New synthetic motor oil cold pour test

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: Oil Changer
I think that if some of you watched a YouTube video of a guy laying down a map of the world and said Earth was flat, you'd believe it.

This wasn't even close to a controlled experiment. I'm not defending any of the brands.


Back in the day some said the earth was still flat when others knew better. I have always known M1 oils flow very well in cold temps.

 

[zray]

Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: deven
It's not what happens inside a combustion engine. This test is good for [censored] and giggles and that's bout it.
What happens inside an internal combustion engine?


For one thing. There is something called an oil pump, it's used to deliver oil to the bearings instead of an inverted cup. They don't perform the same way, SURPRISE ,

If your engine has an inverted cup as an oil delivery device, please disregard my statement.

Z

 

[zpinch]

Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.

 

[jdavis]

Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: deven
It's not what happens inside a combustion engine. This test is good for [censored] and giggles and that's bout it.
What happens inside an internal combustion engine?


For one thing. There is something called an oil pump, it's used to deliver oil to the bearings instead of an inverted cup. They don't perform the same way, SURPRISE ,

If your engine has an inverted cup as an oil delivery device, please disregard my statement.

Z


What's your point? This test is about how fast or slow an oil pours out of the bottle not how fast or slow it pumps through an engine.

 

[zray]

Originally Posted By: jdavis


What's your point? This test is about how fast or slow an oil pours out of the bottle not how fast or slow it pumps through an engine.



Now THATS funny. You have a future in comedy. Remember us little people when you make it big.

Z

 

[zray]

Originally Posted By: zpinch
Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.



Nothing cranky about this post, and Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but has anyone noticed how the Canadians that post on this forum do not SEEM to be the stereotypical easy going guys we generally think of.......

Z

 

[jdavis]

Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: jdavis


What's your point? This test is about how fast or slow an oil pours out of the bottle not how fast or slow it pumps through an engine.



Now THATS funny. You have a future in comedy. Remember us little people when you make it big.

Z

It's the truth, maybe I didn't pay close enough attention to what they were saying in the video but did they specifically talk about one of these oils being better than the other in an engine? I don't think so.

 

[sicko]

Was the test scientific? No, and I'm not going to say that it was.

But was it interesting, and am I glad they took the time to do it? Yes, most definitely.

What I also found interesting is that the oils they tested finished in the same order as their Viscosity @-30° C mPa as tested by PQI America. http://www.pqiamerica.com/March2013PCMO/Marchsyntheticsallfinal.html

M1 has the lowest value, and poured the fastest. Amsoil the second lowest value finished second, followed by Super Tech and then Castrol. Just as their -30 degree viscosities as tested by PQI America.

Not saying it's scientific, just saying it was interesting/cool.

 

[goodtimes]

They don't need to worry about the bottle shape, just if the pouring hole is the same size and they make a vent hole on the other. This is like a plugged vent on a kitchen sink and watching it drain. Let it drain right without air suction holding it back.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: jdavis
Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: deven
It's not what happens inside a combustion engine. This test is good for [censored] and giggles and that's bout it.
What happens inside an internal combustion engine?


For one thing. There is something called an oil pump, it's used to deliver oil to the bearings instead of an inverted cup. They don't perform the same way, SURPRISE ,

If your engine has an inverted cup as an oil delivery device, please disregard my statement.

Z


What's your point? This test is about how fast or slow an oil pours out of the bottle not how fast or slow it pumps through an engine.


what's it there for, and why is it important to anyone then ?

Only applicability I see is getting the wrong grade of oil out of the bottle on a -40C oil change...that's it...

So what's the point they are making ?

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: deven
It's not what happens inside a combustion engine. This test is good for [censored] and giggles and that's bout it.
What happens inside an internal combustion engine?

There is a positive displacement oil pump that will pump oil to a combustion engine.

 

[zpinch]

Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: zpinch
Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.



Nothing cranky about this post, and Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but has anyone noticed how the Canadians that post on this forum do not SEEM to be the stereotypical easy going guys we generally think of.......

Z


You always a stereotypical smart [censored]?

 

[KrisZ]

Next time I'm doing an oil change at -40C and leave the oil bottles outside, I guess I'm going to pick M1 lol.

 

[4wheeldog]

Originally Posted By: zpinch
Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: zpinch
Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.



Nothing cranky about this post, and Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but has anyone noticed how the Canadians that post on this forum do not SEEM to be the stereotypical easy going guys we generally think of.......

Z


You always a stereotypical smart [censored]?



I always find AmSoil testing posted on the internet questionable. Especially the wear ball test. Just sayin'.

 

[4wheeldog]

Originally Posted By: zray
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: deven
It's not what happens inside a combustion engine. This test is good for [censored] and giggles and that's bout it.
What happens inside an internal combustion engine?


For one thing. There is something called an oil pump, it's used to deliver oil to the bearings instead of an inverted cup. They don't perform the same way, SURPRISE ,

If your engine has an inverted cup as an oil delivery device, please disregard my statement.

Z


That is true, for the oil's first trip out of the sump. But.....It is important for the oil getting BACK to the sump, for subsequent trips. Those trips are very similar to your inverted cup. Just sayin'.

 

[fredfactory]

Originally Posted By: zpinch
Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.


The Amsoil test does basically look similar to the youtube results, in that Castrol did poorly compared to Mobil1 (M1 in the Ext Perf flavor anyway).

 

[camrydriver111]

Originally Posted By: fredfactory
Originally Posted By: zpinch
Go and look at the results of amsoil's 5w30 oil paper, trust those results and not some amateur test. The 5w30 paper was done by a third party reputable organization that you couldnt pay enough to skew the results. Quakerstate, mobil1, pennzoil, and amsoil all have very close results, all top 4, amsoil being the best.

Not pour test, but cold cranking simulator.


The Amsoil test does basically look similar to the youtube results, in that Castrol did poorly compared to Mobil1 (M1 in the Ext Perf flavor anyway).

That is an excellent point. Leads me to believe the test isn't bogus.

Yes, you can't tell between small differences like M1 and Amsoil, but between Edge and M1 the difference is pretty clear.

 

[bbhero]

I agree. I like Castrol w titanium but it is a poor performer in very cold conditions. Now the coldest it has ever gotten where I'm at in se VA -12 below in January 1985 super bowl 49 ers - dolphins game. So not likely to see -22 or -30 F temps here. Now low temps this winter in very low single digits the Castrol w titanium performed just fine. But I wouldn't want to go much lower in temps with that in my car. Reason I remember that low temp so well because it was 0 F at kick off. So, I am glad I don't have to regularly see sub 0 temps

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: camrydriver111
Yes, you can't tell between small differences like M1 and Amsoil, but between Edge and M1 the difference is pretty clear.

The difference is significant, mathematically speaking, but whenever I see a graph or chart that has an origin other than 0, in this case starting at 3000 cP, I shake my head. That means the marketing of the graph is more important than the math of the graph. Also, I question the mention of SN/GF-5 upper limits and then the testing of Red Line and RP HPS, neither of which are SN/GF-5 oils. Of course, they do have to fall in line with SAE J300, but that's another matter.

Many, many of the Amsoil sheets I've seen have shown very impressive cold cranking results within their grade, and that data stands out all on its own. There's no reason to tweak the graph axis or pad the data with an example like Red Line.

 

[Shannow]

Garak,
quarter of a century as an engineer here, and I agree...people don't move the zero on a graph unless they intend to misrepresent the numbers.