The four ball wear test evaluates the ability of the add pack to minimize adhesive wear under boundary or mixed mode lubrication conditions. However the specific parameters used by amsoil: 40kg/150c/1800 rpms, or the 60kg load used for their new racing oils make it a severe "overtest" for normal street use. Hence it does NOT directly corrollate with valvetrain wear in UOA's.
4-ball wear test - why no good?
- Thread starter addyguy
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: TeeDub
However the specific parameters used by amsoil: 40kg/150c/1800 rpms, or the 60kg load used for their new racing oils make it a severe "overtest" for normal street use. Hence it does NOT directly corrollate with valvetrain wear in UOA's.
I don't understand. It sound like you are saying that Amsoil is so good that it cannot be tested but I feel sure you didn't mean that. Why would an oil being so much better than you really need be a bad thing? It is like that song that says there is no such thing as, "a girl to pretty, a car to fast, and to much money."
However the specific parameters used by amsoil: 40kg/150c/1800 rpms, or the 60kg load used for their new racing oils make it a severe "overtest" for normal street use. Hence it does NOT directly corrollate with valvetrain wear in UOA's.
I don't understand. It sound like you are saying that Amsoil is so good that it cannot be tested but I feel sure you didn't mean that. Why would an oil being so much better than you really need be a bad thing? It is like that song that says there is no such thing as, "a girl to pretty, a car to fast, and to much money."
Frank, the best way to determine how well an engine oil performs is to run it in an actual engine. There is no getting around it. I've spoken with a GM engineer that works in the engine testing/development division and was told that the tear down is the gold standard. This is what any racing team or OEM will do to ensure an oil is doing it's job.
As TeeDub said though, it does give you an idea of an oils AW capability under certain conditions.
As TeeDub said though, it does give you an idea of an oils AW capability under certain conditions.
If you’re driving a modern vehicle with OEM rollorized valve train, the metal to metal wear test doesn’t have too much merit. However, for those of us who utilize flat tappet camshafts in off road racing with radical lobe profiles and hundreds of pounds of valve spring tension... Huge merit.
Originally Posted By: buster
This is what any racing team or OEM will do to ensure an oil is doing it's job.
I saw Andretti Green using a timken machine next to Danika's car.
This is what any racing team or OEM will do to ensure an oil is doing it's job.
I saw Andretti Green using a timken machine next to Danika's car.
IMHO the 4 ball wear test doesn't give us any usefull information. It just doesn't apply to real world conditions. Case in point , plenty of cars have driven hundreds of thousands of miles with oils that scored terribly on these tests.
Secondly,Amsoils own tests are far from informative. What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils. The very company doing the tests.
Secondly,Amsoils own tests are far from informative. What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils. The very company doing the tests.
Originally Posted By: pev223
IMHO the 4 ball wear test doesn't give us any usefull information. It just doesn't apply to real world conditions. Case in point , plenty of cars have driven hundreds of thousands of miles with oils that scored terribly on these tests.
Secondly,Amsoils own tests are far from informative. What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils. The very company doing the tests.
Agree. BTW, you can get the results you desire if you know what you want ahead of time and that is how it was explained to me with this particular test.
I'd like to know the Seq IVA results for many oils. That would be interesting.
IMHO the 4 ball wear test doesn't give us any usefull information. It just doesn't apply to real world conditions. Case in point , plenty of cars have driven hundreds of thousands of miles with oils that scored terribly on these tests.
Secondly,Amsoils own tests are far from informative. What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils. The very company doing the tests.
Agree. BTW, you can get the results you desire if you know what you want ahead of time and that is how it was explained to me with this particular test.
I'd like to know the Seq IVA results for many oils. That would be interesting.
IMO the real test of wear is tearing down an engine and then take measurements for wear. Or take two identical engines and run them on a dyno until one blows up, same rpm day and night, add oil when needed and just let them run.
These ball wear tests remind me of the Lucas display with the crank handle, what exactly did that devise prove?
Frank D
These ball wear tests remind me of the Lucas display with the crank handle, what exactly did that devise prove?
Frank D
Originally Posted By: pev223
What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils.
You almost imply that it's random. It's certainly not impossible to compare.
The baseline is 40Kg, 75°C, 1200 rpm, 1 hour.
They are all one hour.
It's pretty much always 40kg, with the exception of the 10W-30 and 15W-20 racing oils which are 60 kg.
The racing oils, and HD 10W-40 and SSO are 150°C and the others are 75°C. These same oils are 1800 rpm. The others are 1200 rpm.
What I mean by that is none of there oils run the same test twice. Try to compare 5w30 oils xl,asl, sso, and dominator series you will find different tempuratures, pressures, and rpms in each category; making a comparison impossible even among amsoil's own oils.
You almost imply that it's random. It's certainly not impossible to compare.
The baseline is 40Kg, 75°C, 1200 rpm, 1 hour.
They are all one hour.
It's pretty much always 40kg, with the exception of the 10W-30 and 15W-20 racing oils which are 60 kg.
The racing oils, and HD 10W-40 and SSO are 150°C and the others are 75°C. These same oils are 1800 rpm. The others are 1200 rpm.
Quote:
Engine Oil Performance Testing
"I have seen a number of lubricant manufacturers refer to the 4-ball wear scar test as an indicator of how well the oil will protect an engine. Other larger companies tend to brush off the results of this test indicating that it isn't representative of actual engine conditions adding that because it is cheap to run, the results aren't worth much. What are your thoughts on this?"
The 4-ball test (ASTM D4172) is often used as a screening test for many different lubricant types that contain antiwear additives or similar base oil properties. Other tribo-mechanical bench tests are often used as well, including the Timken Test (ASTM D2782) and the Pin and V-Block (ASTM D2670). Because engines have different contact geometry, loads, metallurgy and speeds, numerous bench tests and test protocols are needed. It is not uncommon for several oils to be tested using two such methods and to find that the performance rankings between the oils to reverse (no correlation). This is why, among other reasons, Passenger Car Motor Oils and Heavy Duty Oils (diesel crankcase) are tested in actual engines using controlled methods such as ASTM D5533 Sequence IIIE and D5302 Sequence VE.
Jim Fitch, Noria Corporation
Engine Oil Performance Testing
"I have seen a number of lubricant manufacturers refer to the 4-ball wear scar test as an indicator of how well the oil will protect an engine. Other larger companies tend to brush off the results of this test indicating that it isn't representative of actual engine conditions adding that because it is cheap to run, the results aren't worth much. What are your thoughts on this?"
The 4-ball test (ASTM D4172) is often used as a screening test for many different lubricant types that contain antiwear additives or similar base oil properties. Other tribo-mechanical bench tests are often used as well, including the Timken Test (ASTM D2782) and the Pin and V-Block (ASTM D2670). Because engines have different contact geometry, loads, metallurgy and speeds, numerous bench tests and test protocols are needed. It is not uncommon for several oils to be tested using two such methods and to find that the performance rankings between the oils to reverse (no correlation). This is why, among other reasons, Passenger Car Motor Oils and Heavy Duty Oils (diesel crankcase) are tested in actual engines using controlled methods such as ASTM D5533 Sequence IIIE and D5302 Sequence VE.
Jim Fitch, Noria Corporation
Exactly. It's A test. Not THE test.
I wasn't trying to ruffle anyones feathers. Truth be told, I am an Amsoil user and happen to think it was one of the better products out there.
That said however they really should use the same parameters on all there tests if any meaningfull correlation is to be made. Not doing so only gives the naysayers more ammunition to knock Amsoil. It is ultimately in Amsoils own best intersts to make the tests equal. That's all I was really trying to get at.
That said however they really should use the same parameters on all there tests if any meaningfull correlation is to be made. Not doing so only gives the naysayers more ammunition to knock Amsoil. It is ultimately in Amsoils own best intersts to make the tests equal. That's all I was really trying to get at.
Hi,
Pablo - I am so sorry you let the cat out of the bag. Now everybody knows that it's an Amsoil marketing tool.......
I thought it was just you and I that knew darn it!
Pablo - I am so sorry you let the cat out of the bag. Now everybody knows that it's an Amsoil marketing tool.......
I thought it was just you and I that knew darn it!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
...it's an Amsoil marketing tool.......
Quote:
The 4-ball test (ASTM D4172) is often used as a screening test for many different lubricant types that contain antiwear additives or similar base oil properties.
Hi,
Doug - so sorry to burst your bubble. Amsoil wrote and controls an entire ASTM test method? Who beside you knew?
...it's an Amsoil marketing tool.......
Quote:
The 4-ball test (ASTM D4172) is often used as a screening test for many different lubricant types that contain antiwear additives or similar base oil properties.
Hi,
Doug - so sorry to burst your bubble. Amsoil wrote and controls an entire ASTM test method? Who beside you knew?
Hi,
Pablo - No bubble to burst really
We all know now that Amsoil uses the most meaningful test for greases and the like - to test engine lubricants so that they can market the results..........?
Or perhaps ACEA may be wrong - as try as I may I cannot see such a test in any of their engine lubricant Test Protocols. But then there are German engine makers on the ACEA 'Panel" and they tossed it out for such purposes around 1942. Perhaps that's why MB, VW-Audi and Porsche don't use it either
Why would they use it in 2008 would be the question I expect
Pablo - It is a meaningful Test - for greases and etc. All the other Oil Companies and Blenders know that - Motul, Repsol or even other Boutique Blenders don't use it for engine lubricants that I know of. But I am often wrong too!
Castrol, Shell, Mobil and all the others that do extensive and expensive National/International Fleet Testing with engine lubricants - some as mandated under the API system - must be missing something? - I think not
Keep it light Pablo - it is just one of Amsoil's "compromises" in the way they market some obviously very good products!
Oh and what about the 400k HDEO OCI facts and figures? Gottem yet???
Pablo - No bubble to burst really
We all know now that Amsoil uses the most meaningful test for greases and the like - to test engine lubricants so that they can market the results..........?
Or perhaps ACEA may be wrong - as try as I may I cannot see such a test in any of their engine lubricant Test Protocols. But then there are German engine makers on the ACEA 'Panel" and they tossed it out for such purposes around 1942. Perhaps that's why MB, VW-Audi and Porsche don't use it either
Why would they use it in 2008 would be the question I expect
Pablo - It is a meaningful Test - for greases and etc. All the other Oil Companies and Blenders know that - Motul, Repsol or even other Boutique Blenders don't use it for engine lubricants that I know of. But I am often wrong too!
Castrol, Shell, Mobil and all the others that do extensive and expensive National/International Fleet Testing with engine lubricants - some as mandated under the API system - must be missing something? - I think not
Keep it light Pablo - it is just one of Amsoil's "compromises" in the way they market some obviously very good products!
Oh and what about the 400k HDEO OCI facts and figures? Gottem yet???
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Oh and what about the 400k HDEO OCI facts and figures? Gottem yet???
Not yet. When I last spoke with him he was still driving on the east coast.
I suppose you didn't believe this since it was real life: 409,000 mile drain interval
Oh and what about the 400k HDEO OCI facts and figures? Gottem yet???
Not yet. When I last spoke with him he was still driving on the east coast.
I suppose you didn't believe this since it was real life: 409,000 mile drain interval
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Pablo -
Or perhaps ACEA may be wrong -..... - Motul, Repsol or even other Boutique Blenders don't use it for engine lubricants that I know of. But I am often wrong too!
Castrol, Shell, Mobil and all the others that do extensive and expensive National/International Fleet Testing with engine lubricants - some as mandated under the API system - must be missing something? - I think not
Please show where I said these groups and companies are wrong. You won't. Please show me where Amsoil uses ONLY ASTM D4172 for decision making. Because they don't. I said it's A test, not THE test. And it's a meaningful test for AW properties and like ANY test is only A test......
Hi,
Pablo -
Or perhaps ACEA may be wrong -..... - Motul, Repsol or even other Boutique Blenders don't use it for engine lubricants that I know of. But I am often wrong too!
Castrol, Shell, Mobil and all the others that do extensive and expensive National/International Fleet Testing with engine lubricants - some as mandated under the API system - must be missing something? - I think not
Please show where I said these groups and companies are wrong. You won't. Please show me where Amsoil uses ONLY ASTM D4172 for decision making. Because they don't. I said it's A test, not THE test. And it's a meaningful test for AW properties and like ANY test is only A test......
So this actually means that the 20W-50 MCV I used in the Honda was actually giving better wear protection than many heavy duty greases since it has a better 4-ball scar than many greases?
I don't get it. What if I decided to rub two aluminum arrow shafts together under laboratory controlled conditions with different lubricants and measure the wear. Would the one with the least amount of wear be no better than the one with the most amount of wear? Why?
I don't get it. What if I decided to rub two aluminum arrow shafts together under laboratory controlled conditions with different lubricants and measure the wear. Would the one with the least amount of wear be no better than the one with the most amount of wear? Why?
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
