PQIA tests ten 5W-20s - one gets an Advisory

[jorton]

Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: RF Overlord


NOW see what you've done, Tom?

So Sorry, but someone has to!

I don't see tests for White Bottle or Synpower or Maxlife 5w-20. With this NextGen result I would like to know if one of the other 3 pass Pqia testing.

 

[Norm Olt]

STATISTICS: Lies, "durn" lies, and DIETY-"durn" lies...

C'mon: it's just a number and the oil is pretty good stuff. I'm waiting (with un-baited breath) for the 1st person whose engine grenaded because the NOACK test result was 22% higher than the standard spec.

At $1 per, F.A.R. or at full price (DIETY forbid!) it still will get the job done.

CHEERS!

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Norm Olt

C'mon: it's just a number and the oil is pretty good stuff. I'm waiting (with un-baited breath) for the 1st person whose engine grenaded because the NOACK test result was 22% higher than the standard spec.

At $1 per, F.A.R. or at full price (DIETY forbid!) it still will get the job done.

You're right the engine won't grenade or even have the slightest bit of increased engine wear and to put into context 18% is well within the requirements of an SJ oil, but you could have slightly increased oil consumption although I doubt you could measure it.

But the real issue is, Valvoline is a name brand oil that has exceeded the maximum NOACK spec' for an SN oil which even the cheapest non name brand API must meet. So considering the huge amount of money Valvoline spends on advertising which includes prime time TV and NASCAR, at the very least it's an embarrassment.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
So considering the huge amount of money Valvoline spends on advertising which includes prime time TV and NASCAR, at the very least it's an embarrassment.

I wonder how Ashland likes the shoe on the other foot after rubbing Mobil's noses in the fact that M1 was out of spec for a period of time back in the SM days.

Here, we know (or should know) better that it's not a big deal. It's one test, we don't know the error bars (other than the vague significant figure claim on the PQIA site), and so forth. But, some people are already biased against recycled lubricants. This isn't helping.

 

[CATERHAM]

What's that expression, "people in glass houses don't through stones"! Ashland could learn from that.

I'm sure PQIA has double checked the NOACK result many times before they issued an advisory. If I was them I'd have also sourced a second bottle to check as well.

 

[demarpaint]

Too bad XOM is a class operation. What they should do is take the ball and run it, play the same game Ashland did a few years back.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Too bad XOM is a class operation. What they should do is take the ball and run it, play the same game Ashland did a few years back.


And how are they going to educate Joe Sixpack about NOACK??? There probably isn't one in a 1000 who have a clue what it is...

 

[yonyon]

If they wanted to they could come up with some explanation that makes it sound like this independent lab test shows that when you get it hot Valvoline evaporates like water. Testing also shows that Mobil 1 provides superior protection against evaporation for your engine when the heat is on!

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Too bad XOM is a class operation. What they should do is take the ball and run it, play the same game Ashland did a few years back.


And how are they going to educate Joe Sixpack about NOACK??? There probably isn't one in a 1000 who have a clue what it is...



Play it from a different angle, not the NOACK angle. I'm sure the marketing dept can come up with some pretty cleaver wording. After all it is the Petroleum Quality Institute of America that did they testing isn't it? Cool name too. They do random independent testing of lubricants. I don't think Joe Sixpack is going to look any further than the advertising. Look what happens here when an oil company like Pennzoil makes a claim about cleaning. Many people here view that as Gospel, all based on the ad. JMO

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I don't think Joe Sixpack is going to look any further than the advertising. Look what happens here when an oil company like Pennzoil makes a claim about cleaning. Many people here view that as Gospel, all based on the ad. JMO



OMG I dun got me the oil with Duck "Dinasty" on the bottle. Happy Hap....

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I don't think Joe Sixpack is going to look any further than the advertising. Look what happens here when an oil company like Pennzoil makes a claim about cleaning. Many people here view that as Gospel, all based on the ad. JMO



OMG I dun got me the oil with Duck "Dinasty" on the bottle. Happy Hap....


LOL

 

[Norm Olt]

That's THROW stones, not "through", please...

Jus' tryin' t'be THOROUGH, ya' rekin'?

CHEERS!

 

[Doc Holiday]

I'm not to sure those Noack #'s for the PZ & QS aren't a miss print or something. Going over to Shell and check the #'s, Shell's site list the 5w20 just about the same as the 5w30 & 10w30...all in the 14's range

 

[Trav]

You need to look at the date on the document. 2011 was before Shell started using GTL base stocks. Ultra also had higher NOAK back then.

 

[Doc Holiday]

Originally Posted By: Trav
You need to look at the date on the document. 2011 was before Shell started using GTL base stocks. Ultra also had higher NOAK back then.


I hope you are right. But those #'s doesn't seem right....That is synthetic like #'s yet the rest of the specs/#'s isn't in the synthetic ball park.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
yet the rest of the specs/#'s isn't in the synthetic ball park.

In what way? TBN is high, viscosity@-30c is much lower with the SOPUS oils.

 

[Doc Holiday]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
yet the rest of the specs/#'s isn't in the synthetic ball park.

In what way? TBN is high, viscosity@-30c is much lower with the SOPUS oils.


True, but the VI is 20 less. The VI doesn't look like a Synthetic #. Though they don't list it, I'd like to see the Flash Points. Synthetics are most always a good bit higher.

 

[Capa]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Too bad XOM is a class operation. What they should do is take the ball and run it, play the same game Ashland did a few years back.


+3. Too bad.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
yet the rest of the specs/#'s isn't in the synthetic ball park.

In what way? TBN is high, viscosity@-30c is much lower with the SOPUS oils.


True, but the VI is 20 less. The VI doesn't look like a Synthetic #. Though they don't list it, I'd like to see the Flash Points. Synthetics are most always a good bit higher.


PU 5w20 SN, PDF dated dec 2011 has a VI of 155 and thats a GTL, sorry i don't see your point.
If anything it shows it may well have a good bit of GTL.

 

[Danh]

Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: Doc Holiday
yet the rest of the specs/#'s isn't in the synthetic ball park.

In what way? TBN is high, viscosity@-30c is much lower with the SOPUS oils.


True, but the VI is 20 less. The VI doesn't look like a Synthetic #. Though they don't list it, I'd like to see the Flash Points. Synthetics are most always a good bit higher.


Actually, if you put the Ultra PDS next to the PQIA PYB test results, the PYB has very, very similar specs: VI 154 for Utra, 155 for PYB; Noack 5.0% for Ultra, 6.5% for PYB, -30C viscosity 4,000 for Ultra, 4,389 for PYB. I'm sure there are many things we don't see, but by this standard, PYB is about 90% of Ultra making it sure look like a synthetic.

And VI by itself can be deceptive as it only measure the viscosity change between 40C and 100C. An oil can have so-so results in this temperature range, but great results when really cold.