Bear95292 - you would **** if you knew what I did for a living - but I've posted this a lot, if you really care, check out amsoil closer before you use it.

 

Lee,

I have seen this report before but didn't link it with your signature. Thanks for taking the time to do the research and for putting it all together. One question for you though; I noticed that you used Amsoil Motorcycle for the comparisons. Is this oil different to Amsoil MCV? If so, then I wonder howMCV would stack up against the opposition. I have also read the oil report from bobistheoilguide and I noticed that he too tested Amsoil Motorcycle. Looking at the data he supplied and the data from the Amsoil white paper it would appear these are different oils as the data is different. Personally, after doing quite a bit of research, I settled on Amsoil 20W50 MCV for all three holes in my bike and she runs like a beauty.

Once again, though, thanks for taking the time to show us all.

 

Any chance of sharing this report or a link to it?

 

The problem some of us have with the White Paper is that (1) it was sactioned, designed, and paid-for by Amsoil--thus isn't truly independent--and (2) the ASTM standards used were used in other tests, notably by motorcycle magazines, which produced results not as flattering as those promoted in the White Paper. That said, Amsoil has always performed well in the tests I've seen, as has Redline, Mobil 1, Royal Purple, and other high-quality synthetics. This raises this issue of whether we should elevate motor oils to a religious status. I think not, and have always maintained that chosing from among the major sythetic offerings based on price and availability is the wisest methodology. I have never promoted one oil over another on these forums, and what I use is not something that I consider important enough to relate to others. It is my choice and I would be happy using another brand, including Amsoil, if quality was my only criterion.

I haven't seen any true bashing of Amsoil as a product, but some of us, myself included, are not comfortable with Amsoil's marketing methods. I point to a case where several Amsoil sites have maintained that moly as an additive will "destroy your valvetrain," and that Cummins Diesel had "banned" moly from motor oils used in Cummins engines. Researching this, including a call to Cummins, reveals that Cummins has never issued a TSB or otherwise warned against using moly in oils. Further, I could find no evidence to suggest moly causes damage to valvetrains, a premise that seems patently absurd considering the common use of the additive. I wrote to the owner of one of these Amsoil sites making this claim, asking them to produce evidence thereof, and I didn't receive a reply. I didn't expect one, actually. In that email I mentioned that I had used an oil high in moly content in my '96 RK, and that at 110k miles the compression had not changed from the readings taken in 1998 or interim years. Had valvetrain wear occurred compression would be affected. I wanted to know how long it would take before the moly in the oil used would destroy that bike's valvetrain. This type of negative and specious marketing will capture some sales, mostly those who form quick conclusions and don't double-check advertising claims. I contend that since the claims are still on these sites that it is unethical for Amsoil to allow them to persist.

It is interesting that the famous White Paper has no test for moly content, and this may be because Amsoil has none and most other high-performance synthetics (RP, M1, Redline, among others) contain it. Redline has the most, around 900ppm, RP (non-racing) close with about 250ppm, and M1 contains about 100ppm. My research reveals that moly is a very important additive, and American Iron stated in their oil test several years ago that moly is perhaps the most important of all oil additives. In their words (paraphrased), "If your oil manufacturer uses moly in their formula, it shows they care about your engine." This isn't to say that oils containing no moly are categorically deficient, but that the use of moly in oils has more positive than negative attributes, the only negative perhaps being cost. It is an expensive additive.

No, but they do have the Internet covered. Do a search on "synthetic oil" or similar search criterion and you'll get more Amsoil hits than anything else. There's nothing wrong with this a

 

No, they're not the only ones using these tests. Royal Purple has been doing it for years, and of course RP always wins.

I'm on the fence with the wear-ball tests. I've seen (with my own eyes) tests performed with Royal Purple, Amsoil, Redline, etc. where RP impressively out-performed the other contenders--yet Amsoil proclaims it's product to be the superior lubricant in similar tests. For anyone wanting to travel to Baton Rouge, I can set up the same test using your samples. Perhaps the results will be different the next time I see the test run! I've made this offer many times over the past 10 years or more and have never had any takers, even Amsoil dealers in this area. I will offer no conclusions as to the validity of the results, or how they would apply toward enhanced engine life or performance, but can set them up for anyone to see for themselves. You can then form your own conclusions.

Some, like Exxon-Mobil, claim that these tests are not designed for depicting wear reduction in an internal-combusion engine, but I'm not so sure. It seems to me that if it protects as revealed in these tests, it will protect as well in less-harsh environments like an automotive or MC engine. It is something I don't promote as a useful criterion, but I'm open-minded and would like to learn more about the validity of these wear-ball tests.

 

Thanks iclick. I wasn't aware that RP used the same test.

 

I have been using amsoil for a while now. I recently took oil samples to wheeler oil labs to have them tested. I brought them the original unused oil (synthetic 20/50) a 4000 mile and a 8500 mile sample from my 07 road glide. The results were amazing the 8500 mile sample had very little wear and only went from a viscosity of 18 to 20.5. The lab tech said the oil could easily run to 10,000 miles. I am also not a distributor just a happy customer as well. I would recommend amsoil to any one who wants the best for their bike.

 

Guys, when I did my research I decided first and foremost to use a synthetic oil for the increased resistance to oxidation (something very important to me down here in Australia). So my choice then had to be narrowed to a particular brand. I reviewed all the documents I could relating to oil and what to look for. I reviewed numerous specification sheets and then I finally reviewedthe varoius claims. I selected Amsoil because I felt they offered the best all round protection for my bike. I also felt that if they were willing to tout this publically on their website, then there must be some truth to the claims. I don't mean to put anybody off side, but after all you guy's are reknowned for being the land of litigation. So, do I need all the touted protection offered in the Amsoil propaganda? Probably not but like cubic inches, you don't need it all the time but it's nice to know you have it if you need it. Do I think Amsoil is the absolute best? I really don't know. But I do know that it gives me peace of mind. However, I am an open-minded person and I welcome all information from oil users, good or bad (after all, the real world user is where it counts particularly when backed up by UOA's). I'm not really interested in whether or not you like a particular companies marketing strategy, but by all means hit me with why you don't like a companies oil.

Cheers and can't wait to hit Surgis in 2010!

 

Does anyone else find it odd that with all the superiority claims made by Amsoil, that their lab reports don't actually show who ran these tests?It's like marketing a car and touting it's safety.Ifthe car actuallyperforms well in independant testing, they will tell you who did the test.You could evencheck their resources for yourself.You might find that you were lied to or you might find that they told the truth.

Where is the report of two Harley's rode rode hard and put away wet, where Amsoil was used in one and HD's 360 or Syn-3 was in the other, which shows the tear down of both engines and definitively proves that HD's products failedor caused abnormal wear?

Short of that, the only way I think I would be undoubtedly convinced as to is superiority would be by sending samples to the lab for comparison. Now the $50.00 dollar oil change, just turned into a $75.00 oil change,

Luckily, I have 1500 miles left before deciding which to go with... But, I do have a sample kit from Blackstone labs. It would at least be interesting to send my Syn3 off after changing. I sure will be disappointed if they tell me that I ruined my engine at 5k.

.

.

 

A little bit of the Amsoil BS is exposed on the Spectro Oil web site in the letter section. I came across it by checking out oil companies web sites. Real important is to use Internent Explorer not Foxfire because they have a old web site, Google Spectro Oil, click on letters and check maybe half way down the page. I don't like people that try to BS me into using their product!