Synlube UOA From Budman

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
3,515
Location
Millbrae, CA
All I could do with small sample size.
5w50 synlube NO VOA availble for this batch.
From "budman" 19,xxx Miles

FE-166
CR-3
NI-2
AL-39
PB-2
ZN-588
CU-44
SN-1
AG- TI- SI-44
B-15
NA-62
K- MO-1126
P-740
CA-333
BA- MG-178
SB- V-
[email protected]
TBN-6.95
 
Last edited:
coffee2.gif
 
With all the controversy surrounding Synlube how do we even know the miles stated are accurate? That's only the first thing that comes to mind........
35.gif
Not doubting you Bruce, I know you can only go by the info supplied to you. I'm sure if Miro/Kirk/jonny-b and crew weren't banned they'll chime in.
36.gif
35.gif
36.gif
 
Last edited:
Doesnt to me, since I get 12-15ppm Fe running 12-14k miles on M1 0w-40 and amsoil sso.
 
They have an answer to the iron, I just don't have the energy to look for it. LOL
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
They have an answer to the iron, I just don't have the energy to look for it. LOL

They say it is sacrificial iron which is yet another load of BULL.

This VOA shows starting iron was 11 ppm. The VOA looks a lot like some normal UOAs:

Originally Posted By: bruce381
I do not know about this spectro was run twice to verify...

Synlube "small Engine"
5w50

Vis @ 100 15.4 (40wt)
TBN 2.5
FE 11
AL 3
PB 8
B 146
NA 32
MO 1597
P 1246
ZN 52
CA 110
MG 26

Others trace
 
I think the main problem here is that we are all trying to look at this oil from an objective scientific standpoint using other oils and industry standards as a frame of reference. But this company doesn't appear to use any standard methods that a normal oil company would use. It's a free country but personally these guys do not seem to be on the up and up to me. We have to be skeptical of anything on the internet and we should all come to our own conclusions, but just a few non-standard things I have seen on the internet off the top of my head are:

1.No office or offices and avoiding anyone who wants to see their office even going so far as to say it is located on a secret government base
2.Selling oil to customers out of the trunk in a parking lot
3.Selling oil in used bottles
4.Selling Delvac 1 with original seals removed and new seals added
5.Belligerant to potential customers on forums
6.Unwilling to provide any data, such as VOA
7.MSDS sheet with different companies names on it
8.Pictures of models with exotic cars on their website with false names and long stories about how they use it in their car
9.Buys back used oil for reuse
10.Permanently revoked business license in Nevada
11.Wildly variable data from VOAs not supplied by the company
12.Posting the real names on forums of customers who are critical of the company
13.Saying that oil pressure is not important and that it is the solids that do the lubricating
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
19k miles, with Ca of 333 and Mg of 178, and TBN is 6.95?

BULL.


I agree. Even if the TBN IS correct, wear metals look absolutely horrible.
 
Originally Posted By: bruce381
All I could do with small sample size.
5w50 synlube NO VOA availble for this batch.
From "budman" 19,xxx Miles

FE-166
CR-3
NI-2
AL-39
PB-2
ZN-588
CU-44
SN-1
AG- TI- SI-44
B-15
NA-62
K- MO-1126
P-740
CA-333
BA- MG-178
SB- V-
[email protected]
TBN-6.95



I take it that the FE-166 is IRON.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Yes FE=Iron


I wonder what the FE will look like at 50,000 miles.

I cannot imagine the IRON numbers getting any better, they will probably get worse, I would take a guess that the FE Number at 50,000 miles will be something like 250
21.gif
 
It doesn't look good. But wait for the Synlube shuffle, it will explain everything and more. After they attack the lab they'll say either it wasn't their oil, or it was tampered with. They could also say that the report is fake. Use your imagination!
 
FE-166
AL-39
CU-44

Something is wrong here. Even for 19k* miles. There are UOA's here of 12-20k OCI's on Amsoil and M1EP that are not nearly as awful.

* I question that mileage number. I do not really trust Synlube at all. While I did happily jump on the Amsoil band wagon, at least there were more than a hand full of good UOA's to back up my decision. Everything I have seen on Synlube seems to be a fallacy.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Use your imagination!


With what I just read, I do not need to use my imagination, I will just stick with Pennzoil Platinum.
13.gif
 
While I'm all for a good group beat down, this is just now falling into conventional condemnation limits for Fe. No Pb of merit and you've got some silicon that could have been responsible for some of the Al, Nickle, and Chromium. The moly might have something to do with the Cu.

For near 20k the TBN is outstanding.

Let's be fair and balanced as we're skewering the beast.
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
For near 20k the TBN is outstanding...

I think the question is, is that TBN credible? We have 2 VOAs which show TBNS of 2.5 and 6.3. So if the oil starts that low, is it realistic that the TBN will go up after 20k miles? I mean without using the TBN booster additive that they sell.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top