I wonder if the MSDS or other information would lead to who makes the grease for Evinrude and Yamaha? I'm guessing they're re-branded products marked up 2x or more.
Before the country was locked-down, Lisa the Lube Chick would stop by the shop and talk oil. She said when she started with the company she noticed there were no Honda/Yamaha/Harley/other barrels on the shelf. Turns out dealerships usually order the cheapest oil they can, and "synthetic" is a blend of dino (dinosaur / mineral) oil of at least a tablespoon of synthetic per drum. If you ask your dealer to put in full-synthetic, well, maybe they stock it up front, maybe they don't, but you'll almost never see a mechanic run up to the front to grab 5 quarts of full synthetic, they just pump in dino oil, typically.
Oil is clear (think fuel oil), contaminants are not. It's the other junk that tends to form carbon deposits and sludge. Gasoline is the same, the stuff giving it the yellow tint is what's going to bake onto your piston, cylinder, valves, etc.
The moral of the story is change your own oil, or have the shop do it more often then the scheduled service interval.
I buy Honda oil because the price is in line or better than other brands and the quality is top-notch. For non-wet-clutch vehicles I buy 0W-(whatever they say this number should be) because it flows better at startup and reduces wear, plus only full synthetic can reach 0W, so what's in the bottle really should match the label in that case. For wet clutches I stick with oil made for the clutch; engineers figured out what oil would work best with their system given the vast array of situations the system would face, and the chance of me improving upon that is pretty remote--other than EPA regulations.
As far as I know, the EPA looks at some target numbers based on short-sighted goals. U.S. emissions are based on a gallon of fuel, in Europe it's based on reducing over-all emissions and fuel consumption, meaning their vehicles pollute more per liter burned, but burn fewer liters per mile, so cumulatively pollute less overall.
Also, the EPA doesn't seem to take cost-of-ownership into consideration. Running 50:1 ratios in 2-stroke engines, direct injection, ethanol gas, even the overly-lean fuel-air mixture shortens the lifespan of the engine, consuming more natural resources in replacing the vehicle, chainsaw, outboard motor, lawnmower, or any number of other things they over-regulate. Wouldn't it make more sense to keep that black-smoke belching Volvo on the road as a clean-burning vehicle where the owner can afford to replace the worn engine components instead of taxing them to death and charging exorbitant fees for everything?
Right now Ford us using twin turbos on their trucks to boot fuel economy, but they burn out between 40 and 60 thousand miles. The whole vehicle lifespan is an expected 120 thousand miles. Meanwhile Toyota uses naturally asperated engines, sound engineering, get slightly worse fuel economy for the weight of the vehicle, but they last 300K+ miles. The total cost of ownership goes down as does the impact to the environment, a win-win for everyone, including the animals.
Wow, that really went off track, hopefully someone finds it useful...
Anyway, I wonder who makes their grease and if there's a cost savings.