Project Farm - Tests Pennzoil Motor Oil

[Shel_B]

Sorry if I misunderstood. My point is just that this can't even be compared to a standard test.

But I don't think he's comparing his tests to standard tests.

If he heats two oils up on a hot plate, and one evaporates more than another, you've got a valid comparison for that situation for those two oils. One oil does evaporate more or faster. To my mind, there's some validity there.

What it tells me is that if I'm thinking of using one or another of the oils, it may be better or worse than the other in some circumstances, so maybe I should look into the issue a bit further.

I like to watch when he pours the oil down the runway to see which flows faster. When I see my favorite oil racing another brand, it's like watching a horse race. I'm rooting for a winner, or hoping that the brand I don't care for loses. I don't care how scientifically valid the test is, I just care to see which one flows better under a given circumstance.

He seems to do a good job of trying to be fair and honest. All oil is tested the same way, and so, IMO, the results are valid for the circumstances.

 

[kschachn]

That test method has large error bars even when it is using proper equipment and being properly used to test gear oils. This has been graphically shown in several long and contentious threads on here. When one deviates from the standard test procedure (or even worse use it for a purpose for which it is not designed) then the bars only get bigger. There are valid technical reasons why it is not used for motor oils.

 

[Mathew_Boss]

I (for one) am glad to see this thread come back. I don't really see why it was sent to La -La-Land to begin with. I understand why many would think that these YouTubes have no validity, and as a test of one specific oil, they don't. However, this particular one compares 4 different oils of the same brand tested the same way, and as a result, it DOES have some validity. I found it interesting and informative and IMO it DOES belong on this board if for no other reason than a discussion of it's merits.

The cold flow test is pretty relevant for northern climates in my opinion. I am glad this thread cam back I was about to close my account here.

 

[TiGeo]

No one is saying he is competing with SAE j300 or manufacturer tests,(which by the way change over time as well, LSPI, chain elongation, etc..)

His tests are meant to compare products using his own set of criteria using his own quipment, he subjects all products to the same conditions and same tests isn't that part of the scientific method?

I'm not saying his tests are valid in determining how these oils will hold up in service. I would not select an oil based on his tests.

having said that, It would be dishonest to say the controls he has in performing his tests using is own rules are not valid.

His Ranking system is based in how these oils passed his own devised tests.

This and I agree - it's all about what his results (b/c they are tests) are being used for. You can say "his ice luge test shows that XYZ oil flows faster at ABC temp" but you can't make the leap (or can you..hahahahaha) and say that b/c ZYZ oil won the ice luge challenge that it will flow better than the other oils tested when you start your car up when it's cold which is the hangup folks are having and what most folks think this test shows (I think he even says that?).

 

[Shel_B]

That test method has large error bars even when it is using proper equipment and being properly used to test gear oils. This has been graphically shown in several long and contentious threads on here.

So what ... his tests are fun to watch (and he does test other things besides oil, and those tests are also fun to watch), he's a pleasant guy, always has a smile ... I can think of many worse ways to spend 15 minutes.

I don't understand why these threads need to be contentious. It's just oil. As many here have said, it doesn't even matter what oil you use as long as it's changed fairly often.

 

[paulri]

And the first page of this thread shows people are still assigning validity to his "tests."

What's being singled out is deep ignorance being presented as amateur science when it is anything but. Yes I know about the disclaimer, but if that was taken literally then my comment about Britney Spears is accurate. You can't have it both ways, claim it is entertainment then proceed to provide a ranking.

 

[Intelligent Molecule]

I like to see the cold temp flow tests, and that's about it. I like the channel in general.

 

[TiGeo]

I'm going to say it......I like how he uses a Space Pen to point out the particulars on the bottles. I too am an avid Space Pen user..hahha

 

[Duffyjr]

I guess he got me a couple years ago with his air filter test, I went out and bought a Purolator

 

[Koainn]

I can understand nipping politics in the bud to keep the peace but to start censoring people on YouTube cause a few so called anonymous experts try to dictate what the majority of members ought to think is just wrong.

I'm glad Bitog changed its mind

 

[kschachn]

I can understand nipping politics in the bud to keep the peace but to start censoring people on YouTube cause a few so called anonymous experts try to dictate what the majority of members ought to think is just wrong.

?

 

[Astro14]

I can understand nipping politics in the bud to keep the peace but to start censoring people on YouTube cause a few so called anonymous experts try to dictate what the majority of members ought to think is just wrong.

I'm glad Bitog changed its mind

Nothing “so called” or “anonymous” about our experts.

Only a fool equates the opinion of an amateur with the opinion of someone with decades of experience in a particular field.

 

[TiGeo]

Something none of us are going to find out from a poor infomercial.

Something none of us are going to find out in any other manner that I can see.

 

[TiGeo]

If all things are equal - as I read here everyday - then what‘s the harm? If UOA’s are meaningless because they can’t determine an outcome based on too many variables. If VOA’s are useless because the oil meets specifications and who are we to judge when we don’t know what the base stocks are...or how are we to know what additive package is best for a given oil? Then what’s the point really? What’s the point in even having this site? Just lock it down and put up a page with all the oil certifications and call it a day.

And never mind oil change intervals. Just go by the manufacturer, they know more than you. Right? So no need to discuss that either.

I think this regularly reading posts on this site

 

[stevejones]

I like PF. I give him clicks.

 

[TiGeo]

Nothing “so called” or “anonymous” about our experts.

Only a fool equates the opinion of an amateur with the opinion of someone with decades of experience in a particular field.

But they are anonymous to most folks that aren't regulars here, how will they know? The internet is full of "experts" that well...aren't so expert. Is it possible to have those users who are "legit" w/r to the oil industry/tribology/chemistry/etc. listed here or are they posted somewhere already?

 

[TiGeo]

I like PF. I give him clicks.

"Smash the like and subscribe"

 

[stevejones]

"Smash the like and subscribe"

Yep & I am sub'd!

 

[TiGeo]

Yep & I am sub'd!

Now I won't stoop to the level of Nate's Interactive channel....ok maybe I watched a few of those one night really late....hahahaha

 

[Scuder]

wallys may give good prices but they still aren't losing money.

They've used oil as a loss leader for decades.