Erik D. Schmid
ArboristSite Member
Dominator is a dual use oil, but it still works fine for use in saws. It seems however the Saber 100:1 is a better choice though. I am going to pick up a bottle today and give it a go.
100:1 killed only the best saw
- Thread starter wiley_p
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Erik D. Schmid
ArboristSite Member
Can you prove this Ben?
Prove what? That they are not certified for warranty use? Or that they are using outdated formulations?
Erik D. Schmid
ArboristSite Member
Both would be nice. I would really be impressed if you can. Do you believe everything they claim on their website about the abilities of their products false as well?
WoodTick007
Addicted to ArboristSite
Amsoil
Eric,
Why don't you contact Amsoil and request one of their chemist join the site to start posting some accurate information on amsoil products.
Ben,
Great information!!! Thanks for keeping us informed!
007
Eric,
Why don't you contact Amsoil and request one of their chemist join the site to start posting some accurate information on amsoil products.
Ben,
Great information!!! Thanks for keeping us informed!
007
Erik D. Schmid
ArboristSite Member
I have and it is their corporate policy to not get involved with internet fora where most people post under a false name and are rarely experts.
Erik, BTW I actually ran some Amsoil 100:1 this year through multiple pieces of equipment at my business. It did ok, but never performed any better than MX2T or Esso easy mix that I usually use. I did not notice less smoke as
they all are smokeless, I did notice more mettalic build up on the plugs insulator nose when using the 100:1. Frankyl I dont see the advantage to using less, oil and am well aware of the potential perils so why bother?
FWIW this stuff perfomes as good as any oil out there and its a lowly syn blend!http://www.imperialoil.ca/Canada-English/Files/Products_Lubes/IOCAENPVLESEasymix_2_cycle.pdf
they all are smokeless, I did notice more mettalic build up on the plugs insulator nose when using the 100:1. Frankyl I dont see the advantage to using less, oil and am well aware of the potential perils so why bother?
FWIW this stuff perfomes as good as any oil out there and its a lowly syn blend!http://www.imperialoil.ca/Canada-English/Files/Products_Lubes/IOCAENPVLESEasymix_2_cycle.pdf
Last edited:
ONe has to question how honest a company is when they use scam tests like the 3,4 ball wear test to hawk oil. They also in the past have claimed that ther products met certain specs that where conflicting. Liek saying that their AIO outboard oil met tcw3 as well as iso egd specs which it cant possibly. So in a nutshell I dont trust them as far as I could throw them.
Go to www.api.org and look up current service class license holders. Ill give you a hint. The only products that Amsoil has certified are their lowly, non full synthetic xl-7500 line and one 15w40 syn blend that I dont believe is even certified to the latest spec.
As for info on the composition of amsoil motor oil. I have the analysis(full work up, not just spectro) some where. Ill see if I can dig them up.
Thats a joke! Last time I talked to one of there so called tech people I came to the conclusion that the tech line didnt know anything more than the scads of amsoil peddlin salesman that roam the internet drummin up sales.....multi level scam er marketing at its best..
Mange
Addicted to ArboristSite
Hold on here, are you saying that an firm selling a pruduct does not respond to coustemers questions.
Why?
Why?
Erik I use Amsoil in almost all my stuff and sell it at my shop. That being said I have noticed quite a bit of hype in what they say over the last few years. 25,000 mile oil change? Maybe in some vehicles under ideal circumstances. Also what Ben says is true about most of their formulas not being approved for the specs they rate them for. Sure they may be great oils but they are still not tested and approved by API etc.
When a claim about a product is made ("It's the best" etc.) it is up to the manufacturer to back up the claim they make. The customer does not have to prove it wrong. So when Amsoil says a product does something a certain way or or it lasts so long, we want to see independant tests or real world use by other customers. We do not have to just take old Al's word that it's magic stuff.
Ben did you get to try Interceptor in anything yet?
When a claim about a product is made ("It's the best" etc.) it is up to the manufacturer to back up the claim they make. The customer does not have to prove it wrong. So when Amsoil says a product does something a certain way or or it lasts so long, we want to see independant tests or real world use by other customers. We do not have to just take old Al's word that it's magic stuff.
Ben did you get to try Interceptor in anything yet?
Last edited:
Yes, I did and its a good oil, but its pretty pricy here. Of course I wasnt buying direct either.
bighoss550
ArboristSite Lurker
quite a few years back, i built a yamaha banshee that ran very nice(82hp on the little dyno).
it was built for amsoil tcw3(not dual purpose, the snowmobile stuff) and camII fuel. it ran only on that. and at 110:1. anything else and it didnt work well.
so i try it in my sachs 112........ terrible. she dont like to start, run, or cut. it will, but u betcha im goin back to the 40:1 stuff now.
it also seems very finicky, as i am always adjustin the screws. is this normal for 100:1 in a saw? or is it somethin else im doin?
the amsoil is a fine oil im sure, but its defin not for everybody!!! but it gives u guys somethin to argue about
it was built for amsoil tcw3(not dual purpose, the snowmobile stuff) and camII fuel. it ran only on that. and at 110:1. anything else and it didnt work well.
so i try it in my sachs 112........ terrible. she dont like to start, run, or cut. it will, but u betcha im goin back to the 40:1 stuff now.
it also seems very finicky, as i am always adjustin the screws. is this normal for 100:1 in a saw? or is it somethin else im doin?
the amsoil is a fine oil im sure, but its defin not for everybody!!! but it gives u guys somethin to argue about
I think if most ignored the 100:1 and went richer or just used the other formulas at the usual (32-50:1) they would fair much better. I have used the 100:1 in several saws and as Ben said I saw no addvantage to this "less oil mix".
Almost anytime the Amsoil 2 Cycle oil comes up in a negative way in conversation it is 100:1 that I hear people talking about. The only other gripe is price. Most people using the other 2 Amsoil stroke products in quality equipment or vehicles either injected or 50:1+ seem to love it.
I must add that I don't know anyone off hand that has blown an engine at 100:1, but I will also say I don't know anyone that blew an engine at the recommended ratios either outside of extreme abuse or a case of "old crappy worn out motor".
Almost anytime the Amsoil 2 Cycle oil comes up in a negative way in conversation it is 100:1 that I hear people talking about. The only other gripe is price. Most people using the other 2 Amsoil stroke products in quality equipment or vehicles either injected or 50:1+ seem to love it.
I must add that I don't know anyone off hand that has blown an engine at 100:1, but I will also say I don't know anyone that blew an engine at the recommended ratios either outside of extreme abuse or a case of "old crappy worn out motor".
P_woozel
ArboristSite Guru
the 7900 seized due to 100:1 mix and the super tight tolerances between piston and jug, the saw wasnt really broken in yet, and there is also the inexperienced sawyer factor, the chain that was on the saw when I got it wasnt sharp, although the crewmember said he thought it was fine. and I'll say it again for the cheap seats Amsoil Dominator isnt even suggested at 100:1, they suggest 60:1 as max. I like it just fine at 40:1
P_woozel , Few questions for you. How much oil did you give your employees and how much gas did they mix it with? What oil where you using? What did the piston look like after you tore it down? Specificly wa sit seized on the exhaust side only or all the way around the cylinder? What kind of shape was the big end rob bearing in? Are you going to replace all the bearings?
P_woozel
ArboristSite Guru
ben, 7oz of Dominator. the pistn was seized tighter than heckmostly exhaust sde losts of ring material on the piston both bearings seem fine there was still a little slippery in the case, not much though, and there was no oil on the threads. I never found out how llong they ran it. It had to be showing lack of power before seizure, maybe not. It didnt apperar that they had messed with the high needle. though I still wonder about that. They did say about 2 gal maybe a little less of the mix whicch was 2.5 with half of the 7, so a little lean dont you think? though many have said its not.
Have you considered the fact that maybe the oil had nothing to do with it? The motors I have seen that where run without oil seize all the way around. I would be replaing alll the bearings while you got it apart. I have rebuilt motors after they where rtun with no mix and not replaced the bearings. Some run fine others lost a bearing in short order.
BTW Roughly 5 oz of oil to 2 galls would be 50:1 so I dont think you where lean on oil unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying.
BTW Roughly 5 oz of oil to 2 galls would be 50:1 so I dont think you where lean on oil unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying.
spacemule
The Peanut Gallery
How many ways does he have to say it? He says they mistakenly mixed half of 7 (7/2=3.5 oz) with 2 1/2 gallons of fuel. This is about the fourth time he's said this, and you're still missing his meaning.
Crofter
Addicted to ArboristSite
So the mixture was 3.5 oz. to 350 oz. gas which is 100 to 1 . I bet from the scoring on the exhast side that it might have been a combination of lean fuel to air mixture combined with the lean gas to oil ratio and a new tight saw. Not a good combination.
