Synlube VOA Attempt - Set-Up Thread

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
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.


I think Occam would approve of your conclusion.

 

[Nick R]

All I can say is.... WTH?


Originally Posted By: XS650
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

 

[Cup of Joe]

Hopefully I will have the results from Polaris later today, sample was from the same bottle bruce tested.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: postjeeprcr
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?


Probably because they will claim it was tampered with. They will attack any result that is not favorable. They will, and have, claimed that only their pet lab understands the oil. That no one else is qualified to analyze it.

 

[demarpaint]

Exactly! I said this early on in one of the threads. They'll swear the oil was not theirs or it was tampered with. What else can they say? Lets see how creative they are with their defense.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
Very inconsistant stuff in that The "small engine oil" was also off vis grade was a 40wt. And both were labeled 5w50.


Thanks Bruce for trunning it.

For sure. As I stated earlier, there is so much variability here it's hard to "Pin-the-tail-On-the-Donkey."

 

[OVERKILL]

I thought Miro stated that it would have at least 50ppm of Fe natively

What does seem to be a common theme here (and I'm no expert so Bruce, Mola, please correct me if I'm wrong) is the [censored] TBN.

There have been numerous theories as to the origins of the "base" fluid that gets "doped", on sale Delvac, whatever the cheapest synthetic is....etc. But that would not explain the horrible TBN.

USED oil WOULD however explain the TBN. As well as the variability between samples from different bottles. He may be visiting the local truck stop, Jiffy Lube or wherever and simply taking their used oil, "filtering it", dumping in some lubro-moly for the colour and VOILA! Synlube!

 

[saaber1]

From Synlube's ebay ad:

"SynLube lubricants are a truly "green" oil, being fully reprocessable at a fraction of the cost that it takes to build them"

 

[Mystic]

So far it seems pretty much like I expected. However, it probably would have been to the benefit of the Synlube crowd to have used a decent oil like Mobil 1, put some Lubro-Moly in it, and sell that as Synlube. Aside from it being dishonest the oil would at least have some chance of holding up for a while and they would still make money because they were selling Synlube for $32.00 a quart.

If all they are doing is using used oil and dumping something into that exactly how cheap can you go? And they probably were not getting too many repeat customers.

 

[Cup of Joe]

I received the results from Polaris. Both samples are from the same liter drawn at the same time and sent out the same day.

Bruce----Polaris
FE-5-----6
CR- NI- AL-2-----0
PB- CU- SN- AG- TI- SI-10----18
B-37-----32
NA-9-----7
K- MO-1246-1035
P-1085--954
ZN-588--599
CA-596--557
BA- MG-366--396
SB- V-
[email protected]23.5

TBN-------6.27----4.10

Ox-----------------12
Nit-----------------7
fuel---------------.3%
Soot---------------.8%

 

[demarpaint]

Exactly what I was thinking. Fuel for their rebuttal.

 

[znode]

Huh. Well the spectro matched up perfectly within margin of error. Vis is really strange though.

Maybe the additives weren't blending properly with the base and settled out?

I don't know if we're sure of anything at this point other than Synlube having the "manufacturing"

quality consistency of a five-year-old.

 

[Nick R]

Hey bruce how much you charge for a UOA? Wouldn't mind supporting you I have a couple blackstone sample kits lying around so ya know.

 

[Colt45ws]

Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
I received the results from Polaris. Both samples are from the same liter drawn at the same time and sent out the same day.

Bruce----Polaris
FE-5-----6
CR- NI- AL-2-----0
PB- CU- SN- AG- TI- SI-10----18
B-37-----32
NA-9-----7
K- MO-1246-1035
P-1085--954
ZN-588--599
CA-596--557
BA- MG-366--396
SB- V-
[email protected]23.5

TBN-------6.27----4.10

Ox-----------------12
Nit-----------------7
fuel---------------.3%
Soot---------------.8%

What!? This is used oil! WTH did the fuel and soot come from? Okay, okay its probably seeing the collidial or whatever lubricants as soot, but fuel?
And on this one its a 60?

 

[MolaKule]

Being from the same sample, I am not suprised that the variability is low.

Other than the viscosity anamoly, the numbers are statistically close.

The soot reading at 0.8% is most likely the colloidal graphite.

 

[MolaKule]

The fuel reading is 0.3% and most likely comes from aromatics, not fuel.

For a supposedly full synthetic I would expect oxidation to be much higher.

 

[Craig750]

Originally Posted By: Johnny
How you going to get the truck load from the NV parking lot to Australia?

You think I didn't have that one covered huh!

I am sure the guys at Sinlube will have an answer from one of their genuises. Maybe a frictionless oil pathway using Sinlube.

 

[Dad2leia]

Welp, been a while for me here, but now I think we can safely say that this is overpriced goop. Thanks so those who took the brave effort and forked over the funds to put this to rest once and for all for me personally.

I've been using Brad Penn now for a couple of years, and even though it may not be the best out there, the price and the locational availability make it great for me.

This is off topic a little bit, but I'm sure that most of you can remember that I would try any boutique that came along, but not anymore. It just isn't worth the expense, effort and time. Besides, with the OLM in the Honda, don't really need to think much about it anymore either. Darn, this car has me spoiled!

 

[bruce381]

Revised viscosity from Me and Polaris
TBN agress in that I use 2896 and they use 4739 which reads lower

Bruce----Polaris
FE-5-----6
CR- NI- AL-2-----0
PB- CU- SN- AG- TI- SI-10----18
B-37-----32
NA-9-----7
K- MO-1246-1035
P-1085--954
ZN-588--599
CA-596--557
BA- MG-366--396
SB- V-
[email protected]
TBN-------6.27----4.10
Ox-----------------12
Nit-----------------7
fuel---------------.3%
Soot---------------.8%

 

[bruce381]

""The fuel reading is 0.3% and most likely comes from aromatics, not fuel.""

Unless the base he starts with is "drian oil" LOL