So what was the final outcome of the GC testing???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
71
Location
Southern ILLINOIS
I didn't find this site until after the test was almost done. And even if I did I doubt that my wife would have let me donate to the testing. Over the last few months I've become a big GC fan and have purchased around 65 quarts, Green Only, little by little. I'm currently running it in two cars and would love to see the results of the testing! Was the test results only given to the members that contributed to the cause or am I missing something? Thanks
 
Messages
3,478
Location
Millbrae, CA
its a secret I did not get in either, for 10$ donation We could have just to late I do not think info gave a total picture since I guess the secret polymer was not identified. bruce
 
Messages
1,116
Location
Huntsville, AL
I recieved a copy and it was more info than I can understand, but basically the important stuff to me was- 1. PAO 2. Special esters derived from PAO. Molakule has talked about these in a few threads. 3. No viscoity index improvers. This is why it doesn't shear down.
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Messages
21,838
Location
Iowegia - USA
quote:
I do not think info gave a total picture since I guess the secret polymer was not identified.
We gave out a lot of information, all you have to do is go searching through this topical area. The ester was a polymer ester. We stated that in more than two threads and the final report sent to paying BITOG members. And I will state again for the third time that one of our internal rules was that we NOT name the formulator/blender nor the additive maker of the polymer ester. People wanted to know what was in it, we found out, and distributed the detailed information to donating persons. The information was interpreted by Terry and myself at no cost to BITOG members. The report was intended for private individuals and those oil enthusiasts interested in the basic composition of GC, not other oil companies.
 
Messages
3,478
Location
Millbrae, CA
"nor the additive maker of the polymer ester" I think this type of lab work is a lot of fun to do and just wondered did you exactly identify the MFG? I do not want/need any names just did you? bruce
 
Messages
3,478
Location
Millbrae, CA
quote:
Originally posted by Terry: Molakule is right on. I wanted to work again! I own my company. I respect intellectual property rights. Honestly the larger formulators still pay more than a group of guys here at BITOG. I do know that some will post/share proprietary comments in direct conflict with my request for non disclosure. Some here are employed by entities in the formulating business so deriving specifics would be very helpful to them. Realities of the oil analysis business.
I did not know I could not disclose MY proprietary information if I want to. Why not if I share only may hurt me but will educate others. bruce
 
Messages
3,845
Your comment shows me you are an employee and I doubt you are willing, or legally able to share your COMPANIES proprietary data. "FUN" is one thing but intellectual property is another and we constantly bang into those obstacles here at BITOG from those of us that are actively working in the industry. As a employee of a formulator I am surprised how lax you seem to be with that idea. You personally own proprietary data on Castrols German made syntec ? Please share it if you choose too. None here are stopping you. Your basic spectro tests to date have been no more revealing than what anyone here can pull from a $25 test from any lab. We have lots of VOA tests of the various formulations Castrol keeps spitting out. Where are you headed with this line of reasoning bruce381 ?
 
Hopefully, this is all a misunderstanding, guys. As an oil geek, I crave info wherever I can get it, but as a business owner, I understand the need to keep proprietary info secret. All I truly want to know is what works best... I don't need or want to hurt a business just to satisfy my curiosity, and I'm sure that most BITOGers agree with this. I want to thank all those who work for the companies we buy our products from, who do their best to answer our questions, yet protect their employers. I think most of us here very much respect that. Just my $.02. [Smile]
 
Messages
3,845
Good point Dave, the fact is bruce381 keeps pumping for info and I just want it clarified as to why and what his goals are , aside from the "fun" factor. In my business transactions I provide as much of that proprietary knowledge and background in EVERY interpretation WITHOUT disclosing proprietary data. I can steer folks here and there without hurting any person or entity. I am very careful and sensitive to that or I don't get the next job. Maybe internet boards just are too loosy goosy for that kind of interaction.
 

vad

Messages
1,856
Location
So Cal
quote:
Originally posted by MolaKule: And I will state again for the third time that one of our internal rules was that we NOT name the formulator/blender nor the additive maker of the polymer ester.
Please excuse me ignorance, but neither of you guys work for Castrol. I do understand undisclosure agreements between the companies and their employees. But how about the "private citizens"? Or is it about potential lawsuits? On what basis? Any company or person has a right to perform an in-depth analysis of any product. Patent and Trademark Office is designed to protect your intellectual property from unlawfull duplication. "Whoever invents of discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent thereof, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title." So unless Castrol holds a patent on their special blend there shouldn't be any repercussion.
quote:
I am very careful and sensitive to that or I don't get the next job.
OK
 
Messages
3,845
VAD, Excused. I work for MANY different competing entities and to keep my kids in college I had better continue to. Castrol or its supplying subsidiaries could be included in that list with me as an independent analyst. I ran the test using my business name and disclosed to the BITOG paying customer as much as I could or was useful. On the test results paper it specifically requests that the results be kept with the reader. In this case a lube formulator would or could use the knowledge gained from additional disclosure to develop their own products from testing they did not pay for. I was asked to discern the basic base oils in this product, I did that and actually gave more because it was so unique. Thus my concern about the comments made here.
 
Messages
5,336
Location
London, AR
The GC oil make-up has been discussed in so many topics I can not count them. Just do a search and you will get enough reading for a month. Now for the discussion on the disclosure. In reality, part of the protection or lack of disclosure in public, is in reality to protect BITOG and its owner. You can bring up all the legal stuff you want about how they (Castrol/BP) can't do that and how I am protected. And you are probably correct, but I would be totally penniless trying to defend myself and the Board. A fact that is not known public is that I have been threatened by a lawsuit on another occasion by a member. I had to seek legal consul. Thanks goodness for one of our members, that is a lawyer, and he gave me advice on how to proceed. So in the spirit of moving on, this is a dead issue on the Board. Thanks for your understanding.
 
Messages
3,845
Molakule is right on. I wanted to work again! I own my company. I respect intellectual property rights. Honestly the larger formulators still pay more than a group of guys here at BITOG. I do know that some will post/share proprietary comments in direct conflict with my request for non disclosure. Some here are employed by entities in the formulating business so deriving specifics would be very helpful to them. Realities of the oil analysis business.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top