Synthetic Motor Oil Poll 2017

[Usual Suspect]

So I wonder how many folks have had an engine failure that can be directly attributed to the brand of oil they were using? My guess would be not very many, if any. I think if you use any brand that meets manufacturers spec and weight and use reasonable change intervals you won't notice a dimes bit of difference in performance or longevity. JMO. It's been working for me for 40+ yrs.

 

[Burla]

Kinda hard to prove hey? You could never prove that an oil caused a failure, and all oil guys have been saying that for twenty years or better. A large % of the oil guys at Bob's use the cheapest oil they can for that exact reason, and it is a legitimate strategy. The application of a gas engine is very forgiving and has always been.

However, modern engines have had many more issues with oils because they have pushed the limits and oil formulations can cause problems. You have heard of low saps, the movement of low calcium oils? You know for the first time ever Cummins recommends lubricity additives because of what the gov't has done to fuel? That Ram changed the oil recommendations for the eco diesel because of wide spread damage?

Things change man, it has never been more necessary to consider lubrication then ever before. I'm 100% sure if you had an engine failure, you wouldn't blame the oil. Also btw, seams like hemi tick numbers that have led to cam/lifter fails have been widespread. As documented on this board there was a point that 6 in a row were non moly oils. Now is that "proof", NO. But those guys will never know if they had a high moly oil if that would have been the case.

What did Ram do in response to all of this with the hemi? They made a hemi specific oil with super high moly- PUP 0w40 made by pennzoil with FCA cooperation. What do those engineers know that we don't? Have a good day

 

[SHOOT2KILL]

Free forum, and it is interesting. But you have to read the results with an educated eye. This guy believes his tests proved the best oil, it is the opposite. His tests proved which oils have the most viscosity improvers, IE lower quality base oils. When the branch chains break, the oil is vulnerable to shear. That is why atsm's have high temp testing and long term testing. That is how you gauge an oil, this guy had a yeoman's try at it, but he refuses to accept what I say and doubles down on his uneducated testing methods.

 

[Burla]

What rat hack says about hths....

HTHS (High-Temperature/High-Shear) test data only provides information on how capable various motor oils are at maintaining their viscosity under high heat and high stress conditions. But, that HTHS viscosity data DOES NOT provide any information at all about an oil’s wear protection capability. Because a motor oil’s viscosity DOES NOT determine its wear protection capability. and so yada yada

What MACHINE lube says..

Viscosity at Operating Conditions
In the early years of automotive engines, oils were simply formulated and obeyed Newton’s equation for viscosity - the more force used to make the fluid flow (shear stress), the faster it would flow (shear rate). Essentially, the ratio of shear stress to shear rate - the viscosity - remained constant at all shear rates. The engine oils of that time were all essentially single grade and carried no SAE “W” classification.

This viscometric relationship changed in the 1940s when it was discovered that adding small amounts of high-molecular-weight polymers appeared to give the oil the desired flow characteristics for both low-temperature starting and high-temperature engine operation. Accordingly, these polymer-containing oils were listed by the SAE viscosity classification system as multigrade engine oils, as they met the requirements of both viscosity temperature zones.

Since that time, multigrade oils (e.g., SAE 10W-40, 5W-30, 0W-20, etc.) have become very popular. However, they were no longer Newtonian in flow characteristics, as the viscosity was found to decrease with increasing shear rate. This was considered important in lubricating engines that operated at high shear rates (as measured in millions of reciprocal seconds), in contrast to the several hundred reciprocal seconds of the low-shear viscometers then being used to characterize engine oils.


Consequently, the need arose to develop a high shear rate viscometer to reflect the viscosity in engines under operating temperatures. In the early 1980s, an instrument and a technique were developed that could reach several million reciprocal seconds at 150 degrees C as well as exert high shear rates at other temperatures on both fresh and used engine oils. The instrument was called the tapered bearing simulator viscometer. The technique was accepted by ASTM as test method D4683 for use at 150 degrees C (and more recently as D6616 for use at 100 degrees C). This critical bench test of engine oil quality became known as high temperature, high shear rate (HTHS) viscosity. Minimum limits were then imposed for various grades in the SAE viscosity classification system.

Interestingly, it was later shown that this instrument was unique and basically absolute in providing measures of both shearing torque or shear stress and shear rate while operating. It is the only known viscometer capable of doing this.


So, Rat hack fundamental flaw is not making a test that understand this dynamic in engine oil. To heat oil to operating temp and do a one arm bandit and say this is the end all in engine oil testing is something a 9th grader would do. Your 15 minutes of fame is long over dude, if you want respect of the oil guys rolling around develop a long term high heat test that sees through low quality base oils, your test DOES NOT. How blind are you to not see this???

 

[Rampant]

Agreed, I don’t get why. My 5.7 ran fine on 5W-30 and never once had a temp problem. Intact I found it hard to get it up to 212*, the 6.4 on the other had with factory fill seems to have no problem getting to 212*.

Seems to me the research he has been doing isn’t as good as possible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He is correct, btw. BUT, moving up one grade isn't going to cause damage. Now if 0w-20 was recommended and you ran 20w-50, you'd obviously see issues.

The reason you see the difference in oil temps between the 6.4 and 5.7 is because the 6.4 has a oil/coolant heat exchanger built-in to the the oil filter mount and the 5.7 does not. Oil and coolant temps should always be pretty close in the 6.4 because of that.

 

[HammerHead]

So, Rat hack fundamental flaw is not making a test that understand this dynamic in engine oil. To heat oil to operating temp and do a one arm bandit and say this is the end all in engine oil testing is something a 9th grader would do. Your 15 minutes of fame is long over dude, if you want respect of the oil guys rolling around develop a long term high heat test that sees through low quality base oils, your test DOES NOT. How blind are you to not see this???

Why are you talking to someone that isn't here? The mechanical Engineer isn't on any forums.

So, Rat hack fundamental flaw is not making a test that understand this dynamic in engine oil. To heat oil to operating temp and do a one arm bandit and say this is the end all in engine oil testing is something a 9th grader would do. Your 15 minutes of fame is long over dude, if you want respect of the oil guys rolling around develop a long term high heat test that sees through low quality base oils, your test DOES NOT. How blind are you to not see this???

Why are you talking to someone that isn't here? The mechanical engineers oil testing site has a Questions and Answers section where you can ask question. He's very professional and always answers questions. I think that's a better option, other than pretending he's sees your comments, or pretending he's on this forum.

 

[Burla]

Why are you talking to someone that isn't here? The mechanical Engineer isn't on any forums.




Why are you talking to someone that isn't here? The mechanical engineers oil testing site has a Questions and Answers section where you can ask question. He's very professional and always answers questions. I think that's a better option, other than pretending he's sees your comments, or pretending he's on this forum.

Yawn hammer, I mean rat540. Read the link, hths is absolute, no other test reveales the weakness or strengths in base oil. Your spitting on hths shows your ignorance. You post that **** ad naseum, this is the response every time we see your garbage. You have insulted this board, we wont respond to you with respect, because you didn't earn any. You are a hack, that is why you didn't address the info I posted. Because to admit my criticism, means your entire test needs to be redone, and you don't have the sand to do it right. have a good day

 

[HammerHead]

Why hasn't this guy been banned yet?

Sent from my magic 5-inch

Banned? Banned?

I'm actually in the field racing and test theory's making them facts. I'm writing letters to the manufacturing plant in Mexico, writing letters to the corporate office in Michigan, writing letters to the corporate office in the united kingdom and getting Answers. What are you doing?

I found the mechanical engineers oil testing site last year and it is full of really good information. My advice to you is go to the site and educate yourself.

 

[Burla]

Banned? Banned?

I'm actually in the field racing and test theory's making them facts. I'm writing letters to the manufacturing plant in Mexico, writing letters to the corporate office in Michigan, writing letters to the corporate office in the united kingdom and getting Answers. What are you doing?

I found the mechanical engineers oil testing site last year and it is full of really good information. My advice to you is go to the site and educate yourself.

I suggest you open your close mind and look at what hths reveals about your oils. If you want to test the quality of a base oil, hths is absolute. Tell your engineer, to go back to the drawing board.

 

[HammerHead]

Yawn hammer, I mean rat540. Read the link, hths is absolute, no other test reveales the weakness or strengths in base oil. Your spitting on hths shows your ignorance. You post that **** ad naseum, this is the response every time we see your garbage. You have insulted this board, we wont respond to you with respect, because you didn't earn any. You are a hack, that is why you didn't address the info I posted. Because to admit my criticism, means your entire test needs to be redone, and you don't have the sand to do it right. have a good day

The Mechanical Engineers Credentials:

Mechanical Engineer

U.S. Patent Holder (Mechanical device designed for Military Jet Aircraft)

Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)

Member ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)

Lifelong Gear Head, Mechanic, Hotrodder, Drag Racer, and Engine Builder

What are yours?

 

[Burla]

Yawn hammer, why is it that on cue you and shoot2kill post in tandem? And I wouldn't believe a word you post, and again you are ignoring the criticism, I posted from machinelube, does your horse post in white paper publications? didn't think so = hack

if you want to talk, try discussing how your test tests base oils better then hths?

 

[HammerHead]

Got home from work to find an entire box of oil kits from Blackstone. I only asked for a few kits so getting a box was a pleasant surprise. What a great company. If some of you decide to get your oil tested consider Blackstone Laboratories.

 

[SHOOT2KILL]

Kinda hard to prove hey? You could never prove that an oil caused a failure, and all oil guys have been saying that for twenty years or better. A large % of the oil guys at Bob's use the cheapest oil they can for that exact reason, and it is a legitimate strategy. The application of a gas engine is very forgiving and has always been.

However, modern engines have had many more issues with oils because they have pushed the limits and oil formulations can cause problems. You have heard of low saps, the movement of low calcium oils? You know for the first time ever Cummins recommends lubricity additives because of what the gov't has done to fuel? That Ram changed the oil recommendations for the eco diesel because of wide spread damage?

Things change man, it has never been more necessary to consider lubrication then ever before. I'm 100% sure if you had an engine failure, you wouldn't blame the oil. Also btw, seams like hemi tick numbers that have led to cam/lifter fails have been widespread. As documented on this board there was a point that 6 in a row were non moly oils. Now is that "proof", NO. But those guys will never know if they had a high moly oil if that would have been the case.

What did Ram do in response to all of this with the hemi? They made a hemi specific oil with super high moly- PUP 0w40 made by pennzoil with FCA cooperation. What do those engineers know that we don't? Have a good day

YAWN

 

[69GWC]

Ha coming from a guy with multiple screen names.

 

[HammerHead]

This is one of the reason I like the oil testing site, he talks about guys like this and is one of the reason he started his own independent oil testing procedures. Not sure why this guy is wanting "Me" to debate base oil and criticism with him. It's not my testing. He could easily debate with the qualified professional himself instead of name calling and insulting people that disagree with him. Only independent test I did was the viscosity test while racing. And wrote letters to the manufacturer. The results are what they are. I bet money if Redline was in the top 10 on the oil testing sights they would be prasing it.

Side note: How do you like that 2500HD 6.4? I almost got a 3500 with the 6.4, CC with the long bed. Almost!

 

[Burla]

You silly individuals haven't bothered to see how little redline is talked about lately. Some dude asked a question and it was answered and you girls whine like weasels about redline, lol. OH btw the answer was not what he had thought, that redline was the only oil with low or no vii's. Go back and look at the last few pages, lol. pathetic

 

[SHOOT2KILL]

This is one of the reason I like the oil testing site, he talks about guys like this and is one of the reason he started his own independent oil testing procedures. Not sure why this guy is wanting "Me" to debate base oil and criticism with him. It's not my testing. He could easily debate with the qualified professional himself instead of name calling and insulting people that disagree with him. Only independent test I did was the viscosity test while racing. And wrote letters to the manufacturer. The results are what they are. I bet money if Redline was in the top 10 on the oil testing sights they would be prasing it.

Side note: How do you like that 2500HD 6.4? I almost got a 3500 with the 6.4, CC with the long bed. Almost!

My 14 previous 3500 dually silverados were a far superior engineered severe duty trucks compared to this RAM P.O.S.

It goes back in the shop next week for more warrenty work...

 

[69GWC]

My 14 previous 3500 dually silverados were a far superior engineered severe duty trucks compared to this RAM P.O.S.

It goes back in the shop next week for more warrenty work...

You say this like anyone on here cares.

 

[Burla]

Hammer-Shoot2kill-rat540 all the same guy and we all know it. Even when you are hit with the fallacy of what rat540 tests omits and that he it she is completely wrong about hths, all you do is attack. Your test is flawed, you are posting bad information. Go back to the drawing board.

 

[Burla]

The results are what they are. I bet money if Redline was in the top 10 on the oil testing sights they would be praising it.

Such an ignorant statement. I use science to break down every argument. If redline was in your top ten there would be a reason you likely wouldn't understand. You never bothered to ask why Prolong was the top two in your test. It is branch chain lubrication you twit. Oil molecules can't compete with branch chain molecules. But when the branches break those molecules are less then base oil as far as lubrication and shear go. If you had any honor, you would thank me for explaining this **** to you. Instead of doubling down on what makes a good oil. Notice, I never doubted your results, only helped you to understand why different oils are having different results. Branch Chain Lubrication, good for very short intervals, horrible for long intervals.