RP 0w-20 + LG Bio-Tech 10,00 mile OCI '12 Tacoma

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
475
Location
Kentucky
This is my first UOA! Good numbers I think, but I'm disappointed in the low TBN. I was hoping that the Lubegard Bio-Tech might increase the TBN a little bit. Leave it to Blackstone to say I should try 11,000 miles next time.

3r1qt.jpg
 
Can you link a VOA of the RP 0w-20?

What reason do we have to think that the bio-tech would increase TBN or support TBN retention?
 
I can't find a VOA for RP 0w20, but there are a couple on bitog for other viscosities. Here's one for sm 0w-40:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2365769

Calcium, phosphorus, zinc and molybdenum are lower than in my sample which is consistent with me adding the Bio-tech. Here's a VOA for the bio-tech:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2794978

I thought the Bio-tech might increase tbn or tbn retention because it is advertised as extending oil life 30% and inhibiting oxidation.

Also, I didn't mention it in my first post, but I ran two Extraguard filters 5000 miles each for the OCI. Originally I planned on changing oil at 5k instead of 10. When I switched filters I added the 0.5 qt.
 
Last edited:
RP is not known for long OCI like M1 EP, also Lubegard Bio-Tech didn't claim to extend OCI(raising virgin oil TBN) either.

If you like to do 15k miles OCI then try either M1 EP or Castrol Edge Gold or Pennzoil Ultra.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
RP is not known for long OCI like M1 EP, also Lubegard Bio-Tech didn't claim to extend OCI(raising virgin oil TBN) either.

If you like to do 15k miles OCI then try either M1 EP or Castrol Edge Gold or Pennzoil Ultra.


Yes, this. Use the right product for the job, or for the expectation.

That Lubegard website screams snake oil with the unsubstantiated claims and inappropriate tests.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
RP is not known for long OCI like M1 EP, also Lubegard Bio-Tech didn't claim to extend OCI(raising virgin oil TBN) either.

If you like to do 15k miles OCI then try either M1 EP or Castrol Edge Gold or Pennzoil Ultra.


Yes, this. Use the right product for the job, or for the expectation.

That Lubegard website screams snake oil with the unsubstantiated claims and inappropriate tests.


I'm thinking about trying m1 ep. Right now it's got synpower in it. Lubegard makes transmission additives that are pretty highly regarded here on BITOG so I thought I'd give the BioTech a try.

Forgetting about the additive for a moment, Royal Purple says it should be good for 12 months or 12,000 miles so I was within its own recommended mileage.
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
Forgetting about the additive for a moment, Royal Purple says it should be good for 12 months or 12,000 miles so I was within its own recommended mileage.


Well maybe it would have been good for 12,000 miles, the TBN isn't zero and who knows how long it would have lasted (and in that regard I don't think the Blackstone comment is unreasonable).
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
Lubegard makes transmission additives that are pretty highly regarded here on BITOG so I thought I'd give the BioTech a try.


Maybe the farming, forestry, cosmetics, or pool & spa additives are better.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
Lubegard makes transmission additives that are pretty highly regarded here on BITOG so I thought I'd give the BioTech a try.


Maybe the farming, forestry, cosmetics, or pool & spa additives are better.


Lol

I'm waiting for them to release a personal lubricant, complete with comparison chart showing friction reduction vs. KY, Astroglide, dry, etc
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp

I thought the Bio-tech might increase tbn or tbn retention because it is advertised as extending oil life 30% and inhibiting oxidation.



You need a real UOA to know what is going on. It should include oxidation, nitration, sulfation, etc. That is where you'd likely see LG's impact.

TBN/TAN isn't the indicator for end of oil life.
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
I can't find a VOA for RP 0w20, but there are a couple on bitog for other viscosities. Here's one for sm 0w-40:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2365769

Calcium, phosphorus, zinc and molybdenum are lower than in my sample which is consistent with me adding the Bio-tech.


Its also comparing a 2011 0w40 VOA to a 2016 0w20 UOA... sorta worse than apples-to-oranges, its more like apples to potatoes. In addition to being polluted by a pour-in additive, its two oils that likely have little in common to start with. Back in '11, that 0w40 probably did have synerlec and would correspond to their "HPS" oils of today rather than their API-approved oils, which is what I believe your 0w20 is. They don't even offer 0w40 in HPS, only in API-approved. They do have a synerlec-containing 5w40 though.
 
Originally Posted By: spiderbypass
Extremely low wear metals-seems like solid report and excellent running engine.


I agree. Super low year metals for a 10,000 mile run.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Fsharp

I thought the Bio-tech might increase tbn or tbn retention because it is advertised as extending oil life 30% and inhibiting oxidation.



You need a real UOA to know what is going on. It should include oxidation, nitration, sulfation, etc. That is where you'd likely see LG's impact.

TBN/TAN isn't the indicator for end of oil life.


Okay so it wouldn't show up as a reduced TAN either, that was going to be my next question if it didn't increase TBN.
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Fsharp

I thought the Bio-tech might increase tbn or tbn retention because it is advertised as extending oil life 30% and inhibiting oxidation.



You need a real UOA to know what is going on. It should include oxidation, nitration, sulfation, etc. That is where you'd likely see LG's impact.

TBN/TAN isn't the indicator for end of oil life.


Okay so it wouldn't show up as a reduced TAN either, that was going to be my next question if it didn't increase TBN.


If they are marketing a reduction in oxidation, I'd expect to see the impact in that category first. It could have some impact on TAN production suppression but that wouldn't be my first expectation.
 
I use Lubegard's Bio-Tech in my Honda Accord. I've fairly recently posted a UOA as well:

UOA with Bio-Tech

I had a great report as well. I don't think it's snake oil. Only haters hate this stuff.
 
Originally Posted By: Fsharp
Okay so it wouldn't show up as a reduced TAN either, that was going to be my next question if it didn't increase TBN.


A careful parsing of the information on their website doesn't lead one to believe it does much of anything. Lots of weasel-wording and unsubstantiated claims.

The thing is (as is for most all aftermarket additive companies), if they really wanted to prove it does what they claim then there are standard tests to show efficacy.
 
Originally Posted By: Phishin
I use Lubegard's Bio-Tech in my Honda Accord. I've fairly recently posted a UOA as well:

UOA with Bio-Tech

I had a great report as well. I don't think it's snake oil. Only haters hate this stuff.


Please detail how the results would have been different without the additive, and what substantive effect it had on this performance of the oil in service.

What are we comparing the numbers against?
 
Originally Posted By: Phishin
Only haters hate this stuff.


What I've noticed is that only people that have no data resort to calling the rest of the world "haters".
 
You are a rabid poster, kschachn.

The problem with "standard tests to show efficacy" is that:
1.) They are extremely costly to perform
2.) The test are really just "models" attempting to replicate a real engine, and thus could still be refuted by anyone.

So it comes down to the fact that the makers of any Bio-Tech, and nearly any business that produces goods, have realized that: It's probably not worth the risk to spend so much capital going through the rigors of these "standardized tests". Because in the end, you'll either buy our product (for whatever reason) or you won't. And a set of rigorously produced data isn't going to sway the consumer that already has made up his mind.

Therefore, there is a HUGE investment to be made in an attempt to "win over" a few customers....and the people who write the checks and hold the purse strings, have decided to hold onto their money. Not because they know their product is snake oil, but because there is likely their ROI is negative.

You've already made up your mind that additives are garbage. So, please move on.

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.” -- Herbert Spencer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top