Wal-Mart fined for off-grade SuperTech Gear Oil

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
You stand out like a bottle of Pennzoil in a case of Mobil 1.


Is that an insult or an accusation?



.

 

[Brian Barnhart]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
So, if ExxonMobil has taken steps to confirm its product meets the API's requirements, but nobody on here believes the API anymore anyways, then this will be an infinite battle of futility because it simply becomes "he said she said"..........

Originally, it was "see what the API says", but now that no longer matters it seems....

The problem is, the API has not confirmed anything themselves. They simply accepted E-M’s confirmation that its product meets the API requirement; despite the fact that the API claims (in their reply to buster) that they do not merely accept an oil marketer’s word. It appears that the API is willing to accept the word of one oil marketer.

When I read between the lines on this, I see E-M correcting a problem they had. If that is true, I still have concerns about the duration of the problem and the timing of the correction.

 

[buster]

That is how I see it as well.

 

[Liquid_Turbo]

Why be in doubt when we have a plethora of great oils available to us and for us to be able to choose.

Just say NO to brand loyalty.. lol.

 

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: Brian Barnhart
The problem is, the API has not confirmed anything themselves. They simply accepted E-M’s confirmation that its product meets the API requirement; despite the fact that the API claims (in their reply to buster) that they do not merely accept an oil marketer’s word. It appears that the API is willing to accept the word of one oil marketer.


The short recap provided certainly could support the conclusion that ExxonMobil presented independent laboratory tests of random samples of the alleged defective formula to the API.

However, once one has concluded that ExxonMobil is in collusion with S-tan, no evidence will ever be sufficient to disspell the various conspiracy theories, anymore than the entire body of evidence from all sorts of experts have ever convinced some people that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman or that there are not aliens on ice in Roswell.

There's just no rational way to deal with irrationality.




.

 

[buster]

Quote:
The short recap provided certainly could support the conclusion that ExxonMobil presented independent laboratory tests of random samples of the alleged defective formula to the API.

However, once one has concluded that ExxonMobil is in collusion with S-tan, no evidence will ever be sufficient to disspell the various conspiracy theories, anymore than the entire body of evidence from all sorts of experts have ever convinced some people that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman or that there are not aliens on ice in Roswell.

There's just no rational way to deal with irrationality.


Maybe in time when XOM collects more data they will respond. They seem to have sent the API their own testing that shows M1 does pass the Seq IVA wear test. If the data they collect does show that M1 5w30 failed the testing, I would expect XOM to remain quiet on the issue.

 

[demarpaint]

I think the real simple solution to all if this is very simple. People who've lost confidence in Mobil 1 should switch brands until this is settled to "their" satisfaction. Those who believe Mobil 1 is still up to par, and "their" individual expectations of the product remain the same, should continue using it.

 

[buster]

There you go.

Maybe we should put this one to rest.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: buster
There you go.

Maybe we should put this one to rest.

No point in me stating again where I stand...... or........

.......

 

[FrankN4]

Originally Posted By: buster
My final opinion on this is that Ashland probably found that M1 5w30 was not meeting the Seq IVA wear test, for whatever reason. No one knows so at this point it comes down to who "you" trust. It could have been due to a variety of reasons...bad batch, cutting some corners, Katrina...whatever.

With that said, I'd be very confident at this point that Mobil 1 does pass the Seq IVA wear test due to the fact that the API has now received data from XOM confirming it does meet the specifications.

I still believe Ashland picked up on something and it's now been corrected.

I have no problem agreeing with this and I have been an exclusive Mobil 1 user for 19 years. I will say that Valvoline dare not even burp

for the next few months until this all dies down and we find something else to discuss in a rational, concise, intelligent manner. Either that or just jump in head first and slam it out.

 

[buster]

...ok one last point (sorry lol) I would make that was pointed out to me is that just bc the API tests 600 oils per year, does not mean they would have picked up on an oil not meeting a spec. They confirm the sample conforms with the approved formulation but they do not confirm that a formulation still passes the IVA engine test. It's up to XOM to prove to the API that M1 does meet this test. Whatever Ashland was finding over the last 2 years or so is anyone's guess.

 

[demarpaint]

It did make for some interesting and entertaining discussion. I wonder what the next hot topic will be??????????

 

[edwardh1]

Maybe its all as simple as wal mart pressuring warren to cheapen the product, and they did. And got caught. walmart does that with lots of suppliers

 

[Tom NJ]

Just to be clear folks, the maker of the off-spec gear oil was Warren Distribution, NOT Warren Oil.

Tom NJ

 

[INDYMAC]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Just to be clear folks, the maker of the off-spec gear oil was Warren Distribution, NOT Warren Oil.

Tom NJ


Thanks Tom. Are you privey to anymore information about what viscosity is in question, and how much they missed the mark by?

 

[PT1]

So I guess the Mobil1 5w30 doesn't meet minimum specs eh?

 

[Rolf]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Just to be clear folks, the maker of the off-spec gear oil was Warren Distribution, NOT Warren Oil.

Tom NJ


Don't confuse folks with actual facts.




.

 

[Tom NJ]

Originally Posted By: INDYMAC
Thanks Tom. Are you privey to anymore information about what viscosity is in question, and how much they missed the mark by?


No, those details were not made public.

Tom NJ

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: PT1
So I guess the Mobil1 5w30 doesn't meet minimum specs eh?

It probably does now!

 

[OVERKILL]

Quote:
Chris,

Though ExxonMobil and Imperial Oil have testing facilities to perform many
of the tests required for certification, we cannot certify the oil
in-house. Certification requires the oil be tested by an independent
laboratory, where all oil companies submit their candidate oils for
testing. We can however test our oils in-house prior to submission.