Oil Consumption QSUD and Mobil 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 10, 2016
Messages
682
Location
il usa
Just finished my usual 800 mile highway run in my 1999 expedition with QSUD 10w30 and noted the oil level only dropped one sixth of a quart. The expy has about 177k miles.

Prior to this after the factory fill was drained the expy has only seen mobil 1 from 5w30 to 0w40 to my blend of 0w20ep/15w50. With any M1 it uses about 1 quart per 700 miles over the same route taken with qsud.

I was hesitant to use qsud but am really happy that i did.

Fuel economy same or slightly better with qsud.
Coolant temps also about same. 190 to 203 f with both qsud and m1.
 
I started a thread about oil consumption in my 10 yo 5.3 Tahoe because it was using 1 qt per every 7000 mile OCI LOL.

I was using M1 0W-30 during the last interval and decided to stay within the M1 family by going to 10W-30HM. Comparing specs of the various viscosity tests at 40C, 100C and 150C, the 10W is markedly more viscous than other 30 wts. So, in your analysis of better consumption with QSUD, don't discount the effect of the 10W. I'm also hoping the HM helps.
 
Last edited:
OP, QSUD appears to be doing the same in my car as well..... although using the same weight 5w30 oils and under different circumstances.
Coincidence or not?
Here is the history FWIW - just my experience for the record:
Factory fill for 1st 1000 mi used +-3/4 qt. Free oil change with dealer and their AC Delco Syn Blend 5w30 Dexos approved and PF64 filter last fall.
Put 5000MI on the Dealer SynBlend, topped off several times during the 5k mile run using a total of +-2 qts, 25% left on OLM.
Took the car out for an Italian tune up before the next oil change at 6k miles this spring. Oil temp got up near 260F-270 F on that 15 minute run.
Let car sit for 1/2 hour and drained the hot oil. Poured 10.3 qts (crank+filter) of QSUD 5w30 and new PF64 filter. After 1000 miles; dipstick reads full.... still monitoring usage and still driving like I stole it.

Maybe the Italian tune up fully seated the rings? or the 6.2L GDI LT1 likes the QSUD?
Pondering options for the next oil change... dealer synthetic, QSUD, M1 or PPPP; sticking with PF64 filter. Next change due probably late summer or early fall.
 
To draw any conclusion from this you should run 10w30 mobil 1 on your same driving conditions and see if you see similar consumption to the QS. Changing 2 variables as once means you really haven't learned much.
 
Yes theeaglefies. It took a lot for me to get off m1 after 177k miles and put qsud in there! But i saw some impressive wear results for qsud on 540rat blog and low noack for shell based gtl oils here and pqia so decided to try qsud 10w30.
 
Yes joelb i plan on running m1 10w30 for 800 mile hwy run and report the results. Blend of 4 quarts of m1 0w20ep with 2.5 quarts of m1 15w50 resulted in loss of 1 quart per 700 miles. So it will be interesting to see how m1 10w30 fairs.
 
I used M1 10-30 in my 96 Merc GM 4.6 for 200K, and from start to when the car was sold it used a qt. every 6500 miles.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Yes theeaglefies. It took a lot for me to get off m1 after 177k miles and put qsud in there! But i saw some impressive wear results for qsud on 540rat blog and low noack for shell based gtl oils here and pqia so decided to try qsud 10w30.


I did see that blog. The 275F temp difference caught my eye more than the wear results.
Some members here aren't too impressed with that blog it seems. some seemed really worked up and rude. to me, it is what it is; interesting viewpoint at the least.

The low NOAK you mentioned and the VI shown in the PQIA results of Dec 2015 somewhat impressed.

The price was right on the QSUD 5 qt jugs when I was shopping for an oil change, so picked them up and checked out. I'm hoping that this oil works out over the OCI for us.

Previous to this car, Redline 5w30 was on my list. It goes in like syrup and honey and comes out the same way. It didn't seem to break down during the OCI, min 6k miles to max 10k miles. I was told that Redline oil would void my engine warranty. I still have 10qts unopened, anyway, so QSUD for now. Redline is double the cost FWIW.

M1 5w30 seemed thinner to me at the end of the OCI on the drain out of the oil pan than when it went in fresh. 7.5k OCI. the overhead valve train and v8 valve train seemed noisier too with M1 after a thousand or less than 2 thousand miles. Maybe its just me? it seemed that way from the 1980's (10w30) to present (5w30) with different cars over that time frame. Never used it for more than a couple of oil changes per car because of those observations.

In the end I am thinking that any Dexos approved oil for my warranty would work out very well for the life of the car.
Sometimes overthinking isn't required.....
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
But i saw some impressive wear results for qsud on 540rat blog and low noack for shell based gtl oils here and pqia so decided to try qsud 10w30.

Originally Posted By: theeagleflies
I did see that blog. The 275F temp difference caught my eye more than the wear results.
Some members here aren't too impressed with that blog it seems. some seemed really worked up and rude. to me, it is what it is; interesting viewpoint at the least.

I haven't seen anyone being "rude" about it to be honest, but the problem is that the results presented in that blog are completely meaningless and people trying to deduce any sort of conclusion about it are being misled by the presentation.

The graph below by user ZeeOSix is a correct presentation of the data. This shows that there is no significant difference between the #1 rated oil and the lowest rated one. So any oil has the same result as any other oil in that test.

By the way, the graph represents the best case scenario for those results. It cannot be better and is likely worse.

full-37311-5060-rat_data_at_2_sig_fig_and_30_error.jpg
 
just my datapoint of 1, but perhaps 10years ago I picked up 2 cases of Costco m1. ran on my middle-aged 60k car for 2 ocis and did notice higher consumption of a quart low at 3000miles.
since and before the m1, switched to pp or pup and the consumption is more like half quart per 4000miles.
 
Last edited:
Will have to go through lengthy blog to see plus minus 30 percent in rankings. I concluded from the blog that qsud is not [censored] but respectable as any with regard to wear protection.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Will have to go through lengthy blog to see plus minus 30 percent in rankings. I concluded from the blog that qsud is not [censored] but respectable as any with regard to wear protection.


It's not in his blog as far as I know (but it should be), those error bars are from the actual ASTM test procedure. But he's not using ASTM equipment so that is why it is a best-case presentation. Without actual ASTM test equipment there is no telling what numbers are being obtained.

He is a sloppy experimenter despite his own assurances that he is not. His lack of knowledge of mathematics and statistics is the most glaring and it is what kills his results. What I showed above is not his only fatal problem. There are others.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Will have to go through lengthy blog to see plus minus 30 percent in rankings. I concluded from the blog that qsud is not [censored] but respectable as any with regard to wear protection.


It's not in his blog as far as I know (but it should be), those error bars are from the actual ASTM test procedure. But he's not using ASTM equipment so that is why it is a best-case presentation. Without actual ASTM test equipment there is no telling what numbers are being obtained.

He is a sloppy experimenter despite his own assurances that he is not. His lack of knowledge of mathematics and statistics is the most glaring and it is what kills his results. What I showed above is not his only fatal problem. There are others.


just curious; do you know him and were you present on location during the tests?
 
Originally Posted By: theeagleflies
just curious; do you know him and were you present on location during the tests?


What would that have to do with it? The problems are with his described methodology and the analysis (or lack of analysis) of his results. He publishes the results in raw form on his blog, why would I have to be there for the testing? Results aren't results until they are analyzed with proper methodology. That is absent in this instance, as is any understanding of significance.

Here, this is a pretty good digestion of the topic. If you can make it all the way to the end there is some actual technical information in the thread:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4346661/1

The graph I posted from ZeeoSix is correct. There is no distinguishable difference between any of the oils he tested using that test.
 
540 rat blog states each oil was tested multiple times and results averaged to yield the stated psi. So there were at least 2 samples per oil at say 230 degrees and 2 samples at 275 degrees.
He tested qsud 0w20 5w20 and 5w30. So there were a minimum of 12 samples for the quaker state family that interested me.
230. 275
Qsud 0w20 124,393. 106,163
Qsud 5w20. 121,396. 92,893
Qsud. 5W30. 113,377. 109,211

New M1 0w40. 127,221. 106,876

So i concluded qsud is not a bad oil. The qsud values dont appear to be all over the place to me. The formulations might be similar?
But i dont know who 540 rat is so who knows. But shell and qsud and gtl based oil speak for themselves.
 
Originally Posted By: theeagleflies
just curious; do you know him and were you present on location during the tests?

That isn't the point. Well, yes, it actually is the point. Since none of us could have been present when he conducted the experiment, the onus is on him to publish his methodology and error analysis. That's how science works the world over. And, if it's proprietary, you have an independent lab verify the results, subject to confidentiality. Nothing like this has happened.

merconvvv: There are several threads on it here already. Six significant figure data reporting is baloney. He barely has one significant figure.
 
Thank you for clarifying your interpretation of the ratblog numbers.

I am wondering if you have any experience with "Oil Consumption" related to this thread that you can contribute?
 
Tig1 do you remember if the 4.6 had its egr ports cleaned or the egr valve dpfe etc replaced. Also curious if you ever had to replace the idle air control valve on that 4.6. Did it have a lot of highway miles?
What was the oil consumption on highway v city. Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top