Oil is Oil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Al
  • Start date Start date
Some companies give you a bit of a hint such as "10x better viscosity control" or "x% better wear protection"

You find those numbers come from tests such as the IVA or IIIH test. So that gives you some idea about the oil's capability. 99.999% of the public will not look that closely at it.

I think Foxtrot said it a while back that few if any oils will change your engine's B10 rating. I really agree with that. Racing would be a different story.
 
Last edited:
Some companies give you a bit of a hint such as "10x better viscosity control" or "x% better wear protection"

You find those numbers come from tests such as the IVA or IIIH test. So that gives you some idea about the oil's capability. 99.999% of the public will not look that closely at it.
New and improved?
 
New and improved?
No. Improved how? Mobil says their oil does 20x better on the IIIH test. That's actually very good. The others only claim 10x. It's just one particular test, a tough one at that, but at least it's something.
 
"Test Parameters Using unleaded gasoline, the engine runs an 8-minute initial lubricant leveling procedure followed by a 15-minute slow ramp-up to speed and load conditions. It then operates at 137 bhp, 3900 rpm, and 151°C (303.8F) lubricant temperature for 90 hours, interrupted at 20-hour intervals for lubricant level checks"

1712349135432.webp


1712349159360.webp
 
Few years back Amsoil found Red Line didn't pass the TEOST test. Maybe it was all that moly who knows. Just saying. Does the TEOST test mean much? Maybe in some situations. You'd never think an oil that is touted at being superior in high temperatures failing a test like that. It's assumed that test correlates to intake valve deposits.

Afton's GF-7 mentions TEOST 33C still be relevent.

https://issuu.com/afton_chemical/docs/gf-7_update_-_apr_2023_issuu_test_.pptx
 
Last edited:
"Test Parameters Using unleaded gasoline, the engine runs an 8-minute initial lubricant leveling procedure followed by a 15-minute slow ramp-up to speed and load conditions. It then operates at 137 bhp, 3900 rpm, and 151°C (303.8F) lubricant temperature for 90 hours, interrupted at 20-hour intervals for lubricant level checks"

View attachment 212552

View attachment 212553
Good god this is torture on a lubricant. The 5W-30 oil in my Turbo car barely gets to 200F during an hour drive to work, and these guys are running a test that the lubricant has to pass at 304F for *90* hours. That's insane. Really makes you appreciate the chemistry.
 
I was being metaphorically facetious as the question has been answered many times over throughout the history of this forum. I truthfully thought it was a joke or troll post. Between UOAs, engine teardowns, bore scope images, and even dyno results, there's enough information to answer your question ad nauseum. If you haven't seen the answer to your question at this point, it's because you don't want to see the answer to your question. I'm at my daughter's speech therapy currently, but I'll do the searching for you when I get the chance. Then again, it would probably fall on deaf ears as it has for 20 years.
You are 100% incorrect sir. None uf us "really" know about each others smarts, education etc. So with that said...I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent maybe 25% of my time dealing with failed large equipment and Lubrication. I have been on BITOG oil guy forever. And although the thread is somewhat in jest. I really believe two oils with the same specs and different brands will produce the same wear. So your comment is really not helpful as it communicates little. Again..not slaming you personally.

There are myriad tests that clearly do in fact answer the question. An oil with 13% Noack that passes the API approvals is not the same as one with 8% Noack that passes LL-01/A40/229.5/502 00...etc for an example.
But none of that relates to concrete demonstrable results in the many many thousands of UOA's we see here. You can educate me. Glad I created the discussion...lol
 
Last edited:
But none of that relates to concrete demonstrable results in the many many thousands of UOA's we see here. You can educate me. Glad I created the discussion...lol
Because it’s not the correct test for that.

You as a mechanical engineer who “spent maybe 25% of my time dealing with failed large equipment and Lubrication” should know that.
 
You are 100% incorrect sir. None uf us "really" know about each others smarts, education etc. So with that said...I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent maybe 25% of my time dealing with failed large equipment and Lubrication. I have been on BITOG oil guy forever. And although the thread is somewhat in jest. I really believe two oils with the same specs and different brands will produce the same wear. So your comment is really not helpful as it communicates little. Again..not slaming you personally.


But none of that relates to concrete demonstrable results in the many many thousands of UOA's we see here. You can educate me. Glad I created the discussion...lol
BITOG, place for lates experimental and testing achievements in Tribology.
However, I bet you can find a lot of that in places like Google Scholar JSTOR, etc.
I think also owners of VW 1.8T engines from 96-2001 could pitch to tell you what happened when VW recommended for the US market API oil, instead of VW502.00, that they were recommending in Europe.
 
You’re not asking a question, you’re making a statement.

Maybe set up the criteria of a question, then one can be answered.
Excellent Point!!
Question: Can anyone point out, based on real world UOA testing (like those on BOTOG) an oil or oils that outperform or under perform with respect to wear metals (results) against other brands with the same approximate specifications (excluding things such as amount of moly, titanium, boron, addpacks, etc.
 
I suspect that for most of us with fairly low specific output engines that we don't run very hard for very long and do OEM recommended OCIs, oil meeting the OEM spec probably is pretty much fungible.
I do think that lower NOACK and better CCS/MRV numbers do matter within the spectrum of mass market shelf oils.
 
Excellent Point!!
Question: Can anyone point out, based on real world UOA testing (like those on BOTOG) an oil or oils that outperform or under perform with respect to wear metals (results) against other brands with the same approximate specifications (excluding things such as amount of moly, titanium, boron, addpacks, etc.
We'll get to that right after the thick v thin and UOA v wear metals issues are settled and agreed upon by all.

Edit; After this thread runs its course, I'm starting a Fox v MSNBC topic.
 
Excellent Point!!
Question: Can anyone point out, based on real world UOA testing (like those on BOTOG) an oil or oils that outperform or under perform with respect to wear metals (results) against other brands with the same approximate specifications (excluding things such as amount of moly, titanium, boron, addpacks, etc.


That’s at best a vague question. You haven’t really defined parameters.

So in this world you really have to compare Product A vs Product B. Or A, B, C, D. In specific testing scenarios. What engine? What driving conditions?

You have to remove the aspects that are not quantifiable. And replace them with criteria’s that are quantifiable.

If you put Mobil Gear 600 220 into a Ford 3.5L ecoboost and compare it to Pennzoil Platinum in a Kia 3.3L… uh, well… yeah what exactly are you trying to prove?


Now if you’re talking about let’s do engine test stand data. Product A, B, C, D. These tests.

There will be differences.

Now translating those results to real life, depends on how the operator of that engine is going to follow through vs the engine test stand data.

To get an answer you’re looking for, you have to set parameters.

Often times you’re looking for the proper question to ask - not an answer.
 
Excellent Point!!
Question: Can anyone point out, based on real world UOA testing (like those on BOTOG) an oil or oils that outperform or under perform with respect to wear metals (results) against other brands with the same approximate specifications (excluding things such as amount of moly, titanium, boron, addpacks, etc.
Wow.

And here you claimed to understand oil.
 
Back
Top Bottom