Ford Forums is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. We discuss all Ford models on the forum. Registered Users do not see the above ads. Please Register - It's Free!
yup. great oil. but I have no idea why they discontinued marketing it. the
only way to get it now is from Napa. napa 15-40 all fleet is valvoline all
fleet in a Napa package.
<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:ato1v115v21ul4ufqhldsid9auh45nih1u@4ax.com...
> Valvoline AllFleet is one oil I used a LOT of when in "the business".
> Also used a lot of Shell - Rotella on the farm, fleet, and industrial
> equipment and their premium normal oil (can't remember the name any
> more) on a lot of other vehicles.
> Also used a lot of HAvoline, Gastrol GTX, and Kendall GT1.
> Never much of a fan of Quaker State or Penzoil.
> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
"CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.com> wrote in message
news:db6If.20030$0H1.11772@trnddc04...
>
> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:45c57vF62fgfU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "tom" <tjctransport@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:9g2If.22$hI1.5@fe11.lga...
>>> my snake oil comment was based on the fact that when a dealer tried to
>>> sell
>>> it to me, and me on it, he handed me a "comparison" sheet of different
>>> oils,
>>> and amsoil synthetic was at the absolute bottom of the list when
>>> compared to
>>> all the other "inferior" brands when it came to the A.P.I. ratings. I
>>> pointed this little fact out to him and his answer was "oh, those
>>> ratings
>>> don't mean anything". for the record, the valvoline all fleet plus that
>>> I
>>> had always used was at the top of the A.P.I. ratings.
>>
>> The API have traditionally set a *lower* limit on oil quality below which
>> is unacceptable. There are always two current ratings, one being the
>> latest and improved while the other is the previous standard which is
>> being run-out.
>> Besides there being a cost to being certified a lack of certification
>> might be because a higher level of certain elements are included in the
>> oil than are set by the standard. This might not be a bad thing for
>> engine wear but might be detrimental to catalyst life if used and burnt
>> in a worn engine for instance.
>>
>> In general there are plenty of superior oils that do meet and exceed API
>> ratings. There is no better oil than Mobil1 0w/40. Other viscosity grades
>> of M1 do not have the same chemistry and are therefore not quite as good
>> for long drain intervals. The 15w/50 is also superior but the viscosity
>> is not suitable for most engines. This advice only holds good for M1 and
>> other brands differ but plenty of brands do produce equivalent oils.
>>
>> Huw
>>
>
> Your post implies that Mobil 1 does not meet or exceed API ratings. That
> is simply not true.
No No I didn't mean to imply that at all. It was obviously clumsily written.
On the contarary, Amsoil is the only oil I know of that doesn't meet minimum
API standards.
You do so because you're trying to bring AmSoil up to the
> level of Mobil 1. You mention the inferiority of AmSoil, then try to say,
> essentially, that Mobil 1 is the same. That's just not accurate.
See above.
Although not all M1 grades are to the same standard all meet API but not all
meet the exacting extended drain interval standards of mainly European
manufacturers. All M1 oils have a superb base oil and quality standard but
do not have the additive package to disperse contaminants for those extended
intervals of 15000 miles and above.
>
> Your argument in defense of AmSoil is that it doesn't meet API ratings
> because it's better. That's silly. That's why the term is "meet or
> exceed."
I am not a defender of amsoil but do know something of their oil. They may
well exceed the API standard by some margin except for a specific area that
I explained which prevents accreditation. Just because it cannot be approved
for the API standard does not automatically infer that it is inferior
[though some oils might well be inferior so watch out].
AmSoil may have more "stuff" than the ratings require, but it
> doesn't meet the minimums for protection, and therefore doesn't even
> submit its snakeoil for approval.
>
I believe Amsoil is better oil than most API approved oil but I have no
reason to suppose it is any better than the latest high performance oils
from other manufacturers that meet mb229.5 or equivilent. Personally I would
use these in preference to any Amsoil product.
Absolutely no reason to use any of these superior oils [amsoil, M1 0w/40 or
otherwise] unless their potential can be and is exploited.
<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:ato1v115v21ul4ufqhldsid9auh45nih1u@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 11:15:05 -0500, "tom" <tjctransport@optonline.net>
> wrote:
>
>>my snake oil comment was based on the fact that when a dealer tried to
>>sell
>>it to me, and me on it, he handed me a "comparison" sheet of different
>>oils,
>>and amsoil synthetic was at the absolute bottom of the list when compared
>>to
>>all the other "inferior" brands when it came to the A.P.I. ratings. I
>>pointed this little fact out to him and his answer was "oh, those ratings
>>don't mean anything". for the record, the valvoline all fleet plus that I
>>had always used was at the top of the A.P.I. ratings.
>
> Valvoline AllFleet is one oil I used a LOT of when in "the business".
> Also used a lot of Shell - Rotella on the farm, fleet, and industrial
> equipment and their premium normal oil (can't remember the name any
> more) on a lot of other vehicles.
Allfleet or mutifleet oils are those that meet API S standards for petrol
vehicles as well as API C standards for diesel. Today they almost always
meet API CH4 for diesel which is a Super High Performance Diesel [SHPD]
standard for extended drain intervals up to 45000kms.
Combining this high detergent long drain specification with approval for
petrol engines gives the highest quality dino oil available today but if
used in an old petrol engine with many existing deposits it might cause a
problem.
The main drawback is that multifleet [mixed petrol and diesel] heavy duty
oils are mainly available as 15w/40 viscosity which is not always suitable
for all engines. Apart from the viscosity this type of oil is superior in
many ways to lesser synthetics.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:42:49 GMT, "CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.com>
wrote:
>Your post implies that Mobil 1 does not meet or exceed API ratings. That is
>simply not true. You do so because you're trying to bring AmSoil up to the
>level of Mobil 1. You mention the inferiority of AmSoil, then try to say,
>essentially, that Mobil 1 is the same. That's just not accurate.
>
>Your argument in defense of AmSoil is that it doesn't meet API ratings
>because it's better. That's silly. That's why the term is "meet or
>exceed." AmSoil may have more "stuff" than the ratings require, but it
>doesn't meet the minimums for protection, and therefore doesn't even submit
>its snakeoil for approval.
>
>CJB
>
The FACT is Amsoil does not have an API specifcation.
This MAY be because it does not meet the spec, or it MAY be they are
too whatever to submit their oil for testing. Either way, the product
is an unknown entity - and if I can not be assured it meets the
minimum requirements and will not cause problems in my engine I will
NOT pay their premium price for their product. If I want to run a
synthentic oil, which up to this point I have not determined to be a
significant advantage to me, I will use one that meets and excedes all
specificatioons called for by the manufacturer of my engine. At this
point, this means an API spec.
I may use a different viscosity than called for by the manufacturer -
one that I feel comfortable with for my operating conditions. I feel
I'm qualified to make that decision for myself and live with any
consequences because viscosity is something that is reasonably easily
understood, where the API specs are a bit more complex. I'm willing to
trade off a small percentage of fuel economy for the aditional
protection I believe my engine recieves from my choice of oil.
I won't try to convince anyone that they should do the same.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:05:38 -0500, "tom" <tjctransport@optonline.net>
wrote:
>yup. great oil. but I have no idea why they discontinued marketing it. the
>only way to get it now is from Napa. napa 15-40 all fleet is valvoline all
>fleet in a Napa package.
><clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
>news:ato1v115v21ul4ufqhldsid9auh45nih1u@4ax.com...
> > Valvoline AllFleet is one oil I used a LOT of when in "the business".
>> Also used a lot of Shell - Rotella on the farm, fleet, and industrial
>> equipment and their premium normal oil (can't remember the name any
>> more) on a lot of other vehicles.
>> Also used a lot of HAvoline, Gastrol GTX, and Kendall GT1.
>> Never much of a fan of Quaker State or Penzoil.
>> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
>> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
>http://www.SecureIX.com ***
>
Last I checked it was still available in bulk from my wholesaler, but
I have not bought any in over a year.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:18:25 -0000, "Huw"
<hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>The main drawback is that multifleet [mixed petrol and diesel] heavy duty
>oils are mainly available as 15w/40 viscosity which is not always suitable
>for all engines. Apart from the viscosity this type of oil is superior in
>many ways to lesser synthetics.
>
>Huw
>
It is suitable for most vehicles in all but the coldest conditions if
you are not worried about the last little bit of fuel economy. Even on
my 3.8 Pontiac, which recommends SAE 5W30 API SH oil, 15W40 is
perfectly acceptable to -7C or +20F without engine pre-heat.
During the winter it could be just a tad on the heavy side, but I use
10W40, which even according to GM tables is acceptable to -20C (even
though they say never to use 10W40 - but allow 10W30 - which makes no
sense at all - don't even start talking about the supposed shear
induced viscosity breakdown in 10W40 oils)
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:bpa2v1lf2omcj57efrl56fue42tfqqvt22@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:18:25 -0000, "Huw"
> <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>The main drawback is that multifleet [mixed petrol and diesel] heavy duty
>>oils are mainly available as 15w/40 viscosity which is not always suitable
>>for all engines. Apart from the viscosity this type of oil is superior in
>>many ways to lesser synthetics.
>>
>>Huw
>>
> It is suitable for most vehicles in all but the coldest conditions if
> you are not worried about the last little bit of fuel economy. Even on
> my 3.8 Pontiac, which recommends SAE 5W30 API SH oil, 15W40 is
> perfectly acceptable to -7C or +20F without engine pre-heat.
> During the winter it could be just a tad on the heavy side, but I use
> 10W40, which even according to GM tables is acceptable to -20C (even
> though they say never to use 10W40 - but allow 10W30 - which makes no
> sense at all - don't even start talking about the supposed shear
> induced viscosity breakdown in 10W40 oils)
I won't ;-)
I use a multifleet 15w/40 in almost all my vehicles although almost all are
diesel.
In the Diesel Range Rover and Land Cruiser I use the highest standard heavy
duty synthetic 10/w40 which can run for 60,000 miles or more given the right
engine systems. I use it because I run at double oil change intervals in the
Toyota at 10,000 miles and the RR engine runs to 15,000 as standard but I
want to use an even more superior oil than specified.
Lawrence Glickman <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in article
<qvs1v1p0dklqd6olk95ib3144je5ekbcje@4ax.com>...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:09:42 GMT, "Arthur Dent" <uce@fcc.gov> wrote:
>
> >> >"Lawrence Glickman" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:f5hvu15uc5r4ms6snp2n5jc1ctomv09r76@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> Amsoil is a ponzi scheme like Amway soap. It might work, but that
> >> isn't the IDEA behind it. The IDEA behind it is to sell inventory to
> >> some other sucker ( eh...associate ) so they can find a sucker (
> >> eh...customer ) or another associate to fall into the same TRAP!
> >>
> >> If it *works,* that's icing on the cake.
> >>
> >> Lg
> >>
> >
> >Bub, that is an uninformed, offensive and insulting statement. As a
former
> >Amway distributor
>
> *former distributor* because you were scammed, just like the rest of
> the people I know personally who became involved with that
> organization.
>
> Two words:
>
> Ponzi Scheme
>
If Amsoil/Amway were, indeed, "Ponzi Schemes", the companies would have
collapsed a long time ago - leaving a handful of people rich, and the
majority of the company investors holding the bag.
"Ponzi Scheme" and "Pyramid Scheme" are NOT interchangeable terms.
You really ought to Google terms such as "Ponzi Scheme" and find out what
they actually mean before trying to impress people by using them as a "$50
words" in your posts.
Your mis-use/mis-application of the term "Ponzi Scheme" only serves to
position you as a bullshitting, bag 'o' wind.......
"Lawrence Glickman" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:qvs1v1p0dklqd6olk95ib3144je5ekbcje@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:09:42 GMT, "Arthur Dent" <uce@fcc.gov> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Lawrence Glickman" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:f5hvu15uc5r4ms6snp2n5jc1ctomv09r76@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> Amsoil is a ponzi scheme like Amway soap. It might work, but that
> >> isn't the IDEA behind it. The IDEA behind it is to sell inventory to
> >> some other sucker ( eh...associate ) so they can find a sucker (
> >> eh...customer ) or another associate to fall into the same TRAP!
> >>
> >> If it *works,* that's icing on the cake.
> >>
> >> Lg
> >>
> >
> >Bub, that is an uninformed, offensive and insulting statement. As a
former
> >Amway distributor
>
> *former distributor* because you were scammed, just like the rest of
> the people I know personally who became involved with that
> organization.
>
> Two words:
>
> Ponzi Scheme
No, not "scammed". I understood how the system works and was in no way fool
enough to think that I would "get rich overnight". I did the work and sold
merchandise to retail customers as well as sponsoring other distributors. My
disagreement was with those people who were abusing the system, spending
more of their efforts trying to push their "tools" instead of teaching
people the correct way of doing business, lining their own pockets with
money and encouraging people to go into debt to buy these "tools" without
teaching them how to strike a profitable balance and manage their expenses.
It's a very short-sighted practice.
If you were to correlate it with auto repair, think of a repair franchise in
which the franchise kept pushing the store owner to keep buying tools to fix
cars and keep getting other people "in" and buying tools, but never actually
taught them how to properly fix cars. A business run like that will
continually chew through an enourmous amount of people, leaving them
disatisfied, in debt and disillusioned while the people selling the tools
make a nice bit of dough.
I was unaware of this aspect when I first started but I'm not stupid. I knew
that people were making money this way. After a while I realized that there
was a problem but wasn't quite sure what it was. I knew how to calculate the
costs for production of these things and estimate the profits. I started
asking questions and learned that there had been a running battle for some
years between those who were making big profits from the independent tool
system and those who wanted to see the business run as it was supposed to
be. Eventually I joined that battle. When those who were well entrenched in
the corrupted tool system began trying to cut off my access to others who
wanted to keep the system pure, and attempting to subvert communications
within my organization and with other like-minded organizations, I knew I
had to take drastic action. I didn't have the resources to fight a
protracted legal battle (and there have been a number of those, though they
try to kep them hidden) so the only option was to cut off *their* resources.
I and my entire organization resigned, and others with whom we were in
contact followed suit. The wholesale defections put a huge dent in the
income on which they were depending and tipped the scales out of their
favor. No longer being supported by the masses of lower-level people
consuming their "product" which could not be sold outside of the system,
their organizations imploded and collapsed, destroying their private little
"inside" business and exposing their ruse.
The business model itself is not a problem. The problem lies with who
unfairly try to tip the scales in their own favor, making the largest part
of their income off the backs of those they are ostensibly trying to help,
and leaving them to try to learn how to *really* be successful on their own.
When, for the most part, those multitudes who are newly recruited into the
business have no previous business experience, only a few will figure it out
in time to prevent their going broke. The rest will leave, convinced that it
was all a scam and never realizing that they *could* have been successful
had they been given the correct guidance. And that gives the entire business
a bad name, hurts those of us who try to do business in an ethical and
responsible manner, and hurts those who would otherwise discover that there
*are* ways of becoming successful outside of the 9-5 employee route.
A mechanic needs tools, but if he spends all of his time and money playing
with his tools and buying new ones but never fixing any cars, he won't stay
in the mechanic business very long.
"Arthur Dent" <uce@fcc.gov> wrote in message
news:DCsIf.5733$lG.2609@trndny01...
>
>
> I don't care if my mechanic smokes a little dope on week-ends...as long as
> he isn't high when he's fixing my car.
>
>
Yes, like that is going to happen...
I don't really care what others want to do either, except when it effects
me, or mine. Just like drunks, pot heads and drug addicts quickly reach the
point where there is no line between weekend use and everyday use.
Eventually nothing else maters except using their drugs... That is where
the problems start.
Clackamas County Sheriff's deputy, David Verbos, 36, is accused in the
indictment of holding-up the Mid Valley Bank located in Wilsonville as well
as armed robberies at various area stores including the pharmacies at the
McMinnville Bi-Mart and Wilsonville Target stores as well as a quick-cash
outlet in Newberg. http://www.kgw.com/news-local/storie...d.ac3f549.html
Linear Mode
