Honestly I had not put a lot of work into this until Ed brought that up.
Now I'm looking and finding exactly what I implied; typical Chinese business model of "close" but not quite right.
Look at these links:
This is the current webpage for their product -
https://www.sinopeclubricants.com/15w40-diesel-engine-oil-5-gallon-pail-p/d-t6001540-sp.htm
This is a link to that product data -
http://sinopeclubricants.com/v/vspfiles/downloadables/pds-D-T6001540-SP.pdf
This is a large data brochure -
http://sinopecenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Technical_Specification_Synthetic_Lubricants.pdf
This is a PDS for their conventional "classic" HDEO -
http://sinopeclubricants.com/v/vspfiles/downloadables/pds-D-T5001540-SD.pdf
Unless I've overlooked it somewhere, I cannot locate any "date" or "title" on the written materials. I have no idea how "old" that Tulux product data sheet is. Which is why Ed's comment is valid; they reference an outdated ACEA spec, but then again, their current PDS might be that old! Heck, the "Classic" diesel oil they offer has really old cert claims. In the big product file, they claim to be certified to ISO and many other organizational creeds, but their document does not even have a date on it or document number on it; that's violation of inspection protocol 101 conceptually!
It might be that they are blending info of marketing with info of product data, all into one sheet. This would be no different than when we see the majors we're accustomed to claiming "intended for applications of ..." or "meets/exceeds ...." or "approved for use in ..." but won't have/claim a license number. Valvoline does it. Amsoil does it. Rotella does it (for the JASO specs). But the Tulux is claiming stuff that is not current certification, on their current product listings! Now, do we accept this as their "it will work if used here" statement, or as a formerly "licensed" but no longer technically valid?
This is what I was trying to assert earlier. I realize that mistakes do happen; no company is completely infallible; we all get that. But the Chinese business culture tends to be good a mimicking stuff, but not understanding the nuances of WHY or HOW things are important. At one point, the Tulux diesel lube was possibly certified to ACEA, and clearly has been submitted to the API and subsequently approved. And because they still make it the same old way, they just presume that they can continue to make the same old claims.
For reference, look at these from various sources:
http://hd.valvoline.com/sites/default/files/20170228_premium_blue_8600_es_0.pdf
https://prodepc.blob.core.windows.net/epcblobstorage/GPCDOC_Local_TDS_United_States_Shell_Rotella_T_Triple_Protection_15W-40_(CJ-4)_(en-US)_TDS.pdf
https://msdspds.castrol.com/bpglis/FusionPDS.nsf/Files/88FB7D0788A68F2580257E2D004F5207/$File/BPXE-9VX5VU.pdf
Each of these (and about a bazillion other examples from well-managed companies) will have a document number (or name, or such) and a date (or revision, etc). That is ISO basic expectations 101, in laymen terms. Yet none of the Tulux products from the "Greatwall Lube Oil Company" I can find have such.
It's just a pervasive issue with Chinese business culture; they can regurgitate and recite stuff they hear, but they don't always know the how-to and why-for associated with the policies and procedures. And therefore, why would I blindly trust a product they make in Singapore, any more than anywhere else they might own a facility? Is it omission or commission? I cannot tell you. But therein lies the level of my skepticism. There are times I've been directly involved in having to deal with mistakes the Chinese business culture induced into my work world; some were by mistake, and frankly others I believe were their effort to short-cut stuff. Now, does that translate directly or indirectly to how GreatWall manages the Singapore facility? I cannot tell you; it's not in my job scope to worry about that. But my suspicions and skepticism are not relieved by the deeper look I just took!
Nothing wrong with trying it; just don't commit to a bulk buy without a little VOA/UOA experiment first. I don't see them offering quart or gallon jugs, so about the only way you'll know is to try this 5 gallon pail.
And like I said, just because they pass a license submittal and make the first batch right, does not mean they won't slip up somewhere else downstream on the calendar. (Either by accident or on purpose). My fears have been no less assuaged so far. While I suspect the lube it probably a decent product, the level of assurance comes into question. What they submit for approval and what we get in the jug may not be the same thing.
Caveat Emptor.
.
