3MP's 3000 mile Amsoil results

[TooSlick]

The current add pack for the Series 2000, 0w-30 looks like this:

Detergent/Dispersant additives:

Ca, 2800 ppm
Mg, 800 ppm

Antiwear and FM Additives - at least those that show up using an ICP machine*

P*, 1200 ppm
Zn*, 1500 ppm
Boron*, 80 ppm

The TBN using ASTM D-2896 is about 12.8, or about 11.6 using the more conservative ASTM D-4739 method.

That's about the most highest additive treat level I've seen in an extended drain formulation, intended for street use....Compare it to the GC, 0w-30 or the Mobil 1, 0w-40 - both of which are also ACEA A3/B4 rated - and you'll see what I mean.

Amsoils formulation approach IS very simple, but their raw materials (basestocks, additives, VI modifiers) are very expensive. Only Redline uses this quality of raw materials across the board, and it's also $7.00/qt, plus shipping, as is this Mobil 1R ....

Tooslick

[ February 15, 2004, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]

 

[buster]

quote:

---

That's about the most highest additive treat level I've seen in an extended drain formulation, intended for street use....Compare it to the GC, 0w-30 or the Mobil 1, 0w-40 - both of which are also ACEA A3/B4 rated - and you'll see what I mean.

---

Thanks for posting them. The level of ZDDP is nice for the S2k oil. I wish I could see what we DONT see in a normal VOA.

 

[buster]

quote:

---

That's why there is so much concern about further reductions in ZDDP levels when the new "GF-4" oils that are due out next summer

---

Ted, you may be right, but what about all these comments that have stated they are not worried about it bc there are many other ways around this problem by using better additives? Johnny and Molekule have said this before. Another thing is that you specifically focus on the LS1. There was an LS1 driven extrmemely hard using regular M1 and showed very low Iron and Copper. Again, it's the same engine everyone likes to use but when looking at the big picture as some have done by doing some simple spread sheets, it's clear that Mobil 1's Fe is no worse then Amsoil's.

You tend to exagerate and make these claims but I don't think they are accurate. Go back through the 100's of UOA's and see for yourself. There are plenty of High Fe Amsoil reports. It's a nice selling tactic but I don't think it is grounded in reality.

 

[TooSlick]

Buster,

I'd like to see 3MP repeat this test with the Series 3000, 5w-30 and the Amsoil SDF oil filters, both of which would be my recommendation for this motor....

I actually think in this particular application, the Series 3000 will last significantly longer than any other Amsoil formulation. This is one of those applications I discussed, were oil contamination from combustion by-products is the limiting factor and not simply heat and oxidation. A CI-4/SL rated, low viscosity synthetic is the way to go in all these big V-8 engines from GM, Ford and DC ....

To make it completely fair, we could also do a run with your beloved Mobil 1R, 0w-30

and see how that does....I'd be particularly interested in how the viscosity changes for drain intervals longer than 10,000 miles with this formulation. It should hold up as well as Amsoil and Redline in that respect ....

If PATMAN wants to run this test, I'll provide the oil, filters and oil analysis testing; provided he posts the results ....I'd suggest only taking samples every 8000 km to make it a more realistic test in terms of total makeup oil.

Ted K.

[ February 15, 2004, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]

 

[Motorbike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:


That's about the most highest additive treat level I've seen in an extended drain formulation, intended for street use....Compare it to the GC, 0w-30 or the Mobil 1, 0w-40 - both of which are also ACEA A3/B4 rated - and you'll see what I mean.

---

But again you have compared an 8 dollar per quart oil to less than 5.00 per quart synthetic motor oils and omitted the 5 and 10w-30 Amsoil in this battle of the additive packs .

I believe these two Amsoil VOA's listed in this thread is representive of what one would get if he/she purchased new stock 5 & 10w-30 Amsoil today and certainly not the motor oil 3MP is using in his test .

Amsoil current formulation VOA

In topics like this the value of VOA's of current motor oils is tremendous contrary to your statement in this thread .

Of course the value of VOA's expand beyond use for converstaion developed on the internet .

VOA's are useless by TooSlick

[ February 15, 2004, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]

 

[Pablo]

Motorbike I agree, that's why I supplied 3madpancheros with ASL at under $5/qt, not HDD at $8/qt. I have posted this reasoning like 20 times.........

 

[buster]

quote:

---

I'd like to see 3MP repeat this test with the Series 3000, 5w-30 and the Amsoil SDF oil filters, both of which would be my recommendation for this motor....

---

Tooslick, in doing this you would be doing EXACTLY what Amsoil does all the time, and why many get frustrated, and that is to compare Apples to Oranges. If your going to use S3k, then I'd use Delvac 1, the Mobil equivalent. You can't do that.

I have a case of Amsoil ASL at home and on the box they compare their oil to all grp III's. It's slick marketing. VOA's according to what Amsoil told me, show almost everything about an oil.

As far as M1R, I can't say whether it will be good at extended drains or not. Yes, I maybe have hyped it a bit, it was more out of excitement and that there will be a top tier oil now available for racing from Mobil. I can't say anthing else regarding this oil until we see more proof.

[ February 15, 2004, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:

If PATMAN wants to run this test, I'll provide the oil, filters and oil analysis testing; provided he posts the results ....I'd suggest only taking samples every 8000 km to make it a more realistic test in terms of total makeup oil.

---

It's a very generous offer, but my engine is not an LS1 like 3MPs, since mine is a 1995 Firebird, and has the LT1 engine. So it would not be a fair comparison, even though both engine's have similar oiling needs (both like a thicker 30 to thin 40wt)

Besides, I've got enough oil in my shrine to last me quite a while right now, and I need to use it up so my wife stops nagging me!

 

[TooSlick]

Motorbike,

3MP IS running the current Amsoil additive chemistry - it 's the same as the 10w-30, "ATM" oil I currently have 9000 miles on in my 2002, Audi TT roadster ...The 5w-30 and 10w-30 are almost the same basestock and have the same VI:

5w-30 is 4990 Cp @ -30C
10w-30 is 3100 Cp @ -25C

According to Lubrizol, for every 5C drop in temp, a PAO based synthetic will thicken by a factor of 1.7. I invite you to do the math ...

Lab to lab variation using an ICP machine is +/- 20% in terms of wear metal concentrations and additive levels, according to the oil analysis training course I am now in the middle of taking ....that's all you are seeing. Repeatablilty from the same lab and two different technicians is +/- 10% ....

Ted

[ February 16, 2004, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: TooSlick ]

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
Motorbike ...

---

Ted, I saw this post before you completely changed the contents of it. Were you actually saying that Mobil 1 0w40 FAILED the Sequence IIIE test? Sorry, but I find that impossible to believe.

BTW, the "fair use" provisions of the copyright laws would permit you to post small excerpts from copyrighted material here.

 

[TooSlick]

The 0w-40 lasted for 152 hours in this test, compared to 146 hours for the 0w-30. I believe the CH-4 version of Delvac 1 lasted about 84 hours.

This is all from memory, so I may be off be a few hours on the Delvac 1 data. The Mobil 1 data is correct and is shown on a chart in the paper from 2000 or 2001 on mobil 1 ....The Delvac 1 data is from the SAE paper from 2001 ....This Mobil 1, 0w-40 formulation was ACEA "A3/B3" rated as I recall.

The point was that Mobil 1 had better high temp oxidation resistance than did Delvac 1 in the Sequence IIIE test ....

Ted

[ February 16, 2004, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: TooSlick ]

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
The 0w-40 lasted for 152 hours in this test, compared to 146 hours for the 0w-30. I believe the CH-4 version of Delvac 1 lasted about 84 hours.

This is all from memory, so I may be off be a few hours on the Delvac 1 data. The Mobil 1 data is correct and is shown on a chart in the paper from 2000 or 2001 on mobil 1 ....The Delvac 1 data is from the SAE paper from 2001 ....This Mobil 1, 0w-40 formulation was ACEA "A3/B3" rated as I recall.

The point was that Mobil 1 had better high temp oxidation resistance than did Delvac 1 in the Sequence IIIE test ....

Ted

---

Well, then none of these oils "failed" the test. The parameters are a maximum of 64 hours before the oil thickens by 375%. Mobil 1 easily exceeded TWICE the requirement of the test.

Given that the current test for API SL is IIIF with an 80 hour limit for a 275% increase in viscosity, and that the current Mobil 1 0w40 meets MB 229.5, I'd say the 0w40 you can buy now would perform substantially better than the old Mobil 1 that made it to 152 hours with the Sequence IIIE test.

As an asside, one of Ford's requirements for a 5w20 to meets their specs is a DOUBLE LENGTH Sequence IIIF. This requirement alone explains why ANY 5w20 that meets the Ford spec will have either a significant amount of Group III or Group IV in the base oil blend.

[ February 16, 2004, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: G-Man II ]

 

[TooSlick]

GManII,

What's your phone #? I'd like to talk to you as well sometime, if that's okay.

I never said it failed - that would not be believable. I do think that gas engine oils have more stringent requirements in terms of high temp, oxidation resistance. Soot dispersion and acid neutralization are the main requirements of diesel oils.

Ted

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
I never said it failed - that would not be believable.

---

In your unedited post you did say it "failed," and you're right, it was "unbelievable."

BTW, one of the most impressive things I've seen from Amsoil is their posting of a TRIPLE LENGTH Sequence IIIF test for their 10w30 where in 240 hours the oil only thickened by roughly 90%. That test alone is the one thing I've seen from Amsoil that would make me consider using their oil.

BTW, I just downloaded the full Ford WSS-M2C153-H spec sheet and their requirements for hi-temp oxidation stability are even more stringent than I originally posted. The spec requires EITHER a double length IIIE test OR a double length IIIF test with a maximum vis increase of 200% not the API mandated 375% for IIIE or 275% for IIIF.

 

[buster]

quote:

---

High-Stress Engine Test
An earlier formulation of Mobil 1 was also subjected to an engine test that demonstrates the oxidative stability and wear protection of an oil under high-temperature conditions. This test of Mobil 1 was derived from a Sequence IIIE engine test and was run using a GM 3.8-liter V6 engine with the oil kept at a constant 300° F (149º C) in the oil pan. While the Sequence IIIE test is normally run for 64 hours, this Mobil 1 test was run four times longer. And even after 256 hours, Mobil 1 still provided oil protection.

Keeping in mind that these tests were conducted with earlier formulations of Mobil 1, ExxonMobil engineers are confident that Mobil 1 with SuperSyn™ will provide even greater protection than its predecessors.

---

This is old and not the latest test but I thought I'd post it. Very vague.

 

[TooSlick]

GManII,

I would agree that standardized engine tests are a much better way of determining oil quality than bench tests....I'd like to see the Sequence IIIF data for every oil on the market posted on a public forum.

The Mobil 1 Supersyn will last a long time in the Sequence IIIF test - I can tell from looking at the UOA's ....I would like to see the amount of cam/lifter wear using Mobil 1 for 240 hours, however. Take a look at the cam/lifter data from that SAE paper on Mobil 1 and compare it to the Amsoil results. Of course, that was the earlier tri-synthetic formulation ....Still the results are fairly compelling.

Ted

 

[3 Mad Ponchos]

*poke*poke*poke*

Why is it that Amsoil is doing about as well as M1 but costs 50% more?

Just thinking out loud.

Cheers, 3MP

 

[sprintman]

Early days?

 

[buster]

quote:

---

BTW, one of the most impressive things I've seen from Amsoil is their posting of a TRIPLE LENGTH Sequence IIIF test for their 10w30 where in 240 hours the oil only thickened by roughly 90%. That test alone is the one thing I've seen from Amsoil that would make me consider using their oil.

---

I'd agree, but have we seen "real world" evidence that this oil is that good? I don't think we have.