4 - Ball Wear of Mobil's 4XT

[buster]

I don't buy into the 4-Ball wear test as an indicator of wear performance of an oil. Mobil 1 4XT has a wear scar of only .40mm. So what exactly is in this oil compared to the Mobil 1 line that changes all of this?

[ April 03, 2005, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

 

[rg144]

Wasn't it always high zinc? That's why Head and Shoulders does good in the test.

 

[TooSlick]

A thicker (higher molecular weight) basestock and significantly higher levels of ZDP ....

I told you EOM could make a much better synthetic oil for $10.00/quart. It's all about what the market will bear in terms of price point. These are both - cost is no object - formulations.

Ted

 

[Mike_dup1]

quote:

---

I don't buy into the 4-Ball wear test as an indicator of wear performance of an oil.

---

So the ASTM accepts it but your standards are much higher? Or is that Amsoil uses it that bothers you?

quote:

---

Standard Test Method for Measurement of Extreme-Pressure Properties of Lubricating Fluids (Four-Ball Method)
Document Number: ASTM D2783-03
ASTM International
10-Aug-2003
9 pages

Description:

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the load-carrying properties of lubricating fluids. The following two determinations are made:

1.1.1 Load-wear index (formerly Mean-Hertz load).

1.1.2 Weld point by means of the four-ball extreme-pressure (EP) tester.

1.2 For the determination of the load-carrying properties of lubricating greases, see Test Method D 2596.

1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

1.4 The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units are to be regarded separately as standard. Within the text, the SI units are shown in brackets. The values stated in each system are not exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.

Keywords: extreme pressure properties (in lubricating fluids); load wear index; weldpoint; 75.100

---

[ April 04, 2005, 08:40 AM: Message edited by: Mike ]

 

[buster]

quote:

---

So the ASTM accepts it but your standards are much higher? Or is that Amsoil uses it that bothers you?

---

You must sell Amsoil bc it's propaganda.

Show me proof that the 4-Ball wear test has any meaing in ENGINE OIL. It's not relevant to oil, but it is to grease.

[ April 04, 2005, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: buster ]

 

[Ethan]

Would this test be relevant to motorcycle oil where the transmission shares the same fluid?

Ethan

 

[TooSlick]

The Four Ball Wear test is used to evaluate the gear protection afforded by auto transmission fluids and gear lubricants. It is therefore very relevant when evaluating engine oils used in wet clutch motorcycles.

Folks might want to actually read through these ASTM test protocols and reference notes, and not just re-post incorrect second hand information. The specific four ball wear test performed on greases (ASTM D-2266) is not even the same test (ASTM D-4712B) as that performed for liquid lubricants.

You can actually download the complete ASTM test protocols off their website, but you will have to pay dearly for them.

Tooslick

[ April 06, 2005, 05:50 AM: Message edited by: TooSlick ]

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
Ted - I have never seen the "4 ball test" used to specify gear lubricants or ATFs used in the heavy truck and earthmoving Industries

Did Eaton-Fuller?
Did Rockwell?
Does ZF or Benz or Getrag or any of the others? Does Allison?
Does VW-Audi?
Does Mobil or Castrol use the test for their ATFs and excellent gear oils?

BMW does NOT use it when specifying gear oils for their bikes but they use dry clutches!

I am really very interested in this subject!

Regards
Doug

 

[buster]

Those that think the 4-Ball wear is relevant to an ENGINE Lubricant's performance I highly recommend you call: Roy Howell of RL (I spoke with him personally), Lubrication Engineers, Mobil, Castrol and Synergyn (former Amsoil chemist). They will flat out tell you it has zilch to do with motor oil. If it did, we'd see the same graphs Amsoil uses. Clearly misleading information IMO, but it works I'm sure.

 

[TooSlick]

Doug,

The four ball wear test IS required as part of the Mercon V specification to evaluate gear protection. The scar diameter must be 0.38 mm or less from the weighted average of tests run @ 75C and 150C as I recall, with a 40 kg load @ 1200 rpms and 1800 rpms, respectively.

Reference: www.Lubrizol.com.

This test is also required for specific types of industrial gear lubes, hydraulic fluids and R & O inhibited, turbine oils. I haven't been able to check all the European OEM fluid requirments, but it may be required for some of those as well.

The point is that it's a perfectly valid test for a fluid used in a motorcycle transmission application. That's why it's included in the spec sheets of these MC oils....

As for wear protection of engine oils - Amsoil has posted the results of the triple length, Sequence IIIF test run on their 10w-30/ATM. Cam/lifter wear was 12.5 microns after 240 hours, vs. an allowable limit of 20.0 microns after 80 hours for the standard test.

Ted

[ April 06, 2005, 07:10 PM: Message edited by: TooSlick ]

 

[buster]

BTW, this thread wasn't started to bash Amsoil. I like Amsoil a lot and have used. My question was what makes an oil do better/worse on the 4-Ball wear test. I found it interesting that the MC oils from Mobil did so well but Tooslick answered the question for me.

 

[Stinky Peterson]

The 4 ball test is a extreme pressure test. Extreme pressure conditions are not found in most engines or transmissions. Differential and worm gears are subjected to extreme pressure conditions. This doesn't mean the test doesn't provide good information, it is just testing something that is of less importance in engines.

 

[1sttruck]

Don't some types of cams produce extreme pressure ? I suspect that at startup a lot of areas will also see it. It also seems that there is sometimes mixed lubrication at the rings at the ends of piston stroke. Won't some areas under lugging conditions also produce mixed lubrication ? Don't timing chains produce extreme pressures similar to gear sets ?

There seems to be a lot of different 4 ball data, most of it from Amsoil, but it seems that it'd be another nice set of data if it were summarized. Especially interesting would be repeatability as the advertising makes distinctions on some apparently small differencs.

 

[buster]

http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g1351.pdf

The so called "World Class Oil, Delvac 1" has a lousy Four Ball Wear scar. In fact, it's higher then the regular 15w-40 scar. This test is bogus for motor oil and to think otherwise is ridiculous. Amsoil should spend the money on making their less prone to thickenning then focus on this garbage IMO.

 

[wileyE]

Would the psi on the balls of a roller crank bearing, or needle rod bearings be high enough to be considered EP? Seems like there would be a lot more force than on a plain bearing engine.

Seems to me that any formulated oil is going have some give and takes. It may be top of the heep in one area and fair to midland in another. So it would be easy to take your strong area and represent it with a bar graph for marketing? then fail to bar graph the fair to midland "compromise" that was made. It's just marketing and our job is to be smart enough not to buy into it.

 

[buster]

wileyE your correct, it is give and take. My biggest complaint with the test though is one could argue (and they do) that you'll see 150% more wear if using oil A that showed a better four ball wear scar. That to me is just flat out misleading.

 

[wileyE]

When A started showing side by side "tests" with S they (spectro) countered with some interesting examples froms A's own distributer websites of supposed misinformation. Mostly it was playing fast and loose with the astm tests, for example using one method to test their product, then using another for the competitors. Or testing outside the temp ranges the method calls for, finding the one temp that favored their product. I clicked around verifying what S was stating to be mostly correct but also kept an open mind in that they might also have an agenda.

 

[1sttruck]

By itself a 4-ball test isn't a good predictor of performance as it's obviously measuring one of many required attributes. Everything else being equal the oil with a better 4-ball should perform better.

http://www.lube-tips.com/BackIssues/2002-02-13.htmQ & A

Engine Oil Performance Testing
"I have seen a number of lubricant manufacturers refer to the 4-ball wear scar test as an indicator of how well the oil will protect an engine. Other larger companies tend to brush off the results of this test indicating that it isn't representative of actual engine conditions adding that because it is cheap to run, the results aren't worth much. What are your thoughts on this?"

The 4-ball test (ASTM D4172) is often used as a screening test for many different lubricant types that contain antiwear additives or similar base oil properties. Other tribo-mechanical bench tests are often used as well, including the Timken Test (ASTM D2782) and the Pin and V-Block (ASTM D2670). Because engines have different contact geometry, loads, metallurgy and speeds, numerous bench tests and test protocols are needed. It is not uncommon for several oils to be tested using two such methods and to find that the performance rankings between the oils to reverse (no correlation). This is why, among other reasons, Passenger Car Motor Oils and Heavy Duty Oils (diesel crankcase) are tested in actual engines using controlled methods such as ASTM D5533 Sequence IIIE and D5302 Sequence VE.

Jim Fitch, Noria Corporation

 

[Stinky Peterson]

quote:

---

Originally posted by wileyE:
Would the psi on the balls of a roller crank bearing, or needle rod bearings be high enough to be considered EP? Seems like there would be a lot more force than on a plain bearing engine...

---

Wiley,

The ball/roller bearings and certain types of gears experience elastrohydrodynamic conditions which is different than EP. Here very high pressures in the neighborhood of 150,000 psi turn the lubricant to a near solid at the point of contact and this is why contamination is so detrimental to these components. I don't fully understand the process but much is written on the topic.

Camshafts come pretty close to EP or boundary conditions but the ZDDP type additives do a pretty good job of protection them from wear. I'm not too sure about chains.

 

[TooSlick]

If you calculate the pressures (in psi) generated against the three load balls in the 40kg load test, you'll find they are realistic for an OHC engine with direct acting cam lobes (ie no rollers or rocker arms). Oils that do poorly in this test consistently show high iron levels in UOA's and vice versa.

The 60kg test is supposed to represent a racing engine that has a more radical cam lobe profile, along with much stiffer valve springs. Again the pressures generated during Parameter #4 conditions are quite realistic.

The four ball test does have a fair amount of test to test variability. The results you see are the average of multiple test runs.

Note that the ASTM D4172-B test results are only valid when comparing oils of the same SAE grade.... All things being equal, a heavier oil will almost always reduce cam lobe and lifter wear in an actual engine, unless it's so thick on a cold start that it can't be pumped up to the valve train. However, due to the geometry of the four ball test, it is relatively insensitive to oil viscosity. So what you are testing is only how effective the AW additive chemistry is....


Anyone who's knee jerk reaction to this test is

"There are no ball bearings inside my engine..."

simply has no fundamental understanding of the concept of ANY analog test. "1sttruck" is a quality control engineer and so he clearly does understand how analog tests are commonly used to evaluate materials properties...

TS