Originally Posted By: postjeeprcr
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Johnny
I was thinking the same thing demarpaint. I've never known of any Pennzoil PCMO with a TBN that high either.
Thanks Johnny for commenting. I've been reading lots of these UOAs trying to learn about them. I come across lots of mistakes and it casts a lot of doubt [at least for me] about the accuracy and the validity of them. All that has to happen is two of them get mixed up same grade of oil similar miles, one good one bad, and the person with the good report and the bad engine thinks everything is fine and dandy, then blows an engine. The other drives himself nuts looking for something wrong with a perfect car. Jury is still out for me, at least for now.
I agree with seeing a lot of mistakes recently. This isntance it could be someone fat fingered the keyboard when typing as the 2 and 3 are next to each other or they thought it was5W30 for some reason. Sadly no way to tell which it was. I was surprised by the TBN also, I would send in another sample to another lab if I had money or the little bit still left in the bottle but I do not have either. I am sure this oil though will be fine for 8000-10000 miles with 90% of that being highway mileage.
Originally Posted By: chevrofreak
Q Horsepower came back with a 10.0 TBN with only 2680 PPM calcium. PP 5W-40 was 10.3 with 2116 PPM calcium. Maybe the calcium used in PP gives a higher TBN per PPM?
All good information here. My problem is the point of paying for the test is to take the guess work out. Here someone paid for a test and the best we can do is guess, since it is obviuos something is wrong. The lab should run the report again for free IMO, and be just a little more careful this time around. Even then I'd have my doubts though. Sorry JMO