead to overcharged .223 cartridges
2
Replies
30
Views
610
wwillson
9
AMSOIL Signature Series 10w30, 6.8k mi; 2008 Chrysler 3.5L 123.9k mi - used oil analysis
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
4wd
R
2025 -- (up to 4/30/2025) YTD Totals: "Post your latest oil change"
Replies
9
Views
5K
SubieRubyRoo
T
Help with recommendation for motor oil for Toyota and Nissan daily drivers
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
9K
GenSan
SammyChevelleTypeS3
Anyone explain this thinking please? Some saying "no to VIIs" when others recommend VIIs.
2
Replies
23
Views
6K
Jeep J
Back
Top Bottom