Four Ball test not relevant?

[buster]

I don't fault Amsoil for testing other oils, they have too. I just don't like this test bc it's not releveant to engine wear, period. So it is misleading IMO. I chose to ignore it thats all.

 

[bruce381]

Buster roy sent amsoil what??
bruce

 

[bulwnkl]

The results of the 'testing' Redline did with the new vs. used oils.

 

[Thingfish]

If I have engine contact that duplicates a 4 ball test, I have other things to worry about.
If an oil provides a proper hydrodynamic wedge, how can there be contact that would even remotely simulate 4 ball type loads?

 

[Shannow]

Thingfish...exactly.

 

[ekrampitzjr]

In my opinion, using the four-ball test seems to have as much relevance as the test one of the chlorinated lubes (I believe it was Duralube) demonstrated in an infomercial, showing its lube preventing a cutoff tool from cutting a workpiece mounted in a running metal lathe. Car engines don't use "knife bearings". Nor do they use any kind of ball arrangement under extreme pressure on a rotating shaft.

Not trashing Amsoil, but for most buyers and users a true comparison test in real engines over many thousands of miles against a large sampling of other brands would be far, far more useful.

 

[Thingfish]

Could the 4 ball be relevant as an ability to protect in a " lack of oil wedge " situation?

 

[LarryL]

Do I have this 4-ball test right? If your engine runs at 75C, and you only use clean, brand new oil that never gets dirty and have a lot of contact spots where balls or roller bearings or valve train components are pushed against each other then this test will help you choose the correct oil for your application. If your temps are higher and your oil gets dirty then the test results may not be as helpful. Would this test be for short run drivers?