Thread on Royal Purple oil filter

[john1944]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI

Seems odd they get one result in the initial test that was so good then a 2nd test shows a different result that put the filter right there with all the others.


I doubt Blackstone Labs has seen any UOA with counts that low on a normal car. They should have raised eyebrows as soon as they saw those results IMO.


Unfortunately, "they" at Blackstone Labs have incompetents, just like every other company today. The attitude seems to be "I only work here. Don't expect me to think besides, duh."

 

[alltrac]

I'm curious to see what the particle count is at 10k when the filter loads up. I bet with the smaller stock size RP filter you would have saw better results at 5k.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: alltrac
I'm curious to see what the particle count is at 10k when the filter loads up. I bet with the smaller stock size RP filter you would have saw better results at 5k.


I'm wondering the same thing. I still wouldn't hesitate to use the RP filter after seeing the flow curve. I'd suspect that the particle counts would close in to the values of the others as it approached 10K. It's a bit of conjecture on my part, but I could see a higher-flowing filter with slightly less starting efficiency improving more than a filter with lower flow/higher efficiency (the PureOne) as they both get more full of contaminants.

Honestly though, I also have a difficult time with some of the numbers. Why did the Amsoil filter decrease in efficiency on its second run? That doesn't make much sense? The Pure One, OTOH, increased about the way you'd expect.

Hmmm....

 

[Sayjac]

Quote:
As you can see, the Royal Purple now scores among the bottom of the others. Sorry to get everyone's hopes up!
Well, I will say I was more than a little skeptical at the RP results and PM'ed another member expressing doubts. Still would think the RP to be a solid filter though, but a bit expensive for my taste and OCI. As for the hubbub about the exceptionally low particle counts from the RP, guess we can say this!

BTW, am I the only one that has difficulty reading/seeing that UOA?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: sayjac

BTW, am I the only one that has difficulty reading/seeing that UOA?


Do a "right click > save" on the photo. Save it to your computer then you can see it larger and zoom in on it.

 

[Pablo]

I have doubted the methodology and the results from day one. Now, I don't think anyone is being dishonest or anything nasty, just that Blackstone is not an accredited lab and the test procedure is not standardized. I also just don't think you can take a pre-filter oil sample and use it to compare oil filters - that may be the largest factor right there.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: sayjac

BTW, am I the only one that has difficulty reading/seeing that UOA?


Do a "right click > save" on the photo. Save it to your computer then you can see it larger and zoom in on it.

You da man now dawg (YDMND)! I can see! Worked like a champ!

And Pabs, very diplomatic way to make the point. Quite honestly I don't know what is possible, or what it costs extra, but I wouldn't be concerned enough to have it tested. Pick a good/solid filter, run it a reasonable/recommended OCI, get a standard UOA if you choose and let it go at that. JMO

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
I have doubted the methodology and the results from day one. Now, I don't think anyone is being dishonest or anything nasty, just that Blackstone is not an accredited lab and the test procedure is not standardized. I also just don't think you can take a pre-filter oil sample and use it to compare oil filters - that may be the largest factor right there.


Pablo! Accredited? Who "accredits" commercial labs? Which of the existing labs are accredited? Ihaven't looked into that so if you have, enlighten me/us? There are test standards every lab uses and so does Blackstone. I believe it's even listed upon the test sheet. If the test standards are followed what's the diff?

As to the pore blockage method Blackstone uses, it most certainly is standardized and they use the most up-to-date software that's available for the equipment they have. I know this from having followed oil samples through testing there, from start to finish. Plus, pore blockage is in use in every lab out there.

As to the efficacy of the pore blockage method, I've jumped more over to your side than I was the last time this came up and agree the terminology for it should be "contamination analysis" not "particle count" but it's still a viable method. It's often the only method. If you have an oil that' gone opaque and you can't use the optical method. In that case, pore blockage is a practical option.

In this seemingly well-founded test, the method is standardized among the samples listed, same lab, same equipment, so it's a fair, apples to apples test. You can't compare those numbers to those done on a different type of machine, of course, except in a very rough way.

As to the test itself, oil that is 17/13 or 17/14, or better, at the end of it's OCI is still in pretty good shape, contaminant-wise. Some stats that I have see are that 18/14 is pretty clean for engine oil and everything on the list beats that. Doesn't mean you can't want cleaner, but I would have no complaints with any of the filters tested.

Kudos to the OP for the serious bucks he spent on this!

 

[Pablo]

There are several companies that issue accreditation.

http://www.nist.gov/pml/nvlap/

This is not a slap at Blackstone or anyone , Jim Allen!, but this procedure is not a standard method of comparing oil filters. I don't see what's so wrong with me saying that (?)

I too thoroughly appreciate the money spent - and time taken. Thanks!!!

 

[Jim Allen]

First off Pablo, my intention here is wasn't to slap you around. My "Pablo!" was just a big, friendly attention getter. Should have had a smiley beside it. Just an exchange of opinions, that's all.

Now, you are free to say anything you like and there is nothing "wrong" in anything you said but it seems to me you being overly dismissive of this test. While this method is not the standard method of testing oil filters used by that industry, it's a fair and worthwhile comparison. Doing an industry standard test would be very, very expensive.

As to accreditation, I didn't see any oil analysis labs listed on the source you offered, but I spot checked several labs. Polaris is accredited by the A2LA. Wear Check does not appear to be accredited, but Like Blackstone, lists their commitment to ASTM standards. I do not see any accreditations listed on the Oil Analyzer's site. Insight Services has ISO certification. That's as far as I went. but it seems far from standard to be accredited, nor accredited by one authority. There are plenty of labs out there that do only industrial stuff, not to the general public, and some sort of certification is more common, often ISO. I suppose I'd rather have a lab that was accredited in some way, given the choice, if I knew what the accreditation entailed. In order to give certification some weight I'd need to understand what's required. In other industries where I am more familiar, it's not much more than paying the vig for a fancy certificate to hang on the wall. I know ISO certification is nothing to sneezeat.

 

[CompSyn]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
First off Pablo, my intention here is wasn't to slap you around. My "Pablo!" was just a big, friendly attention getter. Should have had a smiley beside it. Just an exchange of opinions, that's all.

Now, you are free to say anything you like and there is nothing "wrong" in anything you said but it seems to me you being overly dismissive of this test. While this method is not the standard method of testing oil filters used by that industry, it's a fair and worthwhile comparison. Doing an industry standard test would be very, very expensive.

As to accreditation, I didn't see any oil analysis labs listed on the source you offered, but I spot checked several labs. Polaris is accredited by the A2LA. Wear Check does not appear to be accredited, but Like Blackstone, lists their commitment to ASTM standards. I do not see any accreditations listed on the Oil Analyzer's site. Insight Services has ISO certification. That's as far as I went. but it seems far from standard to be accredited, nor accredited by one authority. There are plenty of labs out there that do only industrial stuff, not to the general public, and some sort of certification is more common, often ISO. I suppose I'd rather have a lab that was accredited in some way, given the choice, if I knew what the accreditation entailed. In order to give certification some weight I'd need to understand what's required. In other industries where I am more familiar, it's not much more than paying the vig for a fancy certificate to hang on the wall. I know ISO certification is nothing to sneezeat.


Oil Analyzers, Inc., utilizes a private label program provided by POLARIS Laboratories, LLC. So you get the highest level of ISO accreditation, the A2LA, when you go through Oil Analyzers, Inc. The cost is very competitive too.