- Sep 26, 2010
Did you have a VOA of the Kendall so you knew where it's baseline was? Why are most of the add pack compounds higher on the 2nd run of the Kendall GT-1? It can't be from residual GT-1 oil if that residual oil had the same ppm of those compounds.
What was the VOA of sodium on the Mobil? The level of sodium can be due to other factors besides what was in a VOA before use.
First and foremost, I am not saying that a $30 UOA is going to prove or disprove my supposition--they are far too many variables in the UOA testing alone for that to be a possibility and it would take substantial testing with a myriad of test parameters to do that.
What I am suggesting is:
1. If the additive pack elements carry over from one UOA to another, then why can’t the wear metals? I believe they can and do which influences the results of the subsequent tests--how much is unknown and I get and accept that.
2. Without completely flushing the internals before starting the next run, there is no “clean” baseline and point #1 happens.
3. I would love to know what test results show the increased wear after an oil change and how much wear happens. I assume one would have to pay someone for them, but it would be interesting to read nonetheless.
Next, to your point of "Why are most of the add pack compounds higher on the 2nd run of the Kendall GT-1?" With the exception of manganese (which neither oil had) if they carry over, why would they not be cumulative and be added to the number of the next oil run?
Lastly, again, I get this is in no way going to prove or disprove anything, it is just a thought that I had that I think has some merit.
Here are VOAs of the two oils. Two different labs so there is yet another variable, not to mention there will always be a range of error in a UOA/VOA and I get that too: