Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: 3311
or more than 12,000 UOAs in my database? If so, step and and give your proof!
Purchase and read 2007-01-4133.
Collect and analyze more than 12,000 UOAs.
Don't talk to me about theory of lube properties; show me real world data that proves it matters.
I have asked you this before and have never seen an answer. Do you have your 10,000 now 12,000 UOA data base in a digital sortable data base or spread sheet form? It would certainly support your arguments and be of value for the whole BITOG community. We might be able to collectively add to it and further it's usefulness.
Step up and show us your real world evidence you love to quote so often.
My evidence you request is in the normalcy article. Have you read it? Many of you still don't understand the concepts of macro and micro data analysis.
What I can do is analyze any sub-set of data desired, and look at the performance range compared/contrasted to other sets.
This wear-rate phenomenon isn't limited to one type of engine or one generation of transmission, etc. This is an overall phenomenon that is seen as a wide ranging generalization. There will always be some obscure odd-ball items that don't conform, but the VAST majority of data exhibits this conditional response; use the lube longer (as long as it's not overtly abused) and the wear rates go down.
I'm sorry let reword it for you so you understand, post your supporting evidence you used to write your article for review.
As you like to state, post up or shut up!! Post the 10,000 UOA's, now 12,000, or stop referring to them to support your assertions. And stop referring to your article as "evidence". It's nothing more than anyone of your interminable posts here without the supporting evidence to back it up.
Sorry for the Dnewtonesque tone but you don't seem capable of a dialogue without snarky condescension.
I fully explain in my article where the data comes from. In fact, in the article, the second bold-Grey header line is actually titled ... wait for it ...
"Where the data comes from".
The data is fully supported by the information I was given from Blackstone. If you doubt the validity of the UOAs, you may call them and ask for Ryan Stark, and he will confirm that he and I collaborated on the transfer of data, and he reviewed my article before I posted it, so that he could make any comments (of which he had only a few) as to the confidentiality of the data. I was never given access to private info such as names and addresses or accounts, etc. I received from them the raw data in excel format form, and then I used my Stat-Pro programs to crunch the data. I have all the data stored. I cannot give it to you, nor post it here, due to the agreement I have with Blackstone. Blackstone essentially "owns" the data; they gave it to me on loan, for a lack of better terms. In addition, I do collect data from several other sources around the 'net, but most are from Blackstone. I own the rights to the data processing work-product and article; it is scheduled to be published formally in the future.
I apologize for the snarkiness, but the source of the data is clearly communicated and discussed in my article.
No - I will not violate my agreement with Blackstone; I value the relationship too much.
No - I will not post my work-product details; I am in the process of being published and it would be foolhardy of me to give away info I own, past what I share in good faith here.
You are welcome to call and ask Ryan to validate my credibility as to my claim of the source of the data. You can find the contact info at their site.
BTW ...
I get a little tired of folks saying I don't post my proof! Just because you don't understand what you read, does not mean I don't know what I'm talking about or have failed to show proof of concept.
For goodness sake, folks, do you expect me to walk to your home, invite myself in, turn on your computer, bring up the webpage, and read it aloud to you as I move your finger over the monitor screen so you can follow along?
for those who say I don't post data, what is it that you think this is or isn't, as taken DIRECTLY FROM THAT ARTICLE? http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/
Oil Miles Vehicle Miles Al Cr Fe Cu Pb
5002 49997 3 1 14 4 3
4976 54973 4 1 13 7 4
4998 59971 3 2 18 6 2
5012 64983 3 1 11 3 6
5003 69986 4 1 15 4 5
5101 75087 5 1 15 3 2
4968 80055 2 1 16 2 6
4899 84954 3 2 18 8 8
5060 90014 4 1 17 5 6
4937 94951 5 1 13 6 3
5014 99965 3 1 15 6 5
5028 104993 3 1 11 3 3
4949 109942 5 1 18 6 7
4993 114935 3 1 15 2 2
5093 120028 4 2 15 5 5
4953 124981 2 2 16 5 4
5001 129982 4 1 14 6 3
5009 134991 3 1 15 2 5
5029 140020 6 1 12 4 2
4920 144940 4 1 17 5 4
4936 149876 3 1 13 4 2
5065 154941 2 3 14 5 6
4956 159897 6 1 13 6 3
4952 164849 3 1 12 8 2
4993 169842 5 1 12 2 5
4927 174769 2 2 14 7 5
5086 179855 4 2 13 5 5
5023 184878 4 1 15 2 3
5001 189879 3 1 18 5 4
5058 194937 3 1 13 3 2
5027 199964 3 2 15 4 4
5019 204983 5 1 13 3 4
4987 209970 6 3 12 4 3
5003 214973 2 1 16 3 5
4989 219962 6 1 15 5 3
4901 224863 5 1 18 2 2
4896 229759 3 1 12 5 6
5023 234782 2 2 18 2 4
4919 239701 4 1 13 4 2
5102 244803 3 2 14 3 3
5014 249817 5 1 11 6 4
5019 254836 2 3 12 2 4
5027 259863 6 2 13 3 5
4966 264829 2 1 14 3 4
4976 269805 5 1 12 3 7
5020 274825 2 1 18 4 3
5030 279855 6 1 15 2 5
4960 284815 3 2 13 6 4
Oil Miles Veh. Miles Al Cr Fe Cu Pb
4996 n/a Avg 3.7 1.4 14.4 4.2 4.0
52 n/a Std Dev 1.3 0.6 2.1 1.7 1.5
5151 n/a UL 7.6 3.2 20.7 9.3 8.6
5102 284815 Max 6.0 3.0 18.0 8.0 8.0
Ppm/1K 0.7 0.3 2.9 0.8 0.8
The reason I was able to post that data is because Blackstone did not own it; I got it from another source and was able to publish it with permission.
The Blackstone data I do not own, and I am under agreement that I won't use it past analytical purposes.
Feel free to call Ryan if you think I'm lying.
[/quote]
Thank you for finally answering the question as to the source and your ability or lack there of to share it.
I did actually think for a brief moment while reading we were not going to see any Dnewton snark.
If you read any of my posts requesting this data in the past I have never challenged any your assertions in you article but merely asked you to publish your data in a sortable digital form since it would be a valuable tool to the BITOG community and you continually state YOU have it(as implied ownership of 10,000-12,000 uoas) in many of your posts. It's certainly not out of the norm and not meant to offend or call into question one's work when asking to see cited data when one posts a paper/article. Especially internet stuff, which I'm sure you can appreciate.
Originally Posted By: 3311
or more than 12,000 UOAs in my database? If so, step and and give your proof!
Purchase and read 2007-01-4133.
Collect and analyze more than 12,000 UOAs.
Don't talk to me about theory of lube properties; show me real world data that proves it matters.
I have asked you this before and have never seen an answer. Do you have your 10,000 now 12,000 UOA data base in a digital sortable data base or spread sheet form? It would certainly support your arguments and be of value for the whole BITOG community. We might be able to collectively add to it and further it's usefulness.
Step up and show us your real world evidence you love to quote so often.
My evidence you request is in the normalcy article. Have you read it? Many of you still don't understand the concepts of macro and micro data analysis.
What I can do is analyze any sub-set of data desired, and look at the performance range compared/contrasted to other sets.
This wear-rate phenomenon isn't limited to one type of engine or one generation of transmission, etc. This is an overall phenomenon that is seen as a wide ranging generalization. There will always be some obscure odd-ball items that don't conform, but the VAST majority of data exhibits this conditional response; use the lube longer (as long as it's not overtly abused) and the wear rates go down.
I'm sorry let reword it for you so you understand, post your supporting evidence you used to write your article for review.
As you like to state, post up or shut up!! Post the 10,000 UOA's, now 12,000, or stop referring to them to support your assertions. And stop referring to your article as "evidence". It's nothing more than anyone of your interminable posts here without the supporting evidence to back it up.
Sorry for the Dnewtonesque tone but you don't seem capable of a dialogue without snarky condescension.
I fully explain in my article where the data comes from. In fact, in the article, the second bold-Grey header line is actually titled ... wait for it ...
"Where the data comes from".
The data is fully supported by the information I was given from Blackstone. If you doubt the validity of the UOAs, you may call them and ask for Ryan Stark, and he will confirm that he and I collaborated on the transfer of data, and he reviewed my article before I posted it, so that he could make any comments (of which he had only a few) as to the confidentiality of the data. I was never given access to private info such as names and addresses or accounts, etc. I received from them the raw data in excel format form, and then I used my Stat-Pro programs to crunch the data. I have all the data stored. I cannot give it to you, nor post it here, due to the agreement I have with Blackstone. Blackstone essentially "owns" the data; they gave it to me on loan, for a lack of better terms. In addition, I do collect data from several other sources around the 'net, but most are from Blackstone. I own the rights to the data processing work-product and article; it is scheduled to be published formally in the future.
I apologize for the snarkiness, but the source of the data is clearly communicated and discussed in my article.
No - I will not violate my agreement with Blackstone; I value the relationship too much.
No - I will not post my work-product details; I am in the process of being published and it would be foolhardy of me to give away info I own, past what I share in good faith here.
You are welcome to call and ask Ryan to validate my credibility as to my claim of the source of the data. You can find the contact info at their site.
BTW ...
I get a little tired of folks saying I don't post my proof! Just because you don't understand what you read, does not mean I don't know what I'm talking about or have failed to show proof of concept.
For goodness sake, folks, do you expect me to walk to your home, invite myself in, turn on your computer, bring up the webpage, and read it aloud to you as I move your finger over the monitor screen so you can follow along?
for those who say I don't post data, what is it that you think this is or isn't, as taken DIRECTLY FROM THAT ARTICLE? http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/
Oil Miles Vehicle Miles Al Cr Fe Cu Pb
5002 49997 3 1 14 4 3
4976 54973 4 1 13 7 4
4998 59971 3 2 18 6 2
5012 64983 3 1 11 3 6
5003 69986 4 1 15 4 5
5101 75087 5 1 15 3 2
4968 80055 2 1 16 2 6
4899 84954 3 2 18 8 8
5060 90014 4 1 17 5 6
4937 94951 5 1 13 6 3
5014 99965 3 1 15 6 5
5028 104993 3 1 11 3 3
4949 109942 5 1 18 6 7
4993 114935 3 1 15 2 2
5093 120028 4 2 15 5 5
4953 124981 2 2 16 5 4
5001 129982 4 1 14 6 3
5009 134991 3 1 15 2 5
5029 140020 6 1 12 4 2
4920 144940 4 1 17 5 4
4936 149876 3 1 13 4 2
5065 154941 2 3 14 5 6
4956 159897 6 1 13 6 3
4952 164849 3 1 12 8 2
4993 169842 5 1 12 2 5
4927 174769 2 2 14 7 5
5086 179855 4 2 13 5 5
5023 184878 4 1 15 2 3
5001 189879 3 1 18 5 4
5058 194937 3 1 13 3 2
5027 199964 3 2 15 4 4
5019 204983 5 1 13 3 4
4987 209970 6 3 12 4 3
5003 214973 2 1 16 3 5
4989 219962 6 1 15 5 3
4901 224863 5 1 18 2 2
4896 229759 3 1 12 5 6
5023 234782 2 2 18 2 4
4919 239701 4 1 13 4 2
5102 244803 3 2 14 3 3
5014 249817 5 1 11 6 4
5019 254836 2 3 12 2 4
5027 259863 6 2 13 3 5
4966 264829 2 1 14 3 4
4976 269805 5 1 12 3 7
5020 274825 2 1 18 4 3
5030 279855 6 1 15 2 5
4960 284815 3 2 13 6 4
Oil Miles Veh. Miles Al Cr Fe Cu Pb
4996 n/a Avg 3.7 1.4 14.4 4.2 4.0
52 n/a Std Dev 1.3 0.6 2.1 1.7 1.5
5151 n/a UL 7.6 3.2 20.7 9.3 8.6
5102 284815 Max 6.0 3.0 18.0 8.0 8.0
Ppm/1K 0.7 0.3 2.9 0.8 0.8
The reason I was able to post that data is because Blackstone did not own it; I got it from another source and was able to publish it with permission.
The Blackstone data I do not own, and I am under agreement that I won't use it past analytical purposes.
Feel free to call Ryan if you think I'm lying.
[/quote]
Thank you for finally answering the question as to the source and your ability or lack there of to share it.
I did actually think for a brief moment while reading we were not going to see any Dnewton snark.
If you read any of my posts requesting this data in the past I have never challenged any your assertions in you article but merely asked you to publish your data in a sortable digital form since it would be a valuable tool to the BITOG community and you continually state YOU have it(as implied ownership of 10,000-12,000 uoas) in many of your posts. It's certainly not out of the norm and not meant to offend or call into question one's work when asking to see cited data when one posts a paper/article. Especially internet stuff, which I'm sure you can appreciate.
Last edited:
