Is an extended interval oil better than a standard one if changing at short interval?

[Rytautas]

You miss the point.

“it has more” is your criteria.

But the analysis, and thus your graph, only shows elements, not actual additives. It doesn’t measure performance, only quantity of elements. Those elements exist in complex chemistry, not just as raw elements, and it’s the performance of the chemistry that matters, not the quantity of raw elements.

So, your graph is judging oil on that basis, quantity alone, which is specious and inaccurate.

To use an analogy, one judges writing by how the letters are put together, not by just the number of letters. You’re measuring the number of letters, ignoring vocabulary, sentence structure, grammar, syntax...and saying more letters is better writing, but that’s inaccurate and misleading.

I know words. I have the best words. Nobody uses bigger words than me, believe me.

 

[Rytautas]

Nobody is trying to say that anti-wear additives and detergents parts per million is the ONLY thing you should look at. It's just one of the things you can look at to determine the "best oil or a better oil or even simply an oil with a more powerful additive package. I stated earlier that Mobil 1 uses a lot less anti wear additives and detergents than most other brands. . And that is true

 

[Astro14]

I know words. I have the best words. Nobody uses bigger words than me, believe me.

In this case, you lack ANY words, because the words we are discussing are chemical compounds and their effects.

You have a big compilation of letters. You've measured letters and base your understanding on a letter count.

 

[Astro14]

Nobody is trying to say that anti-wear additives and detergents parts per million is the ONLY thing you should look at. It's just one of the things you can look at to determine the "best oil or a better oil or even simply an oil with a more powerful additive package. I stated earlier that Mobil 1 uses a lot less anti wear additives and detergents than most other brands. . And that is true

You're not looking at detergent parts per million.

You're looking at element parts per million.

And then you're guessing.

 

[OilReport99]

It's just one of the things you can look at to determine the "best oil or a better oil or even simply an oil with a more powerful additive package.

What they're trying to tell you is that the total amount of elements showing in the VOA is not the thing to look for to determine the "best" oil, nor the one with the more "powerful" package, whatever those two words mean to you.

It is a good indicator though of the oil with the more elements showing in a VOA. And that, overall, means little - except for PF, who's making a killing with those clicks and views

 

[wwillson]

Like @Astro14 said, UOAs show elemental ppm not the compounds those elements make. There might be 10 or 15 different moly compounds commonly used in lubricating oils, but you'll never be able to tell which, as you only see Mo on the report. The same goes for many other elements you see in the reports.

 

[MolaKule]

Nobody is trying to say that anti-wear additives and detergents parts per million is the ONLY thing you should look at. It's just one of the things you can look at to determine the "best oil or a better oil or even simply an oil with a more powerful additive package. I stated earlier that Mobil 1 uses a lot less anti wear additives and detergents than most other brands. . And that is true

Can you define what you mean by a "more powerful additive package," because this is not a meaningful technical phrase in the industry.

How do you know Mobil 1 uses a lot less anti wear additives and detergents than most other brands? A $28 analysis only shows common chemical elements and does not show other organic additives, additives that can only be seen by an analysis costing upwards of $750.00.

$28.00 analyses are good for showing trends when compared to the virgin oils, but tell only a fraction of the story when it comes to a finished oil's performance.