*Don't Fall For Shaddy Oil Testing

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
This thread should never have become a referendum on Royal Purple or Amsoil. Both companies make fine products.

This was about the validity of certain tests and sales tactics, period.

Again, the vast majority of posts in this thread miss the point by a country mile.


I get it, but why the mention of TWO specific companies without specific examples? Buster did not have to list the companies. He very much had a purpose in mind.

I rarely post anymore for reasons such as this. Buster asserts or implies that Amsoil uses the tester pictured....which absolutely isn't true. New readers (and some experienced here) won't see the difference. Amsoil uses ASTM tests, and yes the 4-Ball test IS an ASTM test. Perhaps misapplied, but we have discussed that so many times it's crazy.

The Amsoil white papers are so bad.......but what specifically is worse than say Castrol or other company marketing? One poster mentions his engine failed with Amsoil.....but then says "a left out part by the manufacturer" caused the failure. To me this is pretty ironic given the original topic.

 

[Shannow]

Pablo,

The two specific examples use the 4 ball test to market the oil as being superior...that's relevent to the linked article.

Same as the additive suppliers who use the timken at the fair ground to lure the schmucks into adding Lord knows what to their oils...it's ASTM testing too isn't it...just used shonkilly to fleece the punters.

As to Amsoil ? They recommend lubricants for specs that they clearly DON'T meet (we've discussed before, a dealer told me HTHS was an arbitrary number...he doesn't represent Amsoil as I've subsequently found out).

Still waiting in some other threads for a Monday revelation on what they actually DO do for tiredtrucker's DD "meets or exceeds"...

Castrol ?

not sure why you brought them into this thread, as I haven't seen them use 4Ball or Timken testing in their engine oil sales blurb...but as you did, they have API and OEM approvals on their oils.

The magnatec Sequence IVA claims were in an engine oil specific, API sequenced test...exactly the sort of thing that a 4 ball isn't.

 

[deven]

Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.

 

[kschachn]

So friction and heat affect TBN retention?

Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.


I always enjoy watching the Timken type tests. There was one years back where Pennzoil GT blend,Valvoline Durablend,and RP racing oil (all in 10W40 I think) were the best of the bunch test wise. These oils always have good UOA results as well. Wonder if there's any relation?

I did a UOA a few years back with RP Synerlec 20W50 and it literally had no wear metals.

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
So friction and heat affect TBN retention?

Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.

According to Jimmy it does. Makes sense as well to my novice brain. More heat leads to quicker degradation of oil and higher acidification. Me thinks

 

[kschachn]

I wouldn't think it would (so says the guy with a minor in chemistry), but I'm sure I may be stepped on and corrected any moment. TBN is total base number, right? That is a measure of the amount of acid the oil can neutralize before crossing neutral, much like any other buffer solution. Acid is going to come from combustion by-products and not any mechanical stress or effect. So I guess I don't understand how heat/friction/shearing could affect the ability of the oil to neutralize acids. It would be like taking any alkaline solution and subjecting it mechanical stress, that wouldn't change the pH of the solution.

Originally Posted By: deven
According to Jimmy it does. Makes sense as well to my novice brain. More heat leads to quicker degradation of oil and higher acidification. Me thinks

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
I wouldn't think it would (so says the guy with a minor in chemistry), but I'm sure I may be stepped on and corrected any moment. TBN is total base number, right? That is a measure of the amount of acid the oil can neutralize before crossing neutral, much like any other buffer solution. Acid is going to come from combustion by-products and not any mechanical stress or effect. So I guess I don't understand how heat/friction/shearing could affect the ability of the oil to neutralize acids. It would be like taking any alkaline solution and subjecting it mechanical stress, that wouldn't change the pH of the solution.

Originally Posted By: deven
According to Jimmy it does. Makes sense as well to my novice brain. More heat leads to quicker degradation of oil and higher acidification. Me thinks



Exactly. Tbn represents the oils alkalinity which equates to its ability to neutralize acid. Simple 8th grade science.

So "jimmy" is apparently clueless and is spouting nonsense which Deven feels the need to post in hopes of propping up his position,but what he ends up doing is digging a deeper hole.
If he believes this "jimmy" person at face value it explains a lot about his posts.
However since he refuses to believe anyone other than "jimmy" he is beyond help.

 

[Shannow]

I don't know what's worse, Jimmy making it up, or someone blindly believing what Jimmy made up.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I don't know what's worse, Jimmy making it up, or someone blindly believing what Jimmy made up.



Hehehe


Maybe "jimmy" is the office custodian and is having a bit of fun.
Or maybe "jimmy" is an intern
However what's most probable is there is no "jimmy" and deven is grasping at straws.
What's judge Judy say. The simplest explanation is likely the correct one.
Or if it doesn't make sense it isn't true.

I understand that heat oxidizes oil however that doesn't in any way affect acidity. That comes in as combustion gasses and usually sulfur.

So deven. Could you ask "jimmy" to clarify since you are doing a poor job of it regardless of what you believe.

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I don't know what's worse, Jimmy making it up, or someone blindly believing what Jimmy made up.

I consider myself to be semi smart, you know on the cusp of breaking triple digit IQ numbers...lol. I look at it as TBN being a value of how much life an oil has and I believe that heat or lack there of can deplete the useful life of oil.
The one thing I have learned in being a successful businessman is to form deep rooted relationship that you can trust and lean on when it comes to specialty I'm not well versed with. I do have that relationship with Jimmy so I am well versed to believe him over guys named Shannow, Clevy and kcschan...

 

[dave1251]

Amsoil and RP must stink because they use XOM basestocks and additives?

Is this the point of the thread?

 

[aquariuscsm]

I was thinking RP got their PAO base stocks from Chevron? Someone here had posted that back in the Synerlec days (maybe early 2000s?).

 

[GemStater]

Originally Posted By: CT8
Amsoil seems to cater to the uninformed buyers where Schaeffers and L.E. for example cater to the commercial markets. Amsoil blends a fine product. Even though tho only engine failure I ever had was with Amsoil. It was a left out part by the manufacturer though not Amsoils fault.


Interesting you bring up Schaeffer. In my area there is/was a Schaeffer rep going around with a Timken bearing tester. A friend of mine who worked for an auto repair center told me that a NAPA rep and a Schaeffer rep visited his work and demonstrated to everyone the magnificence of Schaeffer oil with a bench top bearing tester. All the NAPA stores in my area have a big Schaeffer sign displayed in their window and stock cases upon cases of Schaeffer oil.

Unrelated, a time later I called NAPA to ask about a sale on oil filters they were having. The parts guy asked me what motor oil I was running. At that time I was using Amsoil. He responded with, Amsoil has no boundary layer protection and that I should try Schaeffer oil.

I imagine that these parts store employees have been manipulated to believe through bearing tester that only Schaeffer oil with its Micron Moly® and Penetro® provide boundary layer protection.

I e-mailed Schaeffer and asked them if they condoned the use of non-standardized test equipment being used on the part of their reps to sell their products... crickets.

 

[kschachn]

Well you can look at it that way, but it doesn't make it correct. Business relationships are fine of course, but they do need to be based on reality when it comes to a product's performance. Heat can deplete the useful life of oil but that's not what you initially stated or proposed, and it's not what the RP spokesman said either.

You've always been the #1 RP fan here and up until now you've made reasonable arguments and comments. But your statement in this instance just aren't factual. Hey, don't take my word for it nor anyone else's on this site if you don't want. Look it up yourself, it's really not that complicated.

Or, just go on the way you're going. But I'll tell you that this time you're not helping your cause much.

Originally Posted By: deven
I consider myself to be semi smart, you know on the cusp of breaking triple digit IQ numbers...lol. I look at it as TBN being a value of how much life an oil has and I believe that heat or lack there of can deplete the useful life of oil.
The one thing I have learned in being a successful businessman is to form deep rooted relationship that you can trust and lean on when it comes to specialty I'm not well versed with. I do have that relationship with Jimmy so I am well versed to believe him over guys named Shannow, Clevy and kcschan...

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.


Ineresting, thanks for sharing this. Not sure I buy it. I'd gues they use it for marketing purposes.

 

[buster]

For the record, Amsoil makes great oil.

 

[4wheeldog]

Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.


What someone needs to do, to put the wear ball test to bed permanently, is add a cheap gear oil to the lubricants being tested. What this test is really testing is high pressure additives......Which belong in gear oil, but not in engine oil.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: 4wheeldog
Originally Posted By: deven
Buster, it's funny you posted this. I was chatting with Jimmy at RP about RPs ability to have great TBN retention like you pointed out in my UOA thread and guess what he pointed directly at? Yes the timken test. He did admit that the test was irrelevent in terms to what happens in a combustion engine but said that to RP the test was very relevant in determining which oils have higher film strength when comparing apples to apples(ie well formulated oils to oils). To him due to this higher film strength there is less friction and heat inside the engine which leads to less degradation of oil and hence increase useful oil life and better TBN retention. I know I'm going to get berated for writing this but is it a coincidence that the two oils that do have really exceptional TBN retention also do the best on the timken test. Who knows and we'll never find out for sure.


What someone needs to do, to put the wear ball test to bed permanently, is add a cheap gear oil to the lubricants being tested. What this test is really testing is high pressure additives......Which belong in gear oil, but not in engine oil.


Exactly right! Mobil uses the 4-ball test too, but for gear oil!

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I was thinking RP got their PAO base stocks from Chevron? Someone here had posted that back in the Synerlec days (maybe early 2000s?).

That's a good question. I was under the impression that only XOM made PAO in any significant quantities in North America.