Rebuttal: Consumers' Retort

[ScharfR@aol.com]

I'm not a great defender of "Consumer Reports," but I did read the report on
oil (it's part of my job, ok?).  I found that it was quite well done and
informative. Several points of interest to Audi owners, turbo owners in
particular, were noted:

- The explanation of the additives common to most oils was the best I've seen
in a consumer-oriented publication. Most folks can't make sense of the more
arcane information from the engineering societies or petroleum company
technical literature.  This was something that a peson could read to gain a
decent basic understanding.

- The additive post-treatments (STP, Slick 50) were actually tested in the
fleet and laboratories.  A bit more arduous than the test tube observation
erroniously noted in the original post.  CU's bottom line is the same as that
of most car companies - Audi included - when they say that they see no reason
of spend money on the supplementary additives.

- CU recommends - unlike Audi - changing the oil filter at every change.

- They point out that synthetic oils performed no better _in their tests_
than mineral oil, but also suggested that if your driving falls into the
extreme category (high temperature, high load, very low temperature) you
might see some benefit.

- CU also noted that turbo and diesel applications were not covered by their
testing and may require different oil change schedules than those suggested
for gasoline engines.

My take away from the article was that it provided a much better level of
understanding of oils, in general, than I've seen elsewhere.  I found little
to argue with in the test methodology or the conclusions.  There was no
marketing hyperbole to sort through, just factual information.  No
advertising claims, and no data offered without a basis for comparison.

Now here's the part where we have to think for ourselves. If you feel that
your operating conditions are significantly more (or less) severe than the
applications tested, then atleast you have a baseline recommendation from
which to make your personal choice.  For my money, that sure beats some oil
company advertising claim.

A few more words on Consumer Reports, before the flames start.  I've been to
their auto test center in Connecticut and find it to be better equipped and
better staffed than anything any of the "enthusiast magazines" ever dreamt of
having.  The organization does have a point of view, as expressed in their
analysis of cars, toasters and wall paint; but I rarely can find a hole in
their results.  When it comes to cars, I also rarely agree that their
criteria are right for my needs, but we are a peculiar bunch, aren't we?