Anyone have videos that "prove" more or less wear of 40w or higher engine oils?

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by grndslm
Blah, blah, blah.... Just because we're on BITOG, doesn't mean you need to be bitter because you don't have or have never seen actual, visual confirmation of more or less wear on the same engines, metals, components, etc. compared to any other oil.


OK, and how does that test achieve ANY of the things that you are complaining I have never seen ?

It's got NOTHING to do with any part of your engine, metals, components, or "etc.'s"...so why would you put credence in it other than

"I want to believe" ???

I can't provide you with a video of the flying spaghetti monster not existing...a video of a flying spaghetti monster does not mean that he created the universe.

 

[berlyn]

+1
well said

 

[ZeeOSix]

I wonder if the roller bearing pieces he's using in the "lubricity machine" (ie, one-armed bandit) have a very consistant hardness, or if they are case hardened exactly consistant. Yes, I know the accuracy of this test isn't great - as Shannow mentioned the official Timkin test machine is around +/- 20% measurement error per the ASTM test procedure.

I'd like to see him run at least 10 (preferably 100) tests on each oil to see the repeatability.

I'll play devil's advocate here. So if there was a degree of repeatability confidence, and one oil showed a much less wear scar, what exactly is in that oil formulation that is causing a smaller wear scar? I'm thinking in order to show less wear (and less heat like his test showed), there has to be less metal-to-metal contact going on. Is it simply the one with less wear has better anti-friction and anti-wear additives that's protecting the surfaces during contact?

 

[Shannow]

Loud mouthed diatribe was removed thankfully.

In order to have a "scar", metal has to have been removed, and in considerable quantities...enough to be measurable in this example.

To answer the deleted post, it's not simply my conjecture that these tests aren't representative of engine wear, it's the view of the entire automotive, additive, and lubricant industry that these various EP tests have NOTHING to do with engine wear.

Otherwise they'd be all over these like white on rice (or spaghetti, LOL).

The people who DO use these Extreme Pressure tests are in the provision of gear lubricants, and roller bearings. The ASTM tests are for these applications, and all of the ASTM tests have error bands in the 20% range.

These tests either use a load to point of failure, or load to failure and measure the scar that's left.

Anyone who has pulled apart an engine knows that they are looking for variances in diameter and clearances...in tenths and whole thousandths of an inch, not looking for scars/scoring as evidence of a lubricant;s worth.

The OEM's use expensive engine tests to measure the thousandths of wear in components...if they could use a simple one armed bandit to do same, then surely they would...and the proponents of these machines would be rich, having revolutionised the industry...which they didn't/haven't and they won't as these tests simply are not representative of engines and engine wear.

But they ARE good for gears, roller bearings and gear oils and greases...+/- 20% of course.

EP additives often form a soap like sacrificial layer, often from the component's metal itself, to allow the parts to slip past each other rather then welding together...thus the components will "wear" rather than sieze.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted by grndslm
I've seen this video which puts AmazonBasics / SuperTech synthetic virtually up there with Mobil 1 synthetic...

So do you guys have any videos that "prove" the best 40w or 50w motorcycle oil?? Opinions not needed... just tests that we can all see.


The problem with the OP is no such video exists anyplace on earth.
If an oil company TRULY produced an oil that was superior to all the other oils of the SAME API rating, then, that company would produce a video or documentation.

Its almost laughable for someone to think, if a major oil company had some magical oil that the company would keep it a secret and not look to sell more oil based on that.


The problem is, all modern oils of the same API perform the same and are exactly alike when it comes to wear (conv or syn) whether you like it or not. For those people who do not like it, then there is the big expensive marketing departments of big oil companies to get you to pay more for the same product.

(How many people go out of their way to pay more for gasoline when they need gas?)