I agree with Molakule - people on the BITOG Forums tend to focus on 1 or 2 additives, and sometimes forget that it is the total package that counts.
I also believe that the Labs that do analysis need to modernize their analyses - there are a new additive chemistries that have (or are trying) to offset the reduced amounts of ZDDP, which are the best AW/FM components we have seen to date. The Conoco 5w20 formulated for Motorcraft is an excellent example of how modern "thin" oils can be made to be high-performance, and I was a doubter (like Saul of Tarsus) of these "sewing machine" oils until I looked depper at the things that were being added. I would like to see the big labs get off their tails, identify the new additives that are getting the job done, and measure them as well as the old favorites.
Plus, tribology is moving in new directions that will require changes in the way engine oil is referenced. Right now, research is occuring on new classes of lubricants, and I can easily see the day when conventional reporting would show an oil as being -10w5. Yes, even with today's standards, I believe a negative number would be possible, just not reportable. And how will the buying public respond to that? Badly, i eould guess - negatives are so....well, negative!
So I think API or whoever will find a new way - technology moves on, and i think all of us in the oil chain: engineers, consumers, Labs, and oil mfrs. will have to "adapt to survive" in the new world. I can see "smart lubricants" similar to the "smart lubes" being used in the Corvette's shocks, which can change properties in response to electrical or electro-chemical stimuli.
The trend is certainly towards thinner, greener lubes. No doubt.
But focussing on just 1 or 2 components, and then scolding an oil for not having it, is old school. I am not a moly-phile, but it has its peformance qualities, certainly in the area of film strength - great for EP applications. But I have done testing on Lubrication Engineers' LE-607 90w gear lube for the use in the Honda S2000 differential (the only vis recommended, by the way!), and it uses something they call Almasol, which they claim has even higher PSI rating than moly - whatever it is, the tests I ran showed that the EP capabilities of this product are amazing, yet it would probably not look like much on the std Blackstone analysis for the reasons Molakule and I stated.
