Unexpected- Amsoil response ?

Not open for further replies.
Nov 16, 2002

We are in the process of testing various oils for new comparison charts, which will be released soon. As far as the chemistry question, our formulations are proprietary, but I can say that we don’t use things such as Moly, Graphite, Teflon etc. We actually use a fairly basic additive package. Since additives are the weak link in any motor oil we prefer to rely mostly on our high quality PAO basestock.

Thank you,

Jim Van

AMSOIL Technical Services

This goes against everything that has been said in terms additive package being the most important. I also bet Amsoil reformulates soon. I was asking him about the additive package of S2000.

[ August 22, 2003, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

This has been posed before, but wonder if when they talk about moly, graphite, teflon, they are referring to suspended solids as opposed to "liquid formulations" (like Schaeffers does with moly)? Would surely like to know how their base oils, no matter how good they are, carry part of the load of the additive package. I think I can understand the basic "weak link" statement but when someone says something like that, it would be nice if they would go a little deeper.
My idea of Amsoil has always been that they use high quality base oils and very robust additive packages. If you look at Amsoil, they always used higher levels of zinc and phosphorus, hence the lack of full API compliance, but they don't use Moly or Boron which has become a good thing to have from what I've seen. I know they use a different approach which works well, I'm just surprised that he said that additive packages are basic in their oils. I was not suspecting that. *I personally don't think this guy is right.

[ August 22, 2003, 10:01 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
This creates an interesting dichotomy. On one hand, many of our crowd says the oil companies figure the average Joe and JoAnne are clueless as to motor oil, responding only to advertising hype, but on the other hand, the oil companies keep their fomulations so hush hush as if the crowd would rush to their competitors if they stole the magic formulation...doesn't square up in my mind.

[ August 22, 2003, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: pscholte ]
I would think with some decent analysis equipment, any oils composition could be determined. I dont think its rocket science anymore. I beleive Amsoil gets most of their basestocks from Mobil, and most of their additive packages from Lubrizol.The real science and improvements in oil technolgies come from companies like this, not Amsoil.
It's not rocket science, but I don't understand why this guy wouls say something like that, unless I'm reading into it too much. Amsoil's webpage states that they use strong additive packages. When looking at UOA's though of Amsoil, you usually don't see anything out of the ordinary in terms of chemistry such as high moly levels (Redline) or Boron etc. He aslo put alot of emphasis on the base oil, as Mobil does, which goes against the base oil being the minor role idea and additive package being the most important.
Can the Amsoil reps give there thoughts on this?
The Amsoil dealers don't really have much inside information. Even the stuff I hear from other dealers is about 50/50.

I can tell you, Amsoil is constantly testing various oil. (so not a lie)

They always come out with some new charts (not a lie)

Indeed no solids and no sign of going to dissolved moly. Maybe they will up the B. (again not a lie)

As analysis have shown, no smoke and mirrors in the additive pakage and the majority basestock is PAO (not a lie)

But, what was the question?
Thanks Pablo. My question was I thought that Amsoil used stronger additive package and relied less on the base stock. It really doesn't matter as Amsoil puts up great numbers. I was just surprised at that approach and thought they were bigger on additive packages then the base oil's performance.
Interesting how Amsoil's website states heavily how there additive packages are robust, yet this guy states otherwise....or am I interpreting it wrong?
Why can't robust be basic? Given that the characterisitcs of a high quality base oil probably don't need much assistance to make them last.
Not open for further replies.