What makes the whole thing useless is that the decision making process is based on a series of tests that don’t give a relevant answer.
2015 BMW N20 X1 UOA 5K MILES NON-EURO OIL: ROUND 2
- Thread starter KEVINK0000
- Start date
They also do their own standard because they also make some money to provide certification.
But, it's OP's engine. If the QS non-euro oil is so bad, maybe we should be expecting higher wear metal numbers for instance, or maybe the big dosage of Molybdenum is doing its job, based on 2 UOA's so far.
CleanSump
Site Donor 2022
In the original thread, the OP stated this is a hobby and he's testing a premise about European manufacturers approvals. I don't understand everyone getting wrapped around the axle about him destroying his engine.
Just an experiment that he wrote may or may not support a premise.
I'm more worried that my wife may wear holes in my socks.
Just an experiment that he wrote may or may not support a premise.
I'm more worried that my wife may wear holes in my socks.
What premise? I’m legitimately asking.
BS universal average of 27 FE after 6700 mi seems askew…
Plus experiments should employ tests that will eventually yield a valid conclusion, otherwise they are a waste of time at best and deceptive at worst.
CleanSump
Site Donor 2022
I can't answer for the OP. I surmise his premise is that the Euro standards are aimed at long OCIs and that the common standards that the major American and Japanese companies require are good enough for 5k miles.
Again, that's an assumption, I can't speak for him.
Just his hobby and his fun. I find it interesting to watch. However, it is not going to change what I use in my cars.
Let's keep it civil please. This idea is only valid if you accept or "manufacture" the premise that this oil will damage the engine, which I do not believe is the case. I wouldn't be using it if I had any reason at all to think it would damage the engine in some way.
Last edited:
I have a theory about that, from looking at as many UOA I could find with this engine. The early units with the original (flawed) timing chain components all had higher Fe. The retrofitted engines all had a marked drop in Fe, down to single digits in many cases. The presence of which may also tend to challenge some conventional wisdom on UOA wear numbers, if we delve into that also.
Last edited:
To clarify, the two samples submitted to BS and shown on this report were oils purchased months apart. The OAI report I hope to post today will be the same sample as the latest BS report. The first sample was almost all stop and go short trip usage. Like less than 5 miles per start. The second was more mixed but still had a lot of short trip.
D
Deleted member 89374
As you stated in the previous thread, your son owns the vehicle on which you're performing this experiment. Does your son know what you're doing to his vehicle? How about the fact that your actions are morally wrong? Or how about the fact that buying the correct lubricant for his engine costs the same or less than the wrong Quaker State Full Synthetic 5W-30 ILSAC motor oil you're using? Is he aware of all the facts of your ongoing experiment? Does he know you're parading around an Internet forum showing off how you're experimenting on his property? Would you kindly show him these threads and introduce him to the forum? We'd all like to know what he thinks about what you're doing to his vehicle.
Like a very good friend of mine said: "I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation."
I have previously asked, but you didn't answer: What's your endgame with this experiment? What are you trying to prove?
If the BMW engineers thought that ILSAC motor oils blended for North American and Asian vehicles were good enough for BMW engines, they wouldn't have created their own specifications and approval processes. The owner's manual for the 2015 BMW X1 clearly spells out the approved motor oils:
Last edited by a moderator:
Good lord, "morally wrong" has now entered the chat....sounds like a teenager/kid who lives at home that dad bought a car for/handed down car to me based on the last closed thread where "brake boosting" was mentioned, I'm quite sure no moral wrongs have been commited in trying out some regular 5W30 in a BMW and I'm sure dad has shared/son has helped out with this.
Like I said before, keep it civil, please.
No, my son bought car on his own, with his own money, cash, and does not live at home, if that matters to anyone.
Lets talk about oil and engines, now.
D
Deleted member 89374
I doubt anything I said, the questions I asked, or the issues raised can be construed as not being "civil."
Meanwhile, you refuse to provide an answer to any of the issues that I've raised.
@TiGeo making assumptions doesn't help anyone in this instance. @KEVINK0000, all the more reason why you should go back, re-read my post, and provide some answers. Thank you.
That was fairly civil.
It’s a legitimate question - do you own the car or does your son? If you son does , does he know about this experiment?
Can you explain as succinct fully as possible:
What are you trying to prove?
How you plan to prove it?
What’s your control?
What’s your target confidence level?
No, it's not a legit question, and it wasn't civil at all. Let's focus on oil and engines here. The information you are looking for may or may not be revealed in due time. It's still in progress as you may be able to see.
D
Deleted member 89374
@DuckRyder and I have asked exceedingly reasonable questions that you refuse to answer. Consequently, I see no reason why this should go on if you refuse to provide valid reasoning for your actions, as no one here condones what you are doing.
Then, I recommend you move on to another part of the forum if you don't like how this is going. You are free to do that.
Ok well since you answered the ownership question, based on your response I’ll assume he doesn’t know about your little experiment, if he does well and good, if he does not then IMO what you are doing is not right and RK is spot on.
That not withstanding, I don’t understand how you plan to run an experiment without a hypothesis, a control and a plan. Alternatively if you actually have those things why they are not clearly spelled out. IMO the failing of this is why you are getting the responses you are.
So what are the flawed timing components and are the subject to replacement via a recall or similar?
D
Deleted member 89374
Be that as it may, you posted this thread on a public forum and volunteered the information about experimenting on your son's vehicle, a property he paid for and rightfully owns. From your refusal to respond to the question about having your son's consent to experiment on his vehicle, it can only be concluded that you don't. Consequently, you opened yourself to this line of questioning.
Here are the five steps to the scientific method, should you care to follow them and provide adequate information in this thread:
1. Define a Question to Investigate
As scientists conduct their research, they make observations and collect data. The observations and data often lead them to ask why something is the way it is. Scientists pursue answers to these questions in order to continue with their research. Once scientists have a good question to investigate, they begin to think of ways to answer it.
2. Make Predictions
Based on their research and observations, scientists will often come up with a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a possible answer to a question. It is based on: their own observations, existing theories, and information they gather from other sources. Scientists use their hypothesis to make a prediction, a testable statement that describes what they think the outcome of an investigation will be.
3. Gather Data
Evidence is needed to test the prediction. There are several strategies for collecting evidence, or data. Scientists can gather their data by observing the natural world, performing an experiment in a laboratory, or by running a model. Scientists decide what strategy to use, often combining strategies. Then they plan a procedure and gather their data. They make sure the procedure can be repeated, so that other scientists can evaluate their findings.
4. Analyze the Data
Scientists organize their data in tables, graphs, or diagrams. If possible, they include relevant data from other sources. They look for patterns that show connections between important variables in the hypothesis they are testing.
5. Draw Conclusions
Based on whether or not their prediction came true, scientists can then decide whether the evidence clearly supports or does not support the hypothesis. If the results are not clear, they must rethink their procedure. If the results are clear, scientists write up their fi ndings and results to share with others. The conclusions they draw usually lead to new questions to pursue.
Similar threads
