Lots of people use the products you are considering. I use The Motorcraft semi-synthetic oil and Motorcraft filters.

I am not sure if your post is a joke or not though. If you had read through even half of the posts in this thread, you could have taken from a myrid of opinions and tons of information.

 

API licensing or not, they still have to keep their formulations within limits set by the EPA. If they sold diesel fuel, it would still have to be 15ppm or less of sulphur.
Remember, API standards are the Minimum requirements and most companies try to stay as close to the minimum as they can. Minimum = cheap.
API standards are no different then say the specifications that Chrysler puts out for their ATF+4 transmission fluid... they have the specs & the manufactures make or blend the product to meet or exceed those specs.
Whether or not a company chooses to pay for & jump through the hoops that API has set up has nothing to do with whether the product will pass or not.
AMSOIL does have API licensing on their blended oils because API licensing allows them to certify one oil additive package & then cross certify. API does not extend that to group IV or group V oil blends. Any special reason for this bias?

Worried about warranty or API certification? Maybe this link helps.

http://www.amsoil.com/news/2008_worr...warranties.pdf

AMSOIL is most certainly not a package retailer. They absolutely do own their own blending and bottling facility.
See this link so that you can rest assured that they are not just a front with a couple phones & computers.
https://www.amsoil.com/lit/g2593.pdf

You can buy the same product from a major oil company? Really?

What about Redline? Royal Purple?
Redline talks about recommendation for meeting API specifications, but they don't say that they are licensed nor do they have the API starburst.
Royal Purple says they are licensed, but they don't display the starburst either.
Wouldn't any company that had their product licensed by API proudly display the API startburst so that the world would know that their product absolutely meets the lowest standard allowed?

I don't really care if someone will only use Rotella or Crisco or whatever. It is their choice & their vehicle.

 

Mobil makes more than one synthetic base stock. Remember in a few posts above I mentioned that the Mobil automotive syn was Group III, while the aviation syn is Group V, ester based. It's my opinion that Mobil or one of Mobil's customers supplies the synthetic base stock to Amsoil.

Superior, how? In laboratory tests, or UOA? Are you talking about the API Amsoil or the unlabled Amsoil? Superior is relative to the need. If it's laboratory performance far exceeds the manufacturers specification you may not benefit as much from it as you think. It's like puting premium grade gasoline in an engine designed for regular grade gasoline. It doesn't enhance performance one bit. You are just running more of your hard earned dollars through the fuel filler neck. Yet many folks do it in the false belief that since it is labeled premium and costs more, they are gaining additional benefit.

Anyway most of Amsoil's so called superior performance is anecdotal. Don't get me wrong, I've seen some of the unlabled Amsoil's UOA's and after lengthy milage the remaining additive levels and wear metal are impressive. Similar UOA's with Group II dino oils had much lower remaining additive level. But though the additive was lower, the wear metals in the samples still matched that of the Amsoil samples. Now if a Group II dino oil does that at a much lower price, I would say that was the superior oil.

 

Thanks. That is old and has been out there a long time. Amsoil devotee's like to pull that one out in defense of the no API rating. While it addresses oil brand and recommended change interval, it conveniently side steps the API licensing issue. It lists a snippet quote from a small motorcycle manufacturer again addressing the brand issue but not the API issue. If an oil does not have an API rating, how do you know it's adequate for your vehicle? Would you drink medicine out of an unlabled bottle? Saying it meets API standard means nothing if it's never submitted for API testing. It's like the annoying guy who boasts to everyone he has the fastest car yet refuses to race anyone to prove it.

Thanks, my mind is at ease now. I had no idea they carried out their entire operation in such a tiny packaging warehouse. Well that's kind of impressive.

The API starburst label is only applied to oil that is "energy conserving." If your oil doesn't qualify as energy conserving, you can't display the starburst label. Not even if your oil is licensed with the API "doughnut."

 

That bulletin was revised in 2008, so it's not that old.

You;d think that API would be mighty upset & hauling their butts through the courts if they were falsely saying that it met or exceeded API specs.



small things come in great packages

Sorry, I did mean the "doughnut." Thanks for correcting that slip.

 

back to Big Geenie.
no my question was not a joke. the thread is long and after a while it was confusing. I just wanted a quick answer as you seem to have some info and
expertise in this area. The motorcraft syn blend was a more economical choice at $11.50 for 5 quarts at wally world. I just did not want to throw a poor quality oil into a engine that is in great shape. Thanks for your time and
opinions.

 

That completely failed to answer my question. Are you suggesting I should be buying Mobil's aviation grade lubes for my Expedition?

I do not care who Amsoil buys Group IV basestocks from. I do know that if I were paying for a full synthetic oil, that is what I would want. The unlabled Amsoil has it, you seem to acknowledge the automotive Mobil does not.

So if I can get a Group IV more directly, where?

I am talking about the full synthetic Amsoil, not sure why you insist on bring up faux synthetics.

In both lab tests and UOA tests.

I have been saying just that for about five pages worth of thread now. No tangible benefits unless you have EXTREME needs. I used both Amsoil and M1 when I was racing Porsches. For daily drivers I have never chosen to spend the extra for exactly the reasons you mention.

Is this a confirmation that it actually works? Halleluhah

So the additive package does not get used up as quickly so you can extend drain intervals safely. Wear metals are in line, plus better high and low temperature protection. So there is a tangible benefit to running a Group IV based oil with a healthy additive package.

Too bad the automotive line of M1 doesn't offer this. That was the point of the thread originally. My contention has been the whole time that M1 is not worth it, and it is not what they claim it is. IF I wanted to run a full synthetic for some reason, I would want a REAL one, and would probably choose Amsoil.

I am not advocating any such thing however. I was just trying to shed some light on the M1 dominance myth. I am not sure how we got so sidetracked.

 

Ha! You know I think we agree on just about everything except for Amsoil's business practices. I just took it a step futher. Not just saying that M1 was not worth it, but that NO synthetic was worth the extra price for the majority of vehicles and oil drain intervals. Not when a good Group II oil can come close to syn on the paper numbers with UOA's that allow 7-10k drain intervals.

Now you'd better answer 1whoseeks. He's calling your name.

 

Well you never know...sometimes we get some pot stirrers around here

I think that you are almost always assured a decent, or at least compatible, product if the vehicles manufacturer puts their name on it. I think it is a win win for us being able to buy manufacturer brand products so cheaply and easily. As I mentioned, I use the Motorcraft semi-syn and a Motorcraft filter on my truck. Decent oil, well above average filter. I change every 5k because it is easy to remember

 

Who bottles the MC oil?

Tim

 

The internet buzz for some time now is that it's Conoco-Phillips that manufactures Motorcraft oil. That very well could have changed by now but I somehow doubt it. Let my reply serve as a bump up and hopefully Big Greenie will chime in if he knows any different.

 

Sorry, don't know, don't really care

It says right on the bottle that it is engineered specifically, and reccomended for, my vehicle, by Ford.

 

+1... BITOG forums tests have proven time and time again MC 5w-20 is the best bargain out there in terms of oil protection vs. price. 7500 OCI seems to be the norm for this oil. Personally switched from castrol syn/PP with 10k oci's to 5k MC 5w-20 and pretty much the same numbers in the few oil analysis I've done. Other bonus is I'm saving about $10 over the 10k buying from Wally

 

i used Mobil 1 for 80,000 miles in Toyota 2.2R engine looked brand new on camshaft. Engine burned a valve, not due to the oil,.

 

I thught this thread died lol. Look, when it comes to oil, it can be alot of choices out there and what most fail to know is that all API oils are bought from 1 of the 3 refineries that are licensed under the API rules, therefore your money is buying the name on the bottle. What makes each companies oil different is only the additives that are placed in the oil after they buy it, they(the labelled companies) dont even do anything to the oil to give it weight, that is already dont at the refineries. Now when it comes to a full synthetic, there needs to be a better look at the container than just seeing the words synthetic for most of the synthetics are done the same way, sold to this companies to put there name on it. Many will doubt this but it funny when the doubters dont even understand te rules and guidelines under the API. Its far more han a few sentences explaining it. So what ever oil you choose, it will be ok, the key is to select the proper weight.