Wouldn’t it have been more interesting to send the same oil to the different labs?
A tale of 3 identical VOA samples tested by three different test laboratories...
- Thread starter bhvrdr
- Start date
Isn’t that what the op did?
Blackstone and Polaris both use the D4739 TBN testing method, while Wearcheck uses D2896. It's interesting how close BS and Polaris are on M1's TBN, but how off they are from each other on the Mopar and Amsoil.
Where is Blackstone's Flashpoint for the Amsoil?
Where is Blackstone's Flashpoint for the Amsoil?
Oxidation is from ester, not PAO. It shows Amsoil SS has a good bit of ester. Redline, who's oils contain up to 40% ester, are in the 80-120 abs/cm range in virgin form.
Sorry about that. It was 440
Amsoil 0w30 SSO - 2021 formulation VOA
This is the formulation that Amsoil recommends for use in SP and SN Plus applications.
bobistheoilguy.com
Last edited:
Frankly my anecdotal comment, it looks like the labs are closer together than my/our numbers from 200X (2003ish??) . We got delta 300-500+ ppm back then.
MolaKule
Staff member
I agree, I think the "variance" between labs has been decreasing over time and that benefits us.
As for terminology and definitions, I use the various Oxford Dictionaries and depending on context, here are some definitions of Reliability:
The sampling variance of a statistic. For example, the reliability of where σ2=Var (X) so, as the sample size increases, X̄ n becomes a better estimator in the sense that the variability decreases;
From: "reliability, in The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Mathematics"
From the Oxford Dictionary of Academic English:
the quality of being able to be trusted,
the quality of being likely to be correct or true,
the quality of being able to work or operate for long periods without breaking down or needing attention.
The Last definition is the definition with which we generally associate with reliability, but given the definitions above, I still do not think the word reliability applies to any of the OP's charts. Obviously, I do see "variances."
We may agree to disagree but I think we need to choose words carefully when describing technical data.
In today's environment, too many times proper word definitions are re-defined or re-interpreted to suit a particular method of Marketing, or to suit some ideas or strategies of a particular group.
Last edited:
In science, reliability has always been reliability.
Oxford definitions do get changed and added over time. Thats not a scientific definition at all.
Ive provided scientific links to help explain what reliability vs accuracy vs validity vs precision is in experimental design. This has not changed 8n 100 years of science.
I even provided pictures.
Please just read about experimental considerations and you will learn what reliability is. This is first year masters level stuff. Very simple.
The first post was a sample of reliability between laboratories. Think of it as a form of interater or test-retest reliability.
It was not necessarily a sample of accuracy because we dont know what the true results are. We only know what three laboratories say they are.
Precision would be the level each laboratory is able to measure down to.
I do realize these definitions in the lay world change based on how people use them and even change in dictionaries for lay people but they have never changed in scientific inquiry and design.
This is why i gave you the example of the expensive timepiece. ...
... people usually call an expensive timepiece that keeps outstanding time "precise" or "accurate" but of course neither one of those would necessarily apply in the true scientific definition.
Again, a very expensive timepiece that keeps outstanding time to the minute over a year is a RELIABLE piece.
...its only an ACCURATE timepiece if you set it to the actual time of day. If you set it off by 5 minutes then its 100 percent inaccurate.
...its precision is ony down to the second if it has a second hand. A 5 dollar digital stopwatch that measures to thousandths of a second would technically be 1000 times more precise.
Last edited:
So 2 out of the 3 labs report Mobil 1 AFE 0W-30's phosphorus content below the API SP minimum. How can they have an API starburst with <600 ppm phosphorus?
As a non-metal (and specifically not a transition metal) I would think that phosphorus is something that’s a bit difficult to measure properly. When I performed elemental analysis that was one of the elements that was prone to issues such as carry-over. Each element is different in terms of precision as you probably already know.
It would be interesting to see for a specific ICP machine what all the tolerances, sensitivities and interferences happen to be.
I haven't only because i just hadnt gotten to them.
Blackstone is just convenient for shipping. Its no fuss and includes flashpoint which is rare.
I really like working with polaris because i can specify exactly what analyses i want run all the way to uber expensive shear and wear testing. I have mine setup for basic tests i have them run and then i tell them if i need a level 2 or 3 test that adds more variables. My basic test gives elements, contaminants, oxid/nitr, vi, tan, tbn.
Last edited:
Just wondering as they seem to have the best deal $15 for a bare bones analysis, I believe tbn is Included. I thought I had come across threads praising als tribology. Thank you
Wow at that viscosity index, almost as high as Redline 0w40 (one of the highest out there)! M1 doesn't list the KV40 for the 0w30 but based on the tests I'm willing to bet this stuff flows incredibly well in extreme cold.
A man with one clock knows what time it is. A man with two clocks is never quite sure.
I actually find the readings follow trends across the numbers. Polaris has highest numbers, with wearcheck the lowest and blackstone in the middle. While you can't decide which has the correct absolute values, the trends throughout follow.
Response from Mobil a couple months ago regarding the Mobil 1 0w30 afe………
The typical kinematic viscosity of Mobil 1 0W-30 Advanced Fuel Economy is approx. 61 cSt at 40C.
Regards,
Aaron M. McPhee
Americas Technical Help Desk
ExxonMobil Lubricants Technology
Here's their response to me...
Thank you for the e-mail.
The Kinematic Viscosity for MOBIL 1 0W-30 Advanced Fuel Economy at 40c is 60 cSt (60 mm2/sec).
Unfortunately, we cannot provide you with the ht/hs for MOBIL 1 0W-30 as marketing chose not to publish this property.
Hope this helps.
Regards
DIKSHA AGRAWAL
Contractor
Lubricants Technical Support Engineer
I see no reason to bad mouth Blackstone as some have. Ed
Similar threads
