Why is the TBN so low? I'm no professional at reading these anaysis reports, but seeing the trend to the TBN bottoming out almost instantly seems odd. Wrong TBN readings? It just doesn't make sense after perusing through other Amsoil UOAs.
9,000-mile results are in!
- Thread starter 3 Mad Ponchos
- Start date
- Status
quote:I think this is what we've been trying to figure out this entire thread.
Originally posted by ToyotaNSaturn: Why is the TBN so low?
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
quote:Pablo, Just like college, I should not fall asleep during the open book time.
Originally posted by 59 Vetteman: vetteman -quote:Not true. SEE: M1
The same TBN test method is being used since day one on the Mobil test.
![[HAIL 2 U!]](/forums/graemlins/worshippy.gif)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The new TBN method was used from 12k through 18k miles in the Mobil test .
[ June 10, 2004, 06:36 AM: Message edited by: Motorbike ]Something to consider about the TBN-- regardless of what the absolute value is, Mobil 1 exhibited a state of equilibrium over a considerable span of miles. Amsoil is well beyond the point that Mobil 1 reached equilibrium and is still dropping. That to me is much more significant than whether we call it a 1.9 or a 4.0.
Cheers, 3MP
Another thought, just to stir the pot, if it's Amsoil's thickness that is providing the extra protection vs. Mobil 1, why not just run 10W40 Mobil 1 and save $2.50 a quart?
Cheers, 3MP
I posted a bad link to an earlier thread regarding the rational for considering TBN in UOA. Sorry! This is the corrected link.
Discussion of Sulphuric Acid, TBN, etc.
quote:I believe you probably meant 0w-40 but how bout this ? Castrol ISLAC GF3 rated 10w-40 GTX @ 6.37 for a 5 quart jug for 5-7k miles and save alot over the life of the car ?
Originally posted by 3 Mad Ponchos: Another thought, just to stir the pot, if it's Amsoil's thickness that is providing the extra protection vs. Mobil 1, why not just run 10W40 Mobil 1 and save $2.50 a quart? Cheers, 3MP
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon}
quote:Yeah, I just realized that was a pretty dumb question. LOL
Originally posted by Quattro Pete:quote:I think this is what we've been trying to figure out this entire thread.
Originally posted by ToyotaNSaturn: Why is the TBN so low?
quote:Spector, I'm starting to agree with you...Any reasoning on why the TBN flattened to floor under 3000 miles and remains mostly constant from that point forward? Just seems odd.
Originally posted by Spector: The purpose of this sutdy is the effect of extended drains on engine wear, it is not where does the TBN stand at XXX miles. As long as the wear numbers remain fine and have no significant increase per 1000 miles I feel you have to leave this oil in there even if the stupid TBN became 0. I personally gave up on TBN a while back as an indicator of anything, IMO the old method was also something that one could put soem faith in, this new method sucks IMO!
T&S, I'm not sure I agree with the "relatively constant" view -- it's lost half its value since 3000 miles -- but regardless, it's normal behavior for TBN to drop significantly in the first few thousand miles, then level off or drop more slowly over many thousands of miles. I've got several SAE papers studying the phenomenon. Interesting reading -- the relationship of acids and bases in engine oil and on engine wear is still not fully understood.
Cheers, 3MP
"-- the relationship of acids and bases in engine oil and on engine wear is still not fully understood"
You sure have that right!
I just went back and looked at my TBN numbers, LS-1 for 5935 (1st sample) and 5677 (2nd sample) on Amsoil ASL and the TBN was 10 and 4.9 respectively. First sample was done by Terry Dyson with his mail order sample kit, 2nd was done by Blackstone last December. At 5K and 6K miles in this study, the TBN was down to 3.6 and 3.5 respectively. My TBN of 4.9 also included a number of laps on Bristol Motor Speedway on a 100+ degree day.
While I understand how much the Amsoil crowd wants to see Amsoil tromp on M1 we need to keep perspective here.
1) The dexsil test needs to be done so we can see another number beside Black stones just for an objective lookat the TBN!
2) It is not reasonable to ask someone to run with a TBN below 1. It is definately just plain rude to ask someone to run it after it it bottoms out at zero!
3) What was the TBN with the "new" Blackstone method towards the end of the M1 run?
4) If Redline had just turned in this TBN number the "War Paint" would be on. People would have Redline effigys swinging from tree's!
quote:Naw, a good excuse would surface as to why Redline's TBN was so low, poorly operating engine, cleaning up from Amsoil etc. etc. Redliners always have some good one lurking in the background!
Originally posted by JohnBrowning: 4) If Redline had just turned in this TBN number the "War Paint" would be on. People would have Redline effigys swinging from tree's!
I highly recommend switching to Oil Analyzers after this test is complete and using them for any Redline or Royal Purple, or GC, 0w-30 testing.
OAI performs the ASTM D-4739 test CORRECTLY and you won't have the TBN bottoming out after 2000 miles
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
Patman
Staff member
I don't think it's a good idea at all to change labs midstream here. Then the data is not going to be comparable for the next two oils. Blackstone is very reliable, other than their TBN method showing the TBN too low.
quote:Thats what I meant, just for the TBN. What if this study is cut short bc Blackstone's TBN isn't right? Why net get a TBN from another source so this can be avoided? I'd pay for it.
Blackstone is very reliable, other than their TBN method showing the TBN too low
quote:I agree. We need to get a "2nd opinion" on TBN.
Originally posted by buster:quote:Thats what I meant, just for the TBN. What if this study is cut short bc Blackstone's TBN isn't right? Why net get a TBN from another source so this can be avoided? I'd pay for it.
Blackstone is very reliable, other than their TBN method showing the TBN too low
I Question getting another TBN. This test is suppose to be a controled test with both oils having the same lab doing the test. You can't go back and test the Mobil 1 TBN at another lab. If it is a lab error the next analysis would show this. Don't understand all the lab bashing! We have tons of UOA on this site from Blackstone and no one has questioned their TBN on these. We should not shoot the messenger!
Mobil was tested with same TBN method...get over it.
OAI sucks.
NOBODY does a real ASTM TBN test for $20! it takes FAR too long!
Have a nice day!
- Status