LSJR Boutique vs OTS shootout

Cost. If shipping was included this would change. There’s a cost vs performance chart I couldn’t get a clear shot of because it was in the background. Pennzoil Ultra Platinum was #1.

IMG_6637.webp
 
I really don't like that he used Teost with these oils. It's well known here that Teost is falling out of favor and gives false high results with oils that have high amounts of moly-based additives. The Teost results scale pretty much linearly with the concentration of moly. However, the 3 oils that performed worst in Teost have no turbo deposit/coking issues in the real world. HPL is used in fleets of turbo engines going 15k mile intervals or longer for 200k+ miles in high heat climates with no turbo issues at all. I also don't like that he used total wear metals as a comparison when there's only a 1-2 ppm between a lot of them on individual metals. They're all within the margin of error of RDE and ICP. I consider all of those results to be the same within MoE. There's no comparison to be made there. Only running the engine for 2 hours isn't going to tell much either.
 
In all seriousness, the TEOST has come under questioning in the past. I believe I posted about it several years ago. It's still a legit test and Amsoil among others use it so they must think it has some relevance. However, if HPL and RL do not find that their oils in the field leave any turbo deposits behind then there is nothing to be concerned about.
 
I really don't like that he used Teost with these oils. It's well known here that Teost is falling out of favor and gives false high results with oils that have high amounts of moly-based additives. The Teost results scale pretty much linearly with the concentration of moly. However, the 3 oils that performed worst in Teost have no turbo deposit/coking issues in the real world. HPL is used in fleets of turbo engines going 15k mile intervals or longer for 200k+ miles in high heat climates with no turbo issues at all. I also don't like that he used total wear metals as a comparison when there's only a 1-2 ppm between a lot of them on individual metals. They're all within the margin of error of RDE and ICP. I consider all of those results to be the same within MoE. There's no comparison to be made there. Only running the engine for 2 hours isn't going to tell much either.
Agree and to be truly effective, the tests also should have been run several times for each oil in other orders. That said, this was better than most and the TEOST test does have me slightly rethinking Redline, my go-to oil, in a new to us vintage non water-cooled turbo...
 
Last edited:
I’m only going to post one critical comment and it should be accepted by anyone who is a CQE, or really anyone in real world product evaluations and statistical analysis. There are a few other things I could say but will say he put a LOT of work and time in this. Absolutely awesome really. And he was publicly fair. No doubt about it.

Such comparisons are so much better when performed double blind. Subconscious bias is a real thing.

Oh and wear metals are really a statistical tie.
 
I’m only going to post one critical comment and it should be accepted by anyone who is a CQE, or really anyone in real world product evaluations and statistical analysis. There are a few other things I could say but will say he put a LOT of work and time in this. Absolutely awesome really. And he was publicly fair. No doubt about it.

Such comparisons are so much better when performed double blind. Subconscious bias is a real thing.

Oh and wear metals are really a statistical tie.
Winner winner 🍗 dinner …
 
Back
Top Bottom