5w-30 compared by LSJr - NAPA, Amsoil, RP, ST

[rstcso]

I get LPJr's shtick for the benefit of a YouTube audience, but he often has some pretty reasonable points to be taken away.

He potentially saved me from a headache on my Audi. I was looking for a good VW508.00 approved oil and sent in a sample of 0W-20 Ravenol VSE for VOA. When he emailed the results, he said if this oil was being used in a DI or turbocharged engine, he wouldn't recommend using it. The sodium level was 203ppm and calcium 2095ppm. My engine was both, so switched to Motul.

 

[ltslimjim]

The thing is that to tell someone they are wrong you have to know that you are right. The “what lab results do you have” crowd are going to harp on everything, including lab results, because it doesn’t fit their narrative. In this case here is someone who is well qualified and before anyone can say his conclusions are wrong I’ll need to see their resume.

It’s not that Lake is wrong. It’s the erroneous spin off comments that take what is presented out of context. Lake’s presentation is misleading and the responses prove it. You think this is about blame or credit? This is logical reasoning rather than confirmation bias; which the mass spin off comments have used as “aha! The cheap oil is bestest, I knew it all along!” And, besides that, anyone can “be wrong” regardless of qualifications. A professional can be wrong. They are human after all. In fact, not all professionals agree on everything. Humans are funny that way.

 

[FlyingTexan]

It’s not that Lake is wrong. It’s the erroneous spin off comments that take what is presented out of context. Lake’s presentation is misleading and the responses prove it. You think this is about blame or credit? This is logical reasoning rather than confirmation bias; which the mass spin off comments have used as “aha! The cheap oil is bestest, I knew it all along!” And, besides that, anyone can “be wrong” regardless of qualifications. A professional can be wrong. They are human after all. In fact, not all professionals agree on everything. Humans are funny that way.

So now we’ve come full circle where personal experiences, professionals, and lab results are wrong based on the person on the other end of the internet.

 

[rstcso]

So now we’ve come full circle where personal experiences, professionals, and lab results are wrong based on the person on the other end of the internet.

I wasn't aware the internet had an end, let alone two.

 

[Shel_B]

I wasn't aware the internet had an end, let alone two.

https://hmpg.net/

 

[nostradamus]

His results coincide with the BOQI database formulated by GOKHAN. In the 5w-30 variety Napa/Valvoline scored #21 on the list, Supertech #25, Amsoil #33, Royal Purple #43. These are GF-5 formulations. Sorry but don’t kid yourself there is no reason to buy amsoil unless you just like it and don’t care about money

 

[facility1]

His results coincide with the BOQI database formulated by GOKHAN. In the 5w-30 variety Napa/Valvoline scored #21 on the list, Supertech #25, Amsoil #33, Royal Purple #43. These are GF-5 formulations. Sorry but don’t kid yourself there is no reason to buy amsoil unless you just like it and don’t care about money

it seems like engine oils have evolved over the years, this is just old, outdated info, engine oil gets reformulated every so often as formulas change due to costs, engine manufactures demands, specs, licenses, newer add pacs, base oils, product improvements, etc.

 

[Shel_B]

His results coincide with the BOQI database formulated by GOKHAN. In the 5w-30 variety Napa/Valvoline scored #21 on the list, Supertech #25, Amsoil #33, Royal Purple #43. These are GF-5 formulations. Sorry but don’t kid yourself there is no reason to buy amsoil unless you just like it and don’t care about money

Would you be kind enough to post a link to this database?

 

[Glenda W.]

Would you be kind enough to post a link to this database?

If I remember correctly the highest ranking oils contained the most POA, oils like HPL and Amsoil SS. As OTS oils ditched POA for group 3 they fell down the list.

Thread 'List of oils by base-oil-quality index: 0W-20 oils'

Aug 3, 2017

This is a follow-up on my previous thread that compared the 5W-xx oils:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/list-of-oils-by-base-oil-quality-index-a-ranking.273004/

Another one of the ultimate questions asked on BITOG is how the base-oil quality of 0W-20 oils compare to that of 5W-20 oils. Some people are afraid of 0W-20 oils because they think they are made of very thin base oils and will evaporate and leave deposits. However, you (and they) will find these results very interesting and contrary to these myths.

I define the base-oil-quality index (BOQI) as follows:

BOQI =...

• Gokhan
• Replies: 77
• Forum: Passenger Car Motor Oil (PCMO) - Gasoline Vehicles

• 

 

[Pablo]

Neither of these "tests" have much to do with real world use. Amsoil OE is not so crazy expensive, the Amsoil syn blend even less. Both seem to be doing just fine.

I mean, really has the GOKHAN list really translated to actual use cases?

And still Amsoil overall shows less iron in UOAs over the years. I know, just as unscientific as any of this.

 

[buster]

Unfortunately, there are not many great sources for oil information in the YT world. It's pretty much Lubrication Explained, and LSJ. Rest is mostly clickbait and just not worth anyone's time (Fordbossme/Project Farm etc.).

 

[Pablo]

it seems like engine oils have evolved over the years, this is just old, outdated info, engine oil gets reformulated every so often as formulas change due to costs, engine manufactures demands, specs, licenses, newer add pacs, base oils, product improvements, etc.

This. Plus, evaluating an engine oil on just the base oils - which are changed fairly rapidly.

All this is still what Tony banned so many years ago.

 

[OVERKILL]

If I remember correctly the highest ranking oils contained the most POA, oils like HPL and Amsoil SS. As OTS oils ditched POA for group 3 they fell down the list.

Thread 'List of oils by base-oil-quality index: 0W-20 oils'

Aug 3, 2017

This is a follow-up on my previous thread that compared the 5W-xx oils:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/list-of-oils-by-base-oil-quality-index-a-ranking.273004/

Another one of the ultimate questions asked on BITOG is how the base-oil quality of 0W-20 oils compare to that of 5W-20 oils. Some people are afraid of 0W-20 oils because they think they are made of very thin base oils and will evaporate and leave deposits. However, you (and they) will find these results very interesting and contrary to these myths.

I define the base-oil-quality index (BOQI) as follows:

BOQI =...

• Gokhan
• Replies: 77
• Forum: Passenger Car Motor Oil (PCMO) - Gasoline Vehicles

• 

The "BOQI" was basically just dividing CCS by Noack, which is problematic because you are using data derived from two properties of a finished lubricant, both of which are influenced by more than just the selection of the base oils and have considerable error bars (CCS reproducibility is 8.9% of the mean in different labs). There have been issues with Noack test methods as instrumentation has been attempted to be updated, as covered in this article by Savant, which is about 20 years old, but gets into the challenge of "modernization" of the Noack test and so equations are used (as mentioned in the article) to adjust the results between the different testing methods. The Savant article also notes that in comparison of the different test results, finished oil results did not mirror base oil results. That is, the variation between the different testing methods as performed on base oils differed from the results performed on finished lubricants.

As Garak pointed out in the thread you linked, some blenders also don't list Noack as anything other than a whole number (Redline for example), which screws up the math even further.

 

[Glenda W.]

The "BOQI" was basically just dividing CCS by Noack, which is problematic because you are using data derived from two properties of a finished lubricant, both of which are influenced by more than just the selection of the base oils and have considerable error bars (CCS reproducibility is 8.9% of the mean in different labs). There have been issues with Noack test methods as instrumentation has been attempted to be updated, as covered in this article by Savant, which is about 20 years old, but gets into the challenge of "modernization" of the Noack test and so equations are used (as mentioned in the article) to adjust the results between the different testing methods. The Savant article also notes that in comparison of the different test results, finished oil results did not mirror base oil results. That is, the variation between the different testing methods as performed on base oils differed from the results performed on finished lubricants.

Thanks! I remember the divide over this list(calculation). Personally I never gave it much consideration when choosing oils, just like Lakes wear comparisons.

 

[OVERKILL]

Thanks! I remember the divide over this list(calculation). Personally I never gave it much consideration when choosing oils.

Yeah, I found the exercise to try and calculate base oil viscosity more interesting (though it's considerably more complex). But of course as I pointed out in our conversations on that one, that because of how different base oils behave, ultimately the results, even when corrected with a "fudge factor" could be way off.

 

[Pablo]

Thanks! I remember the divide over this list(calculation). Personally I never gave it much consideration when choosing oils.

I dismissed it as more nonsensical "what is best oil?" talk back in 2017. Thanks overkill. To use it to hate on Amsoil in 2025 is just silly IMHO

 

[Hohn]

To use it to hate on Amsoil in 2025 is just silly IMHO

Agree completely, and I'm not an Amsoil guy although I grew up with a family that used the stuff extensively (cheesehead childhood, what can I say).

Focusing on "base oil quality" is absurd because we aren't buying base oils. We're buying finish-blended lubricants. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Yet here we are debating the quality of pudding by the comparing the kinds of chickens that laid the eggs used to make it.

If you can't see the base oil properties in a measurable aspect of the final product, they do not matter.


Now I will say that I prefer the thicker base oil with lower VII treat rates because I believe that they have higher film thicknesses at lower shear rates for a given KV100. Comparing to the water skiing analogy, it's like a thicker base oil has larger skis and comes up "on plane" at lower velocity. I think this helps wear at BDC and TDC reversals in the rings as well as anywhere you have direct-pressure kind of contact (valve tips interacting with rockers, for example).

I readily admit that in most commercial oil cases, the thicker base oil just means cheaper and lower-grade base oils with lower VIs and worse volatility. So I'm indulging my "thicker base oil" preference at present only with HPL. For commercial off the shelf stuff, I'll stay with 0w and 5w even though my local winter environment makes 15w acceptable.

The base oil discussion gets clouded by confusing viscosity vs API Group. A thicker base oil can be better, but only perhaps within identical API group or chemistry. If moving from 0w40 to 15w40 means you move from a PAO co-base to a group I base, that's not a step forward in quality IMHO. And economics almost always dictates that you have to go to thinner base oil to get higher quality base oils in COTS products (i.e. Wal Mart Aisle).

The problem now is that 0w is much too broad a category. We really need like a 00w or 000w grades for the highest VI PAO oils.