shell 10w30 noack 12%

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
PQIA if you are listening then please first test oils that are actually on shelves at walmart autozone napa etc etc. Most of the brands tested i have never heard of.

Who knows your audience might increase by 10 fold.
I think PQIA's primary mission is to educate the public on sub-standard, dangerous, & mis-labeled convenience store motor oils (at which they do a GREAT job)-they also do main-line oil company products, such Valvoline, SOPUS, XOM, etc., but not as many. Maybe Tom in NJ can take special requests?


To be fair u should test the major oil companies too.
Dont they flunk once in a while ?
Ofcourse it will be argued that there is not enough funding
smile.gif
Seems like they got enough rich sponsors.
It seems to be about marketing and hype in selling an oil. But there are enough people that will buy m1. I did !
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Yes noack is correlated with oil consumption until there is some other factor that is being overlooked.
My ford consumes much less qsud 10w30 than m1 0w40.

How did you determine that it is only the NOACK difference and not due to some other factor? People see consumption differences here all the time with different oils. I personally have not seen that but if I did, I don't know how I would isolate the difference to one particular parameter of the oil.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Yes noack is correlated with oil consumption until there is some other factor that is being overlooked.
My ford consumes much less qsud 10w30 than m1 0w40.

How did you determine that it is only the NOACK difference and not due to some other factor? People see consumption differences here all the time with different oils. I personally have not seen that but if I did, I don't know how I would isolate the difference to one particular parameter of the oil.


How do you know its not noack that made the difference ?

You are making my point.

As you say people see oil consumption differences with different oils. But do they know the noack of all the oils. I dont think they do. If one knew the noack of each oil then it will be easier to make educated conclusions. Until then its all try, miss, or hit.
And every oils noack is known by the testing agency but they are told by the oil industry not to share this important piece of data ! Quasi snake oil.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
How do you know its not noack that made the difference ?

You are making my point.

As you say people see oil consumption differences with different oils. But do they know the noack of all the oils. I dont think they do. If one knew the noack of each oil then it will be easier to make educated conclusions. Until then its all try, miss, or hit.
And every oils noack is known by the testing agency but they are told by the oil industry not to share this important piece of data ! Quasi snake oil

I don't know that it isn't, but neither do I know that it is. Different oils are composed of different additives and different base stocks all of which would contribute to consumption. So would driving habits. If it was solely determined by the NOACK why would people on here report that after an OCI or two the consumption moderates or disappears?

No one is "told by the oil industry" not to report certain values, that is a silly assertion that is supported by absolutely nothing. I do know you like to blame oil companies in a conspiratorial sense for "suppressing" information you think is vital for oil choice. But unless you have some sort of proof other than a personal belief I'd suggest you take a different tack on oil choice, such as only buying oil from those manufacturers that do report the values you're most interested in. Amsoil seems pretty fixated on NOACK, why not buy from them?
 
"I don't know that it isn't, but neither do I know that it is. Different oils are composed of different additives and different base stocks all of which would contribute to consumption."

Would these not be reflected in noack?

Too bad you could not influence the scientists/engineers to get rid of noack test.
 
" No one is "told by the oil industry" not to report certain values, that is a silly assertion that is supported by absolutely nothing. I do know you like to blame oil companies in a conspiratorial sense for "suppressing" information you think is vital for oil choice. But unless you have some sort of proof other than a personal belief I'd suggest you take a different tack on oil choice, such as only buying oil from those manufacturers that do report the values you're most interested in. Amsoil seems pretty fixated on NOACK, why not buy from them?"

Thanks for the non technical advice. I am already boycotting m1. I am only buying oil if i know the noack. Luckily i can get qsud 10w30. I might reward valvoline or napa by buying conventional 20w50 and blending a quart of it with qsud 10w30
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Thanks for the non technical advice. I am already boycotting m1. I am only buying oil if i know the noack. Luckily i can get qsud 10w30. I might reward valvoline or napa by buying conventional 20w50 and blending a quart of it with qsud 10w30
smile.gif


You're welcome for the non-technical advise, it only resulted from the non-technical assertion you made first.

So what about the numerous reports of people's consumption first escalating and then decreasing after an OCI or two with a new oil? How is that related to NOACK?
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
I am already boycotting m1. I am only buying oil if i know the noack. Luckily i can get qsud 10w30. I might reward valvoline or napa by buying conventional 20w50 and blending a quart of it with qsud 10w30
smile.gif


It just strikes me that despite me never worrying about NOACK, flash point, pour point, mixing oils, boycotts nor any other ancillary oil spec I've still got all the miles I've gotten in my vehicles. All I've ever done is just see what requirements and specs the manufacturer requires and then buy an oil that carries those specs, and is of an appropriate grade for my climate.

Sometimes after reading all the stuff people go through on here I wonder how I managed. I don't mean that as a criticism, but really I do.
 
But after you select oils with appropriate specs and grades, why not go for something that differentiates them from commodity they are: Noack is one option, but I'm sure there are others.

Maybe you picked quality automobiles?
 
"So what about the numerous reports of people's consumption first escalating and then decreasing after an OCI or two with a new oil? How is that related to NOACK?"

Are you suggesting this was a controlled study to discount the effects of noack?

Seriously u could have saved me and others looking into noack by educating other scientists and engineers in this field.

I am glad you got so many miles. I got quite a few on mine too. Just was trying to cut down on consumption by finding low noack oils so my engine cud run cleaner and not have to top it off with a quart.
Luckily i found one or two low noak oils that have helped minimized consumption on same highway runs as before.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Are you suggesting this was a controlled study to discount the effects of noack?

Seriously u could have saved me and others looking into noack by educating other scientists and engineers in this field.

I am glad you got so many miles. I got quite a few on mine too. Just was trying to cut down on consumption by finding low noack oils so my engine cud run cleaner and not have to top it off with a quart.
Luckily i found one or two low noak oils that have helped minimized consumption on same highway runs as before.

Well I'd say the correlation significance is equal to your conclusion, but maybe that's just me.

Nevertheless I wish you luck on your quest for NOACK nirvana
wink.gif
 
Most of us at first do go by manufacturer specs and grades.

I used m1 5w30 per ford specs and imagine when the lube shop told me i was down 3 quarts. I was like right, sure
smile.gif
.
 
Yet you posted you ordered Mobil Dexron VI ATF - so you practice very selective boycotting.

There is no such directed suppression of NOACK data in the oil industry, if someone uses an information source for purposes it was as never developed for, or makes assertions with no documentation to support them due to a personal belief based system, that's on them. Especially if they choose to castigate heretical non-believers that know better than to drink your kool-aid. That's definitely consistent.

I'll stack my multiple decades of direct employment experience in the petroleum & petrochemical industries against your 2 years of belief based stuff any day.
 
Last edited:
Yes i am boycotting their engine oil.
Not their atf which i thought looked good on paper.
I have nothing against m1. Just need more data.

I dont care if you have 50 years of experience in industry. I have about one year of trying to figure out which oil is best for my ford.
Maybe my 1 year > 2 decades of fancy language and quotes.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Who knows your audience might increase by 10 fold.

They're not interested in an audience; they're interested in getting garbage oils off the shelf.
wink.gif


In any event, I have seen lots of 20w-50s with good Noack, and a lot of 10w-30 options, too. As has been pointed out, we had a couple ringers in the mix, which made this look worse, too.

In any event, the taxis did fine on the high Noack oils of the day. Some consumed a lot of oil. Some didn't. They all ran the exact same product. With some vehicles that are losing oil, switching things around works. With others, nothing seems to work, aside from a mechanical fix. And I do share your frustration with oil burners.

Generally speaking, to minimise burning, I unfortunately had to minimise OCIs. Most of my problem children, as it were, burned the most oil later on in the interval.
 
Kschachn and nyugtha dont provide any citations from archivable journals regarding the lack of correlation between noack and oil consumption.

If one goes from noack of say 10% to 5% then we dont expect oil consumption to go to zero but rather a reduced amount which can be significant in some cases. From what i have learned in the last year is that oil on the piston walls might burn off due to high temp. If i can reduce that from 1 quart to 1/2 quart or whatever on a 14 hour higway drive at good speeds then it is progress as far as i can tell.
 
Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Yes i am boycotting their engine oil.
Not their atf which i thought looked good on paper.
I have nothing against m1. Just need more data.

I dont care if you have 50 years of experience in industry. I have about one year of trying to figure out which oil is best for my ford.
Maybe my 1 year > 2 decades of fancy language and quotes.


Here's a typical good one from you. Show us the GTL you claim is present in Mobil Dexron VI on the SDS sheet. We already know you can't produce any facts on PP MVLV ATF. When it comes to SOPUS you reject data. But when it comes to M1 you want data?

Originally Posted By: merconvvv
Well i send a request to mobil to clarify re flash point of their dex vi.
The sds indicates > 185c and 30 to 40 percent gtl.

Pennzoil platinum lv dex vi approved is almost all gtl upto 90 percent.




When I look at the Mobil Dexron VI SDS I once again absolutely nothing about GTL, nor PAO, on SDS dated 28 July 2016.


http://www.msds.exxonmobil.com/IntApps/psims/SearchResults.aspx

Is this what you mean by looking good on paper to you?

If NOACK was considered a trade secret that the oil industry conspired to not be published, PQIA wouldn't be able to publish it. It's just that simple.

Critical Thinking is something to be considered as an alternative to your system Rev. Jones of GTL and conspiracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

Just because the rest of us can't hear the voices in your head doesn't make them right.
 
Last edited:
Test all oil and get all the garbage out.
Perhaps if the oil company wants to eat that api donought it should pay pqia. Funding problem solved.

Maybe somebody should tell pqia that they are wasting their resources by calculating noack
smile.gif
 
Go for it - tell them all about the rest of your belief system too Rev - make sure they get the whole picture. After all you think they should exist just for your benefit.

Like how you don't believe Dexron VI specifications allow a fully synthetic formulation. Make sure & tell that to PQIA.

Originally Posted By: merconvvv
ya i dont think there is full synthetic dexron 6 even though bottles say so.
Not valvoline. Not ac delco.

After a headache i settled on mobil semi syn dex 6.

I think if the spec allowed it mobil wud have it. They do not have shortage of anything
smile.gif




Whereas, critical thinking says if the formulation wasn't as advertised, the brands advertising full synthetic fluids with Dexron VI licenses wouldn't be able to keep their licenses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top