wemay
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
"Recommended" is Good enough..."
This is a matter of opinion.
"Recommended" is Good enough..."
This is a matter of opinion.
Amsoil 10w-30
- Thread starter toyota62
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
To you, no one suggested such, did they? No!
However kschachn made a statement otherwise- none-zero.
Correct, Amsoil Signature (which is what you originally posted about) has zero certifications.
True they don't have certifications, and are criticised for it.
Certainly they are not alone in the absence of certifications, there are lots of others as well and this fact is hidden in their marketing blurb but few pick up on it or criticise them as much as the evil heathen Amsoil.
"Recommended" and "Suitable for XYZ applications" is some of the wording that comes to mind.
Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
To you, no one suggested such, did they? No!
However kschachn made a statement otherwise- none-zero.
Correct, Amsoil Signature (which is what you originally posted about) has zero certifications.
True they don't have certifications, and are criticised for it.
Certainly they are not alone in the absence of certifications, there are lots of others as well and this fact is hidden in their marketing blurb but few pick up on it or criticise them as much as the evil heathen Amsoil.
"Recommended" and "Suitable for XYZ applications" is some of the wording that comes to mind.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
"Recommended" is Good enough, given all the garbage CERTIFIED OTC Major oils out there. Otherwise you are just a bunch of ninnies
Unelss your driving ultra high end, the service guyus don't care as long as there is decent oil in there.
Also ultra high end that's still under warranty.
"Recommended" is Good enough, given all the garbage CERTIFIED OTC Major oils out there. Otherwise you are just a bunch of ninnies
Also ultra high end that's still under warranty.
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
OK, thanks mate.
The biggest problem with those temperatures is getting me out of bed, not that it even gets close to that cold here.
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
OK, thanks mate.
The biggest problem with those temperatures is getting me out of bed, not that it even gets close to that cold here.
Originally Posted By: Ducman
Certainly they are not alone in the absence of certifications, there are lots of others as well and this fact is hidden in their marketing blurb but few pick up on it or criticise them as much as the evil heathen Amsoil.
"Recommended" and "Suitable for XYZ applications" is some of the wording that comes to mind.
Yep they are not alone, I was just reading about the local Nulon oils. They have a few "Approvals" but mostly a lot of "Claims". Not quite the same thing. Plus some of their ACEA specs claimed are the older ones, not the most recent. To their credit, they don't try to hide any of this, the wording and dates are obvious and clear for those who pay attention to such things.
Certainly they are not alone in the absence of certifications, there are lots of others as well and this fact is hidden in their marketing blurb but few pick up on it or criticise them as much as the evil heathen Amsoil.
"Recommended" and "Suitable for XYZ applications" is some of the wording that comes to mind.
Yep they are not alone, I was just reading about the local Nulon oils. They have a few "Approvals" but mostly a lot of "Claims". Not quite the same thing. Plus some of their ACEA specs claimed are the older ones, not the most recent. To their credit, they don't try to hide any of this, the wording and dates are obvious and clear for those who pay attention to such things.
Last edited:
SAme thing with Chief...they are honest about it 'though.
http://www.chief-oil.com/chicasaw-wrx.html
Quote:
Specifications level *
ACEA C3 & A3 / B4
API SL / SM / CF
VW 504.00 / 507.00
BMW LongLife ‘04
DaimlerChrysler 229.51
* Approval not requested
It IS possible to buy off the shelf additives that meet MB, VW, Porsche etc. by adding them to approved basestocks...then not claim the specs, pay for the licencing.
But given the small nature of the costs for a lot of those, I don't know why a volume producer wouldn't go the last step.
http://www.chief-oil.com/chicasaw-wrx.html
Quote:
Specifications level *
ACEA C3 & A3 / B4
API SL / SM / CF
VW 504.00 / 507.00
BMW LongLife ‘04
DaimlerChrysler 229.51
* Approval not requested
It IS possible to buy off the shelf additives that meet MB, VW, Porsche etc. by adding them to approved basestocks...then not claim the specs, pay for the licencing.
But given the small nature of the costs for a lot of those, I don't know why a volume producer wouldn't go the last step.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
I know that, that's why I was very specific about what I said. A 10w that just barely missed passing (aka just barely failed) the 5w specs. As opposed to an oil that passed 10w, but failed 5w by a large amount.
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
I know that, that's why I was very specific about what I said. A 10w that just barely missed passing (aka just barely failed) the 5w specs. As opposed to an oil that passed 10w, but failed 5w by a large amount.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
AMG, McL, Aston Martin ...
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
You're mixing up "laws" and requirements. API J300 requires that the oil be labeled for the lowest "W" rating it achieves.
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
You're mixing up "laws" and requirements. API J300 requires that the oil be labeled for the lowest "W" rating it achieves.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
You're mixing up "laws" and requirements. API J300 requires that the oil be labeled for the lowest "W" rating it achieves.
Yep, J300 allows only lubricants that have no viscosity modifiers to be listed either as a "straight weight", OR as a multigrade, OR as both...as per Amsoil.
However, IF the oil has Viscosity Index Improvers, it must be labelled to the lowest rating that it achieves.
I'm a bit interested in where Tired Trucker's "Federal Spec" document is, and lives, and would really like to see a PDF of same...
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
You're mixing up "laws" and requirements. API J300 requires that the oil be labeled for the lowest "W" rating it achieves.
Yep, J300 allows only lubricants that have no viscosity modifiers to be listed either as a "straight weight", OR as a multigrade, OR as both...as per Amsoil.
However, IF the oil has Viscosity Index Improvers, it must be labelled to the lowest rating that it achieves.
I'm a bit interested in where Tired Trucker's "Federal Spec" document is, and lives, and would really like to see a PDF of same...
I would think the synthetic 10W30 without VII would fail the cranking test for a 5w but can achieve the pumping test, as there's no VII to shear down during cranking but the pour points are usually still far away off so pumping shouldn't be an issue.
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
I once had to pass a Sequence VIB fuel economy test on a 10W30 oil for a program I was running. To give yourself the maximum chance of passing the test, it's normal to drop the oil's CCS way below the spec maximum. This in turn drops the KV40 which is what you need for fuel economy. What was noteworthy about this test was that one of my so-called colleagues on the other side of the pond spotted that I'd inadvertantly dropped the CCS into 5W30 territory. It wasn't by much, maybe a couple of hundred centipoise, but it was enough to prompt him to push this 'incident' up the management chain and demand that the lawyers were set on me!! Not a fun experience...
I'm not honestly sure what the 'legal' position is on these things (or indeed even if there is any legal position given that so much of J300 is self-certified) but my (bad) experience of these things is that you cannot market a 5W30 oil and label it a 10W30 and still retain your ILSAC and API approvals.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BobFout
That was before the SAE change to the cold weather performance criteria. For some years now, in terms of cranking, 15w is rated down to -20C / 0F, while 10w is rated down to -25C / -15F. Pumping is tested at 5C/10F lower temps for each.
A synthetic 10w might just miss passing the 5w specs too at -30C/-35C...
Point of clarificatio here. A multigrade must be labelled with the lowest "W" it can achieve.
So if what was intended as a 10W could actually pass 5W, then it would HAVE to be labelled a 5W.
You mean like Amsoil's straight 30w that meets a 10w30 spec but they still list it as a straight 30w? There is no requirement that a 10w30 oil be "labeled' a 5w30 if it meets the spec. It is only "required" by Federal law to meet the spec that it is labeled for. The law requires a product to meet the standard it claims. There is no law that says it cannot be better than what is claimed.
I once had to pass a Sequence VIB fuel economy test on a 10W30 oil for a program I was running. To give yourself the maximum chance of passing the test, it's normal to drop the oil's CCS way below the spec maximum. This in turn drops the KV40 which is what you need for fuel economy. What was noteworthy about this test was that one of my so-called colleagues on the other side of the pond spotted that I'd inadvertantly dropped the CCS into 5W30 territory. It wasn't by much, maybe a couple of hundred centipoise, but it was enough to prompt him to push this 'incident' up the management chain and demand that the lawyers were set on me!! Not a fun experience...
I'm not honestly sure what the 'legal' position is on these things (or indeed even if there is any legal position given that so much of J300 is self-certified) but my (bad) experience of these things is that you cannot market a 5W30 oil and label it a 10W30 and still retain your ILSAC and API approvals.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Welcome back, people were just asking about you recently in another thread.
With a new screen name you must have gotten complete ban, not a vacation?
Welcome back, people were just asking about you recently in another thread.
With a new screen name you must have gotten complete ban, not a vacation?
My question about AmsOil is that a lot of their labels say 100% Synthetic. I do not believe that even Mobil1 has ever made that claim... But all the additive systems I know about are usually shipped in a mineral oil carrier. So either AmsOil is lying becasue they have some significant percentage of mineral oil that comes with the add-pak, or they have no add-pak which is really disturbing ...
I realize that marketing would not be nearly as effective if they said "Mostly Synthetic", but that seems like what it has to be... Then the question is what percentage is what? OEM seems to be a syn-blend on purpose, but still says "synthetic" w/o the 100% claim. Signature says 100%, but prolly can't be. It starts to feel like snake oil to me ...
I realize that marketing would not be nearly as effective if they said "Mostly Synthetic", but that seems like what it has to be... Then the question is what percentage is what? OEM seems to be a syn-blend on purpose, but still says "synthetic" w/o the 100% claim. Signature says 100%, but prolly can't be. It starts to feel like snake oil to me ...
Last edited:
you could use an ester oil to dissolve the additives, if you want 100% synthetic.
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
I once had to pass a Sequence VIB fuel economy test on a 10W30 oil for a program I was running. To give yourself the maximum chance of passing the test, it's normal to drop the oil's CCS way below the spec maximum. This in turn drops the KV40 which is what you need for fuel economy. What was noteworthy about this test was that one of my so-called colleagues on the other side of the pond spotted that I'd inadvertantly dropped the CCS into 5W30 territory. It wasn't by much, maybe a couple of hundred centipoise, but it was enough to prompt him to push this 'incident' up the management chain and demand that the lawyers were set on me!! Not a fun experience...
I'm not honestly sure what the 'legal' position is on these things (or indeed even if there is any legal position given that so much of J300 is self-certified) but my (bad) experience of these things is that you cannot market a 5W30 oil and label it a 10W30 and still retain your ILSAC and API approvals.
But if that oil still had a 10w30 pumping viscosity, it would still be a 10w30.... though I imagine the CCS is the one that most oils would fail first when looking for the winter rating.
However, are you talking about dropping the ccs and kv100 more than would be done in the finished, marketed oil?
I once had to pass a Sequence VIB fuel economy test on a 10W30 oil for a program I was running. To give yourself the maximum chance of passing the test, it's normal to drop the oil's CCS way below the spec maximum. This in turn drops the KV40 which is what you need for fuel economy. What was noteworthy about this test was that one of my so-called colleagues on the other side of the pond spotted that I'd inadvertantly dropped the CCS into 5W30 territory. It wasn't by much, maybe a couple of hundred centipoise, but it was enough to prompt him to push this 'incident' up the management chain and demand that the lawyers were set on me!! Not a fun experience...
I'm not honestly sure what the 'legal' position is on these things (or indeed even if there is any legal position given that so much of J300 is self-certified) but my (bad) experience of these things is that you cannot market a 5W30 oil and label it a 10W30 and still retain your ILSAC and API approvals.
But if that oil still had a 10w30 pumping viscosity, it would still be a 10w30.... though I imagine the CCS is the one that most oils would fail first when looking for the winter rating.
However, are you talking about dropping the ccs and kv100 more than would be done in the finished, marketed oil?
- Status
