What do you think of this motor oil comparative test data

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Messages
68
Location
Lakewood, WA USA
I'm not a scientist and I don't play one on the net..I'm sure Amsoil is good/great stuff, I know many fleets in TX used it, personally, I think it's too much $$ so I'm cheap yet still think M1 is overpriced but, I use it to get 5K OCI's on low mileage cars (1x annually O/Filter change), 7.5K on driver's...their reps are at all the cars shows w/ lots of pamphlets/hype/ proof, etc. but really, when is the last time you really knew a motor failed because of the BRAND of oil?? [Big Grin] [Cool] maybe the change interval/the level ran very low/the oil was contaminated or SA "clearance oil" and the owner didn't know, etc., but cm'on..aren't we all here enjoying the "semantics" [Big Grin] anyway that's my "vent" for 6/9...Jeff
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2002
Messages
5,785
Location
Dixie
These are standard API/ASTM tests and can be reproduced at any lab. The real question is how relevant they are to an actual application??? I think the Noack test is an excellent predictor of oil consumption in actual service, for a given SAE grade. In addition the Thin Film, Oxygen Uptake Test gives you some idea of the extended drain capability of an oil, which is normally limited by the acids that result from oxidation/nitration, and the viscosity increase that occurs. You can see that the two PAO based oils - Amsoil and Mobil 1 - far outperform the GP III based synthetics in this respect. The relative TBN's are also a good predictor of extended drain performance, although to be fair, the data I've seen for Mobil 1 from other labs shows a TBN up in the 10.5-12.0 range. The data on CCS viscosities is only useful if you are operating in a very cold environment. One things these results don't show is that GP III's require pour point depressant additives. So there is some question if they would continue to flow this well after say 7500 miles. Results from the four ball test have been talked to death, so I won't say much about that. Amsoil really uses this test as a screening tool when evaluating new anti-wear additive chemistries. The best way to evaluate wear protection is with UOA's.... If you look at lubricants from the stand point of being a basic material, I don't think there is any question that Amsoil has the best overall mixture of physical/chemical properties of the mainline synthetic or petroleum oils. To be fair, I do think that niche products like Redline and Royal Purple would also perform very well in some of these tests, such as the TROUT and Noack. Amsoils position on this is that there is no point in advertising for their much smaller competitors,which is understandable.... Finally, one thing you hear is from some Internet oil "experts" is that Amsoil is merely re-badged Mobil 1, since they do buy their PAO basestocks and perhaps some of their di-esters and polyol-esters from ExxonMobil. Clearly, this is NOT the case.... Tooslick www.lubedealer.com/Dixie_Synthetics
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
34,826
Location
NJ
TS summed it up for the most part. Noak and TFOUT are good things to look at. M1 and Amsoil are going to one up each other every so often. The only think that annoys me with Amsoil's numbers have been the TBN of M1. It is NOT 8, but more like 11-12. People need to remember that M1 is factory fill in some cars that call for 15k -25k mile drains. My friend met someone the other day that had a Porsche. He said it calls for 25k mile drains in Europe. So M1's TBN reserve has to be around at least 11, which we know it is. [ June 09, 2004, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2002
Messages
5,785
Location
Dixie
Buster, These European engines running 15k-25k drain intervals all have oversized sumps and very high quality OEM oil filters. For example, the 2.5L/3.0L, straight six BMW engines hold 7.5 quarts of oil and the 3.2L, Mercedes V-6's hold 7.9 quarts of oil. The small displacement V-8's from BMW, Audi, Mercedes generally hold 8-10 quarts of oil, as do the Porsche 911 engines. It is another thing entirely to run 15k-25k drain intervals with domestic and Japanese engines that only hold 3.5-6.0 quarts of oil, as I'm sure you have noted ....That's where you need a very high quality basestock blend and a high additive treat level. Try running some of these competitive products for 10,000 miles in a 3.0L, Toyota V-6 and most of them would degrade very badly. I'd like to see a "3MP" type test in that engine, with oil samples taken through the dipstick tube every 3000 miles and a minimal # of makeup oil. That would separate the wheat from the chaff very quickly .... TS
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
34,826
Location
NJ
quote:
These European engines running 15k-25k drain intervals all have oversized sumps and very high quality OEM oil filters. For example, the 2.5L/3.0L, straight six BMW engines hold 7.5 quarts of oil and the 3.2L, Mercedes V-6's hold 7.9 quarts of oil. The small displacement V-8's from BMW, Audi, Mercedes generally hold 8-10 quarts of oil, as do the Porsche 911 engines.
Thats true. I did know that but forgot. [Big Grin] [Cheers!]
 

Patman

Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2002
Messages
22,026
Location
Guelph, Ontario
quote:
I'd like to see a "3MP" type test in that engine, with oil samples taken through the dipstick tube every 3000 miles and a minimal # of makeup oil. That would separate the wheat from the chaff very quickly ....
I'd love to see that too! Anyone on here want to do their own version of a long life synthetic study with one of the Toyota 3.0 V6s? Pretty please! [Smile]
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
8,462
Location
Colorado
If this information is all correct then it is difficult to pick out a motor oil that looks good in all areas except for the Amsoil. Even the Mobil 1 according to this information has some weak areas. In checking this out and information from posts above this post I find it interesting that some conventional motor oils actually outperformed some synthetic oils in some cases and in some areas. For example, in another post there was information presented that Valvoline conventional oil actually outperformed Valvoline synthetic. It would be interesting however to see how Redline, Schaeffer's, and Royal Purple would have performed in similiar testing. I am tempted to use Amsoil oil again because I might be able to get Amsoil from a local distributor. I think with this new car I would probably at first go 6000 miles or 6 months to maintain the warranty. What do you think of this?
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
1,130
Location
California
I'm not an Amsoil fan and have often been critical of Amsoil's marketing practices. However, I saw a set of posted test data on this dealer's website which is interesting not only for the Amsoil numbers but also for the 10 competing oils. It is rare to see posted data with ASTM test sequence numbers, etc. Do you folks think the data is real? Any conclusions to draw? "Seven API tests were run on the motor oils. The Thin-Film Oxygen Uptake Test (TFOUT) measures the oxidation stability of engine oils. The High Temperature/High Shear Test (HTHS) measures a lubricant’s viscosity under severe operating conditions. The NOACK Volatility Test measures the evaporation loss of oils in high temperature service. Pour Point indicates the lowest temperature at which a fluid will flow. Total Base Number (TBN) is the measurement of a lubricant’s reserve alkalinity for combating acids. The Cold Cranking Simulator Test (CCS) measures a lubricant’s viscosity at low temperatures and high shear rates. The Four-Ball Wear Test measures a lubricant’s wear protection properties." Results are at: 10W30 Comparitve Test Data John [ June 09, 2004, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: jthorner ]
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
9,427
Location
Pensacola & Vero Beach FL
I'm not a big fan of Amsoil advertising either, but I had great subjective results from running a fill of ASL in my car (next time, I'll do a UOA to back up the subjective impression...). Obviously, advertising doesn't protect our engines, good oil does, so I think it's important to separate the hype side from the performance side. I myself, for example, believe Castrol's part-truth misrepresentation of Syntec verges upon Satanic (I know lots of you disagree with me on this -- not the point here though), but I'm still giving the German Castrol a fair run in my car to see how it does, since that Syntec looks like a good product. The info you linked is undoubtedly crafted by Amsoil's hypemasters. I have no idea how good the research behind it really is. And I don't think we'll ever know. In my opinion, the best you can do is take an oil you believe might be good in your car, and give it a good experimental run. If your subjective impressions and its objective UOA results suggest it's a winner for you, then go for it. So, to answer your question, I would only use this data as a preliminary screening tool for myself, not to globally conclude that Amsoil is motor oil manna from heaven. I also read it all with marked suspicion, as I have yet to see an oil company release data proving how badly their oil sucks. . . [ June 09, 2004, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: ekpolk ]
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
9,427
Location
Pensacola & Vero Beach FL
quote:
Originally posted by Patman:
quote:
I'd like to see a "3MP" type test in that engine, with oil samples taken through the dipstick tube every 3000 miles and a minimal # of makeup oil. That would separate the wheat from the chaff very quickly ....
I'd love to see that too! Anyone on here want to do their own version of a long life synthetic study with one of the Toyota 3.0 V6s? Pretty please! [Smile]

I'd love to see that too . . . but. I'll volunteer my 3.0L Toyota after our engine replacement trust is fully funded so that I can get to and from work every day if our experiment goes horribly wrong. [Wink] Seriously though, another engine type might be a better choice, given the Toyota family's general "stinginess" with the metal they do give up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top