Yepp, but He's involved with it and I'd trust it more than Blackstone. Im talking about the samples you send to Dyson Analysis, not the samples Blackstone does and turns over to him.
Last edited:
3 diff. labs with samples taken frm the same bott
- Thread starter 21Rouge
- Start date
- Status
Trust me, Blackstone is messed up. I've been seeing it in the UOA's. Ca and P and Zn are tough to get accurate, but still....
People arguing about 8 ppm vs 10 ppm can be so entertaining
.
People arguing about 8 ppm vs 10 ppm can be so entertaining
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
http://www.blackstone-labs.com/dyson-analysis.php
Blackstone has a history here of UOA/VOA with additive numbers all over the map sometimes.
Blackstone has a history here of UOA/VOA with additive numbers all over the map sometimes.
We are talking about two different things.
You can also send results TO Terry in Texas.
You can also send results TO Terry in Texas.
Last edited:
Hi,
21Rouge - You will be aware that over several years I have cautioned against the use of single pass "simple" UOAs for anything other than to determine the condition of the lubricant
I have always used Oil Company Labs (both in-house and Commercial) over many decades for the reasons you see. Oil Company labs are usually also "up to speed" with the formulation of the product they are testing (results are compared with calibrations)and can make reasonable judgements
Yes, I have compared one Lab to another several times when I didn't like the first result - and sometimes there are variations. But these have typically been in the acceptable range
I have often commented on the "entertaining" comments from Blackstone - sadly a lot of it is quite misleading too!
Trending UOAs from an acceptable source will result in some meaningful data - then you need to interpret it correctly!
21Rouge - You will be aware that over several years I have cautioned against the use of single pass "simple" UOAs for anything other than to determine the condition of the lubricant
I have always used Oil Company Labs (both in-house and Commercial) over many decades for the reasons you see. Oil Company labs are usually also "up to speed" with the formulation of the product they are testing (results are compared with calibrations)and can make reasonable judgements
Yes, I have compared one Lab to another several times when I didn't like the first result - and sometimes there are variations. But these have typically been in the acceptable range
I have often commented on the "entertaining" comments from Blackstone - sadly a lot of it is quite misleading too!
Trending UOAs from an acceptable source will result in some meaningful data - then you need to interpret it correctly!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Trav
Downright disturbing is what i call it.
People buy oil,switch brands,weights etc based on the numbers coming out of these labs.
That's because some people misinterpret the value of the oil analysis. Trying to determine if an oil will be good for ones engine based on a VOA is pointless, IMO. Ad pack that shows up in a VOA doesn't translate to engine wear in any meaningful way. Even the TBN is a bit useless because the rate of TBN depletion is probably more important than the starting TBN itself.
The value of a UOA comes from trend analysis, and there you look at engine wear (which is expressed in much smaller amounts than ad pack)... any drastic spikes from one UOA to another would be a cause for concern. Same thing with presence of glycol, high fuel content or high water.
Downright disturbing is what i call it.
People buy oil,switch brands,weights etc based on the numbers coming out of these labs.
That's because some people misinterpret the value of the oil analysis. Trying to determine if an oil will be good for ones engine based on a VOA is pointless, IMO. Ad pack that shows up in a VOA doesn't translate to engine wear in any meaningful way. Even the TBN is a bit useless because the rate of TBN depletion is probably more important than the starting TBN itself.
The value of a UOA comes from trend analysis, and there you look at engine wear (which is expressed in much smaller amounts than ad pack)... any drastic spikes from one UOA to another would be a cause for concern. Same thing with presence of glycol, high fuel content or high water.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
I dont disagree, but all Im saying is that if Im gonna spend the dough, I'll spend it where I have faith. We've seen over the years that Blackstone can be all over the place.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
I dont disagree, but all Im saying is that if Im gonna spend the dough, I'll spend it where I have faith. We've seen over the years that Blackstone can be all over the place.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
http://www.blackstone-labs.com/dyson-analysis.php
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
http://www.blackstone-labs.com/dyson-analysis.php
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
http://www.blackstone-labs.com/dyson-analysis.php
Would you please READ and check your facts. Yes, there is a Dyson/Blackstone Coop, where they run it and he looks at the results.
THEN, you can spend $99 and send it to him, where he uses labs in TEXAS.
The problem with this site is there is so much [censored] misinformation from people that dont know any better. [censored]!!!!!!!!!!
Once again, as stated above (for the slow people), Im talking about apples, and your talking about oranges.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
I think Ill spend my $99 with Dyson.
He uses Blackstone!
No, he does not. But still, how can we be sure that the lab he does use is accurate?
http://www.blackstone-labs.com/dyson-analysis.php
Would you please READ and check your facts. Yes, there is a Dyson/Blackstone Coop, where they run it and he looks at the results.
THEN, you can spend $99 and send it to him, where he uses labs in TEXAS.
The problem with this site is there is so much [censored] misinformation from people that dont know any better. [censored]!!!!!!!!!!
Once again, as stated above (for the slow people), Im talking about apples, and your talking about oranges.
Last edited:
I work in a lab where we use much the same equipment as Blackstone, but testing minerals instead of oil. We do have the occasional fubar, but testing a sample twice and being way off the mark both times is VERY unusual. There is some serious problem here.
I kinda doubt Petro-Can fudged the numbers. They'd be very interested in finding out if there was a quality problem going on. But I guess anything's possible.
I kinda doubt Petro-Can fudged the numbers. They'd be very interested in finding out if there was a quality problem going on. But I guess anything's possible.
What lab in Texas does he use then? Don't get your panties in a wad!
When Dyson was a member here way back when, he used Blackstone.
Well dang, I tried to tell ya that we were talking about two different things.
If you are gonna spend the dough, send it to Terry or someone else, stay away from Blackstone.
Sorry for my overreaction.
If you are gonna spend the dough, send it to Terry or someone else, stay away from Blackstone.
Sorry for my overreaction.
Originally Posted By: pbm
This tells me that my money is better spent changing my oil than analyzing it.
+1 I have always thought that.
This tells me that my money is better spent changing my oil than analyzing it.
+1 I have always thought that.
Originally Posted By: elwaylite
Well dang, I tried to tell ya that we were talking about two different things.
If you are gonna spend the dough, send it to Terry or someone else, stay away from Blackstone.
Sorry for my overreaction.
WHAT LAB DOES HE USE THEN, since you're the expert?
Well dang, I tried to tell ya that we were talking about two different things.
If you are gonna spend the dough, send it to Terry or someone else, stay away from Blackstone.
Sorry for my overreaction.
WHAT LAB DOES HE USE THEN, since you're the expert?
Originally Posted By: Vilan
I kinda doubt Petro-Can fudged the numbers.
I don't. Today's corporations will do anything to save a buck...including shorting additives.
I kinda doubt Petro-Can fudged the numbers.
I don't. Today's corporations will do anything to save a buck...including shorting additives.
Look, I've seen the reports, I paid the money to see them. As with other things Terry, I cant say.
For the last time, there are two versions, the Blackstone Coop, then the $99 on Dyson Analysis, and those are analyzed in Texas.
For the last time, there are two versions, the Blackstone Coop, then the $99 on Dyson Analysis, and those are analyzed in Texas.
Last edited:
- Status