2006 Toyota Tundra Mobil 1 EP 5W-30, 5,025 miles
- Thread starter btanchors
- Start date
- Status
Pablo -
Blackstone mails (i.e., US Postal Service Mail) the breakdown of particle counts for some reason...I get the main report via email, then the particle counts follow a few days later. I will update this post when the detailed results arrive...
Blackstone mails (i.e., US Postal Service Mail) the breakdown of particle counts for some reason...I get the main report via email, then the particle counts follow a few days later. I will update this post when the detailed results arrive...
Finally - Here are the complete UOA Particle Count results for the four UOAs above....
The fifth UOA will be using a Mobil 1 filter again. If those results are similar to the first two, I plan to stick with the Mobil 1 filters...
The fifth UOA will be using a Mobil 1 filter again. If those results are similar to the first two, I plan to stick with the Mobil 1 filters...
It appears that the M1 filter trounces the EaO for normal service intervals.
I think you really have something good going here. I would stick with the Mobil 1 filters simply because they seem to be just as good and they are cheaper.
All,
Though I am inclined to agree with BerndV's statement, the real "proof" will come with the next UOA. If the results using the Mobil 1 filter for the 5th UOA are similar to the first two (i.e., cleaner than the Amsoil EaO UOAs), then that would be more proof that it's the filter and not some strange coincidence or other trend.
Also - As was pointed out earlier, keep in mind the Amsoil filter (and really, the Mobil 1 filter as well) was designed for longer service intervals than what I am using them for. It could well be the Amsoil filters sacrifice some short-term filtering to enable a longer-term service life. I'm not stating this as a fact, just as a possibility. In other words, the results we are seeing could be by design on the part of Amsoil. It would be interesting to have someone repeat these same tests, but on a longer interval. However, it would take someone who drives *lots* of miles, otherwise the test could take years to do 5 UOAs, with each UOA interval 10-15K miles!
Though I am inclined to agree with BerndV's statement, the real "proof" will come with the next UOA. If the results using the Mobil 1 filter for the 5th UOA are similar to the first two (i.e., cleaner than the Amsoil EaO UOAs), then that would be more proof that it's the filter and not some strange coincidence or other trend.
Also - As was pointed out earlier, keep in mind the Amsoil filter (and really, the Mobil 1 filter as well) was designed for longer service intervals than what I am using them for. It could well be the Amsoil filters sacrifice some short-term filtering to enable a longer-term service life. I'm not stating this as a fact, just as a possibility. In other words, the results we are seeing could be by design on the part of Amsoil. It would be interesting to have someone repeat these same tests, but on a longer interval. However, it would take someone who drives *lots* of miles, otherwise the test could take years to do 5 UOAs, with each UOA interval 10-15K miles!
I am actually doing back-to-back M1 versus EaO particle counts on my 96 Camry UOA's. I already have the M1 results and will have EaO results within two months. Your results appear to demonstrate approximately three times the filtering efficiency for the M1 compared to the EaO. That is very impressive for a filter that can be purchased at Wal-Mart for under $10.00. With 100% synthetic media in the EaO, I would have expected the opposite. Perhaps the combination of synthetic and cellulose is the ideal for filter change intervals under 10k.
- Status
Similar threads
