OK Terry so what you are saying is that Oil A at say 3 TBN may not be better than oil B is with a 0 TBN.
Is it fair to say that an oil may be built to keep tbn readings high but still not be effective as far as wear goes.
4000 mile results, 3MP study, Amsoil 5w30, LS1 Camaro
- Thread starter Patman
- Start date
- Status
Hi,
Ted, sorry I directed a response to you but it should have been to Pablo!
Keep smiling!
Regards
Doug
Ted, sorry I directed a response to you but it should have been to Pablo!
Keep smiling!
Regards
Doug
A quick comparo between 3MP's results at 4k miles and my Z28's 4k mile interval with M1 10W-30/15W-50/#132. Fairly comparable even though my engine had less than half the miles those of 3MP's car.
EDIT: This VOA is from before I replaced the pistons. This baby is the most "Slap Happy" engine I've ever seen. So bad was the noise, the local dealer did not even make a single excuse.
[ March 02, 2004, 02:23 AM: Message edited by: Last_Z ]
EDIT: This VOA is from before I replaced the pistons. This baby is the most "Slap Happy" engine I've ever seen. So bad was the noise, the local dealer did not even make a single excuse.
[ March 02, 2004, 02:23 AM: Message edited by: Last_Z ]
There has been alot of points made here but one way or another that oil with a TBN of 3 remaining is going to have to hang in there another 14,000 miles
to complete the test .
Thats the goal correct ... 18k like the Mobil ?
Thats the goal correct ... 18k like the Mobil ?
18K is where they stopped the Mobil test do to time and the TBN was bottoming out. I guess 3MP will stop the Amsoil test when it reaches an unsat TBN. I would really like this oil to do well.
What is next in line, Redline?
What is next in line, Redline?
My car hasn't seen any Auto-RX.
The test will end at 1 year or when the lab testing indicates it is no longer fit for duty. I am really hoping TBN does not become the deciding factor.
A big consideration in the decision to drain the M1 was that the insolubles had hit their limit for a second time at 17k, and swapping filters & adding 1.5 qts of make-up oil when there was only a few weeks left anyway seemed rather pointless and wasteful.
Personally, I suspect that Amsoil wil level off in the 3'ish area of TBN and stay there for a long time. We'll see soon.
I don't know for certain what the next oil will be -- it's a bit early to decide -- but I'm leaning toward Redline.
Cheers, 3MP
The test will end at 1 year or when the lab testing indicates it is no longer fit for duty. I am really hoping TBN does not become the deciding factor.
A big consideration in the decision to drain the M1 was that the insolubles had hit their limit for a second time at 17k, and swapping filters & adding 1.5 qts of make-up oil when there was only a few weeks left anyway seemed rather pointless and wasteful.
Personally, I suspect that Amsoil wil level off in the 3'ish area of TBN and stay there for a long time. We'll see soon.
I don't know for certain what the next oil will be -- it's a bit early to decide -- but I'm leaning toward Redline.
Cheers, 3MP
There are only two widely accepted ASTM techniques to determine TBN:
ASTM D-2896, which is typically used for new oils - this is the method you'll find used on most spec sheets for example, including Amsoils, Chevrons, Mobils, etc
ASTM D-4739, which is the PREFERRED method for testing of used engine oils - particularly diesel oils. I'm sure George Morrison of AVLube will confirm that this is indeed the case if he happens to see this. The lab that AVLube uses to do their testing generates their TBN data with the ASTM D-4739 method, as does CTC and Analysts, Inc.
If you were to test the Amsoil ASL/ATM formulations using the ASTM D-2896 method, you'd get an initial TBN of 12.3-12.5. If you were to test it using the more conservative ASTM D-4739 method, you'd get a baseline that is about 1.5 points lower. if you go to the VOA section and look at some data from the past year, you can verify that this is indeed the case ....
Both of these approved ASTM methods generate results for used oils that are more linear in terms of TBN degradation. The problem with the Blackstone method is that it's highly non-linear. As a result, you get all the data compressed down in the 1-5 TBN range after only a few thousand miles. As Terry has mentioned, there may be issues with accurate testing of specific types of additive chemistries as well. I suspected this might be the case, however since it sounds like sour grapes, I didn't mention it.
My suggestion would be to almost ignore the TBN results from Blackstone altogether as a general principle - regardless of whose oil you are testing - and change oil on the basis of wear rates, total solids levels and/or changes in viscosity. If 3MP intends to do any further testing of say Redline or Royal Purple, I'd highly recommend he find a lab that does NOT use a bastardized, made up variation of a widely accepted ASTM test protocol. If the company that sold Blackstone this equipment recommended this method, they have done thousands of Blackstone customers a dis-service ...
For the record, Mr. Dyson does an extremely professional and consistent job of interpreting the Blackstone TBN data - however, he may also read Tarot cards in his spare time for all I know ...
I certainly don't have a clue how to make sense of their TBN results....
TS
ASTM D-2896, which is typically used for new oils - this is the method you'll find used on most spec sheets for example, including Amsoils, Chevrons, Mobils, etc
ASTM D-4739, which is the PREFERRED method for testing of used engine oils - particularly diesel oils. I'm sure George Morrison of AVLube will confirm that this is indeed the case if he happens to see this. The lab that AVLube uses to do their testing generates their TBN data with the ASTM D-4739 method, as does CTC and Analysts, Inc.
If you were to test the Amsoil ASL/ATM formulations using the ASTM D-2896 method, you'd get an initial TBN of 12.3-12.5. If you were to test it using the more conservative ASTM D-4739 method, you'd get a baseline that is about 1.5 points lower. if you go to the VOA section and look at some data from the past year, you can verify that this is indeed the case ....
Both of these approved ASTM methods generate results for used oils that are more linear in terms of TBN degradation. The problem with the Blackstone method is that it's highly non-linear. As a result, you get all the data compressed down in the 1-5 TBN range after only a few thousand miles. As Terry has mentioned, there may be issues with accurate testing of specific types of additive chemistries as well. I suspected this might be the case, however since it sounds like sour grapes, I didn't mention it.
My suggestion would be to almost ignore the TBN results from Blackstone altogether as a general principle - regardless of whose oil you are testing - and change oil on the basis of wear rates, total solids levels and/or changes in viscosity. If 3MP intends to do any further testing of say Redline or Royal Purple, I'd highly recommend he find a lab that does NOT use a bastardized, made up variation of a widely accepted ASTM test protocol. If the company that sold Blackstone this equipment recommended this method, they have done thousands of Blackstone customers a dis-service ...
For the record, Mr. Dyson does an extremely professional and consistent job of interpreting the Blackstone TBN data - however, he may also read Tarot cards in his spare time for all I know ...
TS
I agree. I'm giving TAN a try to see if I can get a more consistent indicator for my gasoline engine.
Ted respectfully you are wrong on the TBN standardization between the two labs you mention and Blackstone labs.
EVERY lab uses modified TBN testing based on their equipement and capabilities. YOU just don't know it because they have not disclosed it !
You all are making a mountain out of a molehill about the BK technique. When it comes to TBN testing you need repeatable data that is comparable to itself as the variables between two different engines and oils are too great to overcome with a trended oil analysis report.
The Bklabs data compared to Bklabs data from this engine is just fine for this test.
Another issue here is initial oxidation and Amsoils formula oxidizes quick and early, then will plateau. Once the TBN begins to drop again you will see the characteristic rise in Vis of the ASL and then wear rates will begin moving north along with insolubles, we'll have to stay tuned to see WHEN that is.
OAI and CTC are not the gold standards of trended oil analysis my friends.
Where are those Tarot cards !
[ March 02, 2004, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]
EVERY lab uses modified TBN testing based on their equipement and capabilities. YOU just don't know it because they have not disclosed it !
You all are making a mountain out of a molehill about the BK technique. When it comes to TBN testing you need repeatable data that is comparable to itself as the variables between two different engines and oils are too great to overcome with a trended oil analysis report.
The Bklabs data compared to Bklabs data from this engine is just fine for this test.
Another issue here is initial oxidation and Amsoils formula oxidizes quick and early, then will plateau. Once the TBN begins to drop again you will see the characteristic rise in Vis of the ASL and then wear rates will begin moving north along with insolubles, we'll have to stay tuned to see WHEN that is.
OAI and CTC are not the gold standards of trended oil analysis my friends.
Where are those Tarot cards !
[ March 02, 2004, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]
Satterfi,
I was going to, certainly, but thought it would be worth getting some more age on the oil first. At 4k the stuff's hardly broken in.
Cheers, 3MP
I was going to, certainly, but thought it would be worth getting some more age on the oil first. At 4k the stuff's hardly broken in.
Cheers, 3MP
I'm assuming your refering to ZDP, which in some engines, seems to make a difference. I guess ZDP is still important in many aspects. ALS is a very good oil and I hope this test continues for awhile. I think this oil though will have trouble from thickening as some others have predicted, sending wear through the roof. Lets hope not so we can see a good 18k mile wear comparison.
- Status
Similar threads
