LOST JEEPS :: View topic - Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification

You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?!

Amsoil doesn't have more then half of it's fluids even tested to be API certified so that's not saying a whole lot for them.

You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?!

Zack A wrote:

You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?!

Since you asked, a lot of technical information on Amsoil and its competitors can be found here:
http://bestsyntheticoil.com/dealer-1858578.php

Notice that all Amsoil "tests" are done by them,or paid by them to have done.

They don't even make there own oil,they buy it and mix it together

and do not warraty anything and yes I have seen them deny there so called warranty.

Oooohh, another oil thread!

:POPCORN:

I saw engine cut aways (chevy 350's) years ago showing cylinder wear after 100,000 or 200,00 miles (can't remember). Still had machine marks and running smooth when they cut them apart on the engine running AMSOIL. The other engines were either blown or severly scored with bad cylinder leak down. That's why I still use AMSOIL after 15 years and never had a problem.
The one vehicle I got away from AMSOIL, a 98 Pontiac Transport, I listened to a hard core ASE Master Certified tech and used Mobil !, the cam broke in half..........

Please let me know the specifics of when and why they denied a warranty claim. If Amsoil has a history of this, I certainly don't want to keep doing business with them.

kvenner wrote:

Please let me know the specifics of when and why they denied a warranty claim. If Amsoil has a history of this, I certainly don't want to keep doing business with them.

They denied any type of warranty on my buddies '70 Nova engine(555 cu in) when the cam bearings ate themselfs,they did not spin and had about 70psi of oil pressure and running Amsoil 20w-50 oil and a Amsoil filter.The reason they denied was he changed his oil to often,every 500 miles.This was not in a race either,he actually never raced the engine yet and it had 2500miles on it at the time.After paying for a new block and cam he had a NGK spark plug fall apart and NGK had no problem buying him a new engine,they did not even flinch and he had the engine in less then 2 weeks.Sad part was he was sponsered by Amsoil and they told him to piss off,he has never used Amsoil since then(about 7 years now) and that lead to over 3/4 of Amsoil use to disappear in my hometown area from his word of mouth.

Maybe they didn't like his cam bearing clearance, just shooting in the dark here, I've seen many a pro screw that one or perhaps they felt since they sponsored him and he had yet to race it after 2500 miles, that the sponsorship money was good enough?

Amsoil had no issues with the oil warranty on the sportsman race boat motor that they didn't have a sponsor on for the gentleman that lives across the street from me in New Bern but he was within the moderately accepted 0025 and 003

Author:	dieselenthusiast [ Sun Sep 05, 2010 6:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Testing Shows 16 Percent of Oils Fail API SM Specification "According to the Institute of Materials (IOM), testing shows that of the 250 off-the-shelf motor oils that claim to meet the API SM specification, 16 percent do not. According to Mary Herrmann, IOM general manager in Midland, Mich., 40 motor oils failed at least one of the specification limits. "This shows the challenge for API,” said Herrmann. “They also gather samples from the marketplace and do testing, but we're still seeing oils that are off-spec which carry the ILSAC and API marks on the labels.” AMSOIL synthetic motor oils meet or exceed minimum API SM specifications, and the company’s rigorous quality control program ensures each quart delivers superior protection and performance."

Author:	JL Rockies [ Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Sounds complicated

Author:	dieselenthusiast [ Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
JL Rockies wrote: Sounds complicated It may sound complicated, but there’s a point to be made. There has been many debates on this forum about whether or not Amsoil meets specifications without being API approved. But as you can see, not every API approved oil meets specifications.

Author:	Zack A [ Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?!

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Amsoil doesn't have more then half of it's fluids even tested to be API certified so that's not saying a whole lot for them.

LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/

Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=55409	Page 1 of 1

Author:	dieselenthusiast [ Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:04 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
tjkj2002 wrote: Amsoil doesn't have more then half of it's fluids even tested to be API certified so that's not saying a whole lot for them. tjkj already knows this answer, but this info is for those who don't: "Why Some AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils Are API Licensed And Some Are Not 1. Full API licensing puts AMSOIL INC. in an inflexible position. Not only would we find it necessary to buy formula components from specific vendors and be at the mercy of their pricing, we would not be able to make any major improvements to the lubricant formulas for 2 to 3 years, without new testing and the associated costs. To solve this problem, the API must establish basestock interchange guidelines for synthetic basestocks just as they have for other basestocks, as well as develop interchange guidelines for other components too. 2. Full API licensing would impose strict phosphorous limitations on our motor oils. This limitation is the main reason most AMSOIL motor oils are not API licensed. AMSOIL INC. currently disagrees with this limitation and feels strongly that the reduced wear and longer oil and additive life achieved through higher levels of properly balanced phosphorous content is more important than the arbitrary API phosphorous limit that does not give any consideration to the NOACK volatility level of an oil. When chemistry is developed that will provide superior engine wear protection with reduced phosphorous levels, or Noack volatility considerations are put in place, then the phosphorous level will become a non-issue."

Author:	kvenner [ Mon Sep 06, 2010 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Zack A wrote: You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?! Since you asked, a lot of technical information on Amsoil and its competitors can be found here: http://bestsyntheticoil.com/dealer-1858578.php

Author:	JeepinJarhead03 [ Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
I'd prefer to hear argument over which wax has the best UV protection The whole blah blah API this API that, gets real old We all know once we pick a favorite oil, regardless of the reasons, we are very unlikely to budge and will always reinforce our "sleeping good at night" by disregarding anything a competitor company produces just stay away from Dino castrol or you'll be scooping the sludge out of your valve covers with a kitchen spoon Other than that, mobil, valvoline, amsoil all have good oils

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Mon Sep 06, 2010 9:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
kvenner wrote: Zack A wrote: You don't happen to have a link to the testing do you? That way we can all see what oil's placed where?!?!?!?!?! Since you asked, a lot of technical information on Amsoil and its competitors can be found here: http://bestsyntheticoil.com/dealer-1858578.php Notice that all Amsoil "tests" are done by them,or paid by them to have done.They don't even make there own oil,they buy it and mix it together and do not warraty anything and yes I have seen them deny there so called warranty.

Author:	JeepinJarhead03 [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:20 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
api isn't the end all beat all by any means, otherwise, you wouldn't stick to Mobil 1, you'd use whatever has an API but you don't and there's a reason, there's plenty of crap oil that makes it through API Amsoil has API on some of their oils, the ones with chose high phosphorous (which is good ) do not, the API low phosphorous ppm requirement was done for enviro reasons via our favorite dolts and has no interest what so ever in our engines lasting Whats the difference in them paying a lab to do testing and other oil companies paying API a heck of a lot more to do tests that may or MAY NOT mean jack in terms of wear preventive, so.. in that aspect.. why should they waste the money on something that means nothing more than exactly what you just said "they paid to have it tested.." So far nothing you've said condemning amsoil doesn't apply to Mobil 1 and every other oil company in existence, Penzoil doesn't brew their own 'new' big dog synthetic either

Author:	kvenner [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
tjkj2002 wrote: Notice that all Amsoil "tests" are done by them,or paid by them to have done. Almost all products are tested in one of two ways: either in internally by there own R&D department, or by a paid independent lab. The difference between Amsoil and other brands is that Amsoil publishes the results of their testing. I've never seen such test results published by any of the major brands. If you have some of these test results, I would like to be able to see them so that I could be fully informed. Quote: They don't even make there own oil,they buy it and mix it together Using this logic, Chrysler doesn't make Jeeps, because they use parts made in Mexico and china. Quote: and do not warraty anything and yes I have seen them deny there so called warranty. Please let me know the specifics of when and why they denied a warranty claim. If Amsoil has a history of this, I certainly don't want to keep doing business with them.

Author:	linewarbr [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:17 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Oooohh, another oil thread!

Author:	JJsTJ [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
linewarbr wrote: Oooohh, another oil thread!

Author:	BugginKJ [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
I saw engine cut aways (chevy 350's) years ago showing cylinder wear after 100,000 or 200,00 miles (can't remember). Still had machine marks and running smooth when they cut them apart on the engine running AMSOIL. The other engines were either blown or severly scored with bad cylinder leak down. That's why I still use AMSOIL after 15 years and never had a problem. The one vehicle I got away from AMSOIL, a 98 Pontiac Transport, I listened to a hard core ASE Master Certified tech and used Mobil !, the cam broke in half..........

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	dieselenthusiast [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
BugginKJ wrote: I saw engine cut aways (chevy 350's) years ago showing cylinder wear after 100,000 or 200,00 miles (can't remember). Still had machine marks and running smooth when they cut them apart on the engine running AMSOIL. The other engines were either blown or severly scored with bad cylinder leak down. That's why I still use AMSOIL after 15 years and never had a problem. The one vehicle I got away from AMSOIL, a 98 Pontiac Transport, I listened to a hard core ASE Master Certified tech and used Mobil !, the cam broke in half.......... Amen Brother………

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
kvenner wrote: Please let me know the specifics of when and why they denied a warranty claim. If Amsoil has a history of this, I certainly don't want to keep doing business with them. They denied any type of warranty on my buddies '70 Nova engine(555 cu in) when the cam bearings ate themselfs,they did not spin and had about 70psi of oil pressure and running Amsoil 20w-50 oil and a Amsoil filter.The reason they denied was he changed his oil to often,every 500 miles.This was not in a race either,he actually never raced the engine yet and it had 2500miles on it at the time.After paying for a new block and cam he had a NGK spark plug fall apart and NGK had no problem buying him a new engine,they did not even flinch and he had the engine in less then 2 weeks.Sad part was he was sponsered by Amsoil and they told him to piss off,he has never used Amsoil since then(about 7 years now) and that lead to over 3/4 of Amsoil use to disappear in my hometown area from his word of mouth.

Author:	kvenner [ Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
tjkj2002 wrote: kvenner wrote: Please let me know the specifics of when and why they denied a warranty claim. If Amsoil has a history of this, I certainly don't want to keep doing business with them. They denied any type of warranty on my buddies '70 Nova engine(555 cu in) when the cam bearings ate themselfs,they did not spin and had about 70psi of oil pressure and running Amsoil 20w-50 oil and a Amsoil filter.The reason they denied was he changed his oil to often,every 500 miles.This was not in a race either,he actually never raced the engine yet and it had 2500miles on it at the time.After paying for a new block and cam he had a NGK spark plug fall apart and NGK had no problem buying him a new engine,they did not even flinch and he had the engine in less then 2 weeks.Sad part was he was sponsered by Amsoil and they told him to piss off,he has never used Amsoil since then(about 7 years now) and that lead to over 3/4 of Amsoil use to disappear in my hometown area from his word of mouth. What was Amsoil sponsoring?

Author:	JeepinJarhead03 [ Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
Maybe they didn't like his cam bearing clearance, just shooting in the dark here, I've seen many a pro screw that one or perhaps they felt since they sponsored him and he had yet to race it after 2500 miles, that the sponsorship money was good enough? Amsoil had no issues with the oil warranty on the sportsman race boat motor that they didn't have a sponsor on for the gentleman that lives across the street from me in New Bern but he was within the moderately accepted 0025 and 003

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:08 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Testing Shows 16% of Oils Fail API SM Specification
JeepinJarhead03 wrote: Maybe they didn't like his cam bearing clearance, just shooting in the dark here, I've seen many a pro screw that one or perhaps they felt since they sponsored him and he had yet to race it after 2500 miles, that the sponsorship money was good enough? Amsoil had no issues with the oil warranty on the sportsman race boat motor that they didn't have a sponsor on for the gentleman that lives across the street from me in New Bern but he was within the moderately accepted 0025 and 003 That was not his race engine,the engine that went was the "back up" engine used for poker runs and car shows.The cam and cam bearings where a matched set from Crane.The race engine did not ever run Amsoil,used straight 30 weight oil in the race engine.