M1 TDT 5w40_5,235_miles_SAAB_9-5 - DISCREPANCY

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
85
Location
Portsmouth, NH
Okay call me crazy, but my initial report showed Zinc and Phos at identical levels. The lab generously agreed to redo the test, but the differences in some of the results concern me a bit. Take a look - amended numbers for the most recent test are in [brackets]:
 Code:
Oil  			New M1 TDT	Mobil 1 TDT	Castrol (GC)	Castrol (GC)	Univ/Avg
			w/supersyn

Weight  		5W/40		5W/40		0W/30		0W/30
Makup qts		1.0		0.5		0.5		0.0
Miles on oil		5,235		5,666		4,845		4,998		[5,100]
Miles on engine		84,534		79,299		58,937		54,092		[n/a]
Sample Date		09/01/08	05/24/08	03/03/07	12/01/06

Aluminum		2 [1]		2		3		3		[3]
Chromium		1 [1]		1		1		1		[1]
Iron			8 [7]		11		55		40		[22]
Copper			6 [6]		2		6		10		[5]
Lead			0 [1]		1		10		4		[6]
Tin			1 [0]		0		0		0		[1]
Molybdenm		30 [5]		11		3		6		[52]
Nickel			0 [0]		0		1		1		[1]
Manganese		1 [0]		0		1		1		[1]
Silver			0 [0]		0		0		0		[0]
Titanium		0 [0]		0		0		0		[0]
Potassium		0 [2]		1		0		2		[1]
Boron			15 [24]		30		0		6		[39]
Silicon			0 [12]		7		5		11		[8]
Sodium			1 [7]		8		15		18		[20]
Calcium			2,635 [2640]	2,453		1,588		1,778		[2,130]
Magnesium		514   [616] 	446		425		468		[259]
Phosphorus		1,108 [1,180]	980		796		887		[839]
Zinc			1,108 [1,459]	1,304		932		1084		[992]
Barium			0		0		0		0		[5]

*Amended numbers in [brackets]
											*for most recent
Sus Visco (210F)	72.2		70.6		64.7		63.4		s/b 65-78
cSt Visco (100C)	13.54		13.10		11.52		11.16		s/b 11.6 - 15.3
Flashpoint (F)		370		405		355		375		s/b >375
Fuel %			TR		<0.5		1.5		0.5		s/b <2.0
Antifreeze %		0.0		0.0		0.0		0.0		s/b 0.0
Water %			0.0		0.0		0.0		0.0		s/b <0.0
Insolubles		0.4		0.3		0.3		0.3		s/b <0.6
TBN			4.6		4.2		3.8		3.6		S/b >1.0
Most concerning is the jump in silicone - 0 to 12! If the silicone numbers are accurate I know how to address this, but it seems to be a large variance from test to test - with the same oil sample. I know we're talking ppm values, but is this within normal test tolerances? Moly, Boron and Sodium also show large relative percentage changes ... again, is this within test tolerance?
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Messages
2,216
Location
Cedar Park, TX
if you sent your sample to blackstoned, do NOT be surprised. heck, they can't even get a VOA from the same bottle to show the same results (sent in 3 weeks apart).
 

f1forkvr6

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
85
Location
Portsmouth, NH
The lab was very accomodating to my query, and concerns ... this is the explanation I was given: "No, this isn't a normal test tolerance. This sample was actually run twice on Tuesday and then once again yesterday. On Tuesday, during the first run, our spectrometer had some tubing problems and your sample was in a batch of 10 that had to be rerun again due to low element readings. On the second run, the person who did the report was entering the data and some elements were not updated from the original run. This is a very unusual circumstance for us and you should not run into this type of error again."
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Messages
2,216
Location
Cedar Park, TX
basically, don't trust what we send you for data, we are making this up as we go! but we'll re-run it if you dont like the results the 1st time. nice!
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
36,818
Location
NY
If you can't rely on the data, or trust the data, what is the point of the test? Frank D
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,800
This is a world wide issue ..and I do mean world wide. A survey of (something like) 100 international labs showed that few could match controls ..even after being told that they didn't "PASS" and allowed to recalibrate to exact standards. That's why trending is the real key. Using the same lab tends to give you "consistently incorrect" data.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,329
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
I think OAI does a better job. Now they have 3 labs and you mail it to the one closest. The silicon in your original run was wrong. There is always a little, never 0.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,800
 Originally Posted By: Donald
The silicon in your original run was wrong. There is always a little, never 0.
Take a look - amended numbers for the most recent test are in [brackets]:
 

f1forkvr6

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
85
Location
Portsmouth, NH
 Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Using the same lab tends to give you "consistently incorrect" data.
Which is why I'll probably use the same lab for now. I'll have somewhat accurate trending, and the service commitment to re-run my sample after I questioned it was appreciated - good customer service deserves return business and at least a second chance. We'll see where it takes me.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,800
Well, they (Blackstone and most labs for that matter) do tend to be consistent in their deviations from (each) other labs. The exception for all labs appears to be moly. That appears to go all over the place from my observations. Blackstone is great at doing stuff over again if readings are in question. You're right. Great customer service.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top