Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
such baloney. It's ADVERTISING! Everyone plays with the numbers.
I don't get it why Amsoil is such a target. We've all heard equally questionable claims from other manufacturers.
Why the 'grudge match' against the big A?
Maybe it's advertizing all right, but they made it appear like a study while clearly it's not. A lot of not so sophisticated readers will fall for this "scientific" study. This is the same misleading advertizing they do with the 4 ball scar test and similar.
I actually think Amsoil is a good product, but they employ some really sleazy marketing. I sure hate being lied to.
Amsoil user here and i agree with you. Some of their marketing techniques are strange
In the end, it's just oil. It can only do but so much.
Regarding this report. I've already stated that the standard test itself is seriously flawed. Too many variations to throw off the results.
The same truck should have been used and strapped to a dyno / ran for x amount of time. Then had the fluids changed and re-ran without any human errors / climate change.
^In my heart, i still believe that with that test, the lower viscosity synthetic would clearly show better performance (it's kinda obvious without even doing the test and lower viscosity oils will help reduce drag and increase MPG)
OF course that sort of testing is expensive and i see why Amsoil choose to do a simple backyard test and call it a day.