Synlube VOA Attempt - Set-Up Thread
- Thread starter znode
- Start date
- Status
Yep, and dodge any pointed question towards factual basis. I will be dropping an email to Oakland P.D. on Monday (when I get back to work), to see if they will give me any facts about this "stuff". Law Enforcement Agencies are generally not allowed to "endorse products" unless approved by the Head of the Agency. Since I work at a Sheriff's Office, I feel they might give a more candid response to a Law Enforcement Agency, vs Civilian inquiry, which would probably be yeah, it works or no, it is junk.
Dave
Dave
Originally Posted By: Trajan
The synlube cultists will attack any result that isn't what they want to hear anyway.
Exactly!! However it is nice to have this discussion without them jumping up and down!
The synlube cultists will attack any result that isn't what they want to hear anyway.
Exactly!! However it is nice to have this discussion without them jumping up and down!
I think the Synlube cultists are gone from this website. They were not able to bully anybody into using Synlube. They probably returned to Mercury Nevada or to Area 51. Or maybe even another part of the Galaxy. Seaman Kirk might be on the other side of the Galaxy as far as we know.
I am using Pennzoil Ultra right now and I am 100% certain it is far superior to this Synlube junk. At least, my car really runs well with it!
I am using Pennzoil Ultra right now and I am 100% certain it is far superior to this Synlube junk. At least, my car really runs well with it!
Kirk and company will return once the VOA report finally arrives. After all they'll have to attack the report if it isn't stellar.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
I think the Synlube cultists are gone from this website. They were not able to bully anybody into using Synlube. They probably returned to Mercury Nevada or to Area 51. Or maybe even another part of the Galaxy. Seaman Kirk might be on the other side of the Galaxy as far as we know.
I am using Pennzoil Ultra right now and I am 100% certain it is far superior to this Synlube junk. At least, my car really runs well with it!
One of the cultist, inhaliburton, posted here asking about MMO. Over there, he doesn't care for us asking about synlube, or thinks too much of this place either.
I think the Synlube cultists are gone from this website. They were not able to bully anybody into using Synlube. They probably returned to Mercury Nevada or to Area 51. Or maybe even another part of the Galaxy. Seaman Kirk might be on the other side of the Galaxy as far as we know.
I am using Pennzoil Ultra right now and I am 100% certain it is far superior to this Synlube junk. At least, my car really runs well with it!
One of the cultist, inhaliburton, posted here asking about MMO. Over there, he doesn't care for us asking about synlube, or thinks too much of this place either.
Okay I said to myself I would not chime in to the SynLube madness, but here I go:
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
I really don't know. All this SynLube stuff seems to baffle me and I can't make heads or tails of it.
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
I really don't know. All this SynLube stuff seems to baffle me and I can't make heads or tails of it.
Originally Posted By: Michael_P
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
This is another thing that makes me think they may be using filtered used oil and just adding additives. Someone should ask them about it. They may freely admit it.
On one of the posts they said as I recall that the oil pressure doesn't matter, it's the solid colloidal particles that are doing the lubricating.
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
This is another thing that makes me think they may be using filtered used oil and just adding additives. Someone should ask them about it. They may freely admit it.
On one of the posts they said as I recall that the oil pressure doesn't matter, it's the solid colloidal particles that are doing the lubricating.
Originally Posted By: Michael_P
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
Not neccessarily. The main issue with testing the product is the high solids which are not found in any other oil in the market place. Moly according to Miro should be at or above 5000ppm plus the use of PTFE and graphite could very possibly overwhelm the equipment. I have a sample at Polaris now which they think (a its a diesel oil and (b some test results are being re-evaluated since they are so far out of the norm. Particle count for instance could be a real challenge to be accurate since the oil is gray/black.
Once we have a basic idea of what the oil contains then we will have a base to evaluate UOA's from. The primary issue will then be repeatability.
With all these VOA or UOA numbers being so different, could this mean this product has highly inconsistent quality?
Not neccessarily. The main issue with testing the product is the high solids which are not found in any other oil in the market place. Moly according to Miro should be at or above 5000ppm plus the use of PTFE and graphite could very possibly overwhelm the equipment. I have a sample at Polaris now which they think (a its a diesel oil and (b some test results are being re-evaluated since they are so far out of the norm. Particle count for instance could be a real challenge to be accurate since the oil is gray/black.
Once we have a basic idea of what the oil contains then we will have a base to evaluate UOA's from. The primary issue will then be repeatability.
MolaKule
Staff member
It could mean that whomver is doing blending is doing Tote blending in 30 or 55 gallon quantities and not doing computer blending.
Tote blending is often done for small or special batches and can show wide variations unless you're very careful to make exact measurements.
Let's remind ourselves that of the UOA's we've seen to-date are all unverified and in many cases we don't know what the operating conditons were.
In addition, the UOA's were given by people who seem to have little or no experience with oil analysis.
It would be helpful if Polaris and Bruce could give the raw data and their observations and then perhps someone could list them for comparison.
Tote blending is often done for small or special batches and can show wide variations unless you're very careful to make exact measurements.
Let's remind ourselves that of the UOA's we've seen to-date are all unverified and in many cases we don't know what the operating conditons were.
In addition, the UOA's were given by people who seem to have little or no experience with oil analysis.
It would be helpful if Polaris and Bruce could give the raw data and their observations and then perhps someone could list them for comparison.
Last edited:
If it proves to be impossible to get good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube I don't really have a problem with that. My mind is already made up about Synlube anyway. I don't feel like doing business with a company that cannot be located (and when people try to locate it it gets 'moved' to a place impossible for an ordinary citizen to get into).
I would like to see some good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube of course. But there have been problems already and if additional problems come up I will be disappointed but still quite certain of my determination to never use Synlube.
All the other negative information about Synlube has been quite adequate in convincing me to never use Synlube.
I would like to see some good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube of course. But there have been problems already and if additional problems come up I will be disappointed but still quite certain of my determination to never use Synlube.
All the other negative information about Synlube has been quite adequate in convincing me to never use Synlube.
Originally Posted By: LargeCarManX2
Originally Posted By: bruce381
all the solids may blind the test to total additives BUT?? I will wait for more "good" sample.
I think it would also be "Right" to only test a sealed bottle, and not a bottle half full to quantify "or" make this test creitable!
Why would it have to be out of a sealed bottle for it to be credible?
Originally Posted By: bruce381
all the solids may blind the test to total additives BUT?? I will wait for more "good" sample.
I think it would also be "Right" to only test a sealed bottle, and not a bottle half full to quantify "or" make this test creitable!
Why would it have to be out of a sealed bottle for it to be credible?
Originally Posted By: Mystic
If it proves to be impossible to get good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube I don't really have a problem with that. My mind is already made up about Synlube anyway. I don't feel like doing business with a company that cannot be located (and when people try to locate it it gets 'moved' to a place impossible for an ordinary citizen to get into).
I would like to see some good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube of course. But there have been problems already and if additional problems come up I will be disappointed but still quite certain of my determination to never use Synlube.
All the other negative information about Synlube has been quite adequate in convincing me to never use Synlube.
I had a feeling the UOA and VOA of Synlube would be problem ridden. First off I think it is blended as an order is placed, using what ever synthetic oil is on sale at the time, so there is little to no consistancy in the product. Secondly the Synlube people will attack the lab or person doing the test results, casting doubt, and a smoke screen. Their behaviour here and on the other forum is more proof than I need, so I won't ever be buying their oil. I also think everyone here realizes that too.
At this point even the entertainment value the Synlube people were providing is lost now.
If it proves to be impossible to get good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube I don't really have a problem with that. My mind is already made up about Synlube anyway. I don't feel like doing business with a company that cannot be located (and when people try to locate it it gets 'moved' to a place impossible for an ordinary citizen to get into).
I would like to see some good VOAs and UOAs on Synlube of course. But there have been problems already and if additional problems come up I will be disappointed but still quite certain of my determination to never use Synlube.
All the other negative information about Synlube has been quite adequate in convincing me to never use Synlube.
I had a feeling the UOA and VOA of Synlube would be problem ridden. First off I think it is blended as an order is placed, using what ever synthetic oil is on sale at the time, so there is little to no consistancy in the product. Secondly the Synlube people will attack the lab or person doing the test results, casting doubt, and a smoke screen. Their behaviour here and on the other forum is more proof than I need, so I won't ever be buying their oil. I also think everyone here realizes that too.
At this point even the entertainment value the Synlube people were providing is lost now.
VOA Synlube 5/50 From "taternoodles"
Waiting on Sulfated ash not done yet
NEW
FE-5
CR- NI- AL-2
PB- CU- SN- AG- TI- SI-10
B-37
NA-9
K- MO-1246
P-1085
ZN-588
CA-596
BA- MG-366
SB- V-
[email protected]
TBN-6.27
Waiting on Sulfated ash not done yet
NEW
FE-5
CR- NI- AL-2
PB- CU- SN- AG- TI- SI-10
B-37
NA-9
K- MO-1246
P-1085
ZN-588
CA-596
BA- MG-366
SB- V-
[email protected]
TBN-6.27
Interesting, a "an xW-50" that is thinner than middle of the road SAE 30 at 100C and a lower TBN than Budman's used sample.
ok other than it is a 30wt oil NOT a 50. Very inconsistant stuff in that The "small engine oil" was also off vis grade was a 40wt. And both were labeled 5w50.
Here are Tater-n's VOA vs Budman's . Strange numbers.
Bruce, were both from the same lab? I noticed you commented that Budman's were from an outside lab.
Even if they were from labs on different planets, the differences are
I did some minor realignment because the Zn numbers were originally in different locations in the two columns.
Code:
Tater-n Budman
-Noodles
19k miles
VOA UOA UOA-VOA
FE 5 166 161
CR 2
NI 1
AL 2 39 37
PB 1
ZN 588 588 0
CU 44
SN 0
AG 0
TI 0
SI 10 44 34
B 37 15 -22
NA 9 62 53
K
MO 1246 1126 -120
P 1085 740 -345
CA 596 333 -263
BA
MG 366 178 -188
SB
V
Vis@100C 10.5 18 7.5
TBN 6.27 6.95 0.68
Bruce, were both from the same lab? I noticed you commented that Budman's were from an outside lab.
Even if they were from labs on different planets, the differences are
I did some minor realignment because the Zn numbers were originally in different locations in the two columns.
Code:
Tater-n Budman
-Noodles
19k miles
VOA UOA UOA-VOA
FE 5 166 161
CR 2
NI 1
AL 2 39 37
PB 1
ZN 588 588 0
CU 44
SN 0
AG 0
TI 0
SI 10 44 34
B 37 15 -22
NA 9 62 53
K
MO 1246 1126 -120
P 1085 740 -345
CA 596 333 -263
BA
MG 366 178 -188
SB
V
Vis@100C 10.5 18 7.5
TBN 6.27 6.95 0.68
Last edited:
Previous VOA, Massive variability among samples and this VOA had a starting TBN of 2.5.
Originally Posted By: bruce381
I do not know about this spectro was run twice to verify.
Bottel has "small engines" pictures on it I'm told this is different than regular Synlube so I will not spend any more thime with this one.
Synlube "small Engine"
5w50
Vis @ 100 15.4 (40wt)
TBN 2.5
FE 11
AL 3
PB 8
B 146
NA 32
MO 1597
P 1246
ZN 52
CA 110
MG 26
Others trace
Originally Posted By: bruce381
I do not know about this spectro was run twice to verify.
Bottel has "small engines" pictures on it I'm told this is different than regular Synlube so I will not spend any more thime with this one.
Synlube "small Engine"
5w50
Vis @ 100 15.4 (40wt)
TBN 2.5
FE 11
AL 3
PB 8
B 146
NA 32
MO 1597
P 1246
ZN 52
CA 110
MG 26
Others trace
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
