Motor wear test results - Interesting read

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dude's test method sounds suspiciously like the Timken 'one-armed bandit' frequently used to shill snake oil at state fairs and such.

Wonder how well bleach, Coca-Cola or Head & Shoulders would have fared, they usually put most snake oils on the one-armed bandit to shame but no rationally thinking person would ever put them in their engine.
 
Very interesting! BITOG is using most of the best performers. PU, M1, EDGE FST (which I was impressed with).

Chevron Supreme 5w30 was a Sleeper oil for sure, nice surprise for the cost.

I know not super scientific but in line with what we consider to be quality lubes.
 
I'm trying to wrap my head around the testing procedure that he's using. Is it something similar to the 4-ball wear test where its applicability to motor oils in actual engines is of limited use? I realize he's increased the testing temperature to 230F, maybe to make up for this deficiency.

Still, are such high pressures as he's applying even present inside an engine? Just curious how relevant this is...
 
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
OK, It looks like this guy used Timken method for gear oil testing and heated the oils to 230F.

Not valid for engine oil testing.


So all that and the test was flawed from the beginning..Why?
 
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
OK, It looks like this guy used Timken method for gear oil testing and heated the oils to 230F.

Not valid for engine oil testing.


But you don't know for sure. It maybe valid.
You cant rule it out just yet.

The fella was just trying help.

Its just one more test to help split hairs.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
OK, It looks like this guy used Timken method for gear oil testing and heated the oils to 230F.

Not valid for engine oil testing.

He stated he used ASTM D 2782, the Standard Test Method for Measurement of Extreme-Pressure Properties of Lubricating Fluids (Timken Method), and NOT ASTM D 2509, Standard Test Method for Measurement of Load-Carrying Capacity of Lubricating Grease (Timken Method). They are NOT the same test spec.

The ASTM method he used is for fluids with a viscosity of less than 5000 CSt at 40C. So this isn't just for gear oil, but for any fluid.
 
Originally Posted By: C4Dave
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
OK, It looks like this guy used Timken method for gear oil testing and heated the oils to 230F.

Not valid for engine oil testing.

He stated he used ASTM D 2782,

But then he also stated:
Quote:
I did not precisely follow what I consider the useless ASTM D 2782 standard.

So who knows what he actually used.
 
Yet a dino like GTX sure did better than some $$$synthetics. Marketing affecting our thoughts??? If it costs more it has to be good. We have a moral obligation to take $$ from suckers.
wink.gif
 
Possibly or not invalid information but an interesting read either way. I would put a little stock in the testing, after all it is something other than marketing hype and undisclosed information from the oil companies.
 
First he states that he's interesting in thin film rupture, because that's what's on start-up, with thin films in the valve train.

Then modifies the standard test (with little relevance to engines) to 100C, to represent operating conditions.

Ignoring his original premise/problem.

I like the test for what it is, but it doesn't mean much...I'd probably be half OK making it back off the trail with GTX in the diff ????
 
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Yet a dino like GTX sure did better than some $$$synthetics. Marketing affecting our thoughts??? If it costs more it has to be good. We have a moral obligation to take $$ from suckers.
wink.gif



We who use synthetic oil object to being called "suckers". My using synthetic oil may in reality be less expensive than most using dino. Food food thought.
 
Last edited:
I also use synthetic oils exclusively now and I haven't pay for oil since 2006 and have a good stash of free synthetic oil in my garage. All thanks to BITOG.
 
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
No, extreme pressure test is for gear oils. There is no extreme pressure in combustion engines last time I checked as there are no helical gears.

EP additives are not the same thing as EW additives!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_pressure_additive

One would think that timken tests and 4 ball tests should not fool BITOGers.


That explains those fantastic results. Thanks!
 
Thank you very much for sharing

But Mobil is a brand that has WAY too much similar products
I would really appreciate it if anybuddy can tell me which one of these has the same formula or results as the one he tested so that I don't buy the wrong one
thank you very much!! ^^

http://www.mobile01.com/topicdetail.php?f=266&t=2646102&p=1 -->Mobil 1 5W50 Excellent Wear Protection (Advanced Full Synthetic)
http://goods.ruten.com.tw/item/show?11090326871716 -->Mobil 1 5W50 The World’s Leading Synthetic Motor Oil (Fully Synthetic)
http://goods.ruten.com.tw/item/show?21105110292802 -->Mobil 1 15W50 The World’s Leading Synthetic Motor Oil (Advanced Full Synthetic)
http://goods.ruten.com.tw/item/show?21104081486555 -->Mobil 1 5W30 The World’s Leading Synthetic Mtoro Oil (Advanced Full Synthetic)

Does anyone know the difference between these Mobil 1 oils except for their viscosity?
Thanks a lot!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

AEHaas
Another "Taxi" Study: Relationship of Engine Bearing Wear and Oil Rheology 872128
17 18 19
Replies
361
Views
25K
TiGeo
L
  • Locked
Any credibility to RAT 540 Valvoline Maxlife review?
Replies
6
Views
4K
Astro14
Oilblivion
  • Locked
Oil Types, High Mileage Motor Oils, and Ideal Oil Change Intervals
Replies
12
Views
5K
M56959
wwillson
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Pennzoil Q&A GF-6 and GF-7 with the American Petroleum Institute (API) - Answers
2
Replies
22
Views
13K
weaponoffreedom
ZeeOSix
Tribofilms: Aspects of Formation, Stability and Removal
Replies
2
Views
1K
ZeeOSix
Back
Top