Pennzoil High Mileage 5w-30 SL

[Bror Jace]

If the additive packages change dramatically, are labs like Blackstone, Butler-Caterpillar and others going to change the way they do (or at least report) analyses?

Wear particles will still be the same ... but it will be harder to see how additves are being depleted without seeing the additive levels, virgin and used.

--- Bror Jace

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

Bror, You raise an excellent point. Looks like reputable analyzers, such as Blackstone, will need to adjust what they're testing for so they can respond to market conditions and give the customer the needed info that's not currently tested for. Otherwise they'll soon be seeing their business dwindle down to a trickle.

 

[novadude]

Whatever happened to Johnny and the official word from Pennzoil?

 

[fuel tanker man]

If this data is correct on the SL and SM oils...

http://www.infineum.com/information/api-passenger-sm-2004.html
http://www.infineum.com/information/api-passenger-sj-sl-2004.html
Then the minimum for Phosphorous should be 600 ppm (.06%). Max is shown to be 800 ppm (.08%)--this in the SM oil.

If that's the case, this batch of Pennzoil is way on the low side of SM requirements--in other words, with Phos below 400 ppm it does not meet SL requirements, nor does it meet any of the older standards.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on any of this...


Dan

 

[Johnny]

Just received the email and letter this morning. Bear with me on this as I am going to type the email first, word for word, then I will type the letter that was attached.

Email:

From: xxxxx
To: Johnny xxxxxx
March 15, 2005

Our analysis show results typical of HMV. It also agrees with retain sample results when the batch was blended and packaged. I think anyone making any claims about low additive treat levels should make very sure that they have valid data. I have had no other complaints or evidence that a off specification product left our facility. The chances of just a few bottles or gallons of defective product leaving a facility are extremely remote. Samples are taken and tested from the fill nozzles at the very beginning (first bottle), middle and end (last bottle) of every production run. This includes quarts, 5 quarts, 5 gallon pails, 55 gallon drums, tankers, and rail cars.

The Letter:

Our Technology Center has completed evaluation of the sample of Pennzoil HMV 5W30 that was submitted in regard to the concern over suspected low additive levels.

The oil sample contained:

Viscosity @100cSt of 11.95
Calcium ppm 1760.0
Magnesium ppm 8.0
Molybdenum ppm 115.0
Phosphorus ppm 1007.0
Silicon ppm 8.0
Zinc ppm 1232.0

The analysis results look typical for our PZ High Mileage Vehicle formulation. Additionally, this analysis agrees with our production sample analysis taken at the ISO 9000 packaging facility when this oil batch was blended and packaged.

I hope the information supplied meets your needs.

Regards,
xxxxxx
_________________________________________________

So, there you have it. For those of you that are using this product, you can sleep well tonight. You got what you paid for.

Johnny

[ March 16, 2005, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Johnny ]

 

[fuel tanker man]

Okay...

ToyotaandSaturn, the ball is back in your court.

The only certain way to refute the Pennzoil factory analysis would be to take another sample from the same bottle of oil and have the same lab re-do the analysis--for no charge, certainly.

If the lab refuses to repeat the analysis (show them the link to this forum thread) then that is a tacit admission that they certainly erred and have no confidence in the initial report; a vindication of Pennzoil, yes.

If the lab repeats the analysis and the results come back the same as the first time, then we've got some pencils to chew. Perhaps another analysis from another lab.

If you have no more samples of this original oil, then that's that. In this last scenario reasonable thinkers will certainly give Pennzoil the benefit of the doubt and place the blame on the lab.

Dan

 

[sully]

My sample of Mobil 5000 was done probably a month or so after the Pennzoil HM (by Blackstone).
Mobil Clean 5000 5W30

Aluminum 1
Iron 1
Moly 64
Boron 44
Silicon 1
Sodium 218
Calcium 829
Magnesium 4
Phosphorous 341
Zinc 347

I'm not quite sure if I trust the results now. I know it's not the same oil but compare this to the Mobil 7500 done by Butler Labs.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

I'm seeing an interesting trend here...

Blackstone:
1st run: approx 1/4 element data as compared to PZ run
2nd run: approx 1/2 element data as compared to PZ run

code:

---

1st 2nd

Blackstone Blackstone PZ

Run Run Run



Moly 29 44 115

Silicon 2 4 8

Calcium 582 1007 1760

Magnesium 1 3 8

Phosphorus 294 505 1007

Zinc 303 516 1232

---

I don't mistrust Blackstone nor PZ's data, but somthing is off here and I'm inclined to think that since this product was bottled last summer, that it's an SL formula. As such, we're going to see higher Ca, Ph and Zn than Blackstone is showing.

I only have a 5qt jug of PZ HM 10w-40 dated 12/29/04 left in my shed, so I'm not so sure that would be a fair comparison. (I have plenty of PZ dino for a couple years!

)

I started this topic purely for curiosity's sake. But oh, my, has it ever taken on a deeper meaning.

 

[fuel tanker man]

ToyotaandSaturn,

I didn't even realize that Blackstone was the lab. I either missed that or forgot it.

I re-read your initial analysis and they mentioned checking the add numbers a second time because it didn't make sense the zinc and phos would be so low...

When I made my previous post, I was thinking the analysis lab may have been some sort of fly-by-night outfit since the usual Blackstone heading wasn't on your report. I'm still kinda new at all of this...

My apologies to Blackstone.

So, considering that it was Blackstone, and considering that they checked the sample twice... I don't know what to think.

You asked, in your initial post if you should have "shaken up" the oil before pouring out the sample.

Maybe the answer to that question is "yes?" Does the add pack tend to settle? Here's where my often fast moving money now resides.

Need more brain power. Does not compute.

Dan

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fuel tanker man:
You asked, in your initial post if you should have "shaken up" the oil before pouring out the sample.

---

I mentioned that to Ryan at Blackstone at the 2nd run, he said that (paraphrasing here) it most likely wouldn't matter as the adds just don't fall 'out' unless it's a rare case.

Perhaps this is the rare case? I don't know.

I DO know that I'll use this oil. And probably be quite happy with it.

 

[Johnny]

Sorry fellows, it's not a milkshake. You don't have to shake it and nothing falls out.

I don't believe you will see low phos and zinc levels even on the new HM oil. Remember, this stuff was not designed to meet new car warranty requirements. It's designed for older cars.

 

[Brett Miller]

Thank you Johnny for your attention to this matter. Your responses here are a welcome addition and you are a great spokeman for Pennzoil.

[ March 16, 2005, 08:17 PM: Message edited by: Brett Miller ]

 

[SKUNKY]

`Where is Terry????????

 

[fuel tanker man]

I dunno... but my head hurts...

Both labs can't be right.

I'm out of ideas...

 

[fuel tanker man]

Okay. Just call me mean.

http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000126#000001

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sully:
My sample of Mobil 5000 was done probably a month or so after the Pennzoil HM (by Blackstone).
Mobil Clean 5000 5W30

Aluminum 1
Iron 1
Moly 64
Boron 44
Silicon 1
Sodium 218
Calcium 829
Magnesium 4
Phosphorous 341
Zinc 347

I'm not quite sure if I trust the results now. I know it's not the same oil but compare this to the Mobil 7500 done by Butler Labs.

---

Sully, thanks for your reminding us of your post! When you compare your numbers to the numbers from the MC 7500, the add levels are approx 1/2 of the Butler labs numbers.

There's that number again, 1/2 of another lab's numbers.

 

[sully]

Well we are comparing the M1 5000 to M1 7500, but you wouldn't think there would be that much difference in additive values. Of course I could be waaaay off base here. I'm "half" a mind to send a sample of the M1 5000 off to Butler and see how the numbers compare.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnny:
Sorry fellows, it's not a milkshake.

---

 

[jason07-1zzfe]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sully:
Well we are comparing the M1 5000 to M1 7500, but you wouldn't think there would be that much difference in additive values. Of course I could be waaaay off base here. I'm "half" a mind to send a sample of the M1 5000 off to Butler and see how the numbers compare.

---

I was thinking about your VOA too after seeing this.
JohnBrowning said Blackstone got a new spectro. When? And how did he know that?

 

[Cutehumor]

I'm starting to really question the value of oil analysis after seeing all of this virgin or used. I just got my UOA from a different lab and it's way off. I don't believe it.