PDA

View Full Version : Amsoil vs. Mobile 1



Cue-Ball
01-24-2006, 03:00 PM
They Say Nothing Outperforms Mobil 1? Wrong!

http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/asl_200h.jpg




AMSOIL INC. set out to examine the specifics of the overly broad “Nothing Outperforms...” Mobil claim. AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil (ASL) and Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil were analyzed in five key bench tests measuring motor oil performance: NOACK volatility, flash/fire point, pour point, four ball wear and total base number (TBN). As shown in the charts below, AMSOIL outperformed Mobil 1 in all five areas.


NOACK Volatility

The NOACK Volatility Test determines the evaporation loss of lubricants in high-temperature service. The more motor oils vaporize, the thicker and heavier they become, contributing to poor circulation, reduced fuel economy, increased oil consumption and excessive wear and emissions. A maximum of 15 percent evaporation loss is allowable to meet the API SL and ILSAC GF-3 specifications. As shown in the graph, AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil lost an extremely low 4.9 percent of its original weight during high-temperature service, maintaining its superior protective and performance qualities,while Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil lost 9.17 percent of its original weight.


http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/noack.jpg


Four Ball Wear


The Four Ball Wear Test determines the wear protection properties of a lubricant by measuring the wear scars produced by four metal balls in sliding contact under the test parameters. The smaller the average wear scar, the better the wear protection provided by the lubricant. As shown in the graph, AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil completed the Four Ball Wear Test producing a smaller wear scar than the Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil.


http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/4ball.jpg

Flash/Fire Point


The Flash/Fire Point Test determines the lowest temperatures at which application of a flame will cause lubricant vapors to ignite (flash point) and sustain burning for five seconds (fire point). Lubricants with higher flash and fire points exhibit more stable volatility characteristics and are safer to use and transport. As shown in the graph, AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil has higher flash and fire points than does Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil.


http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/flashfire.jpg

Pour Point


The Pour Point Test determines the lowest temperature at which a lubricant flows.The lower a lubricant’s pour point,the better protection it provides in low-temperature service.As shown in the graph, AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil has a lower pour point than Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil.


http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/pourpoint.jpg

Total Base Number


Total Base Number (TBN) is the measurement of a lubricant’s reserve alkalinity. The higher a motor oil’s TBN, the more effective it is in handling contaminants and reducing the corrosive effects of acids for an extended period of time. As shown in the graph, AMSOIL 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil has a higher TBN than Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30 Motor Oil.


http://www.synthetic-oil-tech.com/d.cgi/1102880/images/tbn.jpg


Mobil will not recommend or guarantee 25,000 mile/1-year drain intervals like AMSOIL 5W-30, 10W-30 or 10W-40 or 35,000 mile/1-year drain intervals like AMSOIL 0W-30 Severe Service Synthetic does and that is a fact. No-where on the Mobil bottle does it state 25,000 miles/1-year or 35,000 miles/1-year.

Mobil 1 has run the tag line for their advertising stating "nothing outperforms Mobil 1". Mobil makes a good oil, but I'm here to tell you that it does not outperform Amsoil Synthetic Oils. They can come out with all the catchy advertising buzz words to market their oils, but in the final analysis, buzz words don't add one thing to their product's performance. The only reason Amsoil has continued to grow and prosper competing with large corporations like Mobil is that AMSOIL products have consistently performed better.

Here's a special excerpt from A.J. Amaturio, President of AMSOIL, as written in the monthly AMSOIL Action News magazine to all AMSOIL Dealers regarding AMSOIL and Mobil 1:

"As most of you are aware. Mobil 1 was introduced after AMSOIL had paved the way for synthetic motor oils back in the '70's. When it was introduced it cased great concern among many of our Dealers. But in my Presidents Message at the time, I assured everyone that having Mobil 1 on the market would only help us sell more oil. Mobil confirmed everything we had been saying about synthetic oils, and our products and claims instantly became more credible.

Since then, we have always been compared to Mobil 1. When people think of synthetic motor oil, they think of Amsoil and Mobil 1, not the other Johnny-come-lately's that have come on the market more recently. I have always said that Mobil 1 is a good motor oil, because compared to the run-of-the-mill motor oils on the market, it is. I have also always said that AMSOIL motor oil is better, again, because it is. Mobil makes their oils to run at normal drain intervals while we make ours for extended drain intervals, and therein lies the difference. Their oils don't have to be as good as ours, so they are not.

To prove that point, we ran a number of comparative tests on our 5W-30 and Mobil 1 SuperSyn 5W-30. The test results are published in this Action News, and they confirm what I have been saying all along. AMSOIL makes a better motor oil.

These test results show significant differences between the oils. Look at the results of the NOACK Volatility Test. Which synthetic oil is going to last longer in service? Look at the difference in Total Base Numbers. Again, which oil is going to provide the longest lasting protection? Look at the Four Ball Wear Test. Which oil will protect against engine wear better? In every category we tested, Amsoil proved superior. Lower pour point, higher flash and fire points, AMSOIL tested best.

So when I hear claims that nothing outperforms Mobil 1, I have to say "wrong!". They may have good slogans and marketing hype, but when it comes to superior performance, I say nothing beats AMSOIL!"

grnd93
01-24-2006, 03:30 PM
I assured everyone that having Mobil 1 on the market would only help us sell more oil. Mobil confirmed everything we had been saying about synthetic oils, and our products and claims instantly became more credible.


Interesting.......

zj-monster
01-24-2006, 07:20 PM
Intersting yes. It's good marketing actually. When a company comes out with a new product, it usually has a hard time making any press until another manufacturer markets it also. That's when the general public starts showing any interest in the new product.

After the sales start, then it becomes an advertisement war on who makes the best of this product. Of course all advertisement becomes psychological.

Unfortunatly, it's up to us, the public, to do the proper research and decide for ourselves who makes the best. I say unfortunate because the majority of drivers are not mechanically inclined & therefore will believe that Mobile 1 does outperform better.

It's kinda cool that the president of amsoil thought this way.

Anyway, this is just me ranting away. :smt016

Cue-Ball
01-24-2006, 07:26 PM
I agree it usually ends up in who does the best job marketing.

CurtP
01-25-2006, 08:16 PM
Ugh. I know you're a dealer, and I know you're excited about Amsoil, but they are just as guilty at marketing hype as all the other oil manufacturers (well, nobody is as bad as Castrol with their "synthetic" conventional). I really wish they'd stop using antiquated tests and results from unrealistic situations that will never be seen in real world situations in a standard automotive IC engine. I'd rather see the new TFOUT (oxidation resistance) and FALEX (pin and V-block test) results from the independant labs. The only results I have are from a couple of years ago when Amsoil still couldn't get API certification because of the excessive phosphorus content, which, as I understand it, has been corrected.

I'm in no way saying that Amsoil is bad oil. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from their choice of any oil and I'm not singing the praises of Mobil 1 (or any brand for that matter). I just wish the industry, as a whole, would clean up their act. While I'm dreaming, I also wish more people would learn better lubrication handling techniques and quit doing 3k/3mo oil change intervals (haven't these mouth breathers ever heard of oil analysis?).

I'll go back to shutting the fuck up now http://forums.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/leaving.gif

Cue-Ball
01-25-2006, 08:23 PM
Curt I agree that it is all about marketing.

I also agree that there needs to be more real world testing, I do know that there is a case of a big rig going 409,000 without an oil change with Amsoil (that is pretty real world to me), and I have gone over 25,000 miles in my Grand before an oil change.

I send samples in for independant testing every 4k miles now, and will simply change it when they tell me too.

CurtP
01-25-2006, 08:52 PM
As I'm sure you know, but maybe others do not, the big rigs that are on such long OCI's are running surface filters (and Amsoil has some kick-ass surface filters) and are having OA performed on a regular basis. Considering how much oil those engines take and the associated cost, I'd want to get as much out of my oil too!

I establish baselines with my vehicles. I do two short OCI's using my oil of choice, then after the third change, pull a sample every 2.5k until it shows that it is getting near the end of servicable life. On the following oil change, I pull a sample at half service life, then at half of the remainder and at the final. If it is consistant, then that is my baseline for that vehicle. From there, I usually only pull a sample anually or near at the end of the oil service life, depending on if the oil ends up needing to be changed by mileage or time.

For those who think oil analysis is too expensive, I end up saving more long-term over doing short OCI's. I've also had an analysis identify problems that were resolved before it caused permanent damage (which would be considerably more expensive to fix).

nate
01-25-2006, 09:02 PM
The thing though, is that oil analysis is about the cost of an oil change for a Jeep... so IMO you don't save money.

How much oil does a big rig hold?

My truck holds 3 gallons and it's $7 a gallon, so really not that bad. Filter is like $10. I change every 5000 miles. Granted I'm not putting 5000 miles on it in 2 weeks either like a big rig might.

grnd93
01-26-2006, 12:14 AM
I've been running synthetics for a few years. The hardest habit for me to break has been the 3000 mile oil change.

When I turned wrenches for the Air Force all the vehicles basically got a LOF (lube, oil, filter) a minimum of twice a year. We never did sampling, and ran 15w40 in just about everything. Of course we really didn't care about wasing money....your tax dollars at work.

CurtP
01-26-2006, 10:19 AM
Basic OA from most places is around $20 (I use Blackstone Labs). It costs me a minimum of $30 to do an oil change (oil and filter, using a premium, but non-exotic, synthetic oil). The only time I really spend more on testing is during baseline. I will admit that if I'm using a previously proven oil, I will normally skip the 2.5k, 5k and sometimes the 7.5k tests (again, dependant on type/series of oil and the vehicle's use). So it usually ends up being 4 or 5 OAs for baseline. So on 20k miles driven, I've spent $130 ($30 oil change, $20 10k, $20 12.5k, $20 15k, $20 17.5k, $20 20k). Using a short OCI, I'd have spent $180 ($30 3k, $30 6k, $30 9k, $30 12k, $30 15k, $30 18k). Even extending OCI to 5k, it's still $120 ($30 5k, $30 10k, $30 15k, $30 20k), so I've only saved $10 during my baseline.

Can you see how the saving will stack up once the baseline is done? I drive an average of 20k mi/yr per vehicle. If I'm on a 20k oil change interval, the entire year costs me $50 in oil ($30 oil change, one $20 OA). Using 3k OCI, I would have spent $180 (with no OA) and $120 on a 5k OCI (with no OA). Considering we have four vehicles in our household, the costs add up quickly (all but one of them is a daily driver).

Cue-Ball
01-26-2006, 12:09 PM
Basic OA from most places is around $20 (I use Blackstone Labs). It costs me a minimum of $30 to do an oil change (oil and filter, using a premium, but non-exotic, synthetic oil). The only time I really spend more on testing is during baseline. I will admit that if I'm using a previously proven oil, I will normally skip the 2.5k, 5k and sometimes the 7.5k tests (again, dependant on type/series of oil and the vehicle's use). So it usually ends up being 4 or 5 OAs for baseline. So on 20k miles driven, I've spent $130 ($30 oil change, $20 10k, $20 12.5k, $20 15k, $20 17.5k, $20 20k). Using a short OCI, I'd have spent $180 ($30 3k, $30 6k, $30 9k, $30 12k, $30 15k, $30 18k). Even extending OCI to 5k, it's still $120 ($30 5k, $30 10k, $30 15k, $30 20k), so I've only saved $10 during my baseline.

Can you see how the saving will stack up once the baseline is done? I drive an average of 20k mi/yr per vehicle. If I'm on a 20k oil change interval, the entire year costs me $50 in oil ($30 oil change, one $20 OA). Using 3k OCI, I would have spent $180 (with no OA) and $120 on a 5k OCI (with no OA). Considering we have four vehicles in our household, the costs add up quickly (all but one of them is a daily driver).

I too use Blackstone labs, I do not do the baseline test that Curt does but I do regular 4k sampling.

Curt you really nailed the savings on the head, this is what I try to get across to people that yes synthetic costs a little more per quart, BUT you save over time.

CurtP
01-26-2006, 04:57 PM
I dropped an e-mail to a buddy of mine who has given me test results in the past. I haven't heard back from him yet. I asked about Mobil 1, Lubrication Engineers, Amsoil, Redline, Royal Purple, Castrol Syntec (both US and EU versions), Valvoline, Quaker, Penzoil and Case IH. He doesn't work for an independant lab though.

If anyone is interested in learning more, threre are several free e-mail newsletters and magazine subscriptions available from LNG Publishing (Lubes-n-Greases Magazine) and Noria. Here's a link to past Lube-Tip newsletters: http://www.lube-tips.com/backissues.html

Krash80
01-26-2006, 06:01 PM
Interesting test and results, but I'm also curious as to what the test would look like if it were performed by Mobil 1. It's hard as a consumer to rely on a test that's performed by one of the manufacturers whose products are being tested. I find myself wondering what other sorts of tests can be done on oil and what those results would show, and did Amsoil only display the tests in which it excelled?

I'm not saying I don't believe the test results or that Amsoil is not the best oil, I'm just saying there's always a bias when a test like this is performed.

I'd really like to see how other oils, especially non-synthetics compare in similar tests. The graphs on these tests are a bit misleading...in some of the tests, Mobil 1's results are very close to Amsoil, but when the graph is zoomed in so far, it portrays an astronomical difference between the two oils. If Amsoil is supposedly the BEST oil available, then it looks to me like Mobil 1 is pretty damn good stuff if it scored as close as it did in some of these tests.

Cue-ball-
I hope you don't take what I'm saying the wrong way and think I'm knocking your product, cause that's definitely not my intention, I'm just saying that I am not "sold" yet on Amsoil. I've always used Castrol Syntec and Mobil 1 Synthetic oils in all my vehicles (except my trucks), and have had very good luck with both of them. For example, when I pulled apart the engine on my ZJ at 180k miles after drowning it and bending a connecting rod, the insides of the motor still looked like new. The cylinder walls, rings, valves, etc all looked like new and when measured with calipers had basically no detectable wear. That motor had Castrol Syntec 10w30 used in it since it was new. I'll continue to use that oil in my jeep until that motor is toast cause it certainly has been doing a good job so far.

For most of my other vehicles though, it doesn't seem to me like it's worth screwing around with ordering oil and sending in oil analyses because even if the motor lasts forever in the vehicle, the rest of the vehicle only has so long of a useful life until it rusts out or wears out beyond the point of me wanting to own it anymore.

When I change my oil, I usually just wait until a rainy day or weekend when I'm not working and then spontaneously decide I'm going to do oil changes that day and then I cruise down the road to K-mart or Autozone and pick up my oil and filters and come home and do oil changes.

I may be someone that you want to convince to use Amsoil though. I run a small trucking business with three "big-rigs," each of which takes 30-40 quarts of oil, and I'll be leaving for Sam's club shortly to pick up a 55-gallon drum of Rotella 15-40. From what I understand (have been told), Rotella has the "ingredients" in it that a severe service diesel engine needs, and other oils like Castrol Syntec do not and are only meant to be used in gasoline engines. Is Amsoil made to be used in diesels like Rotella?

I know very little about motor oils other than what has worked for me and what others have had good luck with, but I go through a helluva lot of it. Since you're an Amsoil distributor, I'd appreciate it if you could teach me more about your oil and convince me that it really makes more sense, both economically and conveniently, to use your oil instead of my Castrol/Mobil/Rotella. My cars I'm not that concerned about...they're pretty much "disposable," but my big diesels I want to last forever...they're my main source of income.

-Ron-

Cue-Ball
01-26-2006, 08:31 PM
Ron,

No offence taken.

But to answer your question YES Amsoil is made to run the big rigs, there was even an independant test of a big rig going 409,000 miles with NO oil changes.
Amsoil also carries the 30 and 55 gallon drums so having that shipped out to you would be NO problem.

Let me know if your interested, I can get you a price and some more info on the 409k test.

Dirk

jsteves
01-26-2006, 08:39 PM
again, not to offend, but no matter how good the tests look i can't see leaving the same oil in my jeep for anywhere close to 25k no matter what oil it is.

Cue-Ball
01-26-2006, 09:05 PM
again, not to offend, but no matter how good the tests look i can't see leaving the same oil in my jeep for anywhere close to 25k no matter what oil it is.

If the oil test comes back good WHY would you change it??

nate
01-26-2006, 09:06 PM
Now let's say in those 20,000 miles you used regualar oil. It's $2.50 a quart and the filter is $6.

Every 3k is 6.66 oil changes. Oil changes costs $21. 6.66 x 21= $138.60





Basic OA from most places is around $20 (I use Blackstone Labs). It costs me a minimum of $30 to do an oil change (oil and filter, using a premium, but non-exotic, synthetic oil). The only time I really spend more on testing is during baseline. I will admit that if I'm using a previously proven oil, I will normally skip the 2.5k, 5k and sometimes the 7.5k tests (again, dependant on type/series of oil and the vehicle's use). So it usually ends up being 4 or 5 OAs for baseline. So on 20k miles driven, I've spent $130 ($30 oil change, $20 10k, $20 12.5k, $20 15k, $20 17.5k, $20 20k). Using a short OCI, I'd have spent $180 ($30 3k, $30 6k, $30 9k, $30 12k, $30 15k, $30 18k). Even extending OCI to 5k, it's still $120 ($30 5k, $30 10k, $30 15k, $30 20k), so I've only saved $10 during my baseline.

Can you see how the saving will stack up once the baseline is done? I drive an average of 20k mi/yr per vehicle. If I'm on a 20k oil change interval, the entire year costs me $50 in oil ($30 oil change, one $20 OA). Using 3k OCI, I would have spent $180 (with no OA) and $120 on a 5k OCI (with no OA). Considering we have four vehicles in our household, the costs add up quickly (all but one of them is a daily driver).

CurtP
01-27-2006, 12:01 AM
Now let's say in those 20,000 miles you used regualar oil. It's $2.50 a quart and the filter is $6.

Every 3k is 6.66 oil changes. Oil changes costs $21. 6.66 x 21= $138.60

I'm missing your point - that's still considerably more than what it costs me to run a full synthetic for the same mileage. 20k miles @ $30 for an oil change comes out to $50/yr, and that includes having a basic OA performed. Not to mention I'm not on my back all the time changing oil (and going through the hassle of having to dispose of all that oil). Plus, extended drain intervals are only part of the benefits of running a good synthetic oil.

I was even nice in my above examples - I didn't even factor in the .66 oil change (I stopped at 18,000 miles just for the sake of simplicity).

I think I should clarify something while I'm here. Just because an oil is labled as a synthetic, doesn't make it good. Just because it's a conventional, doesn't make it bad. Modern engine oils are very complex and work as a system in itself. The quality of an oil depends on how well it's refined and the additive package used. Some oils are even allowed to be called a synthetic despite them being conventionally based. Semi-synthetic is a misnomer - they should be called semi-conventional. With one exception, all the semi's that I know of have less than 10% synthetic content. With the same exception, I haven't heard of one semi that could even make it through FALEX and most have the same low TFOUT numbers of a regular conventional (not really much of a surprise if you think about the composition). Yet semi's cost 3/4 - 2/3 the amount of a full syn.

One thing seems to be pretty consistant though - typically the cost of an oil is an indication on how well it's made. If it's cheap, there's a reason.

nate
01-27-2006, 12:13 AM
I misread your post.

I don't put enough miles on the Jeep to bother with syntethic. Maybe 1000 miles a year. I change everything out once or twice a year, depending on what fluid.

nathaniel
01-27-2006, 01:27 AM
Anybody ever seen any tests on Walmart brand full synthetic? Really curious as to its quality. Currently using walmarts synthetic and changing the oil every 5k. If oil analysis wasn't so expensive I'd have it done.

CurtP
01-27-2006, 12:51 PM
Wal*Mart = lowest bidder, and who knows what kind of quality you're getting each time you buy it. I haven't seen independents test store-brands and I'd venture to say it's because of their inconsistancy.

I always run (and recommend) a well-known, proven lubricant.

Cue-Ball
01-27-2006, 01:43 PM
I always run (and recommend) a well-known, proven lubricant.

I agree 100%, I am not going to say that you have to use Amsoil, but please use something of quality and something you feel comfortable with.

jsteves
01-27-2006, 06:29 PM
If the oil test comes back good WHY would you change it??

because i like to change my oil before it breaks down and loses substantial viscosity...not after

Cue-Ball
01-27-2006, 06:35 PM
because i like to change my oil before it breaks down and loses substantial viscosity...not after

I understand that but if the test comes back good you are still BEFORE.

jsteves
01-27-2006, 07:35 PM
edit


I understand that but IF the test comes back good you are still BEFORE.

plus sending those souns like a PITA

Cue-Ball
01-27-2006, 07:37 PM
Honestly it is not really that difficult or time consuming.

nate
01-27-2006, 08:27 PM
It's interesting on just about every board I visit, once someone makes a post about Amsoil, it starts an "oil war". Myself, I sit on the fence. I would run Amsoil if it weren't so darn expensive.

Personally though, I would rather change the oil more often, just cause I like to see what's going on... or the oil get's dumped out to work on something anyhow.

CurtP
01-28-2006, 12:14 PM
I didn't see any "oil war". I just posted that I didn't like the way oil manufacturers twist things around to show in their favor (I know, marketing does that to EVERYTHING, not just oil). My problem with this is oils that routinely do very well with industry standard tests are still using advertising bullshit instead of standing on their own merits. It may look like I'm bashing Amsoil, but I'm not - it really is a great oil with good FALEX wear numbers and high TFOUT. Mobil 1 is another great oil, as is Lubrication Engineer's. Of these top three oils, LE is the only one that isn't so blatent with their advertising (but aren't completely innocent either).

An even bigger pet peeve of mine is the end-users. Everything is done by routines that were set decades ago when oil was cheap and not well refined. Modern blends are leaps and bounds better than what was available even just ten years ago. With recent ILSAC GF-4 and the soon-to-be GF-5 on the horizon, there is just no good reason to stick with short OCI's anymore. I am the last one to be called a tree hugger, but short OCI's are a huge burden both economically and environmentally. Even oil filter technology has evolved to be able to support longer drain intervals. Oil choice and change frequency is like religion and is often based on myths and habit despite factual information that supports otherwise. Even things that are so simple such as OA is beat down with "it's too much of a PITA" or "it's too expensive" when in fact it is cheaper and easier than an oil change. You don't even have to get under the car to pull a sample - it can be taken right out of the dipstick tube with an inexpensive pump. Some people even find an oil passage plug and use a small valve to make taking samples even easier.

Reality is, with a high quality oil and a good full-flow oil filter, oil changes can safely be extended many times over. Add a surface filter in the mix and oil changes can go even further. The ROI on such systems is actually pretty short. I know with OA and better oils, I have saved a huge amount of money and time.

Of course, to be able to go to a long OCI, you'll need to make sure the supporting hardware is up to the task too. Air filters, quality of fuel, condition of the cylinder walls, piston rings and cylinder head(s) all play a role too. That's why OA is so important - it lets you know exactly what is happening and how well everything is working together as a system.

Cue-Ball
01-28-2006, 06:11 PM
Curt,
What do you do for a living?

Dirk

CurtP
01-28-2006, 09:01 PM
Curt,
What do you do for a living?

Dirk

Do I need to shut my big mouth? :D

I'm studying for my ICML lubrication and oil analysis certification, but I don't work in the lubrication field (yet). Right now I make a living being a Cisco Network Engineer. Not exactly related fields, are they? :rolleyes:

Hope I haven't been too much of a dick in this thread :smt075

Krash80
01-29-2006, 04:16 AM
Of course, to be able to go to a long OCI, you'll need to make sure the supporting hardware is up to the task too. Air filters, quality of fuel, condition of the cylinder walls, piston rings and cylinder head(s) all play a role too. That's why OA is so important - it lets you know exactly what is happening and how well everything is working together as a system.

I think you touched something here that many people w/ off-road vehicles overlook...the AIR filters. If you're running dirty/bad air filters, you can be doing WAY more damage to your engine than you realize even if you change your oil religiously.

Cue-Ball
01-29-2006, 11:48 AM
Do I need to shut my big mouth? :D

I'm studying for my ICML lubrication and oil analysis certification, but I don't work in the lubrication field (yet). Right now I make a living being a Cisco Network Engineer. Not exactly related fields, are they? :rolleyes:

Hope I haven't been too much of a dick in this thread :smt075

No NOT at all Curt, I really like the open exchange and the attitude you have displayed.

You are right a network engineer to lube tech is a bit of a difference, but what the hell what every works for you.

And no you have not been a dick at all.

CurtP
01-29-2006, 12:13 PM
I think you touched something here that many people w/ off-road vehicles overlook...the AIR filters. If you're running dirty/bad air filters, you can be doing WAY more damage to your engine than you realize even if you change your oil religiously.

All I have to say is to those that insist on running a conical filter, PLEASE use a K&N Drycharger with it! I really wish someone would make disposable paper conical filters :(


Thanks Dirk - I try to keep my mouth shut when it comes to lubrication. I've been banned on other boards over some of my oil posts before, so I when I post now, I try to tread lightly. I know I won't convince people with what I say - perception is reality and if they perceive that what they use and how they use it is the best, then there is no changing their minds. Since this is a smaller board and seem to be more open minded when it comes to new ideas, I thought I would post. I didn't get such a warm welcome over on the 'Vette, F-body and BMW message boards. The other Jeep message boards weren't so friendly either.

I've been waiting for someone to post about bobistheoilguy.com. Years ago, it wasn't a bad site, provided you could read between the lines of some of the posts. Then someone figured out it was a Schaeffer Oil ran site, then there was a sudden "conflict of interest" and the helm was passed over to someone who didn't work for Schaeffer (but it is still sponsored by them and sways heavily in their favor). I'd rather get my information from publications and periodicals from inside the industry then parse through all the bullshit from the KIA's on BITOG, but that's just me :D

nate
01-29-2006, 02:07 PM
This if from a 30 page paper from Cummins on getting better fuel mileage. I thought it was interesting.

Lubricants


While the efficiency of drivetrain components is largely fixed by design, gross efficiency losses can be minimized through proper selection of lubricants. Synthetic base lubricants are manufactured in the laboratory to exhibit superior high temperature stability and low temperature fluidity. Since these fluids are created to exhibit less thickening at low temperatures, pumping losses are reduced and substantial reductions
in spin losses can be realized at low operating temperatures.
Test results indicate no significant difference in engine efficiency between synthetic and mineral base lube oils at normal operating temperatures. Since the synthetics are more expensive and, in an engine crankcase, are subject to the same contaminants as mineralbased oils, they may not be cost effective. All oils thicken at low temperature, causing increased fuel consumption. The synthetic oil is less affected by temperature. This makes synthetic oils more fuel efficient at lower ambient
temperatures.

Krash80
01-29-2006, 06:11 PM
Aside from efficiency, one thing to point out from what Nate just posted, is that since synthetics are less affected by temperature, they PROTECT the engine far better at lower temperatures than mineral oils. More damage occurs to an engine in the first few seconds of starting it cold than occurs over several hours of running the engine warm (this could be an exaggeration, but regardless, starting an engine is one of the worst things for it), so it's really important to have an oil that protects the motor when it's cold.

Cue-Ball
01-29-2006, 06:57 PM
All I have to say is to those that insist on running a conical filter, PLEASE use a K&N Drycharger with it! I really wish someone would make disposable paper conical filters :(


Thanks Dirk - I try to keep my mouth shut when it comes to lubrication. I've been banned on other boards over some of my oil posts before, so I when I post now, I try to tread lightly. I know I won't convince people with what I say - perception is reality and if they perceive that what they use and how they use it is the best, then there is no changing their minds. Since this is a smaller board and seem to be more open minded when it comes to new ideas, I thought I would post. I didn't get such a warm welcome over on the 'Vette, F-body and BMW message boards. The other Jeep message boards weren't so friendly either.

I've been waiting for someone to post about bobistheoilguy.com. Years ago, it wasn't a bad site, provided you could read between the lines of some of the posts. Then someone figured out it was a Schaeffer Oil ran site, then there was a sudden "conflict of interest" and the helm was passed over to someone who didn't work for Schaeffer (but it is still sponsored by them and sways heavily in their favor). I'd rather get my information from publications and periodicals from inside the industry then parse through all the bullshit from the KIA's on BITOG, but that's just me :D

Curt you are right this is a smaller board (hopefully we will grow in the future), so we are failry open minded ESPECIALLY when someone like yourself states fact and has backup for that better than "I have a friend who heard it from their brothers best friends cousin that synthetics cause XXX"
You brought first hand knowlege as I try to always do and that is ALWAYS welcomed, all to often most of the stuff you read on the boards is all conjecture and bullshit.

Thanks for being open about your thoughts, and you are right some people will never have their minds changed and well, that's fine also.

CurtP
02-01-2006, 10:40 PM
This if from a 30 page paper from Cummins on getting better fuel mileage. I thought it was interesting.

That is an interesting take on using a conventional over a synthetic, but I do have a couple of comments. The way it reads for me is that they're specifically discussing the cost benefits of a conventional following a short OCI. It also seems that they're still throwing out that there is a bene of running synthetic in low temprature conditions. It also fails to go into any other details or specifications about what grade/series of oil they're actually talking about. I'd have to read the whole thing to get a better grasp at what they're actually trying to say. What is the date of that document and what engine(s) did it cover?

It does appear that Cummins is taking a very conservative OCI stance on some engines. They say something to the effect that the additive package in oil is depleted after 12 months. However, this was from 2001 and only seemed to apply to ISB and ISC engines as they were "untested" for extended OCI at the time.

I see on their web page that their current maintenance schedule for B & C midrange engines is to change the oil every 250 hours, 3 months or 6,000 miles (whichever occurs first), but I didn't see a reference to using a synthetic or conventional.

nate
02-01-2006, 11:19 PM
The B in the pickups is every 7500 miles. Not sure about the C

rob92xj
02-04-2006, 03:04 PM
The Dodge Ram 2500/3500 5.9 CRD Cummins is good for 7500 miles or 6 months for schedule "B" schedule "A" is 15000 or 12 months that is using Mopar 15W40 oil the Factory demo's use schedule "A" as they are used for durability testing and have to pass emissions at 80000 miles using the schedule "A". I beileive in using synthetic fluids and oils only but both my XJ and my wifes KJ use convensional oils. I'm not going to start using synthetic in a vehicle with over 200000 miles when I build my stroker for my XJ then it will get sythetic oil, my wifes KJ has a pre paid maintance plan and it uses conventional oil only.
My Ram gets a diet of Mobil 1 10W30 every 6 months or 6000 miles.
My Jeep and Ram get Mopar or Baldwin oil filters. Check this out http://people.msoe.edu/~yoderw/oilfilterstudy/oilfilterstudy.html
As for conical air filters I sold my K&N FIPK after I found my throttle body full of mud after wheeling with it after installing it, back to stock air box and drop in filter. AEM makes a sythetic air filter that is supposed to flow better and filter better than the cotton or paper filters. I need to find a part # for it so I can get one for my Jeep.
How many API grading tests does Amsoil pass? I know Mobil 1 passes the manufactures spec for oils they put there name on.

Cue-Ball
02-04-2006, 06:49 PM
How many API grading tests does Amsoil pass? I know Mobil 1 passes the manufactures spec for oils they put there name on.

I am going to have to check on that to tell you the truth.

CurtP
02-05-2006, 02:48 AM
API grading tests? Are you talking about the API certification marks? It used to be that Amsoil could not pass certification because it exceeded limitations for phosphates (which raises concern for catalytic converter poisoning). However, within the last few years, Amsoil has reformulated and are now certified on some of their oils (XLF, XLM, LXT, XL-7500 and PCO). However, I believe all those series are not meant for long OCI's (but are OK for extended OCI's). I am unaware of anyone being able to prove that Amsoil killed a catalytic converter with their uncertified oils, so I can't really say there is a huge amount of concern.

Even while Mobil meets API specifications, their full PAO based (Mobil 1, AKA "Extended Performance") still does not meet ILSAC GF-4. To be fair, long OCI Amsoil oils don't meet ILSAC GF-4 either (but their XLF, XLT, XLM and XLO series do).

API certifications are exaggerated and overrated. I'm more concerned about ILSAC specifications over API licensing. The whole API certification is confusing for the consumer and needs to be overhauled. All API certification means is that a certain series of oil is within certain limitations in a couple of areas and that the oil manufacturer has paid the dues to be called "API licensed" - it does not guarantee quality.

rob92xj
02-05-2006, 12:01 PM
Any oil left in a vehicle that does not meet GF-4 is know to cause excessive sludging in an engine. The problems Chrysler has had with the 2.7L engines was caused by GF-2 and 3 oils. Also for any oil to be endorsed by a vehicle manufacturer they have to meet 10/10 API grading tests most others only meet 8/10 to get the API rating.

nate
02-05-2006, 01:42 PM
I changed the oil in my Jeep yesterday and I almost put Mobile 1 in it... until I looked at the price. $13 for Castrol, $26 for Mobile. Yeah screw that shit.

rob92xj
02-05-2006, 02:26 PM
I changed the oil in my Jeep yesterday and I almost put Mobile 1 in it... until I looked at the price. $13 for Castrol, $26 for Mobile. Yeah screw that shit.
It costs me $25 for 6 qts of Mobil 1 at Wal-Mart, $33. at my job...ummmm guess where I buy it.
When I buy oil for my XJ it is usually Castrol 10W40 conventional.

nate
02-05-2006, 02:42 PM
It was at Walmart I got the oil. It's normally the cheapest there. If there would carry 5 gal buckets of 80w90 it would be nice.

CurtP
02-05-2006, 06:33 PM
Any oil left in a vehicle that does not meet GF-4 is know to cause excessive sludging in an engine.
Where did you come up with that nonsense?
:rofl:

rob92xj
02-05-2006, 11:41 PM
Diamler Chrysler engine class(cam in head and cam in block) and the causes of engine slugging. With the way the 2.7L engine was slugging they DC did research and found the same results Toyota found the properties of GF2 or 3 would allow an engine to sludge. GF-4 is a much more stable oil.

CurtP
02-06-2006, 10:03 AM
Someone is full of shit. GF-4 has not been out long enough for them to make a determination that it will prevent sludging long term. The GF-4 specification was delayed several times. Because of GF-4 testing problems, GF-4 oils were slow to market.


Now here's where I become a dick:

If they were using a shitty oil to begin with (like an SA), then I could see them having a problem. A good quality GF-3 (SM) that has a decent additive package will minimize sludging. I'd be more inclined to say that DC is passing blame for a fucked up engine design and/or them selling/installing obsolete oils at their dealerships so they don't have to take responsibility. Do you have a source for these claims?

GF-4 more "stable"? Exactly how is a GF-3 (or even a GF-2 for that matter) unstable? Do you even understand the GF-4 specification? The goal of GF-4 was to reduce sulfur and phosphorous maximums of .05% to meet new EPA Tier 2 bin 5 .07gm/mile NOx emission standards while reducing engine wear (and reduce suspected catalytic converter toxins). They didn't meet that goal. Phosphorous maximums are .08% (.06% minimum) and sulfur maximums vary depending on grade - it had to be done to make it compatible with older engines. If you're going to bring an argument to the table, please be prepared with the subject matter. Here is the GF-4 specification: http://www.ilma.org/resources/ilsac_finalstd011404.pdf
Here is report on low quality oils and sludge formation from ILMA: http://www.ilma.org/resources/impact_lowqualityoils.pdf

rob92xj
02-06-2006, 01:44 PM
The information I have is what the tell us at the training centers, I have seen less engine sluging using the newer GF-4 oils than when they were filled with GF-2 or 3 the problem was the sulfur content of the engine while sitting idle on a lot or just started and moved then shut off right away, I'm not an oil expert but I know what is good for a engine.

CurtP
02-06-2006, 10:02 PM
Fair enough - unfortunately I'm familiar with the crap that's passed out at these "training sessions". Much of it is nothing more than to cover their asses and shirk responsibity for either poor practices or poor design on their part. There's always neglect, but there's not much anyone can do to correct poor maintenance by the owner which is way too common of a problem.

I could see there being issues with poor-performing naphthenic based conventional oils, especially if there was any sort of maintenance neglect. For conventionals, I always recommend a Group II or II paraffinic based oil, but don't typically recommend long or extended OCI (dependant on brand and series used). It's difficult to give recommendations for specific brands unless it is known how the base oil was hydrocracked and what the balance of the three general hydrocarbons (paraffinic chains, cycloparaffins (naphthenes) and aromatics) is. Each one has a role in the finished product and it's a balance of these three hydrocarbons that affect the overall performance of an oil. How many mechanics have this knowledge? For that matter, how many people actually in the oil industry actually know - I don't! All I have to go by is what has performed well in standarized testing and in OA and even then it's different by application/usage/environment.

AprilzWarrior
02-07-2006, 12:45 PM
I'm not saying I don't believe the test results or that Amsoil is not the best oil, I'm just saying there's always a bias when a test like this is performed.


I'm just saying that I am not "sold" yet on Amsoil. For most of my other vehicles though, it doesn't seem to me like it's worth screwing around with ordering oil and sending in oil analyses because even if the motor lasts forever in the vehicle, the rest of the vehicle only has so long of a useful life until it rusts out or wears out beyond the point of me wanting to own it anymore.

I cruise down the road to K-mart or Autozone and pick up my oil and filters and come home and do oil changes.

-Ron-



Im sorry, Ive been helping to run JU for a few years now... and when a vendor gets slammed (thats what Im reading) in their own thread, thats not cool. Talk about your oil changes in another thread, etc.

You brought up some good point that I left out, but I wanted to focus on what I thought needs to be removed from this thread.

Ron, think of it this way... if this was your business, and you paid to advertise here, you would want the same respect.


Now that Ive said that, if no one else agrees I STFU.


Thanks
AW