You don't need expensive engine oil

[Ohiocruiser]

I applaud your choice to save money, but just because you want to do it, doesn't mean others are wrong to spend more on other oils that claim to be better. I'm not saying you're wrong to choose Walmart oil, I'm just saying that while you have the right to do that...others also have the right to choose more expensive oils.

View attachment 72211

Me like expensive oil

 

[Stiletto]

Being first to market with X has nothing to do with being a boutique. Both can be simultaneously true and are merely coincidental.

View attachment 72206

In fact, being first to market with X yet failing to be the market leader for X suggests some bad luck or poor corporate leadership.


In my statement, I asked about what is the problem with ILSAC GF-6A. I am only getting crickets. Until we can clearly substantiate how ILSAC GF-6A is inadequate, we have no problem that is solvable by some other oil.

Your statement starting with "you presume" is the strawman. You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say, then attacking that false allegation about me.

View attachment 72207

Repeating a key point: if some other oil is better, then it has to be because ILSAC GF-6A is inadequate. Without evidence to substantiate ILSAC GF-6A inadequacy, there is no problem that a different oil would solve.

AMSOIL obtaining the first API rated synthetic was the point, I wasn't stating a causality. So, no, post hoc fallacy is not present. Nice try.

Clearly your opinion that they are boutique won't be changed, so I'll cease addressing that point.

Define "market leader". AMSOIL has a different business model and never sought to compete with the likes of Chevron, Mobil and Valvoline. If AMSOIL pushed the envelope in the 70's and continued to do so, but lacked the marketing or desire to cater to the frugal buyer.

Nothing is wrong with the ILSAC GF-6 specification. But, a company must spend money to apply for that label. If you tested an oil using the ASTM/API/SAE method and it exceeded the ILSAC-GF6, would that not be the preferred brand (even though they may not have the ILSAC label)?

I have never seen straw man used in that way. Usually, an extreme is posited (but was never stated by the opposing party), and that is argued. I guess in a way by discussing a presumption is a form of straw man, albeit flimsy. Nevertheless, you are guilty as well, since your statement, "what you mean to say is" places a presumptive bend to my assertion.

 

[Stiletto]

Years ago we had similar discussions on the motorcycle boards too. Many of us (self included) were running shell t6 15w40 in our bikes. It's a diesel oil (not energy conserving) which met many of the requirements for the bike. No issues here with engine or clutch across multiple bikes, each in excess of 40K miles (one had 85K).

Imagine minds getting blown when using diesel oils for bikes!.

Same thing happened in the Subaru community. Rotella became the "go to" oil because it didn't burn off like other brands.

 

[GennyGuy]

Btw. Both meet minimal requirements. View attachment 72199View attachment 72200

Best response I've see all day.

 

[arencambre]

I applaud your choice to save money, but just because you want to do it, doesn't mean others are wrong to spend more on other oils that claim to be better.

My objection is that if the record isn't set straight, then others like me risk being misinformed.

No judgment if you choose to spend more than you need to on oils (oops, judgy statement just typed ), but the decision to do so is not backed by sound evidence.

Clearly your opinion that they are boutique won't be changed, so I'll cease addressing that point.

"Boutique" is a reference to the size of the operation. For example, a firm with only 300-something employees in the petroleum products space is absolutely a boutique as it suggests a company size that is a single-digit percent of the mainstream players in this space.

Nothing is wrong with the ILSAC GF-6 specification.

Thank you. Ergo, there is no problem to solve with boutique oils. Case closed.

 

[Stiletto]

My objection is that if the record isn't set straight, then others like me risk being misinformed.

No judgment if you choose to spend more than you need to on oils (oops, judgy statement just typed ), but the decision to do so is not backed by sound evidence.


"Boutique" is a reference to the size of the operation. For example, a firm with only 300-something employees in the petroleum products space is absolutely a boutique as it suggests a company size that is a single-digit percent of the mainstream players in this space.


Thank you. Ergo, there is no problem to solve with boutique oils. Case closed.

The record HAS been set straight...with studies showing that certain "boutique" brands outperform other mainstream brands. If you can't cite any reports/studies that price otherwise, then you are the one propagating the misinformation.

Ah, so company size is the driving factor? But, what if that small company has the largest share of their market as it pertains to sales?? Market disruptors usually start out as small players, e.g. Apple, Amazon, Tesla.

You are quite adept at avoiding the argument. I'd declare "case closed" too, if I had no facts to back up my claims.

 

[AtomicGTL]

brb putting walmart oil in my stinger while Walmart certified tech gives me a wink

 

[bfglitch]

My objection is that if the record isn't set straight, then others like me risk being misinformed.

No judgment if you choose to spend more than you need to on oils (oops, judgy statement just typed ), but the decision to do so is not backed by sound evidence.


"Boutique" is a reference to the size of the operation. For example, a firm with only 300-something employees in the petroleum products space is absolutely a boutique as it suggests a company size that is a single-digit percent of the mainstream players in this space.


Thank you. Ergo, there is no problem to solve with boutique oils. Case closed.

Still beating that dead horse.

Your whole argument is judgement and based off of your opinion. Call it misinformation, call it not being backed by sound advice, but until you get a degree in chemistry and chemical engineering, what you're saying is completely opinion and can also be considered "misinformation" and "not being backed by sound advice" simply because you say cheap oil meets specs. Yes....walmart oil meets spec...but just because you're happy with meeting spec doesn't mean the more expensive brands are wrong with their claims.

Once again, while "boutique" oils are more expensive, they MAY exceed the recommendations by Kia for engine oil. Also there have been tests, both by large labs as well as smaller independent labs (and not paid for by boutique oil companies) that have proven that some of the more expensive "boutique" oils provide better protection.

And no..I don't have a degree in chemistry or chemical engineering. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. (no I didn't)

 

[arencambre]

The record HAS been set straight...with studies showing that certain "boutique" brands outperform other mainstream brands. If you can't cite any reports/studies that price otherwise, then you are the one propagating the misinformation.

Step one is is to define what is inadequate about ILSAC GF-6. Until that is done, there is nothing to be better than. At best, it's just economical vs. expensive versions of "good enough".

Ah, so company size is the driving factor? But, what if that small company has the largest share of their market as it pertains to sales?? Market disruptors usually start out as small players, e.g. Apple, Amazon, Tesla.

Yes, a key driver of whether something is "boutique" is relative market size. Apple started out as boutique, and today it is not.

until you get a degree in chemistry and chemical engineering, what you're saying is completely opinion and can also be considered "misinformation" and "not being backed by sound advice" simply because you say cheap oil meets specs

No, I am presuming that Kia, which 1. designed and manufactured our cars, 2. does not sell engine oil, and 3. benefits from a reputation for reliability, is acting rationally. Therefore, I presume rationality of Kia's engine-oil specification. That reasonable presumption does not require either degree you mentioned. In fact, I'll hereby admit that my doctorate is in engineering management, so I do not have a degree like either that you mentioned.

As mentioned above, I invite someone to show me, objectively, why Kia's selected motor-oil standard is unsound. Without a problem to fix, it is not possible to do better, so allegations of superiority of other oils are irrelevant.

If anything, it is likely that even ILSAC GF-6 and "full synthetic" are too high of a standard because Kia used to recommend lower engine-oil standards on the same engine, as per photos of older manuals provided earlier in this discussion. That even further kills off the idea that there is value in allegedly "better" oils.

It's time to stop repeating boutique oil-marketer propaganda. Unless we can find a problem with Kia's standard, there is no basis for using expensive engine oil.

 

[bfglitch]

Guess I should have just smiled and nodded from the beginning.

 

[AtomicGTL]

Guess I should have just smiled and nodded from the beginning.

Or be a stone cold killer like my guy

 

[arencambre]

Or be a stone cold killer like my guy

Any guesses where that photo was taken? :-D

 

[AtomicGTL]

Any guesses where that photo was taken? :-D

Near a walmart

 

[Stiletto]

Step one is is to define what is inadequate about ILSAC GF-6. Until that is done, there is nothing to be better than. At best, it's just economical vs. expensive versions of "good enough".

As mentioned above, I invite someone to show me, objectively, why Kia's selected motor-oil standard is unsound. Without a problem to fix, it is not possible to do better, so allegations of superiority of other oils are irrelevant.

If anything, it is likely that even ILSAC GF-6 and "full synthetic" are too high of a standard because Kia used to recommend lower engine-oil standards on the same engine, as per photos of older manuals provided earlier in this discussion. That even further kills off the idea that there is value in allegedly "better" oils.

It's time to stop repeating boutique oil-marketer propaganda. Unless we can find a problem with Kia's standard, there is no basis for using expensive engine oil.

You have a doctorate in engineering management and you completely dismiss the methods used in ASTM/SAE/API in lieu of the ILSAC standards?!! Wow...you should ask for a refund from the learning institute which sold you that degree.

The ILSAC GF-6 is not a "problem" or "inadequate". It will be surpassed someday, just as GF-5 was. Nor is Kia's standard a problem. Your justification to abstain from oil that performs better than other, sometimes cheaper, oil because it lacks a ILSAC label or costs more is not based on science!

 

[arencambre]

Near a walmart

Haha! The nearest Walmart (with its sweet, sweet Super Tech oil!) is about 27 miles from that spot.

The ILSAC GF-6 is not a "problem" or "inadequate". It will be surpassed someday, just as GF-5 was. Nor is Kia's standard a problem.

Bingo. Yet again, we lack a rational basis for any benefit to an oil alleged to exceed that standard. If the pretty label or the marketer's messaging makes you feel better, then meh?

 

[Ohiocruiser]

Near a walmart

Close enough

 

[stoopid]

And no..I don't have a degree in chemistry or chemical engineering. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. (no I didn't)

That's my line!

 

[bfglitch]

That's my line!

Not my fault you didn't use it yet in this thread

 

[Ohiocruiser]

Is it a time to bring oil additives into discussion yet??

 

[arencambre]

Is it a time to bring oil additives into discussion yet??

NOOOO!!!!!! (flees the discussion)