Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I also wouldn't put MoS2 in any of my vehicles, but not because of fear of sulfur. The oil I have in my 2002 Tahoe 5.3L is 1.85% sulfated ash (>3x the API limit) and my copper wear at 10k mile OCI is
I'd also like to note that the metal shown here is realistically about 20% higher than what is shown there. Blackstone is pretty notorious for reading low. I communicate with several blenders and formulators, all of which conduct periodic quality checks on their batches, and none of them use Blackstone for that reason.
I don't agree it's real easy to lookup and compare. There can be up to around 10% variance between Wearcheck Blackstone, WIX, CAT. Not 20% you have a habit of writing well written and thoughtful posts often there is a tidbit of inaccurate information.
I'm not talking about the10% margin of error. I'm talking about Blackstone commonly being down 20% compared to everywhere else.
For example, here's PQIA's results of this same oil.
http://www.pqiadata.org/Peak5W30.html
Likely different batches thus this comparison is invalid. Also I did not state margin of error I stated variance.
Variance= the fact or quality of being different, divergent, or inconsistent.
Margin of error= amount that is allowed for in case of miscalculation or change of circumstance.
Take a sample and send it to 4 labs and all 4 will have different interpretations. Plus "blenders" don't have access to their own test equipment and data. The "blender" needs to rely on a 3rd party for a QC check on a product which could already be in use. That has disaster waiting to happen all over it.
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
I also wouldn't put MoS2 in any of my vehicles, but not because of fear of sulfur. The oil I have in my 2002 Tahoe 5.3L is 1.85% sulfated ash (>3x the API limit) and my copper wear at 10k mile OCI is
I'd also like to note that the metal shown here is realistically about 20% higher than what is shown there. Blackstone is pretty notorious for reading low. I communicate with several blenders and formulators, all of which conduct periodic quality checks on their batches, and none of them use Blackstone for that reason.
I don't agree it's real easy to lookup and compare. There can be up to around 10% variance between Wearcheck Blackstone, WIX, CAT. Not 20% you have a habit of writing well written and thoughtful posts often there is a tidbit of inaccurate information.
I'm not talking about the10% margin of error. I'm talking about Blackstone commonly being down 20% compared to everywhere else.
For example, here's PQIA's results of this same oil.
http://www.pqiadata.org/Peak5W30.html
Likely different batches thus this comparison is invalid. Also I did not state margin of error I stated variance.
Variance= the fact or quality of being different, divergent, or inconsistent.
Margin of error= amount that is allowed for in case of miscalculation or change of circumstance.
Take a sample and send it to 4 labs and all 4 will have different interpretations. Plus "blenders" don't have access to their own test equipment and data. The "blender" needs to rely on a 3rd party for a QC check on a product which could already be in use. That has disaster waiting to happen all over it.
