Some folks around here have 7 vehicles so no telling.Who drives that much!?![]()
Some folks around here have 7 vehicles so no telling.Who drives that much!?![]()
The wife and I have 4 vehicles registered & insured at all times.Some folks around here have 7 vehicles so no telling.
Assume 20 then. Oil in the grant scheme of vehicle ownership costs are minuscule compared to other things like purchase price, fuel, insurance, etc.
I don’t remember who said it or I would cite them but oil hoarders need to get some perspective.
Actually I don’t need your financial advice -Assuming M1 AP average is $30 you saved $15 x 23 = $345. Also assuming 5-6 oil changes a year it would take 3.8 -4.6 years to recognize that $345 savings. Now even if you used it all up in one year that is still only $345. I mean listen you hand me $345 yeah I’ll take it. But a couple hundred dollars is not a financial windfall.
Between my vehicles and what I give away - that’s a bit short …5-6 oil changes per year!!?
I just came across this thread, but from what I've read the very first formulation of Mobil 1 to hit the market in the earlier part of the 70s was mostly PAO with group I as an additive carrier, but was quickly superseded by the POA+POE version probably due to it poor additive holding and poor elastomeric compatibility.His VOA shows the oil labelled as SF, which appeared in 1980.
And no, apparently Mobil 1, from the get-go, was PAO/Ester until Tri-Syn happened. That was from TomNJ, who I believe supplied the esters at the time through Hatco, so he'd know. They may not have had the balance right in the first few years though, based on the claims of it causing leaks (possibly due to PAO seal shrink, but that's just speculation on my part).
On the Valvoline, that's Synpower Racing Oil, it could very well have some ester in it as well, like 300V for example. Yes, the water should still condemn it, my point is that we don't know what virgin oxidation is for any of these oils and given the known impact ester content has on this, claims that this is a reliable metric are dubious at best.
Another data point: The gear oil had an oxidation figure of only 6.1, so if this was true oxidation, why was it exempt?
Iirc there is a correlation as they were showing you the foaming test in action.Where's the picture of an oil that didn't foam? With respect, that amount of liquid oil difference in a test tube for lack of a better term, relates very little to the difference in oil level in a sump that is spread out over much more area. As we know, the oil pickup pulls from the lower end of the sump . Given that no one here has heard of an oil related failure with Rotella, it's a talking point and nothing more for guys that need something to talk about.
Where's the picture of an oil that didn't foam? With respect, that amount of liquid oil difference in a test tube for lack of a better term, relates very little to the difference in oil level in a sump that is spread out over much more area. As we know, the oil pickup pulls from the lower end of the sump . Given that no one here has heard of an oil related failure with Rotella, it's a talking point and nothing more for guys that need something to talk about.
BMW recommends it as the oil of choice in 5W-40 for their bikes.
I've gone back and read through this thread. I see the more recent pictures are recent vintage Rotella and recent vintage hpl. Definitely a difference. But is it a difference that has made a difference? I need to caution as well that my statement about Rotella for millions and millions of miles and millions and millions of bikes is typically the 15w40. However BMW users don't seem to have an issue with 5W-40 rotella.
I'm not knocking hpl oils, I'm knocking the test in its entirety and that 20-year-old oil doesn't raise a red flag to anybody who's seriously taking the test seriously. Real world results more than speak for themselves again for millions and millions and millions of miles and millions of motorcycles.