There really should be a law for labeling

[alarmguy]

I understand your point but do not agree. We have enough laws in this country and always a reason for more laws that are not needed.
The bottle is clearly and properly labeled. What we need in this country are more people to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.

Its REALLY easy for the consumer to buy the right oil, if they cant, they shouldnt be driving.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: SR5
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Jake777
what can they even sell it... stores shouldn't carry it if it doesn't meet current spec

I understand your point, but beware of unintended consequences. What would happen to uncertified high mileage oils from the majors? How about non-API Royal Purple or Amsoil? What about Red Line oils? Should Mobil and others yank their racing oil lines, too? After all, none of these carry current specifications.

There are two markets for uncertified oils: We have people that have the unique combination of being a cheapskate, pigheaded, and willfully ignorant and will do whatever they can to save a penny a quart. Then, we have people who have a legitimate need or desire for something uncertified, with different additive packages. Why should the latter group pay for the foolishness of the former?


Well said Garak..
I need less people telling me what to do, not more, and that's where it would end up. Penrite make some great, full synthetic, high zinc API SL oils. It's only SL because of it's high zinc content, in every other way it meets the requirement of a SN oil. Castrol make a high zinc 25W-50 heavy mineral SL racing oil too.

Freedom works both ways.



Thanks to the both of you, WAY to much over regulation in this country. Buying oil is really easy for the average person to do, if they cant, well, to bad they shouldnt own something they cant take care of, time for government to stop being baby sitters.

I use what I consider a HIGH quality non certified oil in my 2014 Harley. Mystik JT8 semi syn 15/50 CH4+ Ci etc CJ4. The company simply claims to meet that standard. It does not carry the API donut. IN fact, it is the only oil on the market that claims to meet the rating Harley recommends other then Amsoil, maybe Royal in that weight range. 15-20/50.
I have full faith in the Mystik its a Citgo product (same producers of Harley oil) and widely used in heavy industry and agriculture. I did a VOA and UOA on it, very happy with the way the bike runs/sounds as well and honestly feel its best for my bike.

Also other oils such as Harley and other specialty bike, atv, automotive oils are not certified.
Last thing we need is government certification programs to protect people from their own stupid mistakes at the cost of once again, freedom for the less stupid coming from laws written by stupid and corrupt public servants!

 

[Kira]

An empty cheap oil bottle is lying on a parking lot which looks as if transmission fluid was drained onto it and the OP gets all bent out of shape over the existence of cheap oil?

I don't see the ruckus?

Tell ya what I'd like to do-as an experiment of course.....Invert and drain all the empty oil bottles in the garbage cans around any parts store. I'd call the resulting catchings "multi-weight".

 

[fdcg27]

Let's say that I'm working poor and live in the hood, where stores of any kind are few and far between, even gas stations.
Let's say that I find that the old Taurus/Aerostar/Buick that I rely upon has its oil level below the add line on the dipstick.
Needless to say that I don't have a 300 qt stash of free or cheap oils ranging from API SL through API SN in any grade your little heart might desire.
I can buy what may be a current spec oil for six bucks at a gas station or I can buy some DG for $1.79/qt.
Is API SF really that bad?
Probably not, since millions of engines back in the day did just fine with it, some of which were my own.
Is it better to add a quart of an honestly labeled obsolete spec oil or to run the engine low on oil?
I think that the answer is obvious.
This oil would not be the best choice for an oil change, but certainly won't do any harm as a top-up oil.
It's also reasonably priced, something you don't often find in the hood.

 

[Justin251]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Let's say that I'm working poor and live in the hood, where stores of any kind are few and far between, even gas stations.
Let's say that I find that the old Taurus/Aerostar/Buick that I rely upon has its oil level below the add line on the dipstick.
Needless to say that I don't have a 300 qt stash of free or cheap oils ranging from API SL through API SN in any grade your little heart might desire.
I can buy what may be a current spec oil for six bucks at a gas station or I can buy some DG for $1.79/qt.
Is API SF really that bad?
Probably not, since millions of engines back in the day did just fine with it, some of which were my own.
Is it better to add a quart of an honestly labeled obsolete spec oil or to run the engine low on oil?
I think that the answer is obvious.
This oil would not be the best choice for an oil change, but certainly won't do any harm as a top-up oil.
It's also reasonably priced, something you don't often find in the hood.


ST literally costs $1 more and is current spec.

My issue is with the label and it's placement right next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils while not meeting those current specs?

Problems with laws that help the consumer? Do you have issues with housing codes that keep the consumer or at least help prohibit you from purchasing a house with bad electrical wiring or fake plumbing?

I'm not saying that the oils shouldn't exist. I'm saying thier placement next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils price wise is wrong. They are targeting those who don't know any better.

Also, the api SF rating is listed in paragraph form on the back.

There should be a label on the front saying "not for vehicles after 1988".

I don't care that it exists. I know there are purposes for older spec oils. But the purpose of this is to prey on those who don't know any better while lining the pockets of someone else.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
I use what I consider a HIGH quality non certified oil in my 2014 Harley. Mystik JT8 semi syn 15/50 CH4+ Ci etc CJ4. The company simply claims to meet that standard. It does not carry the API donut.

We get some Mystik up here, in the motorcycle sections, too. I have no problem giving companies grief if their oil fails to meet specifications, particularly in a fraudulent manner. But, there are valid reasons to do things differently, and none of this is an excuse for not reading labels. If a label has an intent to mislead or is false advertising, there already are rules in place to deal with that.

Justin251: I would agree that product placement on the shelf is important. However, our Walmarts put "weird" stuff off to the side. The out of spec type stuff and ND oils are off to the side, not intermixed with PYB and Mobil Super, for example. You have your PCMOs on the right, and then you drift to the left to HDEOs and ATFs, and to motorcycle stuff, and down further to the real oddballs.

Additionally, every owner's manual says what to look for on bottle labels, with respect to API markings. There's no Starburst on the front, at least that I can see, or Donut on the back, since this service category is obsolete, so it's clearly not an API certified oil. It says what it's good for, and that might even be optimistic.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
I understand your point but do not agree. We have enough laws in this country and always a reason for more laws that are not needed.
The bottle is clearly and properly labeled. What we need in this country are more people to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.

Its REALLY easy for the consumer to buy the right oil, if they cant, they shouldnt be driving.



100% agree

 

[fdcg27]

So ST conventional is only $2.79/qt?
That's nice, but you won't find too many Walmarts in most hoods.
I suspect that the average buyer who uses DG oil for top-offs is well aware that he isn't getting a bee's knees oil out of the deal. He's just trying to take reasonable care of his daily driver beater until he can afford to do a proper oil change.
Yeah, an API SL/SM/SN would be a better choice, but any oil is always better than no oil.
The working poor are often very astute shoppers, well aware of the value of what they're buying.
They aren't typically ignorant and oblivious.
They literally can't afford to be.
Not sure what any of this has to do with plumbing or electrical codes, though.

 

[Snoman002]

Originally Posted By: Justin251
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Let's say that I'm working poor and live in the hood, where stores of any kind are few and far between, even gas stations.
Let's say that I find that the old Taurus/Aerostar/Buick that I rely upon has its oil level below the add line on the dipstick.
Needless to say that I don't have a 300 qt stash of free or cheap oils ranging from API SL through API SN in any grade your little heart might desire.
I can buy what may be a current spec oil for six bucks at a gas station or I can buy some DG for $1.79/qt.
Is API SF really that bad?
Probably not, since millions of engines back in the day did just fine with it, some of which were my own.
Is it better to add a quart of an honestly labeled obsolete spec oil or to run the engine low on oil?
I think that the answer is obvious.
This oil would not be the best choice for an oil change, but certainly won't do any harm as a top-up oil.
It's also reasonably priced, something you don't often find in the hood.


ST literally costs $1 more and is current spec.

My issue is with the label and it's placement right next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils while not meeting those current specs?

Problems with laws that help the consumer? Do you have issues with housing codes that keep the consumer or at least help prohibit you from purchasing a house with bad electrical wiring or fake plumbing?

I'm not saying that the oils shouldn't exist. I'm saying thier placement next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils price wise is wrong. They are targeting those who don't know any better.

Also, the api SF rating is listed in paragraph form on the back.

There should be a label on the front saying "not for vehicles after 1988".

I don't care that it exists. I know there are purposes for older spec oils. But the purpose of this is to prey on those who don't know any better while lining the pockets of someone else.


I disagree with your comment about laws that help consumers. Electrical code and oil ratings are two wildly different things. One requires a certification, schooling, and the end result of their work is hidden to the purchaser. The other requires reading two pages in a small book and the end result is readily visible to the consumer. Making laws to protect those who choose to be ignorant is more likely to negatively effect others than to protect the ignorant.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: wemay
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
I understand your point but do not agree. We have enough laws in this country and always a reason for more laws that are not needed.
The bottle is clearly and properly labeled. What we need in this country are more people to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.

Its REALLY easy for the consumer to buy the right oil, if they cant, they shouldnt be driving.



100% agree


When have you ever seen a thread on this site where there was any consensus about the "right" oil for any application?
Whenever any credulous new member comes along and starts a thread asking what would be the best oil for his application, you'll see recommendations here for everything from the cheapest API SN conventional all the way through Red Line, with oil filters ranging from jobber quality to Ultra.
Grade recommendations will range from 0W-20 through 5W-40, with maybe even 20W-50 if certain folks get into the thread.
If we who actually take some interest in oil have no consensus as to what the "right" oil might be, why would we expect DG shoppers to have any better knowledge?

 

[Justin251]

Originally Posted By: Snoman002
Originally Posted By: Justin251
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Let's say that I'm working poor and live in the hood, where stores of any kind are few and far between, even gas stations.
Let's say that I find that the old Taurus/Aerostar/Buick that I rely upon has its oil level below the add line on the dipstick.
Needless to say that I don't have a 300 qt stash of free or cheap oils ranging from API SL through API SN in any grade your little heart might desire.
I can buy what may be a current spec oil for six bucks at a gas station or I can buy some DG for $1.79/qt.
Is API SF really that bad?
Probably not, since millions of engines back in the day did just fine with it, some of which were my own.
Is it better to add a quart of an honestly labeled obsolete spec oil or to run the engine low on oil?
I think that the answer is obvious.
This oil would not be the best choice for an oil change, but certainly won't do any harm as a top-up oil.
It's also reasonably priced, something you don't often find in the hood.


ST literally costs $1 more and is current spec.

My issue is with the label and it's placement right next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils while not meeting those current specs?

Problems with laws that help the consumer? Do you have issues with housing codes that keep the consumer or at least help prohibit you from purchasing a house with bad electrical wiring or fake plumbing?

I'm not saying that the oils shouldn't exist. I'm saying thier placement next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils price wise is wrong. They are targeting those who don't know any better.

Also, the api SF rating is listed in paragraph form on the back.

There should be a label on the front saying "not for vehicles after 1988".

I don't care that it exists. I know there are purposes for older spec oils. But the purpose of this is to prey on those who don't know any better while lining the pockets of someone else.


I disagree with your comment about laws that help consumers. Electrical code and oil ratings are two wildly different things. One requires a certification, schooling, and the end result of their work is hidden to the purchaser. The other requires reading two pages in a small book and the end result is readily visible to the consumer. Making laws to protect those who choose to be ignorant is more likely to negatively effect others than to protect the ignorant.


My point is ethical.

They know it's a wildly outdated spec. But they place on the shelf righr next to current spec for the intention of competing price wise.

If it was in the lawn and garden section and labeled as such then no big deal. You put it in your car that's your fault. But when the SF 10w30 is right next to a SN 10w30 on the same shelf then it's intended purpose is to sell to those cheap and ignorant.

Last I knew being ignorant of something isn't a good reason to condemn someone.

I don't see how it's so wildly different from housing codes. I'm ignorant of those and I'm sure glad they are there.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Justin251
My issue is with the label and it's placement right next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils while not meeting those current specs?

Do the people arranging the shelves, let alone those stocking them, have the foggiest idea, either?

 

[Justin251]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Justin251
My issue is with the label and it's placement right next to current spec oils with the intention of competing with current spec oils while not meeting those current specs?

Do the people arranging the shelves, let alone those stocking them, have the foggiest idea, either?


Probably not. But if they are anything like other retailers they get a picture/diagram of how to arrange the shelves and what product goes where.

This is from corporate.

 

[Red91]

Take a chill pill. Seriously, even most well educated, well to do people haven't the slightest idea what the API is or what it does. Where I live, there are at least ten DG's in a ten mile radius, yet one Wal-Mart, and it's not located in a rural or particularly poor part of town. DG's SF rated 10W-30 and 10W-40, and SA rated ND 30 are clearly labeled as such and clearly state what they are and aren't intended for. So there isn't a dark shroud of corporate misinformation like you say. That, and most people at least know what year their car is, and if they choose to use this product in their 2010 Camry, it's their choice ultimately. Stop assuming the poor are stupid. That's a rampant misjudgment on this board.

 

[Justin251]

lol ok.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Justin251
Probably not. But if they are anything like other retailers they get a picture/diagram of how to arrange the shelves and what product goes where.

This is from corporate.

That's generally true, but they'll even have less of an understanding of the issue.

Such a product could actually be positioned to compete with something like VR1, should the company choose to do so. In reality, though, I wouldn't be that confident. It can't or won't compete with an appropriate, SN/GF-5 motor oil, or a non-certified HM, or a non-certified niche lube.