PQIA Tests Amsoil OE 0W-20 Thoughts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Ducman
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Fail. Shame on you Amsoil. This oil is specifically listed to meet Dexos 1 specifications. Dexos limit on NOACK is 13%. Amsoil lists it on the PDS as 12.6, yet here it is failing at 14.2.


Where does it say that it meets the dexos spec?
From what I can see Amsoil only recommend it for a dexos application.

There is a difference.

Where's the shame?


Its implied. Amsoil and their reps have done everything under the sun to assure people it meets X performance level for warranty purposes EXCEPT formally license it.

According to your statement, we very well might recommend it for CJ-4 applications. Or long drain A3/B3 applications. Doesn't mean it meets that spec. It's just a recommendation, right?
 
At $4.70 a quart (PC Price) it's cheaper than ST Synthetic. I don't know that it's overpriced. They have rerun the NOACK Test before when an oil was outside spec. Normally they come back within 0.2. In my opinion if it is recommended for Dexos 1 it should meet the specs. Outside the Dexos 1 issue I don't have a problem with it.
 
Originally Posted By: Gene K
At $4.70 a quart (PC Price) it's cheaper than ST Synthetic. I don't know that it's overpriced. They have rerun the NOACK Test before when an oil was outside spec. Normally they come back within 0.2. In my opinion if it is recommended for Dexos 1 it should meet the specs. Outside the Dexos 1 issue I don't have a problem with it.


M1 0w20 is only $4.57 a quart @ walmart: http://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-0W-20-...-5-qt./17034374

M1 test results: http://www.pqiamerica.com/June 2014/exmoM1.htm

10.1% NOACK (vs 14.2%), 8.78 TBN (vs 7.84) & much better cold crank performance too (4110 vs 5723)
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The oil I use in both my 2015 2500HD and 2006 Cadillac are not dexos1 "approved" either, but claim meeting dexos1. The oil I use in my 2013 semi truck is not on the Detroit Diesel "approved" list but claim to meet 93K218 spec. And the list goes on. And none of them are Amsoil. I don't concern myself if an oil is on any "approved" list. This approval thing is highly overrated. Kinda the same level as "official oil of NASCAR" kind of thing in my book.

Yeah...we're well aware of your stance -- that it's all a big money grab. You're totally cool with an oil company self-certifying their product, and subsequently using creative legal language ("recommended", "complaint") in their product data sheets.


I am totally cool with an oil company that self certifies, especially one that has been at the oil and lube game longer than any other company in N. America. Long before GM was an auto company. If they were putting out products that didn't do the job, they would have gone under years ago. And since the big boys like Mobil and Shell come to them to get some products that they cannot seem to make well enough for some customer demands says something also. I have seen products being made specifically for Mobil and Shell when I was at the Schaeffer facility in St. Louis. Shell even tried to buy out Schaeffer, but the Schaeffer family had enough savvy to put the company in trust so that it is untouchable. So when they say their oil meets and exceeds the OEM demands, I have no problem taking them at their word.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
The oil I use in my 2013 semi truck is not on the Detroit Diesel "approved" list but claim to meet 93K218 spec. And the list goes on. And none of them are Amsoil.


32.gif
, but so is the Schaeffers...remember, we are still waiting for the Amsoil testing that proves 93K218 in another thread...a week MUST be up by now.
 
Is it a bad oil, no. Price/prestige, it is overcooked. The gap between "good" and "better" oil is so razor thin, it is ridiculous. At one time, there might have been a difference but today many house-brand oils are holding their own against the boutique offerings.


I still dislike DEXOS but I dislike folks "fake" suggesting that it can be used "fake" metric/label.
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
... You're totally cool with an oil company self-certifying their product, and subsequently using creative legal language ("recommended", "complaint") in their product data sheets.


Amsoil did not self certify this oil.

Due to their testing, they determined it is safe to recommend (to do a spec "read-across") that this oil cover the Dexos1 specification.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Due to their testing, they determined it is safe to recommend (to do a spec "read-across") that this oil cover the Dexos1 specification.


You would hope so, but they could also just be saying it due to their assumptions based on how it was formulated.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So when they say their oil meets and exceeds the OEM demands, I have no problem taking them at their word.


Well just the same as Amsoil that's all you have to go on.
 
Amsoil does warrant engines that are damaged as a result of the oil's failure. I'm with Tired Trucker here -- even if an oil isn't certified it can exceed the standard and be just as good if not better than an off-the-shelf oil that HAS paid for the certification. (Kind of like your company being ISO 9000 compliant but not paying for the certification - it's a racket).

So Amsoil likely meets the standard - or at least will protect more than sufficiently - the same as any other oil.

[insert several threads here about how hard it is to use any warranty]
 
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Amsoil does warrant engines that are damaged as a result of the oil's failure. I'm with Tired Trucker here -- even if an oil isn't certified it can exceed the standard and be just as good if not better than an off-the-shelf oil that HAS paid for the certification. (Kind of like your company being ISO 9000 compliant but not paying for the certification - it's a racket).

So Amsoil likely meets the standard - or at least will protect more than sufficiently - the same as any other oil.

[insert several threads here about how hard it is to use any warranty]


Certain of the tests are engine based tests, of significant complexity and cost.

Saying that it "meets or exceeds" those tests without actually DOING the test, "but we'll warrant you if we got it wrong" is not the same as actually meeting the tests.

There's another (old) thread regarding the DD meets or exceeds, where information was to be forthcoming in a relatively short period of time as to what Amsoil DID to satisfy themselves with that recommendation rather than trusting luck.

That information, while promised, never made it back to the thread.

Relying on the fact that most engines and families aren't outliers isn't guaranteeing that the standards are, in fact being met...
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow


Certain of the tests are engine based tests, of significant complexity and cost.

Saying that it "meets or exceeds" those tests without actually DOING the test, "but we'll warrant you if we got it wrong" is not the same as actually meeting the tests.


+1

Uncertified oils may meet the specifications....or they may not. So long as the consumer understands that they are trusting in and relying solely upon the technical competence and/or ethical standards of the marketer, fine.

The beauty of certifications, and the reason that the industry uses them, is that they independently assure that the all of the specification tests have actually been run on the formulation, in qualified laboratories, and that all standards have been met. No trust factor required.

Certification against API and ILSAC specifications is dirt cheap and, in my opinion, the lack of a such certification marks on products qualified to use them is a red flag.

Certification against dexos1, however, is much more expensive and some marketers have chosen not to seek formal certification in spite of having a dexos1 compliant formulation. While this increases profit per quart, it also limits one's market as GM owners are told to look for the dexos1 certification mark to preserve their warranty. While a number of companies, including some majors, initially resisted the dexos1 certification program, virtually all now carry the certification mark because it expands their market and increases sales opportunities. In short, it brings value, as GM bet it would. Hence lack of a dexos1 mark is less of a red flag to me, but still makes me wonder why.

Tom NJ
 
Originally Posted By: Kuato
I'm with Tired Trucker here -- even if an oil isn't certified it can exceed the standard and be just as good if not better than an off-the-shelf oil that HAS paid for the certification. (Kind of like your company being ISO 9000 compliant but not paying for the certification - it's a racket).

So Amsoil likely meets the standard - or at least will protect more than sufficiently - the same as any other oil.


That is a non sequitur. What would lead you to that functional conclusion?
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Certification against API and ILSAC specifications is dirt cheap and, in my opinion, the lack of a such certification marks on products qualified to use them is a red flag.


Thank you! Finally.

If they are indeed running the tests in-house to prove to themselves that the certs are met, then yes that is somewhat cheaper than paying an outside entity to perform the tests. However it isn't dramatically more money. It's not going to mean the difference between profit and loss on the product, assuming they are even running the test at all.

Back in the day it was a marketing hook to brag about not having certifications. Either the claim was that they exceeded the spec somehow (and would subsequently "fail" because they were "better"), or that the cost was too high and the company was saving the consumer money by not paying for the test. There was also the cool factor, the whispered secret shared with the customer - given with a nod and wink that you were part of an insider club by using the product. That just doesn't work today given the large number of actual certified products, with ubiquitous availability and low prices.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Castrol 0W-30 & Motul 300V 5W-40 volatility results
Replies
8
Views
739
JAG
Hohn
Let's talk about Flashpoint (ASTM D92) and volatility
Replies
9
Views
1K
RDY4WAR
S
Pennzoil 0w-20 Full Synthetic
Replies
13
Views
6K
Al
Z
In Light Driving Conditions Would You Notice Difference in 5w-20 vs 0w-30 - Subaru BRZ
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
5K
zeroptzero
H
PQIA Noack test temp
Replies
6
Views
2K
HKPolice
Back
Top Bottom