From: Sophie on 5 Apr 2007 11:42 On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 08:33:05 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >Sophie wrote: > >> Wow, never seen so much hatred towards one comanies oil > >There is no hatred. Amsoil itself points out that other than the XL-7500 >product, that their oil is not API certified, and explains why this is >the case. Unfortunately, you have many resellers that will say anything >to make money, and that don't understand anything about oil, engines, >emissions control, etc.. The people that buy inappropriate products for >their vehicles from these salespeople are their legal prey. Legal prey? Wow sounds like hatred to me
From: SMS on 5 Apr 2007 13:19 Sophie wrote: > Legal prey? Wow sounds like hatred to me It's not hatred toward the company. They cannot control their independent sales people, who are the chief culprits in spewing the misinformation. On the other hand, even the corporate site does a good job in providing misinformation. For example, look at "https://www.amsoil.com/storefront/xlf.aspx". They start with the false premise that the conventional recommendation for oil changes is 3000 miles, yet no vehicle manufacturer, and no reputable mechanic, recommends oil changes at such a ridiculously short interval; the only entities pushing 3000 mile oil changes are companies like Jiffy Lube, that profit from such nonsense. If Amsoil intentionally misleads people with the 3000 mile nonsense, what about their other marketing? How much of it is accurate, and how much of it is similarly self-serving?
From: aarcuda69062 on 5 Apr 2007 19:40 In article <724a135do77rk8o657qakehssouiqspkvi(a)4ax.com>, Sophie <none(a)yours> wrote: > >Well, that would certainly fit you then, wouldn't it? > >You claimed that Amsoil had been tested and didn't have any > >effect on catalytic converters, but then you posted clear > >evidence that you didn't have a clue on -what- that effect would > >be. > > I didn't claim that about Amsoil, only about ZDDP and catalytic > converters. You most certainly did. Your exact words were; --begin quote-- "Let me chime in here. Amsoil's non API certified oil has been tested, at least the ASL 5W-30 and the results show that there was no effect on the catalytic converter. While in theory ZDDP can cause the converter to plug up, the main reason for them to plug up is something seriouly wrong with the engine." --end quote-- > However there is a case study on the Amsoil site, but you would just > blow that off now wouldn't you, despite it being indepedantly tested. You got that right. > You must have some wierd beef with Amsoil I have a strong dislike of all snake oils and those that peddle them. Matters not to me whether you think that's wierd or even weird.
From: SMS on 5 Apr 2007 20:41 aarcuda69062 wrote: > I have a strong dislike of all snake oils and those that peddle > them. Matters not to me whether you think that's wierd or even > weird. Now let's not get too carried away with the fact that Sophie don't speak no good English.
From: Sophie on 5 Apr 2007 21:57
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:40:35 -0400, aarcuda69062 <nonelson(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >In article <724a135do77rk8o657qakehssouiqspkvi(a)4ax.com>, > Sophie <none(a)yours> wrote: > > >> >Well, that would certainly fit you then, wouldn't it? >> >You claimed that Amsoil had been tested and didn't have any >> >effect on catalytic converters, but then you posted clear >> >evidence that you didn't have a clue on -what- that effect would >> >be. >> >> I didn't claim that about Amsoil, only about ZDDP and catalytic >> converters. > >You most certainly did. >Your exact words were; >--begin quote-- >"Let me chime in here. Amsoil's non API certified oil has been >tested, at least the ASL 5W-30 and the results show that there >was no effect on the catalytic converter. > >While in theory ZDDP can cause the converter to plug up, the main >reason for them to plug up is something seriouly wrong with the >engine." >--end quote-- > >> However there is a case study on the Amsoil site, but you would just >> blow that off now wouldn't you, despite it being indepedantly tested. > >You got that right. There is your problem |