Schaeffer 5-30 Mitsubishi 2.4l 16k on oil

Status
Not open for further replies.
salesrep

salesrep

Joined
Aug 22, 2003
Messages
3,653
Location
lllinois
Mitsubishi 2.4l Eclipse 2001 138,858 on engine. 1St column 10 k on oil. 2nd column 16,852 on oil and 9 months. Schaeffers Supreme 7000 5-30.


Copper 4,4
Iron 34,41
Chrom 2,2
Alum 12,17
lead 1,1
moly 285,344
phos 444,921
zinc 785,1097
mag 8,28
calcium 1794,2539
sodium 14,19
pot 6,6
silicon 16,6
sulfur 25,6
oxidation 23,21
nitration 13,41
visc 9.59,10.68
Fuel,H2o,anti-freeze all nil
 
Again, I point out that if Mobil 1 shoiwed iron numbers this high, some members would go "beserk". When is iron too high? Some opinions, please!
 
Originally Posted By: Boomer
Again, I point out that if Mobil 1 shoiwed iron numbers this high, some members would go "beserk". When is iron too high? Some opinions, please!


And again I agree! If Amsoil was 41 ppm - people would say the company is failing!!!

50 ppm at 15K seems like a high mark.........but the trend is the thing.
 
I do not feel as though an iron report of 41 with low lead on a 16k run is high at all for a machine with 138k. Still well below the "redline"
crackmeup2.gif
Why is it that Pablo feels the need to comment on Schaeffers samples?
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: salesrep
I do not feel as though an iron report of 41 with low lead on a 16k run is high at all for a machine with 138k. Still well below the "redline"
crackmeup2.gif
Why is it that Pablo feels the need to comment on Schaeffers samples?
21.gif



Am I not allowed to comment on any UOA I want to? Why not? Does it bother you or something?

For the record I specifically did NOT say this is a bad report. I merely was in agreement that certain oils are held to different standards. You have to admit if Amsoil had low lead and 41 ppm Fe in 16K people would say something!
 
"Does it bother you or something?" Quite the contrary, I find it humorous.

"You have to admit if Amsoil had low lead and 41 ppm Fe in 16K people would say something!" No, I don't, because I rarely read the Amsoil threads.
 
salesrep, the attitude you've shown here has done your reputation harm in my book. I'm probably not alone. It can go up or down from here, depending on your choices.
 
Pablo,

What's your favorite subforum, out of curiosity?

The oil analysis forums are definately my favorite. I also try to read every report posted when I can.
 
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Mitsubishi 2.4l Eclipse 2001 138,858 on engine. 1St column 10 k on oil. 2nd column 16,852 on oil and 9 months. Schaeffers Supreme 7000 5-30.


Copper 4,4
Iron 34,41
Chrom 2,2
Alum 12,17
lead 1,1
moly 285,344
phos 444,921
zinc 785,1097
mag 8,28
calcium 1794,2539
sodium 14,19
pot 6,6
silicon 16,6
sulfur 25,6
oxidation 23,21
nitration 13,41
visc 9.59,10.68
Fuel,H2o,anti-freeze all nil

These are outstanding numbers. Once again Shaeffers brings home the bacon.
 
This is a very good run 16k miles on a blend, and all number still at an acceptable level! Good show!

I have to ask: why is is that site sponsors, who sell a product, have to be SO defensive about their products. Frank, from Auto-RX, before he left, would nastily mock anyone who dared to question that Auto-RX was the best engine cleaner around. Now Salesrep is isinuating that no-one can negatively comment on a Schaeffers report.

It seems the only laid back site sponsors we have are the Amsoil guys, and LCD...but we don't hear from them much.

Salesrep, its a good product - the results, all of them, speak for themself. Lighten up!
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Now Salesrep is isinuating that no-one can negatively comment on a Schaeffers report.


This is far off base.
I merely stated my opinion on the iron ppm and made a simple query.
 
Interesting that the silicon dropped over longer miles. Can you attribute this to an AF change or?
 
Originally Posted By: Boomer
Again, I point out that if Mobil 1 shoiwed iron numbers this high, some members would go "beserk". When is iron too high? Some opinions, please!


Show us a near 17k mile UOA of Mobil1, period. Not to say they aren't on here, but you rarely see UOA's this long.

I think, overall, Mobil1 has definitely shown higher iron numbers than it's competitors. That's all. It's not that they are threatening the engine, it's just some people want what is best for their engine, and Mobil1, no matter how small, usually shows higher iron wear. With us being OCD about oils, we care about the extra 2-4 ppm of wear, lol.
 
Not exactly on topic, but pertinent: Does anyone remember the thread for the guy that did the looong term test of M1 in his Camaro? Firebird? He was determined to leave it in until the engine cooked or the oil totally failed, which it never did............
Mike
 
Is it possible that the 1st set of numbers is the 7000, and the 2nd set is Schaeffer's 9000?
I'm considering the Zinc/Phos and Moly values...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top