5w30 compared by LSJr - NAPA, Amsoil, RP, ST

martinq

martinq

Joined
Jul 22, 2005
Messages
1,568
Location
ON, Canada
Lake Speed Jr tests & compares four, synthetic 5w30 engine oils.

Super Tech Full Synthetic
Amsoil OE
NAPA Full Synthetic
Royal Purple Premium

He spends 8hrs on the dyno testing these oils while testing out a piston ring coating. It's really nice to see some comparable test numbers on these four oils (same test / tester, same engine, same procedure).
I'd like to chart out the results here but I'm out of time right now.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nessism1 said:
There was a thread earlier today, about that same video, which was deleted. Wondering why?
Click to expand...
Because it is against our rules to post a video link and then add no substantial comments or dialogue. That thread was sent to quarantine.

The OP here has posted his comments along with the video; this is acceptable.
 
Nessism1 said:
There was a thread earlier today, about that same video, which was deleted. Wondering why? It seems like a good video to me.
Click to expand...
Because the poster failed to comply with our copyright policy. We’ve been over this so many times…

Edit: I see that @dnewton3 responded. I‘ll leave this here for review.

dnewton3

Thread 'Copyright Policy; protections and Fair Use exceptions'

Copyright protections will be observed and obeyed to the best of our limited abilities here on BITOG. If you see a suspected infringement, please "report" the possible violation and allow the Staff here to review it.


First and foremost, for anyone who wants to post linked materials of any nature here on BITOG, it is that member's responsibility to make a reasonable effort to research any potential copyright protections for any and all materials, prior to posting. If copyright protections exist, and you still want to post the materials, you must comply with the copyright license...
  • Like
  • Haha
 
martinq said:
Does anyone know what Valvoline product it is roughly comparable to?
Click to expand...
My guess is the basic Valvoline advanced full syn, I ran that stuff a few years ago and it had a high amount of moly.

The other year I asked Valvoline about the 15w-50 oil and here’s the spec sheet they sent me. The first page has CCS, HTHS, and pour point mixed up but it’s pretty easy to tell which numbers are which.

IMG_2924.webp


IMG_2925.webp
 
Things we should already know as BITOGers, but this video does help confirm ...

- too much oil in the sump will aerate (foam) and cost power and lose pressure

- UOAs won't see all particles; the little device he does use to see stuff over 10um help prove that larger particles are not very prominent, at least when the sumps are reasonably clean

- to really understand how the oil did, you must have a VOA to judge vis and oxidation, etc so you can understand the delta (change) in each characteristic or parameter, as every batch will be a bit different, every oil brand will be different, and certainly they will be different between spec changes (SM, SM, SP ...)

- spending more won't always get you more; paying 2x more money won't often return 2x greater performance



My additional comments:
- these tests run do NOT indicate any manner of longevity for use; these were dyno runs comparing/contrasting power and don't address duration of use (extended OCIs). In this video, he is using "performance" merely to describe wear control and power in short-term testing. This does not address long-use oxidation, cleanliness factors, etc. If these lubes were run for significantly extended OCIs, there might well be a distinct separation of many traits of wear and cleanliness, oxidation, vis, FP, etc ...
- these tests ignore the statistical variability regarding "normality" (though he does acknowledge the existence of variation, he does nothing to account for it)
- I'm not a fan of his "total wear metals" method; I don't believe adding data values for separate elements is a good way to understand "wear"
- singular UOAs are NOT by any stretch a proper way to compare/contrast one lube to another; small sample sets are rife with variability which cannot be accurately predicted without decent quantity of data (30 samples min)
 
Last edited:
dnewton3 said:
Things we should already know as BITOGers, but this video does help confirm ...

- too much oil in the sump will aerate (foam) and cost power and lose pressure

- UOAs won't see all particles; the little device he does use to see stuff over 10um help prove that larger particles are not very prominent, at least when the sumps are reasonably clean

- to really understand how the oil did, you must have a VOA to judge vis and oxidation, etc so you can understand the delta (change) in each characteristic or parameter, as every batch will be a bit different, every oil brand will be different, and certainly they will be different between spec changes (SM, SM, SP ...)

- spending more won't always get you more; paying 2x more money won't often return 2x greater performance



My additional comments:
- these tests run do NOT indicate any manner of longevity for use; these were dyno runs comparing/contrasting power and don't address duration of use (extended OCIs). In this video, he is using "performance" merely to describe wear control and power in short-term testing. This does not address long-use oxidation, cleanliness factors, etc. If these lubes were run for significantly extended OCIs, there might well be a distinct separation of many traits of wear and cleanliness, oxidation, vis, FP, etc ...
- these tests ignore the statistical variability regarding "normality" (though he does acknowledge the existence of variation, he does nothing to account for it)
- I'm not a fan of his "total wear metals" method; I don't believe adding data values for separate elements is a good way to understand "wear"
Click to expand...

He does have another video that goes into longevity a bit more. it's comparing 10W-30 conventional to synthetic and a race oil aswell. He has the link to that video in the description and mentions it in the video.
 
I liked the video. I myself would like to run the Napa oil but one thing that bugs me is how good fomulas change and it is hard to know what additives are in them if you continue using the same brand in the long term. It has a nice high moly count today, but like TGMO it could change next week and the moly level drop, if that is you preferred additive like I want to have. With some of the big name brands they don't seem to change as much.
 
2.7ecoboostFordBronco said:
Uh oh, he’s using used oil analysis to compare the relative performance of different oils.
Click to expand...

Glenda W. said:
I’m sorry but vids like this are why I’m so torn about this guy. So much left out here to make these claims. This is 100% clickbait. The interwebs are screaming Napa oil is the best because Lake said so….
Click to expand...
Very poor video in being misleading. Not real world, long/term use implications for many of the reasons @dnewton3 covered.
 
And this right here folks is why mickey mouse certificates in oil analysis comment writing are not worth anything but this guy having those thinks it's the same as having a chemical engineering degree and calls himself a tribologist "Science not speculation" lol. I love how he went out of this way to make the comment about people saying that this cannot be used conclusively but says it can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Castrol 5W-40, QS 5W-40, QS UD 10W-30, Amsoil SS 10W-30 Volatility Results - Dec. 2024
Replies
1
Views
1K
edyvw
goblin
Valvoline Restore and Protect - 2017 Hyundai 3.3 V6
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
goblin
fantastic
  • Locked
LSJr's Video Testing Data - Pennzoil and Quaker State's Differences
10 11 12
Replies
235
Views
24K
dnewton3
burbguy82
Amsoil Syn Blend 5w30, giving it a shot
2 3
Replies
45
Views
4K
crashz
Don_M
MIA since 2016 ... I'm back - with a (subjective) observation
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
SimpleSyrup
Back
Top Bottom