Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
A serious question to think about( for the open minded anyway )...
Why is it that BITOG members on the whole are willing to accept answers/info from oil companies OTHER than RP on their products( like when Pennzoil did the Q&A here )but when RP tech answers a question via e-mail or makes the info available in some way to the public it is not to be believed? More than one person has e-mailed RP tech with the base stock question and received the same exact answer = most of their oils are primarily PAO. It is never believed though. RP isn't even given credit for actually answering the question which most won't do.
I also hear people complain all the time on this site that oil companies won't reveal info on their product, like base stock type, because it is proprietary. They get mad because they won't give the info they asked for( in e-mails and they usually post what they sent and the response ).
So my question is, if we are willing to write to say Mobil 1 or Pennzoil and ask questions one would assume that implies a willingness to accept that answer as truthful correct? It says that even more to me when the people get mad if no answer is given. If you were predisposed NOT to believe the answer you wouldn't be upset you didn't get one right? If you didn't expect to get a truthful answer why would you even write and ask to begin with?
So if the BITOG masses are willing to believe what Pennzoil said in the Q&A held here a while back( and count me in as believing ), or what Mobil 1/Castrol/Amsoil/whatever brand you wish to use, says in an e-mail response to a member who posts the info here, why does no one believe what RP says in their e-mail responses? I don't get it other than it is a clear indicator of how negative people are about that company and it's products.
You asked some good questions and raised some good points I would like to comment on. (As long as we understand these are my comments and in no way representative of this board, its members, my own clients and vendors or anything else) Possibly some people here may find it beneficial so here goes.
Preamble
First let me establish a baseline for my commentary. I am a Professional Engineer and by extension a scientist. (On the forensic side where it matters) Because of reputation, client base, involvement in litigations and all that “stuff”, I don’t have the luxury of voicing my “opinion” because it can come back to haunt me in a number of ways and when I “officially” state something (signature and stamp affixed) both legal and criminal liability attaches.( not to mention financially with my bond) That’s just the nature of this business and all my peers know it going in. I try to maintain that same objectivity in posts in the few technical blogs I talk on. That said, I think (and try) my best to call things straight down the middle with no bias and maintain an open-mindedness to re-evaluate my position with the influx of any new data.
Obviously the people here will form their own opinions (and probably not hesitate to let me know or call me out when I cross the line- I call that a good corrective interview) on how well I adhere to that standard.
RP the company- The reality is that RP has engaged in conducts and claims that some would consider unethical and deliberately deceptive. When a company does this, it leaves a bad taste in people’s memories and it takes a long time for them to go away. It also colors opinions and sets a standard of distrust from that point forward. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, I have personally witnessed this and had to deal with it. That’s not a product testament obviously but in that realm the product is not on trial- the company is. I also made the distinct point to differentiate and separate the company from the product proper.
That raises the next argument- “everybody does this”. That’s equally true but cannot be used to excuse conduct. The sword of truth cuts both ways and makes no distinction. Those who trash RP (the product) because of this are as guilty of unjustified prejudice as RP is guilty of the actions of some of its agents.
The fact remains that we as humans cannot fully separate our emotions, biases, prejudice, preference and agenda from our rational thinking process. I have learned to deal with it because I cannot always control it within my own mind so I cannot expect anyone else to either.
Now that the philosophy is over, let’s go to cold hard science where the facts speak for themselves and everything is on equal footing and let me tell you my personal and professional standards. (Using oil as the subject) This should also explain why I don’t endorse or condemn any specific product.
Motivation
Before I go further, every human has a motivation that colors their commentary and action. Let me give you mine so that it’s out in the open for all to see (and judge). I am in the asset management and reliability business. My motivation is making money by saving my clients money over the long term and issue resolution. Since I sell a service that is very measurable, I have no option but to lay my cards on the table and produce results or I don’t get paid. I don’t have the luxury of being wrong and cannot afford to guess. I don’t always succeed but at least they are high level failures or cases where the data to drive the corrective action is not conclusive so I have to guess. It’s a nature of the beast type thing. By virtue of that, it is in my best interest to promote the “best” in whatever category to our clients but it ain’t that easy.
Commentary
Any oil (insert other product here) that claims to be the “best” or whatever is automatically viewed by me as a rain making claim. Here’s why: (focused on engine oil but the concept is the same regardless)
If a product wants to wear that title (with me promoting it) then it better be prepared to get in the Octagon in a death match and win. This is what motor oil would have to do and meet.
1) The test would have to be totally transparent with 3rd party oversight (nobody has any secrets and everything is in plain sight)
2) The test engines and their stands would have to be identical right down to the machining tolerances, subjected by computer control to exactly the same parameters in real time.
3) Test oils would have to be tested and certified prior to usage and matched for the same class.
4) ALL parameters of the engine would have to be measured. (Accelerometers, thermal signatures, fuel consumption, coolant condition, aspiration, DC motors (no slip, no argument, no excuses just raw flat wave power acting against those zero potential waves in an IC engine) used to induce torque with a dyno attached) This would occur through all ranges and trended. All data would be cross examined and correlated against the parameters. I don’t mean just a single data point- I mean the full spectrum.
5) The engines would be disassembled after each phase to measure critical wear and stress points and trended. This would be reportable just as much as the oil condition.
6) The engines would be run from idle, full load all the way to destruction
7) The service oils would be tested against OEM specs after the test to measure residuals
Every parameter would be measured and published just to be sure.
Those are the minimum requirements any oil would have to meet before I would even consider an endorsement (or critique). Even then the results would be posted by metric category (you may find one given product performs better in a certain area than others) then an aggregate ranking (best overall)
Yeah those are high standards but to quote the Nature Boy- “In order to be the man, you gotta beat the man and the TEST is the man” “WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO”
Summary
If anyone knows of a testing protocol as described above, I would love to see a link to it so I can know what the best oil really is. If not then all product specific arguments based on anecdotal unqualified data and opinions are meaningless and worthless. In the absence of verifiable falsifiable data the only remaining argument is “less filling or tastes great”. That’s why I don’t argue.
If you are happy with RP then use it, if you prefer something else- use it instead. All products are equal until proven otherwise. Word to the wise- don’t bash any product or compare unless that product is prepared to face the same scrutiny with the same yardstick.
Lastly, if anyone would like to commission such a test conducted with 100% transparency and the results published globally, send me a PO and I will invite them all in writing and certified. I personally would like to see who showed up (and more importantly, who didn’t…. and why)
