The oil testing discussion

[DrMango]

So everyone keeps pushing this Australian oil test from streetcommodores(SC), because its about the only one that was "scientifically" done.

Really was it so well done in their test of 18 oils. All of which are vastly different weights and yet they use the same test for each oil. This would seemingly make for a skewed test, which from the sounds of it makes the lower weight oils look worse. They don't do the test at running temp either.

some information I have found when doing some quick searching around.

http://forums.noria.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/616604995/m/8381065241
This is a post started by an editor from SC asking for help with their test and to obtain quality info. A guy named Roger Miller posted the most important reply on there on May 18th.

Quote from this forum:
Hi Ben. My name is Roger Miller. I do work for Red Line Oil in Victoria. One of my clients passed on your enquiry. In a rough sense this test is used for grease not oil. It is like using a quarter mile drag strip to find the "best four wheel drive on the market." A real test but totally irrelevent to what happens in the real world.The addition of friction modifiers to the test bears this out. You can take the nastiest oil on the market, add friction modifier to it and it will out-perform the best oil on the market. If you add friction modifier to a GL1 oil in this falex test you can make it exceed the results for a GL5 oil. Most general use oils contain friction modifiers to a greater or lesser degree depending on the recipe the oil manufacturer is using that particular day. So what does the falex test really test...???

To answer all your questions satifactiorally is beyond what this forum is designed for. Please feel free to contact me via redlineoil@redlineoil.com.au

Quote from SC about their previous "scientific" oil test on engine wear:

A few months back (issue 108), you might remember we did an oil comparison. At the time, we thought it was a bloody good thing, and we don't mind telling you we were pretty proud to publish an article that basically bagged a heap of big name brands. You see, at Street Commodores, we can't, and won't be bought. We like to play things straight. And in the name of playing things straight, we'd like to tell you what has happened since that story went to print.

Basically, we made a few oil companies very cross, and some others quite happy; but we've also been educated some more on engine oils, and being the type of publication that we are, we wanted to fill you in on it. The information we've learned since then suggests the test we performed may be irrelevant. Some sources have advised us that the test we used would have been better served testing some of our favourite greases rather than the engine oils we commonly use on our street cars. Sure, we did the test with the best intentions, with a level playing field for each oil and no preconceptions as to who would perform better than another, but when, and if, we mess up, we like to think that we're man enough to set the record straight.

So keep an eye out in an upcoming issue real soon for an in-depth look at what makes up the contents of your oil, what to look for when choosing one, why certain ingredients are so important and whether the test we used was irrelevant for testing oils.

Your thoughts?

Kyle

[j-ran]

my thoughts: I have opened a can of worms.

Ok, thats a good point what you have there. I've spent the last hour trying to find another motor oil test that is done properly. The biggest thing I run into is over simplified bullshit that tells you that you should use a 5w30 because its the best weight... I actually found a site that said that lol. The other problem I ran into is that the oil tests I found do not involve any high performance oils... I really don't care what is better between Castrol, Havoline, Quaker State, or Penzoil.

The only good test I found is on the AmsOil website itself, but guess what they didn't compare it to??? Royal Purple!!!

http://www.bestsynthetic.com/comptest.shtml

From all of the info I did come across, the 2 big dogs in the synthetic game (for applications like our RBs) are Royal Purple and Amsoil. Mobil 1 also got the best bang for your buck award, but it seemed like a consolation prize. Everyone said go with mobil 1 if you can't afford Royal Purple or Amsoil.

99% of what you will find on the internet is opinion. Everyone thinks it's scientific proof to say "I've been using XXXX oil for 2 years and haven't had a problem" Thank the lord, my questions have been answered.

I don't know if Royal Purple is better than Amsoil, but I can get Royal Purple, in town, in any weight I want for about 7.75 per litre, which is why I use Royal Purple. And I have not had any problems with it in 3 years!

[DrMango]

Yeah I've run into the same DIY tests like you mentioned. "I've been running Mobile 1 for years and my motor can still turn over". Its really useless info and people still eat it up like its the only true test. I couldnt care less about the penzoils and castrols of the world but I do want to see a comprehensive test that is actually based in reality, with a variety of oils(price/performance wise).
There is also something to be said about the SC test. They only did one run per oil. Even in highschool chemistry we learned that you need to do tests more than one time for a true baseline test to be accurate.
They really got a lot of attention because of their test either way.

Something I found interesting about Amsoil on another forum. It might not be correct and I have yet to confirm this, but its still interesting.

Amsoil isn't even API certified is it? I think their website says the tests are too expensive!?!?!?! Seriously??? If they don't have the money to run the standard tests that everyone else runs, I doubt they have the money to hire the same level of engineers, or do as much testing.

I don't know, I wouldn't use it. The allure of getting an extra 50,000 miles by some magic oil is too risky to me. I think the odds that it would do more damage than good are too great(just my own guess). I would rather get a solid 300,000 miles out of a popular widely used Synthetic.

Then again, I could be wrong.

The last part is obviously all opinion and is sounding something like the people we both mentioned previously living in their own version of reality. If they arent API certified because of the reason stated, then I do tend to wonder whats up

Kyle

[Aaron]

Good ol' Pennzoil 20/50 dino for me in the rex.

Once the Miata is boosted I'll be running 300V.

[DrMango]

This isnt a thread for what oil you use. That thread exists here
What Oil/Filter Do You Use? - GTRPWR Forums

I made this thread separetely from that one for a reason. Not trying to be rude. Just want this to be about oil testing not personal use/opinion

Kyle

[Aaron]

suck me.

[DrMango]

suck me.

I love you too Aaron ;)

Kyle

[Aaron]

Much love.

[rb-racer]

I think the oil test pdf hosted in the downloads section on this site is a good comparison. These are oils coming out of the manufactures bottles as we would use them. Test works for me.

[DrMango]

That is the test we are talking about rb-racer. This is why I want to discuss what people think about that test specifically.

It's also true that some oil manufacturers use different formulations in different markets, so an oil as it is sold in Australia, where this test was performed, may or may not be the same composition as the oil labeled the same is sold in North America or Europe.

It's also true that they didn't test how the oils perform when they are hot, which is where synthetics are most advantageous

So maybe the oils out of the manufacturers bottles might not be exactly the same from australia(where that test was performed)

Kyle

[M13]

suck me

Have some time off falcon.


Imagine if this were GTRC ;)







As for the oil test, the oil is not even at operating temp. However, it does show a good base line for cold-start wear. This test does exaggerate quite a bit as if any of the bearings were to be worn to those levels, you'd be knocking your roads soon.

I'd like to see a fluid shear test, having two large metal move around with load while a stream of oil is injected at a constant pressure and temperature.

[XXXsebXXX]

I think that this test is still better than nothing, all the different brands were tested in the same conditions and they proved to have different results. I don't think that the operating temperature would double the sheer factor of any oil on the market. If the test had been conducted on very cold temp. this would be another story but at ambient temp. the results are still fair from my point of view.



Amsoil isn't even API certified is it? I think their website says the tests are too expensive!?!?!?! Seriously??? If they don't have the money to run the standard tests that everyone else runs, I doubt they have the money to hire the same level of engineers, or do as much testing.

About this API rating make suree that this not because they are constantly upgrading their formula that they don't want to the API test done again and again. I can confirm you that this is the case for Motul 300V product line, there is no kind of homologation on these oils because the blends are always evolving from months to months and because the poeple how run them just don't care about these homologations.

[DrMango]

I think that this test is still better than nothing, all the different brands were tested in the same conditions and they proved to have different results. I don't think that the operating temperature would double the sheer factor of any oil on the market. If the test had been conducted on very cold temp. this would be another story but at ambient temp. the results are still fair from my point of view.


Thats like saying, my car has square wooden wheels but its better than nothing(kind of :p)
Synthetic oils work best at full running temp. The test should have been run for each oil at full running temp. That wouldnt have been any harder then running at 40 deg. They would have atleast had a closer to reality test then.
I have no doubt that this test did prove something. Im just debating that it is (IMHO) not as accurate of a "quality of oil" test as some might believe

Kyle

[XXXsebXXX]

Thats like saying, my car has square wooden wheels but its better than nothing(kind of :p)
Synthetic oils work best at full running temp. The test should have been run for each oil at full running temp. That wouldnt have been any harder then running at 40 deg. They would have atleast had a closer to reality test then.
I have no doubt that this test did prove something. Im just debating that it is (IMHO) not as accurate of a "quality of oil" test as some might believe

Kyle

For sure this not as accurate as the test Amsoil did but the final ranking wouldn't change that much if it was done at operating temp. There is much more than just the 4 ball wear test to be done on oil to know its real performance, but this test is still a tough one.

[M13]

This test does show an exaggerated result of cold-start on parts.

Another test that could be easily done is flash point/ sublimation/boiling point.

See how well oil resists heat.

Also a heated state viscosity test would be nice, to actually see if the oil can maintain its stated viscosity at higher temperatures and protect our engines.

[DrMango]

Sounds like most oils cant maintain their heated viscosity after a certain amount of abuse.

Multi-weight oil has additives that expand when they heat up to change the rating. For example, in a 10W30, the oil is a 10 weight oil, with additives to thicken it to a 30 weight when hot. Over time, these additives burn up. I haven't done oil tests in the NSX yet, but in the Type-R, 3000 miles of spirited driving was enough to burn up enough additives so that it could only turn the 10 weight into a 20 weight when warm. This means, every time I revved to 8400rpm, I was doing so with only a 20 weight protecting my engine! I can only imagine if you ran the oil for 7,000 miles!!!

And zinc is only useful for oil starvation. It doesn't protect you when your oil breaks down from usage

Kyle

[DrMango]

These numbers are all taken from manufacturers sites by me personally

Oils are all 10w30 full sunthetic

Manufacturer: Flashpoint
Mobil 1: 244C/471F
Asmoil: 226C/439F
Royal Purple 235C/455F
Red Line: 250C/480F
Valvoline Synpower: 232C/450F
Castrol Syntec: 235C/455F
Pennzoil Platinum Synthetic: 224C/435F

This site shows flashpoints for a lot more oils and weights. Some numbers are different from what I found on the north american sites I looked at for flashpoints
http://micapeak.com/info/oiled.html

Kyle

[M13]

One thing people have to understand is, synthetic oil does not break down, only the friction modifier and viscosity agents.

If the oil were cleaned, and had proper amounts of these additives, it can run forever.

But, why do the math, purchasing of these additives when you can just dump the oil and pour in new ones.

One thing I have proven myself in real life about Royal Purple is their surface tension modifier (Synerlec)

The oil can be placed on bare metal and it will form a coating and does not get moved/wiped off easily, making the metal very slippery, which is good for cold/dry starts.

I tested it with mobil1 and RP of same SAE rating on a polished SS pipe. Left them alone after putting two drops of oil on them and came back a day later. Mobil 1 was dripping down and left the top parts of the pipe bare while RP just disspiated over the surface and stayed on all surfaces.

This is probably the only reason I use RP. And now that I can get 1 quart for 9 bux after tax, which is cheaper than Redline (which I have never used nor plan on using, just preference).

Probably biased, but when I ran Mobil1, my engine did not feel well nor did I like pushing the car with it in it.

[DrMango]

Yeah that seems to be a trend from what Ive been reading. Ive been doing a lot more reading about oil than ever before and its been like a slap in the face as to why I hadnt tried RP yet. My rebuilt motor will be my first motor using RP and I'll likely stick with it for the duration.

Kyle

[bobbo]

This is one of those topics you can easily beat the hell out of. I work with some EXTREMELY smart people (I don't fit in with them so well) who deal with analizing both synthetic and conventional oils. We do a lot of research to find what oils are going to fit our needs the best.
If you want to know what additives and percentages of each there are in an oil I have access to the tools that can tell me.
If you want to know after "X" numbers of miles on your car what condition your oil is in... I can tell you that.
Is one oil going to cause a noticable deterioration of components faster than another. Not likely.
If you want to make sure your oil is going to maintain maximum effectiveness one of the most important things is not running overly rich and reducing short driving times.
If you want some info on Amsoil I have a pile of it. We even use their gear oils in some applications. It is very good stuff from what we've found.

[Insta_AxE_Toast]

When I first saw that test the first thing I thought was it was a joke. As others have said it only tests one thing and it does not even test it at operating temp. The best test method is to use real engines in a controlled environment.

[bobbo]

When I first saw that test the first thing I thought was it was a joke. As others have said it only tests one thing and it does not even test it at operating temp. The best test method is to use real engines in a controlled environment.


Not exactly true. Engineers who have a lot of money spent on education have designed systems that are now an industry standard and new/improved ststems are comming out every couple of years.
I agree that the ideal way is to use it in an engine to see the effects however you don't know what is happening to the oil or the engine without tests.
I deal with these tests as part of my job and you would be suprised at what you can find out.

[DrMango]

There is definitely value in the test here, even with engine oil but its not that effective of a real world test like its been portrayed to be. I would like to see some more complete tests with more than one test performed

Kyle