Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Trav
Mobil themselves caused their own grief when the sued BP in Germany many years ago for claiming hydro cracked was full synthetic.
It wasn't a lawsuit, and the results are history and we can't do a darned thing about it. This argument has been beaten to death ages ago, and in the end, it doesn't matter. No oil company, from Amsoil to SOPUS, provides an "open source" type recipe to its oil. Even almighty German-labelled synthetic oil likely has at least some Group III (or lower) component as a carrier oil.
If you want pure Group IV oil, Imperial Oil will sell you as much as you want, heck, even more than you can afford. If you're interested in a Group IV or V oil, it's pretty easy to check the pour point on a PDS. If it's very low, odds are its a Group IV. If it's hardly lower than conventional, it's probably a Group III/III+. I suppose that's the only real use for the pour point value - it creates a rough rule of thumb for finding out if there's more than a splash of Group IV.
Incidentally, Liqui Moly Top Tec 4600 5w-30 has a rather unimpressive pour point of -36 C, whereas Mobil 1 0w-40 has a pour point of -54 C. Even Mobil 1 5w-30 has a much better figure than the Liqui Moly.
With respect to Germany, it would appear that German labeling rules have been long superseded by the market. MB, BMW, Porsche, VW/Audi, and many others all have proprietary specifications. One looks for MB 229.5 or whatever, and that's it. It may be PAO or something else. As long as it meets specifications, it's good enough. I'd rather used a specified Group III+ than an out of spec Group IV any day of the week. Castrol 5w-40, if I recall correctly, is not Group IV and still meets specifications. I suspect that a lot of dexos1 and dexos2 (more important in Europe) oils will also be Group III/III+. Even Liqui Moly's website is more interested in making it easy for users to find which specs are met by which varieties.
As for Liqui Moly, they label their product according to German regulations. Good on them. As others have pointed out time and time again, the average North American consumer thinks Mobil 1 when they think synthetic oil. They don't think PU, PP, RP, or Redline, and I'm sure Liqui Moly is at the bottom of the average consumer's product recognition list. The names Liqui Moly, Eneos, and the like mean far more to the boy-racer crowd than they do to the mainstream public or fleet users. No offence to the serious users of such products, but the only people I've ever seen that use these more boutique type brands are those whose daddies bought them an A4 or a 370Z or are driving some blister of an Audi 90 and think it's more important to run a fancy German oil than it is to actually have more than a gallon of as in the tank.
It's tempting to think that one should have Group IV to justify the high prices of synthetic. One should real ly be looking to performance. Primarily, does it meet the specifications you require? Will it do the job you're asking of it? My car has 3750 mile OCIs under warranty. I'm not going to use Mobil 1, regardless of Group III/IV content, and regardless of the current sale at Canadian Tire, for such short OCIs. And I'm certainly not going to use Liqui Moly in it, particularly since it'll probably cost $15 per litre here in Canada, if I can find it.
I don't think there are a lot of complaints about PP's performance in the applications for which it was designed, regardless of group content. I wish companies would be more transparent about group content. I'd rather they updated their PDS files more regularly and more accurately, first. If we're worried about labelling, I'm more worried about claims to "meet or exceed" a specification rather than actually being a specified lubricant.
Well put.
Tom NJ