Ron:
This response demonstrates exactly what I'm talking about. Look at that list you created, alleged BITOG myths which you ascribe to a presumed hazy group of BITOG insiders as if "they" have all unconditionally bought into all of them. Let's break it down (the numbered, italicised statements are from your list):
1. UOA is essential. This is a generality that is far from "settled" amongst BITOG membership. UOA might be essential, depending upon one's oil use and OCI strategy. Then again, it may not be. If you're a dedicated 3/3 dino user, UOA is most certainly not "essential" by any fair meaning of the word, though it may be helpful for catching insidious slow-building problems (like a coolant leak). Again, anything but consensus on that here.
2. EOCI are great with synthetics. What do you mean by "great"? Longer OCIs may or may not be an effective strategy, depending upon the siutation. I went 13 months and 10k miles with GC on my wife's Sequoia and got great UOA results (and the engine looks clean inside, and so did the old oil when it came out, btw). Would I recommend this OCI for everyone? No way. Extended OCI may be "great" for some users in some circumstances (which for brevity I won't bog down with here). Again, the generality of your sweeping statement renders it largely meaningless, and it actually approaches misleading (though I'm not saying that's your design -- I hope).
3. Group IV's are great, and Group III is bad
High TBN's are great. What's "great"? What's "bad"? And what's "high" w/r/t TBN? This sweeper is further off in that much of the resistance to G-IIIs, and this is my own opinion (but tell me if you think I'm really wrong), arises from the infamous Castrol bait-and-switch shenanigans. Castrol's quiet switch to G-III infuriated many who felt cheated and deceived having thought they were getting one thing when they were suddenly getting another. I was among those people. I can now see that G-IIIs for the most part perform perfectly well and are a competitive group of oils. Still however, I don't fault some for wanting what they want. Again, I don't see any "BITOG insider" consensus on this issue. Many of the most senior and respected members are happy G-III users (Patman is using it, Terry Dyson has recommended that I try a certain G-III, and so forth).
4. The XXw number needs to be high if it does not snow This isn't a matter of interpretation -- I just don't see that "trend" or "consensus" at all.
5. Auto-RX is a legitimate product (and should be added to your oil before you drive off the new car lot). Well, that's two assertions, but both reflect overgeneralization of the sort that's your pattern. I'll give you the first -- I think a lot of members do think it's a legit product (and I am among them). But there's a lot more to it, for example, the product is sometimes misused and certainly misunderstood. Misuse and misunderstanding have led to some discussion of the efficacy of the product. Many "insiders", right or wrong, question the value of the product. As to the "new car showroom" thing, that's definitely a minority position. It gets voiced from time to time, but it's hardly "accepted doctrine."
6. VOA is meaningless - and clean oil is good Where did this come from -- at least the first part??? Many of us find VOAs to be interesting and useful. Again, I see no dominant consensus to this effect. Once again, maybe if you were not so sweepingly general, we might be able to discern something in your statement, but as it is, no.
7. Oil has magic properties that can't be measured with specifications. Come on now. Admittedly, this isn't one of your usual generalities, but it is still objectionable in context. This is a position most often seen from new members who have much to learn and a headfull of pre-conceived notions they don't want to let go of. This is anything but a dominant accepted idea within the BITOG inner circle.
Say now, have I been around long enough to apply for Inner Circle membership???
Oh yeah, for those of you wondering -- this is just a less fattening way to spend my lunch time. . .
