Four-Ball wear test: Amsoil versus Red Line

[Pablo]

 Originally Posted By: ADFD1

Why was the test done differently then? My thoughts were the test was the same exact test? I went through it too fast I guess, my bad. Shouldn't the testing process be exactly the same for each product? Isn't 100C the desired operating temp for engine oil? Especially if the test is showing how engine oil reduces wear? AD

Tougher the oil, the tougher the conditions. It's marketing. 100°C? No, that just happens to be a convenient temp to measure the viscosity for example (water bp). All the tougher tests are 150°C and above.

 

[Pablo]

 Originally Posted By: Johnny

Wonder what the ASM would of been if run for the same temp and rpm? And, do you know the difference between ASTM D4172 and 4172B? I do not.

1) I don't know. I imagine it would have been worse. 2) B is the revision. They are the same.

 

[ADFD1]

I like their oils, my father recently switched over to them. What puzzled me was he called them once and they were really pushing the 0W30 even for a Ford calling for 5W20. Then called again and got someone else and they pushed the 0W20 that time. He went with the ASM 0W20. I looked at the test and I guess focused on the 0.406mm vs. .35mm and said the ASM did better. Now that I've pulled my foot out of my mouth I realize the test was on the same machine but run differently.. OH well. I always thought testing products the criteria was supposed to be the same, therefore question it when it's not. AD

 

[buster]

Ah the good ol 4-ball wear test. It's used as a "pre-screen" for certain additives and is a very simple bench test. Very poor correlation to real world engine testing, so I was told. I could be wrong about that, but that is what I found. I don't fault Amsoil for using it. It does have some validity to it for screening/testing AW additives. You never want to rely heavily on bench testing. It's a decent machine that can give you some idea of wear performance characteristics, but is extremely limited in what it can tell you. If the 4-ball wear scar was that important, all other companies would formulate so they achieved a good 4-ball wear scar. They don't. They have been ignoring this test for years and years. Apparently both TFOUT/4-ball wear machines collect dust at most labs and are not used anymore. Much more sophisticated and expensive testing is available now.

 

[Pablo]

Rest assured, he chose the correct oil. Both oils do great in the REAL world. IMHO, a LOT of bench tests are just that....not real world. EDIT: I just said what buster said!

 

[ADFD1]

 Originally Posted By: Pablo

Rest assured, he chose the correct oil. Both oils do great in the REAL world. IMHO, a LOT of bench tests are just that....not real world.

Thanks for clearing that up, and he'll be happy to know he's using the correct oil for his application. AD

 

[Jim Allen]

Pablo Said "It's just a single test. We should not get so hung up on it. Some people (not you) act as if it's the only thing Amsoil hangs their hat on. Certainly not. I don't put a ton of stock in the test myself because an IC engine has a heck of a lot more going on than sliding contact...and this bench test certain has no combustion component." Pablo, our dear and trusted friend, if you had just said this a page or so earlier there would not be so many feathers on the floor right now. (: < ) Anyway, I learned something from the exchange so I guess it wasn't a total waste.

 

[Pablo]

Sorry Jim - I've said it several (many?) times over the years here. I should have said first post. But I could see I needed to kill some of the "rumors".

 

[buster]

 Originally Posted By: Pablo

Both oils do great in the REAL world.

Very true.

 

[demarpaint]

I'm learning too, at a fast glance looking at ASM and SSO side by side I thought the ASM did better on that wear test too. Then I see the test was run on the same machine, but the only thing in common was the time element, everything else was different. I guess I should pay a little more attention to detail early in the morning. Had I read it at lunch time I would have figured it out. I do agree that there is a lot more involved in testing and formulating an oil than one basic test. I like the user reviews I read on BITOG more than the advertisements anyway.

 

[buster]

Engine sequence testing with tear downs are as real as you can get, however it comes with a price. Not cheap.

 

[demarpaint]

 Originally Posted By: buster

Engine sequence testing with tear downs are as real as you can get, however it comes with a price. Not cheap.

Without a doubt!

 

[buster]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-4WnBc3CKY&videos=f40mT9Shykk&playnext_from=TL&playnext=1 Tests like this.

 

[Built_Well]

I completely understand why Amsoil promotes the 4-Ball Wear Test. After seeing the chart where Mobil 1 Extended Performance scored "greater than 1" millimeter (way off the chart), I switched from Mobil 1 to Pennzoil Platinum [heh heh]. Mobil 1 used to score better on the 4-ball wear test, though. The awful-looking "> 1" result occurred in 2007, but in 2003 Mobil 1 Super Syn scored a much better 0.60 result, as shown on Chris Puyear's page at [no non-sponsors] .

 

[tig1]

 Originally Posted By: Built_Well

I completely understand why Amsoil promotes the 4-Ball Wear Test. After seeing the chart where Mobil 1 Extended Performance scored "greater than 1" millimeter (way off the chart), I switched from Mobil 1 to Pennzoil Platinum [heh heh]. Mobil 1 used to score better on the 4-ball wear test, though. The awful-looking "> 1" result occurred in 2007, but in 2003 Mobil 1 Super Syn scored a much better 0.60 result, as shown on Chris Puyear's page at http://www.deluxeoil.com/compare_test.htm .

I see you bought into the 4 ball test some companies us to prompote their oil. Here is Mobils answer to that that sales pitch. http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Car_Care/AskMobil/Oil_Film_Strength.aspx

 

[Pablo]

 Originally Posted By: tig1

Bleach does well on this test.

tig1 - Dude we are still waiting for the evidence on this one.

 

[tig1]

Here is a product with bleach in it that performs well on the 4 ball test. http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj6(3)/14.pdf

 

[Pablo]

 Originally Posted By: tig1

Here is a product with bleach in it that performs well on the 4 ball test. http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj6(3)/14.pdf

I'll give you an B- for effort!! A couple things. You said "bleach". AND that Palm grease doesn't contain bleach it was "Bleach Deodorized".

 

[tig1]

Here is info on the machine thet was designed for this test. http://www.swri.org/4org/d08/ShearTst/4ball.pdf

 

[ATS-V]

Which is the test with hanging weight (load) on a spinning piece of metal to measure the current required by the AC motor. Whatever that test is, I have seen that bleach does well in this test. My point is, and I believe "Tig1"'s also, is tests can be biased many number of ways.