Here's a polite challenge to the Amsoil and Red Line reps on this board. Since there is such animosity towards the API donut and how it affects oil specs, do you have any automotive OEMs that sing the praises of your products?
Why is Red Line Oil not API certified?
- Thread starter troy_heagy
- Start date
- Status
True...so I guess not a single automotive OEM would support the use of these products? And that's a good thing?
They don't support the use of any specific brand. They require the use of an API certified oil.
It's neither good nor bad...it's just the current situation.
the API rating has its use. The purpose is to make sure that the consumer knows that a certain product is up to a minimum standard.
Throuh use and oil analysis, I know that Amsoil works just as well (actually better where extended intervals are concerned) as an API certified oil.
Not quite true. The manufacturer's that use Mobil 1 as the factory fill in certain cars (Dodge in the Viper, Mercedes in its AMG models, all Aston Martins, and all Porsches) do recommend that Mobil 1 be used. They "support" this recommendation by placing special decals under the hood and in the owner's manual.
Shell Helix Ultra is the only "approved" service fill for all Ferraris. As such, Shell imports it into the US specifically for Ferrari dealerships and shops that service Ferraris.
For the past few years, Castrol has been the sole supplier of lubricants to BMW. Part of the agreement stipulated that BMW would recommend the use of Castrol oil in the owner's manual, as well as put a Castrol sticker under the hood. For certain models, BMW does more than "recommend" Castrol; 10w60 Castrol is "required" in the M models.
I thought long and hard about this when I bought the Vette. But, on another board, I have watched others sing the praise of Mobil-1 (before SS) and yet complain about other lubrication related issues. I researched and selected Amsoil to use in my car, knowing it doesn't carry the API star. In the end, I think my motor will be better for my decision.
MolaKule
Staff member
From G-Man-II
Again, we have to realize that the API situation is a mimimum standard situation. Why is it there? So the uneducated public won't pick up a bottle of 40 weight "Accell" non-detergent oil, and put into their 5W20 "EPA'd" eengine.
In most court cases with which I have been associated (about 213 so far), the API symbol and starburst's subject only came up once, and wasn't even considered as a piece of "pivoting" evidence by either side.
[ May 27, 2003, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
So these manufacturers must really concern themselves with the API minimum standard "Donut."
Again, we have to realize that the API situation is a mimimum standard situation. Why is it there? So the uneducated public won't pick up a bottle of 40 weight "Accell" non-detergent oil, and put into their 5W20 "EPA'd" eengine.
In most court cases with which I have been associated (about 213 so far), the API symbol and starburst's subject only came up once, and wasn't even considered as a piece of "pivoting" evidence by either side.
[ May 27, 2003, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
Sounds as though the majority of people on this board do not give a lot of credibility to the API donut but do acknowledge the significance of the ACEA specs. I accept that.
Here are the ACEA specs mentioned above. It's kind of a loose system, with the following statement included in it:
"ACEA requires that any claims for Oil performance to meet these sequences must be based on credible data and
controlled tests in accredited test laboratories."
A bit tougher spec is the ACEA spec for light duty diesel engines which requires testing a la the API EOLCS system.
Amsoil claims it meets A3/B4. Would it ever claim and have the licensed symbol (as shown on page 9 of the light duty diesel attachment) on it?
- Status
