Sir Anthony Stamer, who works for Jet Petroleum Ltd., has pointed out to us that the comments made last month about jet Motor Oil 30, which we referred to as Jet 30, was unfair to the reputation of the entire range of Jet lubricants of S.A.E. 30 viscosity. He goes on to say :—
“Motoring Which? wished to compare modern multigrade oils with a straight mineral oil (devoid of all additives) of the type which we all used without question in pre-war days—indeed, I rather believe that your favourite motor oil’ appeared in this form until well after the war period. As a readily-obtainable example of the latter type of engine oil, Motoring Which? chose Jet Motor Oil 30 (please note its correct title) from the comprehensive range of lubricants marketed by Jet. This is a high-quality straight mineral oil which consequently sells at a realistic price and in considerable quantity—it is in fact the basic stock from which Jet’s more sophisticated grades are blended, and is an excellent product within its natural limits. Many motorists regularly use it, in the interests of immediate financial economy. But nobody would expect it to prevent engine wear to the same degree as a modern Multigrade.
For those motorists who prefer their engine lubricant to contain all those additives which are now expected in a first-class blended lubricant, there is the Jet Premium range. Further, Jet Multigrade 10W-30 and 20W-50 complete the picture at the top end of the scale. Unfortunately, Motoring Which? did not include either of these oils in their tests. To refer to ‘Jet 30′ as you do, without further qualification, is somewhat akin to saying ‘Ferrari’ and no more when you wish to refer to some characteristic of, say, the type 275LM. The reader is left with the impression that you must be referring to all products from that maker, when in fact the various specifications are highly diverse.
I would add that no Jet lubricants are what hack British journalists (and I do not refer to you, Sir!) love to term ‘cut-price products’ – Jet decided from the very start that lubricant quality would be their major concern, and that a policy of second-rate products at sensationally low prices was definitely ‘out.’ As a Jet employee I am of course heavily biassed, but I know that our lubricants are of sterling quality. Were they not, I can assure you that I would not use them in my own cars, nor would I write you this letter.”
What we intended to imply was that, as ordinary mineral oils clog up an engine to a greater extent than modern multigrade additive lubricants, and as we assume that in general Motor Sport’s readers are discerning car owners who do not have to scrape the barrel when buying oil, over any sort of mileage there are more suitable oils than the mineral oil tested by Motoring Which? Of this Jet Motor Oil 30 they said it did not keep impurities finely dispersed, and let contaminating particles clot together, right from the beginning and Jet recommended changing it twice as often as the other oils (all of which did keep particles finely dispersed). It eventually dumped out sludge on to the engine (as did Co-op Cascade 20W/30—none of the other oils did this). It allowed dense varnish to build up on the pistons (as did Cascade 20W/30 after 12,000 miles—none of the other oils did this).
Jet can hardly think we are antagonistic to their products, because when this petrol first appeared, pioneering cut-price (“5d. off”) brands, we went up to their refinery in 1961 and published a story about it, and only this year the Continental Correspondent wrote: “I am not the least bit dubious about Jet petrol as I often use it in the E-type and applaud strongly their cutting of costs by eliminating Tigers, Blondes, Knives and Forks and Personalities and just’ getting on with the job of selling petrol at competitive prices.”—W. B.