"Scamsoil"?

1.  You don't really believe all that Scamsoil bullshit do you?

I’ve never gotten such a bold question, but I’m glad you asked.  I hope that you’ll appreciate an honest answer, because I don’t know how to do marketing BS.

I’m a full-time engineer in industry, and I work and talk with engineers every day.  Maybe they’re with Bobcat, some with Ford, some with GM, Polaris, John Deere... as well as many companies you’ve never heard of.  True, some people sell AMSOIL.  I’ve never been a good salesman, and I prefer to just educate people and let them sell themselves.  I’ve never liked sales, and even had a boss tell me to never go into sales because I’d never make it.  I’m most interested in the truth, and the best possible recommendations, not in schmoozing people to do what I want.  To me, that’s not responsible engineering. 

There are several products on the market that I think would be far more honestly labeled as “scamsoil”, but Amsoil products are on the entire opposite end of the spectrum.  Over the last several years, people have asked me about several products/brands that are supposed to be really great.  What they’re great at is marketing and misleading with slogans and gimmicks.  But when you start talking real performance data from standardized tests, and actual chemical content, the truth comes out fairly quickly.

I don’t believe in Amsoil because I sell it.  I haven’t retired from a job, desperately trying to make ends meet by selling something.  Not at all.  Rather, I sell AMSOIL products “on the side” (sometimes at a loss), because I believe in them and stand behind them and use them, and because I think people like you deserve to know the truth.  

My Duramax diesel truck really does have Amsoil's BMK-17 Dual Remote Bypass filtration kit on it that I really installed myself side-by-side with a GM engineer.  I really did my last oil change when I converted it to Amsoil at 43,000 miles, I really do have 111,000 miles on it now, and I really can scan and send you the oil sampling analysis report showing that the oil performance is still great, the oil is very clean, and the engine wear rate is very low.   I’ve really gotten an 8% fuel economy improvement.  I’ve really saved hundreds of dollars in oil changes and hundreds of dollars in fuel costs.  That’s as real as “reality” can get.

In the engineering discipline areas of my greatest expertise, I’ve created new standards in world-class performance areas several times in manufacturing, in several industries including automotive.  If you care to look at the exhaust system under a Ford Focus, you’ll see one of the best examples of robotic welding performance in the world, primarily due to my work, accomplishing what many experts and worldwide companies said couldn’t be done.  I can recognize world-class.  And I know that world-class never happens by using what everyone else does and following what everyone “knows”.  It takes understanding the science & physics and doing the hard work to identify truly innovative potential for performance advantages, and using those to create greater profitability.  I recommend AMSOIL products as a way to share what I’ve learned from my own personal research and experience, because I feel that’s the responsible thing to do.  After all, not one in 100,000 people will research and analyze to the extent I’ve done.  So this is a way for me to give to people some tangible everyday benefits from my engineering training and research. 

I don’t purchase a dime of pay-per-click advertising, and I don’t have time to invest in “viral marketing” approaches:  the internet simply provides a way for people to find what I’ve learned, and new Amsoil users pass along that information to help others.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that mechanics know better.  The best ones are essentially trained by the OEM car-company service techs, to be good at wrenching – efficiently and correctly.  They’ve never had training in the sciences of fluid mechanics, heat transfer, boundary lubrication, tribology, metallurgy, fatigue stress fractures, or Root Cause determination with Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) or other tools used throughout the world of automotive design and manufacturing.  Engineers are the ones who design the cars, and they’re the ones who determine much of the content that goes into the service manuals.  Engineers are the ones who aid and advise the world’s top racing teams. 

My professional reputation as an engineer is far more important to me than selling some oil, which is why I tell everyone about being a Preferred Customer to buy at wholesale and cut out my retail profits.  I believe it’s far more important for people to benefit from current lubrication and filtration technology than for me to make money.  And with AMSOIL, everyone wins except the big oil companies and the car companies:  you win, I win, AMSOIL wins, the environment wins, and your pocketbook wins. 

Lubrication industry insiders know that AMSOIL products are the worldwide benchmark performance standard, and all the test data and accolades attest to that fact.  OEM engineers know that professional racing performance is silently, quietly dominated by AMSOIL lubrication.  And major trucking and construction companies also hold their Amsoil secrets closely to their chest because of the competitive advantages it gives them.  Marketing is an entirely different subject from performance. 

Many engineers I’ve worked with have switched to Amsoil.  Every single one has noted and measured performance improvements, and none has gone back.  The most measureable difference is in fuel economy, and while it ranges from 3 to 20%, a 7 to 8% improvement is typical.  It’s not surprising to me.  I knew the results I would get before I ever tried Amsoil: the technology is world-class, so it naturally produces world-class performance.  

As far as I can make it, my website is a bullshit-free zone that is data-driven.  Study the research White Papers on gear lubrication and motorcycle engine oils, and you’ll begin to understand the importance and the science behind measuring real performance in the lubrication industry.  If you find anything you question, please feel free to ask and I’ll dig into it and either explain myself or correct it.  If there’s any way I can help you, let me know.  Call me if you like: my cell number is below. 

But please accept this challenge to be a true skeptic – identify the products for your vehicle, buy them at wholesale as a Preferred Customer and use the products yourself, to prove to yourself whether or not they really work. 

THAT is why Amsoil continues to grow so quickly: it’s rare for someone who knows their vehicle to try Amsoil and ever go back to anything else.  Most people are skeptics: they don’t believe it until they investigate and prove it to themselves.  Some never investigate, but it’s not accurate to call them skeptics: those are merely people who choose to be ignorant – too lazy or busy to research the facts.

2.  If Scamsoil filters are so great, how do you explain this [link to filter testing results]?  http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm

First, my idea of a concise summary on air filtration performance is already here:  http://autoengineer.wordpress.com/2008/04/04/how-to-pick-an-aftermarket-air-intake-filter-that-removes-dust   
And this link gives you a broader summary of nanofiber technology in both air and oil filtration:  http://autoengineer.wordpress.com/2006/09/24/is-nanofiber-filtration-really-that-big-a-deal

Second, here’s a more detailed explanation that specifically addresses the link you sent:

There’s nothing wrong with their info in the link you sent, and it’s actually quite good as far as it goes.  But it doesn't go far enough.  Bottom line, it doesn’t tell you the whole filter performance story in 2004, and most importantly it tells you nothing about current Amsoil air filter performance which uses nanofiber technology.  Here’s why:

1. ISO tests using certified “coarse” test dust (not “course”, as misspelled everywhere in the report you linked) are the historical industry norm, and are commonly used by filter manufacturers to imply how much better their filters perform.  In fact, coarse dust is so overwhelmingly common that it’s nearly an assumption.  In the testing link you provided, they state “To be consistent with common industry practice all filters were tested using PTI Course Test Dust. Course dust is more commonly used… “  (Although they do provide some data on the AFE and K&N with Fine dust.) 
   
   The big problem is that – are you ready for a shocker? – coarse test dust is COARSE.  It’s TOO coarse.  While it may reflect what an air filter is exposed to when roaring down a ramp in a strip-mine, or closely trailing Baja race leaders in a in a shower of sand and dust, it doesn’t mimic what most vehicles are exposed to.  Nearly any filter is going to stop the 40 to 80 micron range, and traditional (depth-loading) filter technologies rely on the “dust cake” buildup to get more reasonable filtration capability at lower micron sizes.  So loading the filter with that large-particle content is going to dramatically skew all the results.  But the engine wear-particle range is historically regarded by the SAE as 5 to 25 microns.  (In an extensive testing report published as an SAE research paper, a senior GM engineer documented a 70% engine wear-rate reduction by filtering “all” particles down to 15 microns out of the engine oil. The air filter is how most wear particles get into the engine oil.)  Thus, in order to test/compare filter effectiveness in real life in a way that correlates to actual engine wear, you must use ISO “fine” dust… which is seldom done. 
   
   [I find it interesting that full-page 2008 magazine ads by a particular filter manufacturer misspell "coarse" test dust as "course" throughout their entire advertising campaign. I wonder if this is a deliberate attempt to imply the idea of a driving course, to keep consumers from realizing that while ISO test dust can meet either Coarse or Fine specifications, they are using Coarse dust.]
   
   In fairness, there are two technical reasons that newer ISO tests with Fine dust are seldom used in automotive filtration: first, because they don’t match well to the limitations of conventional filter media.  And secondly, because it’s more expensive and technically difficult to test.  In the link you provided, they noted difficult challenges in accurately testing with Coarse dust – you can imagine the greater technical difficulty and cost in obtaining good resolution and accuracy levels with a Fine dust sample size range.  Note the last table in that report, which roughly compares the content of “Fine” vs “Coarse” test dust. 
   
   (In the data I notice that the AFE and K&N turned in efficiencies of 92.33 and 89.85 with Fine dust [compare that to Amsoil's EaA filters with 98.7% efficiency at 2 microns], and the oiled-gauze K&N passed over 20 grams of Fine dust, which is more than 10% of the total dust weight ingested and unfortunately probably accurate to real life.  That illustrates why K&N has never talked about filter efficiency, but focused on drag-strip levels of airflow.  I’m embarrassed to admit that at one time I had K&N’s in all of my vehicles.) 

2. Those comparison tests are noted as being performed in 2004, and the Amsoil filter is correctly noted as a TS series which was a Dual-Density (2 layer) Oiled Foam (DDOF) filter.  If tested against other filter technologies using an ISO Fine dust, data showed it to be the best technology available at the time – “best” in terms of removing the 5-25 micron wear particle range with decent capacity before plugging up.  However, there were at least two manufacturers of that DDOF technology.  I’m not aware that Amsoil specifically claimed to be better than all other air filters, but I think they did feel that the dual-density oiled foam was one of the best-performance technologies to that point in time.  Again, the graphs would have looked very different with Fine dust, but in the case of oiled gauze and DDOF they will also look different depending on the amount of oil in the filter: always a manufacturing challenge with oiled media, and the levels of flow restriction the TS was showing in their testing suggest to me that it may have been over-oiled.  I’m not sure how detailed you’re wanting me to get, but bottom line –
   Amsoil was well aware of the performance variations and limitations of conventional filter media including DDOF, and was dissatisfied in pairing it to their advanced oil technology: engine filtration is a vital twin to oil performance in achieving maximum engine life.  That’s why they aggressively searched out nanofiber technology, and then scaled many obstacles including a mountain of delicate negotiations over several years, in order to bring nanofiber technology into the light-truck/automotive market.

3. Current Amsoil filtration is nanofiber technology, introduced in late 2006 (if my memory is right), and is exclusive on the market.  Nanofiber filtration is the undisputed performance champion, and only the Amsoil/Donaldson product line offers that technology.  (Nanofiber technology dominates performance in hospital operating rooms and electronics clean-rooms, as well as industrial dust-capture and military equipment filtration.)  A critical difference is that these nanofiber air filters are surface-loaded filtration.  By preventing the clogging that occurs with depth-loading, and taking advantage of the micro-physics slipstream effect that increases air velocity flowing around/between small-particle objects, nanofiber technology offers the unequalled ability to have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too:  fine-particle capture, heavy loading, low pressure-drop, fast and easy dry cleaning, all at the same time.  And of course, it eliminates all the issues of under or over-oiling of the filter media.
   
   Specifically, reference my page here on Amsoil’s nanofiber air filter performance:   http://www.ultimatesyntheticoil.com/Filters/Ea_Nanofiber_air_filters.htm      If you look at the microscope photos and illustrations, you can visually understand that nanofiber technology isn’t mere sales talk: it’s as fundamentally different as Cathode Ray Tube TV’s and LCD or Plasma HD flat panel screens.  Note that AMSOIL’s data referenced here was obtained in certified ISO testing by Southwest labs, one of the world’s most respected certified filtration test laboratories and often regarded as the #1 authority in North America, using Fine test dust.  “Filters are 100% efficient on 3 micron particles, and have 98% efficiency at 2 microns. “  Actually it’s Absolute Efficiency at 2 microns, which is 98.7%.  And you get that performance level from the start – not eventually, after driving the vehicle for 10,000 miles and getting the dust-cake buildup, which you lose every time you replace a conventional filter with a new one.  (That’s why some companies and agencies have actually warned technicians and vehicle owners that too-frequent air filter changes will increase engine wear rates.)
   
   Anyway, if you compare that performance to the page you linked, it’s a bit tricky because the efficiencies are a percentage of the particle weight of the entire test-dust spectrum: in essence they are listing the % of total particle weight as efficiency.  That’s a common practice, but one that makes it difficult for laypeople to interpret useful performance.  Amsoil worked with Southwest to put the test data in the clear, concrete terms of Absolute Efficiency at a specific micron size – which I feel is a big advance in terms of indicating actual wear-prevention performance and briefly stating real numbers that consumers can accurately understand and use for comparison.  I hope other companies will follow that lead, but I’m not holding my breath.  Nevertheless, I think it’s evident that none of the other filter technologies can produce balanced overall size/capacity/flow performance at anywhere near the level of nanofiber media.

4. Yet again, I have complete ISO test data (supplied directly to me by the owner/president of S&B) that “proves” their dry multi-layer synthetic fiber filters equal the performance of Amsoil’s EaA air filters.  It’s rather puzzling that ISO certified testing can legitimately produce such results… until you consider that they are again using ISO 5011’s protocol with Coarse test dust, which doesn’t at all reveal the functional performance benefits of a nanofiber filter.  Nor does it reveal the inability of conventional filter technologies to stop the smaller wear particles of 10 microns and below, due to the dust-cake which is formed so quickly in coarse media when using Coarse test dust. In essence, using Coarse test dust is not only the historic norm for testing, but is also a very effective way to hide the performance superiority of nanofiber filtration technology.  That’s fortunate for conventional filter salesmen, and for all the OEM's who are banking on engines wearing out, but not so fortunate for the everyday consumer.
5. Ea is the notation for Absolute Efficiency.  One reason Amsoil refers to their filters in this way is because they rival the performance of the Absolute Efficiency master reference filters that have traditionally been used to capture and analyze the Coarse test-dust particle content that passes through conventional filters. 

Please keep in mind that all this is me talking, not Amsoil.  To the best of my knowledge as an engineer, everything I’ve said is accurate.  But I can’t guarantee 100% accuracy and I reserve the right to learn more and improve the accuracy of my statements.  However, I hope these are some helpful insights in interpreting test data and understanding the filtration technology.  I wasn’t as short as your e-mail, but shorter than the ISO test protocols and reports.  Let me know if you have any other questions.

p.s.  By providing 98.7% efficiency at 15 microns, AMSOIL’s EaO oil filter line gives you a 70% reduction in engine wear rate – according to published SAE/GM testing data.  Imagine what the 98.7% at 2 microns does for you in the air filter.  Actually, the same SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) report concluded that filtration down to 2 microns “virtually eliminates” measureable engine wear. 

p.p.s   In the earlier e-mail I mentioned the White Papers on gear lubrication and motorcycle engine oils.  Here are links to download them: 
http://www.ultimatesyntheticoil.com/pdf_files/g2457_Gear_Lube_White_Paper.pdf  

http://www.ultimatesyntheticoil.com/pdf_files/g2156-WhitePaperMotorcycleOilStudy.pdf   

Those are extensive product performance comparisons using certified independent-lab test-data results of industry standard tests.  Keep in mind that they are also lubrication-industry firsts: no one else has EVER dared to undertake such expense or publish such data, because if they’re not completely legitimate and accurate, some of the world’s biggest corporate legal offices are going to sue their pants off.  No-one has ever legally challenged the accuracy of any AMSOIL test data, even though they probably publish more of it than all other lubrication companies in the world, combined.  
That fact alone is formidable evidence of the accuracy of the data.

5.  As a "engineer" haven't you at least ever wondered why Amsoil just hasn't caught on to the mainstream car guy in masses? You guys don't even make up 1% of the market. I know... it's because big oil is keeping ya down right? And all those non-scamsoil sponsored tests that are bogus right?
Hell, what does your oil line have? one or two API certified oils? Because the certifications costs too much?   Thanks, M...

M –

While I know nothing about you, I’ve been completely open with you.  After what I’ve explained so far, I’m surprised at the tone that comes through in your e-mail.  However, assuming that you’re looking for some knowledgeable, balanced perspective, and assuming that you’re suspecting perhaps you’ve been soured by arrogant opinions... spread online to bash Amsoil as if they know something, I’ll address the comments/concerns/accusations you brought up.

Let me assure you that NOTHING you’ve mentioned as a concern has slipped past me.  Not in the slightest.  I’ve investigated all of that long ago, most of it before even trying Amsoil products or becoming a dealer.  I can give you clear answers.

-    “haven't you at least ever wondered why it just hasn't caught on to the mainstream car guy in masses? “  I have thought about the reasons and how I can help people move past the obstacles, if that’s what you’re asking.  Marketing, in the big picture after the merging of psychology with Wall Street finance after WWII – when Hitler proved how the combination could be so effective at manipulating the masses of people – marketing is about creating enough emotional impressions with enough strength to determine mass behavior.  Even many people who are individualistic will follow the masses, based on an assumption that most people are right, or on the desire/pressure to fit in or not appear “wrong” or “unenlightened”.  In the case of marketing, or politics, most people are manipulated – the days of mainstream media informing the public are long gone.  People THINK they make logical decisions, but in reality most decisions are emotional.  That’s why mass marketing is emotional.   So again, I try to help people educate themselves on the DATA. 
Test data has no emotional manipulation.  Slogans may sell, but choosing products based on tested performance is the only way to get superior performance.  As I note on my website “Don't be fooled by NASCAR advertising contracts with cool graphics and beautiful women - those cars don't run on Via-gra, and neither does yours! Somebody else didn’t write that, btw – I did.
Further, it’s important to realize the profit motive is huge.  Jiffy Lube’s president is on public record for promoting 3,000 mile oil changes purely because JL and the oil companies make more money.  An auto parts store manager asked me point-blank “why in the world would I sell 25,000 mile oils and filters when I have people come in there and buy stuff off those two shelves, all day long?”  In the face of such marketing efforts, how is the “mainstream car guy” going to catch on to how he’s being suckered, if you or I don’t tell him?
But Amsoil has “caught on” where it counts.  Our dealer organization has more OEM engineers than all the rest of Amsoil combined, which is why we’re the fastest growing and the largest.  We’re focused on customer education and performance results.  The guy leading our group is a former FORD lubrication engineer, who is highly respected for his knowledge and track record.  He has helped set up many fleet and construction equipment maintenance programs, showing them how to decrease their costs and boost capital equipment life by 30 to 100%.  He has worked with many race teams, and was well aware that Rousch and many other leading technology centers were in full agreement with the superiority of Amsoil lubricants.  He notes that when Rousch can use ANYTHING in the world, yet chooses to recommend and use AMSOIL almost exclusively, without any sponsorships or contracts or money changing hands, that speaks volumes.  He knew that new designs in transmissions and differentials were sometimes repeated endurance failures until Amsoil was contacted and their latest un-released cutting-edge product was tested. 

We know what we’re talking about, and we’re passionate about performance and value.  That’s why we use the products ourselves, and why we believe others should at least try them.

-    “not even 1% of the market”.  I don’t know the actual numbers, but don’t much care.  I know that Amsoil is the largest synthetic oil company in the world, and growing at a constantly increasing pace.  I know that our dealer organization has been growing in the strong double digits since we started, and that we lead all of Amsoil in growth.  I know that I see my business grow on a monthly basis.  I know that even in the non-pro racing communities, Amsoil is becoming the legendary standard.  Talk X-Cross or Sno-Cross or Champ Boat and it’s overwhelmingly Amsoil. 

-    "I know...it's because big oil is keeping ya down right?"  Mostly what holds growth back is ignorance.  The ignorance of mechanics, of consumers, of maintenance people.  I didn’t say stupidity – just ignorance of the facts.  They’ve never gotten ahold of authoritative data on synthetic performance, so they’re led by myth and marketing.  We try to change that problem – one person at a time.

-    “those non-scamsoil sponsored tests that are bogus right?  “  Are you referring to anything specific?  Test Data is test data, as long as it’s meaningful.  If it’s not a standardized ASTM or SAE or API or ISO or ASHRAE (some current test developed by an authoritative engineering organization), then it means nothing (bogus) because the test has not been rigorously enough defined so that the results can be accurately duplicated and can’t be manipulated (whether accidentally or purposefully).  Also, if the test data is not by an independent certified lab AND is only against undefined “Competitor A, B, C”, then it is meaningless because there is no legal weight behind it: the data can be imaginary, or against oils meeting 25-yr old standards that are illegal to sell in the U.S.  If you want to talk about specific test and specific data, let’s talk turkey. 
Again, AMSOIL’s data is independently certified as verifiably accurate, is legally binding, names actual competitive product names, and they are the only ones publishing their test data.  Haven’t you ever wondered why? 
If Mobil 1 is the greatest performer, or Lucas, or Shaeffer, or something else, why not publish – just once – some certified test data that proves they beat the #1 synthetic lubricant company in the world? 
Every once in a rare while, someone will publish ONE chart, from one test.  We call those products “one-trick ponies”, because rather than create a balanced product that performs all the required functions of the lubricant at a high level of performance, they deliberately focus on one thing in their formulation so that they can use it as a marketing gimmick.  That’s an all-too-common problem in motorcycle and gear oils. 
So who’s hiding from who?  Who’s scamming who?

-    “what does your oil line have? one or two API certified oils? Because the certifications costs too much?  “  This is the old API certification question.  Been asked thousands of times, and often answered poorly or incompletely by both Amsoil and Dealers… I’ll give it my best shot, [and also give you some helpful official AMSOIL explanations]: 
API is about minimum performance standards – they could care less about maximum performance, and anything of mediocre quality is going to pass API certification. Certification is not only about meeting the minimum standards, but about being certified into their pockets as meeting the minimum standards, at a high price.
API is American Petroleum Institute.  Notice anything about their name?  The requirements for maintaining API certification are DIFFERENT for synthetics than they are for the petroleum oils they were originally and are still designed for.  The API certifications are based on the old petro management assumption that you’re going to formulate once and sell it for 8 to 15 yrs, and while they give full leeway for petro to change base-stock sources, synthetics are not permitted to do that without recertification.  Changes to that are underway or complete, but to preserve competitive advantage to the oil-drilling companies the changes are deliberately limited to (petroleum) Group III “synthetic” base-stocks, not the true synthetic Group IV and V base stocks that Amsoil works with.  And yes, because they are treated differently, maintaining the certifications is much more expensive for synthetics than for petroleum oils. 
But more importantly, the API system does not support Amsoil’s foundational operational philosophy of always offering the best performance that technology advancements will allow.  In fact, the API certification system blocks that philosophy.  In many lubrication segments, Amsoil’s product formulation life is only two to 5 years because they improve the formulation to improve the performance.  That’s why they’re the best.  It’s not accidental, and it’s not marketing… it’s engineering.  Yet every formulation improvement would have to be re-certified to still bear the API star.  Where is the value in that, particularly if it’s not on a Petroleum oil?  Would that benefit the customer, or would it delay them from getting improved performance and force them to pay a higher price? 

Further, because the API Licensing standards are not written to take advantage of technologies to dramatically extend oil drain intervals, or reach very low wear-rates, high-performance formulations cannot be submitted for licensing.  So API certification, licensing the display of the API starburst, is NOT a mark of rigorous quality.  Instead, it is a verification both of passing the minimum quality required for the SAE/API Service Grades, and of NOT being particularly high performance. This is why NASCAR and other race-team advertising contracts are such a big deal: oil companies can purchase an illusion that their high-profit, minimum-performance API starburst products are being used in the best race cars - when in reality... they almost never are.
Amsoil corporation gave this summary of API certification requirements: "What this means is that if a consumer wants a product that just meets minimum specifications, then they should purchase API Licensed products and get exactly what they paid for…minimum performance! In the future, should these standards be raised to a level consistent with AMSOIL's standards for motor oil performance, AMSOIL will consider licensing all oils."If Amsoil products are formulated to dramatically exceed every API, ASTM, SAE and ILSAC minimum, and the laboratory testing proves they exceed the performance of all requirements and all licensed oils, then why bother jacking up the price of products to pay the API high dollars for maintaining an unfair competitive bias in the favor of petroleum oils and fake petroleum “synthetics”?

AMSOIL is far more interested in demonstrating how big a performance advantage they have over the competition, than in proving they can pass the tests of API licensing mediocrity. So, AMSOIL chooses to dramatically exceed API performance standards and leave them in the dust – from a test-data/performance perspective.  They offer very few API Licensed oils:  the inexpensive XL series covers that ground with Group III petroleum base stocks that the petroleum companies decided to call “synthetic”, and do so only for people who have been marketed into the belief that API certification is essential for oil performance or – more likely – for warranty coverage, and who do not know/believe the validity of extended drain intervals of 15,000 or 25,000 or 35,000 miles or more. 

Amsoil XL Series:
Even though they are the cheapest-priced products in the "scams oil" lineup, neither Amsoil nor automotive engineers recommend Amsoil's API licensed oils on the basis of best performance or best value. However, if API licensing and low per-quart pricing are the goal, then the XL goals meet those objectives while giving the best performance that API limitations will allow.

An important point: the XL oils are API licensed ("synthetic" under the new definition by Big Oil), and quite inexpensive, but they cannot touch the performance of the rest of the Amsoil line.  And while AMSOIL's primary true-synthetic oils are far more expensive per quart than the XL oils, they are actually much cheaper in use because of their extended drain intervals -- which the restrictions of API licensing limits will not allow.

There is a great deal of confusion about the significance of API Certification, in two specific areas: 1) as it relates to oil performance, and 2) as it relates to vehicle warranties.  public perception that non-API Licensed products should be avoided at all costs. But is that really true?

Please note that "API’s Engine Oil Licensing and Certification System (EOLCS) is a voluntary licensing and certification program that authorizes engine oil marketers who meet specified requirements to use the API Engine Oil Quality Marks." So API Certification is designed to create a profit stream for them by verifying the minimal performance of petroleum oils.  API certification includes engine test stands for validating overall performance, but also uses the individual ASTM performance measurement tests as part of their product quality verification for the licensed packaging contents that are actually being sold in retail stores. 

The API Licensing is primarily based on the very ASTM test results that Amsoil publishes, and those ASTM test results are what determine meeting SAE service classifications, which is what the OEM's require.  API Licensing - or "certification" - is a completely different issue than meeting or dramatically exceeding API Service Classification performance, which all AMSOIL products do.  Licensing places far higher unfair cost burdens on true synthetic lubricants, and by its' own admission in API 1509, API only licenses certification to minimum performance standards, not maximum performance.  Further, API Licensing does nothing to identify or encourage development of high performance products. 

In light of this background, carefully consider this question about the value of API Certification and Licensing: 

API tests lubricants using ASTM tests to verify meeting SAE service grade requirements, then adds expensive ASTM engine-stand test sequences to verify overall performance to minimum requirements, then uses the standard ASTM tests to "police" the store-shelf quality.  If comparative testing, by certified independent labs, using the same standardized ASTM/SAE performance tests that the API uses to validate continued quality of certified formulations, shows that Amsoil dramatically exceeds the performance of every "API Certified" oil bearing the API starburst, then what value does API Licensing have to Amsoil or Amsoil customers?  Here's an example of such comparative performance testing.  And since Mobil 1 is API certified, here's how Mobil 1 performs against Amsoil in the most critical API/ILSAC/ASTM tests.

AMSOIL's exceeding API performance standards is not a matter of idle marketing claims, but of test-proven facts.  AMSOIL "scamsoil" products outperform API Licensed products because they are designed to be the best.  Look at scamsoil motor oil results in one of the API Certification test protocols: Amsoil 10W-30 exceeded all performance standards in API Sequence III test. It's not API licensed, but it blew the API test out of the water: AMSOIL exceeded TRIPLE the API requirements, and looking at the performance graph it's obvious that the motor oil would NEVER fail. This level of performance reflects what the other standardized ASTM test results demonstrate, but at a big cost difference.
Call us crazy engineers, but if Amsoil wants to "scam" us like that, we hope they never stop!

Further, Amsoil motor oils are designed to exceed the far higher performance standards of the European ACEA standards that Europe adheres to, where 10,000-20,000 mile oil changes have been the norm for more than a decade.  So can you begin to see how ludicrous the API Certification (Licensing) issue is to knowledgeable automotive engineers, lubrication engineers and AMSOIL users? 

Is API Certification required for vehicle warranty?  NO.  In Amsoil's words: "Another common misconception is that motor oils must be API certified in order to meet warranty requirements. The fact is, lubricants are not required to be certified by the API, only meet or exceed API specifications."

Just this week we saw someone on a forum saying that a Ford dealer denied a warranty claim because of using a non-API-licensed synthetic oil.  It's a new variation on the false claim that synthetic oil nullifies vehicle warranties.  OEM and automotive engineer and federal government statements are more authoritative than either car-dealership employees or people posting to online forums.
 
Just because a Dealer employee says so (perhaps misinterpreting an owners' manual reference to API Certified oils) does not mean that the OEM will not honor the warranty.  It merely means the Dealer employee is wrong.  If the customer calls the OEM and complains about such falsehood, it will almost certainly turn the dealer around.  lf not, Amsoil's legal department will contact them for you.  A dealer can try to claim that using a vastly superior engine oil voids the warranty because it isn't API licensed, but that's not only logically ridiculous - it's completely false.  

In the Magnuson-Moss Act, Federal law prohibits denying warranty claims for unrelated reasons, and places the burden of proof on the OEM, not on the consumer.  The legal precedents in interpreting Magnuson-Moss are clear and long-established.  Unless the OEM can demonstrate in failure analysis that an equipment failure is due to the oil being out of specification and directly causing the failure, the warranty stands. If the oil did not cause the problem the warranty cannot be voided, regardless of the brand of oil used, or the length of time or number of miles the oil was used. Oil selection cannot nullify a warranty unless the oil is proven to be at fault, any more than the engine warranty can be voided for installing aftermarket headlight bulbs. In truth, oil is very rarely the cause of any warranty problem.  And Amsoil has NEVER been found to have caused an equipment failure. Never.

On the other hand, API Certified oils produce major sludge problems in many 1999 and later engines from a number of OEM's including Toyota, GM and Saab, causing fatal engine damage as early as 50,000 miles in perfectly-maintained vehicles.  Yet even in these cases, because the oils meet the API service requirements that the OEM requires, they are covered under warranty as long as recommended maintenance intervals were followed and documented. This was detailed in the August 2005 Consumer Reports magazine, as well as many other automotive sources, and Amsoil published a TSB (Technical Service Bulletin) to advise customers and Dealers on these engine sludge problems. 

Sludging is primarily the aftermath of design changes to meet new EPA emissions requirements. While the mediocre API Licensed petroleum oils were found to be bad performers, AMSOIL already outperformed the problems!

Take Saab for example.  The Saab engines are well designed, but highly prone to rapid turbo failure and engine failure using API Certified "synthetic" oils.  In fact, API certified oils simply don't meet many of the European specifications because they require higher-performance oils. Chuck Andrews is one of North America's foremost Saab authorities, and writes the "Nines" Saab newsletter for owners.  Since 2006 he has proven that 5,000 mile oil changes with Amsoil 5W-40 European car oil (AFL) will consistently outperform all other options in preventing damaging sludge buildup, retaining good oil chemistry and minimizing engine wear. Previous to extensive Amsoil testing in the many Saabs he services, his favorite had been Mobil 1. Neither Saab nor Mr. Andrews' dealership seem concerned that Amsoil's product isn't API Licensed or Saab certified. However they are very concerned with performance, and are very pleased with Amsoil performance. They don't call it scamsoil.  In fact, they invited Amsoil to speak at the 2007 Saab owners club convention.

Here are some additional official Amsoil statements on these issues:
http://www.amsoil.com/magnuson_moss.aspx  ]

 

Tell me something, M.  Let’s assume I’m not on the level with you, and Amsoil products are merely hyped marketing scams.  Carefully consider these four questions:

1. Why would I sell nearly everything at wholesale and pay for the literature out of my own pocket to freely hand/mail to people, knowing that they had to use the products for a year for me to pay my expenses in helping them?  Why would I do that if there was a big risk they would try the products and not see clear benefits? 

2. Why would I spend hours e-mailing you, who most other Amsoil dealers would have ignored or written off?  Where is the financial benefit to me in that?

3. Why would Donaldson – the world leader in nanofiber filtration technology, who has refused to partner with ANY company – decide to partner long-term with Amsoil exclusively, make their entire vehicle-related product line available to them, and provide them with all the filtration media and cover them with exclusive warrantys that they’ve never done before, even for their own distribution network?  I’ve talked to current and former employees of Fram and another famous filter company who were AMAZED at that, saying “how did they do that? Donaldson won’t work with anyone!”

4. Would you – in the face of information like this – want to risk missing an opportunity to try the products yourself?