Mustang Bullitt Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Amsoil says that with documented use of their synthetic oil, you have a warranty that the lubricated part will not fail.

And, Ford says you have a lubricated part failure due to use of an uncertified oil like Amsoil that they won't cover the damage.

Doesn't it sound like using Amsoil will give you one or the other option of getting the repair covered? Either Ford will repair it under warranty, or Ford will be forced to provide you with a document showing their refusal to repair due to the use of Amsoil, which can be used to justify a claim against Amsoil.

It also sounds like Amsoil would likely consider filing a tertiary suit against Ford. A judgement of liability would need to be reached that would nearly insure that the repair gets covered by one or the other.

From what I understand (which isn't much!), Amsoil was the first fully synthetic. It may be true that Mobil 1 was the first semi-synthetic. I'm pretty sure Amsoil has well-documented independent results of its product testing. My guess is that Amsoil is pretty decent stuff and they have a fully synthetic 5W20.

_________________
DHG #2095


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: 01GTCOUPE on 2001-12-07 13:59 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
203 Posts
Going through the hassles and expense of potential litigation with Ford and Amsoil (unless you have REAL deep pockets) to settle a claim in case of a failure probably are not worth exploring. Choosing to go with Motorsport oil as recomended by the owners manual at least while the vehicle is within the warranty period may be prudent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
I have to agree. Unless you want to pay for the re-build or replacement and then seek reimbursement, you will have a broken car sitting around for a LONG time.

Many warranties are nothing more than sales gimmicks. I actually consider new car warranties reliable and fairly painless.

I respect anyone's right to do with their cars what they will. I personally don't see the need to "straddle the line" so to speak.
Ford says 5W20, hell, it's on the oil cap. If something goes wrong, I figure my best chance of success is with Ford, not some oil company.

But you know what opinions are worth.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crs2879 on 2001-12-07 16:16 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crs2879 on 2001-12-07 16:18 ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
Actually the manual clearly states that
5W-20 oil is recommended. I would imagine that they also recommend you not speed.
Ford is kind of in limbo anyway because they have required an oil that is not due to be required by API until March of 2002. I would imagine that this explains why we have got so many dealers acting like it is no big deal about the 5W-20 oil. It will all go away in March 2002.
I have changed my information regarding the new Ford specs on my web page. It should be worth a laugh or two.
http://www.quicksurf.com/ths/Bullitt/BUPG5/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Mid Life,

i think you have an excellent site. it's got a lot of good information and reference.

i don't understand why your using a 4 ball tests on your page? are you an amsoil dealer? as much good information you have on there i really think you should consider working with correct facts and the 4 ball test is not a valid motor oil test. it has no bearing on how well a motor oil will hold up. you have sliding surfaces in a motor, not rolling. there is no balls rolling in the motor. the four ball test is a grease test.

might i suggest too if you want to do some comparisions, that you can get an independant test from a company that is not conected in anyway with any one oil company and will supply you the actual astm numbers as to how well they perform compared to other oils. http://www.engineoilinfo.com


i totally agree though, like someone had said, why chance your warr? if it doesn't have that donut on the bottle, it hasn't passed any tests that can be proven. your taking a biased companies word for it. if you have a problem your leaving yourself holding the cost of repairs and court costs.

i think your extremely intelligent from what i have seen and very well read. i am finding it hard to understand why your walking that fence and giving advise that if someone was to take and experience a problem could include you in thier law suit. i do hope that in your contract as an amsoil distributor that you are covered in such a case by them.

becareful my friend.

bob
Member STLE
Lubricant Specialist
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
Bob,

I will try to answer each of your comments, perhaps I can teach by example...

thanks for the compliment on the site, it would not be there if it were not for everyone here at bullittclub.com contributing in one way or another..


The four ball wear test is an example of how manufactures use what looks to be the same test to compare the results when actually the tests are totally different, look at the example.... There aren't even any results given, just the the test description.......I only picked that one because it was long and deceptive.

I am not an Amsoil dealer.

The facts are correct, read it again. You think something is wrong quote it, I'll prove it or change it.....


Four Ball Wear Test (ASTM D 4172)
http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/DATABASE.CART/PAGES/D4172.htm?L+mystore+yqky2298

"evaluation of the anti-wear properties of fluid lubricants in sliding contact "
and while there are no balls rolling around in the engine I do believe there is some metal sliding on metal happening.


The GEASE Test Method D 2266
As a member of STLE you should know the difference...and I think you do.....


As far as http://www.engineoilinfo.com
First they want money, second It looks like they only give you 8 test results and if they use astm numbers then good because the 4 ball test is an ASTM TEST.........

I'm walking the fence???? ON what? You tell people that an extended drain is ok and will not violate the manufactures warranty is dependent on how nice the dealer is????????????

A lot of this discussion started when people (Not naming names) where bashing other peoples choices of oil when the product they were praising, (not mentionging names) did not meet Fords warranty either.
For some reason the rules you want to bash other people with do not apply for your products.

I am walking the FENCE, what in the hell are you talking about? IF anything that last paragraph about

"giving advise that if someone was to take and experience a problem could include you in thier law suit." Doesn't that more go to someone like YOU............

Still have not heard back from your company, I asked what the 4 ball wear test was on some of their products and if they approve of you telling people that extended drains would not violate the manufactuers warranty.....
I will let you know when they get back though..

becareful my friend.


_________________
Mid Life Crisis #388



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mid Life Crisis #388 on 2001-12-08 13:57 ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
WC,
Thanks for the info, however my reference to the 4 ball wear test was as an example to demonstrate that one makes sure they are comparing like tests to like tests. I did NOT say go out and compare the 4 ball wear tests before making your decisions on what oil to use. It did not even give any results of the test. Just an example of how the manufactures present the data. That was all.


_________________
Mid Life Crisis #388



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mid Life Crisis #388 on 2001-12-08 16:17 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
Understood, but to explain comparisons, I was suggesting that maybe ASTM D92, might help explain it better in relationship to results on engine oil. It's the same test used to find different results. Flash Point and Fire Point. One manufacturer may quote the results of ASTM D92 Flash Point against another manufacturers ASTM D92 Fire Point. Same test used but entirely different results. The one using Fire Point makes himself look better in the eyes of the consumer. Does that make sense? Tried to explain as best as I could.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
actually I liked mine better because the difference is in the test specs and not a different test. Had I put some numbered results at the end of the test then it would be easy to think that one was better than the other when in fact you could not compare the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
I'll try again. ASTM D92 was only an example, but one that related to engine oil. The title of your page " The Best Oil To Use!!!" followed by an ASTM D4172 example may lead one to go looking for that particular test on manufacturers TD sheets for engine oil. I know what your saying regarding comparisons and its a very valid point. For engines oils, I was just suggesting one other than D4172. How'd I do this time?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
Much better. But I 'm not changing it....
It is actually in your favor... those two tests are from Amsoil's own website. For two different oils they use two different test values making it impossible to compare the two, but making the more expensive oil LOOK better.
You could actually use this to show how Amsoil is cheating on a test that you hold to be worthless in the mortor oil business. And that by deceiving the public they are aware that the D4172 test is not worth anything...This would help to prove your point....
Hows that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-12-08 13:56, Mid Life Crisis #388 wrote:
Bob,

I will try to answer each of your comments, perhaps I can teach by example...

thanks for the compliment on the site, it would not be there if it were not for everyone here at bullittclub.com contributing in one way or another..


The four ball wear test is an example of how manufactures use what looks to be the same test to compare the results when actually the tests are totally different, look at the example.... There aren't even any results given, just the the test description.......I only picked that one because it was long and deceptive.

I am not an Amsoil dealer.

The facts are correct, read it again. You think something is wrong quote it, I'll prove it or change it.....


Four Ball Wear Test (ASTM D 4172)
http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/DATABASE.CART/PAGES/D4172.htm?L+mystore+yqky2298

"evaluation of the anti-wear properties of fluid lubricants in sliding contact "
and while there are no balls rolling around in the engine I do believe there is some metal sliding on metal happening.


The GEASE Test Method D 2266
As a member of STLE you should know the difference...and I think you do.....


As far as http://www.engineoilinfo.com
First they want money, second It looks like they only give you 8 test results and if they use astm numbers then good because the 4 ball test is an ASTM TEST.........

I'm walking the fence???? ON what? You tell people that an extended drain is ok and will not violate the manufactures warranty is dependent on how nice the dealer is????????????

A lot of this discussion started when people (Not naming names) where bashing other peoples choices of oil when the product they were praising, (not mentionging names) did not meet Fords warranty either.
For some reason the rules you want to bash other people with do not apply for your products.

I am walking the FENCE, what in the hell are you talking about? IF anything that last paragraph about

"giving advise that if someone was to take and experience a problem could include you in thier law suit." Doesn't that more go to someone like YOU............

Still have not heard back from your company, I asked what the 4 ball wear test was on some of their products and if they approve of you telling people that extended drains would not violate the manufactuers warranty.....
I will let you know when they get back though..

becareful my friend.


_________________
Mid Life Crisis #388



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mid Life Crisis #388 on 2001-12-08 13:57 ]</font>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

well i see as someone emailed me about how your not working on all cyl's must have been a correct asumption. if your trying to get me into some trouble with my company that i have been using for over 8 yrs myself, let me say i hope you quoted me verbatem, cause i'm sure you'd never want to "imply" something i said when in fact it wasnt true. personally i think your not a very nice person trying to play that game with me and the company i work with. pretty low don't you think trying to get something stired up with my lively hood?

i'll explain this as plainly as possible and if you want to accept it, so be it, other wise, i tire of trying to explain myself to you and i will not bother continuing as i have been doing nothing more than trying to educate some points and NOT SELL.

i have not badgered amsoil to sell schaeffers. don't care if you do or don't use it. your the idiot if you stick a non api oil in and extend your drains without talking with the dealer and covering your expensive investment.

i have repeatedly told you, we don't and wont' carry a 5w20 oil so where do u get off saying i'm knocking them to sell ours when in fact we don't even cary that oil?!!!

GOD you sure can get someone wound up with your ability to twist words and make things sound as they're not intended as.



one thing, i never said they can extend drains against the manufactures recomendations! don't twist my statements. i said "with the dealerships approval which is the one that has to do the warr work, then you could extend your drains", which is being more widely accepted by more manufactures around, but only if approved by such can they. in no way am i advocating extending drains with out such aproval. i hope you can understand that.


four ball wear tests
".1 This test method covers a procedure for making a preliminary evaluation of the anti-wear properties of fluid lubricants in sliding contact by means of the Four-Ball Wear Test Machine"

This test method covers the determination of the wear preventive characteristics of greases in sliding steel-on-steel applications. It is not intended to predict wear characteristics with metal combinations other than steel-on-steel or to evaluate the extreme pressure characteristics of grease where steel rides on steel. The evaluation of lubricating grease using the same machine is detailed in Test Method D2266. do you know the difference in viscosity between grease and motor oil? if the CSt is over 5000Cst's then this test is appropriate.

after the disputed and interesting article put out by redline about the 4 ball test, http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/Amsoil_S2000.pdf i have since heard from other leading individuals in the industry that what redline said had some serious merit. oh yeah, thier not a disgruntal employee either, just someone that decieded to stand up to some untruths.

they stated in short, amsoil loads up with high levels of (zddp maybe?) or whatever, causing good 4 ball tests on the bench initally, but when run in an engine for approx 800miles where effected by normal blowby gases, heat and such, then it performed no better than a standard synth motor oil thus the 4ball wasn't a true evailuation of the oil.
although i think the priciple idea is good, it is misleading. i think you'd find not many people consider the heat and blowby gases as a factor in this test.

now if you want to test load carrying capacity for an engine oil here is this test.
this test is used in motor oils and in some cases, greases as well. show me where you see the word motor oil in the 4 ball wear test listed on the astm board.

http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/DATABASE.CART/PAGES/D2782.htm?L+mystore+uzia0481+1007867656

timken.. 1.1 This test method covers the determination of the load-carrying capacity of lubricating fluids by means of the Timken Extreme Pressure Tester.

Note 1-This test method is suitable for testing fluids having a viscosity of less than about 5000 cSt (5000 mm2/s) at 40°C. For testing fluids having a higher viscosity, refer to Note 7 in 9.1.1.2

here is the point.. why not use the timken if testing for ep in the oil instead of the 4 ball? this test was designed for just that.
4 ball is for higher CST's like grease.

if you study more on the states of lubrication. this is where you have the difference of hydrodynamic/full fluid film, mixed film, and barrier film lubrication properties. you'll start to understand what and how shearing affects oil and how barrier lubricants make the difference in a good oil and not just is it synth or mineral.

now this isn't to say amsoil isn't good, just think that people need to understand when a company is using shaded practices for selling thier lubricants.

IMO, in think amsoil is ok, but i think ford's oil is as good as any of them since they do have a double sequence III tests where as most only provide a single test.

that's my story and i'm sticking to it!

bob
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com

ps, yes your so right, it is very importaint for me to stay in the middle as much as possible and not mislead people. if you read my board and site, you'll find i try not to descriminate against an oil because i don't like it, i try to base my opinion on numbers and facts from 3 party non biased companies and not listen to just what the company propaganda is.





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: bobistheoilguy on 2001-12-08 18:42 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: bobistheoilguy on 2001-12-08 19:18 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
after re reading several of your previous posts, i feel like the jerk for going off on you about the 4 ball test when in fact you did bring out a very good point on that test.

although i think alot of my anger is from your comment about how i tell people they can go against manufactures in extended oil drains then say you question the company i deal with about my comment.



bob
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,120 Posts
Bob,
You need to lighten up and don't forget to take your blood pressure meds.

First, no problem with not getting the examples the first time, we are all busy and in a hurry. No biggie.

also, now read slow,,, if an independent rep told you something that you thought was wrong, might you think it would be your responsibility to contact the company and see what their poition was? It is a big investment, and you said that your self.

I understand the extended drain thing with analysis. Weather you talk to the dealership or not, you will at least have some type of documentation on YOUR side if something happens.

By the way I never emailed Schaeffers about ANTHING you said or did not say. And I would never misquote you,,, on purpose.

I would like to thank you for helping to further my oil education. and if you need an EKG come on by I got some old wheatstone bridge circuits I think we can hook up....
Later

_________________
Mid Life Crisis #388



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mid Life Crisis #388 on 2001-12-08 23:16 ]</font>
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top