LS6 Crate Motor- Quantum Blue Lubricants/Mobil 1 Analysis

[buster]

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/articles/chevrolet/smallblock/0503em_ls6/

quote:

---

The reason Mobil 1 was used was because of it's proven anti wear properties. By any yardstick it is a top quality oil and my tests have shown that Mobil's ads concerning its anti wear properties fall well short of reality. This point is being made because the intent was to do an oil analysis wear comparison between the BND Quantum Blue oil and the proven performance of Mobil 1.

---

quote:

---

The thinking here was that if Quantum Blue cut wear by means of friction reduction then this might offset any viscous loss due to being a 15-45 blend versus the 0-30 Mobil blend currently in the sump

---

These engines do seem to like thicker oils. 15w-45 vs a 0w-30.

 

[90lsteg]

The author of that article stated that his testing found that Quantum Blue motor oils reduced friction better than M1. I checked out the Quantum Blue website which has some interesting claims/info. Seems it is a Gp II or Gp II+ base oil with their additive pack. This stuff was used in the military. Any thoughts from the oil gurus??

 

[pscholte]

quote:

---

Originally posted by buster: this might offset any viscous loss due to being a 15-45 blend versus the 0-30 Mobil blend currently in the sump

---

quote:

---

These engines do seem to like thicker oils. 15w-45 vs a 0w-30.

---

There's a lump in the sump of my LS1 There's a lump in the sump and my engine is "done" If only there were something to make it rev free If only...if only...I had some GC

 

[Bio-T]

Quantum Blue Motor Oils

 

[Steve S]

??????????????? Amsoil has competition??????????? just using Amsoil as a product .They make many great products.

 

[427Z06]

Running the numbers, in this example, the engine made about the same power whether it was running with 12 cSt oil or 14.5 cSt oil when run WOT on a dyno. Then we just have to take his word for it that the "Magic Oil" cut wear of iron parts by some 30 percent and bearing parts by some 15 percent since no details are provided on how they determined this. Not good enough for me. P.S. I wish people would stop perversing the J300 viscosity classifications. There is no such thing as a 12.5w-35 (look at the picture in the article). Why don't they just list the actual values of CCS, MRV, 100C cSt and VI? You can find more complicated labeling on bottles of drinking water nowadays. [ April 25, 2005, 03:07 AM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]