Recent Topics
NAG1 (W5A580) fluid replacement
by macka
02/01/15 04:15 AM
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has new name, logo
by wemay
02/01/15 03:09 AM
Shift knob
by mjoekingz28
02/01/15 02:25 AM
Did some homework on treadwear warranties
by The Critic
02/01/15 12:44 AM
Battery bad in truck but guy at Sears says "GOOD"
by syndini
02/01/15 12:18 AM
G-Oil 4 Cycle Small Engin Oil VS PCMO
by landtoy80
02/01/15 12:15 AM
Gun barrel storage
by Camprunner
01/31/15 11:33 PM
1 quart overfilled on GM 3.5....
by gregk24
01/31/15 11:28 PM
Post your self-destructing engines...
by addyguy
01/31/15 11:25 PM
Fastener setup for sheetmetal and wood
by JHZR2
01/31/15 10:57 PM
The cat...He's baaaaack.
by Chris142
01/31/15 10:53 PM
Bending painted sheetmetal
by JHZR2
01/31/15 10:46 PM
Newest Members
macka, boyd, zlove007, HK45, CUCOTECH
52691 Registered Users
Who's Online
28 registered (BobsArmory, Astro14, Bumble_guy, ARB1977, Boczech, Black_Thunder, 3 invisible), 528 Guests and 150 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
52691 Members
66 Forums
225851 Topics
3594592 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG
Topic Options
#2673093 - 07/03/12 08:57 PM Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count
OldCowboy Offline


Registered: 05/28/11
Posts: 734
Loc: SW Missouri
Either the Fram XG Extended Guard 3614 and NAPA Platinum 41348 filters are extraordinary oil filters, or Polaris Laboratories screwed up the particle count analysis on three samples. Here's the basic information:

- Sample 1: Toyota 0W-20 after 9837 miles. ISO Cleanliness 17/16/14, with 698 particles 4u>10U

- Sample 2: Virgin Pennzoil Platinum 5W-20. ISO Cleanliness 21/17/13, with 15634 particles 4u > 10u

- Sample 3: Pennzoil Platinum 5W-20 from the same 5 qt bottle as Sample 2, but after the vehicle had been run 10 miles to circulate the oil and mix with the remaining oil that was left in the oil passages after draining the oil. ISO Cleanliness 17/16/14 with 738 particles 4u>10u.

If these analyses are correct, which I doubt, the NAPA Platinum filter removed 98.8% of the particles which were less than 10u in diameter and 99.5% of the particles which were less than 14u in diameter. Frankly, I cannot believe these results.

Can anyone explain this???

Top
#2673104 - 07/03/12 09:04 PM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
Rand Offline


Registered: 08/20/03
Posts: 8225
Loc: Barberton,Ohio
sounds like 1 and 2 were switched and 3 is normal.
_________________________
2015 Forester I-Premium 6MT w/Blizzak ws-80's

Top
#2673137 - 07/03/12 09:38 PM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
OldCowboy Offline


Registered: 05/28/11
Posts: 734
Loc: SW Missouri
That's what I was thinking. I've asked them to rerun the particle counts.

This is not the first time I've had problems with Polaris. One of the virgin oil samples I sent in came back with wear metals similar to a 3000 mile sample. I'm starting to think their quality control is sloppy.

Top
#2673165 - 07/03/12 10:03 PM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
Rand Offline


Registered: 08/20/03
Posts: 8225
Loc: Barberton,Ohio
or lazy.
_________________________
2015 Forester I-Premium 6MT w/Blizzak ws-80's

Top
#2673202 - 07/03/12 11:08 PM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
LargeCarManX2 Offline


Registered: 09/23/06
Posts: 2279
Loc: Up here in the NorthWest
And if they are correct? Wow! now that would be Greeaat!
_________________________
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
Sir Winston Churchill

Top
#2673267 - 07/04/12 01:53 AM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
ltslimjim Offline


Registered: 08/06/10
Posts: 5295
Loc: FreelanceRoverRogerRabbit
Is there a difference in the ISO code for Virgin oil and Used oil?

Where is Jim Allen when you need him...grin2
_________________________
1992 Civic VX 285k+
Waiting on winter OCI to sample first time post-HG job 18 months ago..

Top
#2673380 - 07/04/12 07:47 AM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
cp3 Offline


Registered: 07/26/06
Posts: 2642
Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Well clearly they are extrodinary filters and it just cleaned up that virgin oil in the 10 mile run!!! grin2

I agree that they probably just mixed up the samples but it sure makes you wonder about the rest of their practices if they can't keep samples straight.
_________________________
Dodge Charger|Pennzoil Platinum 5w20|Mopar MO-744
Pontiac G6 GT|Mobil 1 0w40|Mobil 1 M1-101

Top
#2673398 - 07/04/12 08:04 AM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: OldCowboy]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 22003
Loc: NY
Man that sucks, no clue what to believe. Some of these UOA reports leave a lot to the imagination, even what appears to be a good UOA could be wrong. confused
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops


Top
#2673403 - 07/04/12 08:12 AM Re: Disappointing Oil Analysis Results (Particle Count [Re: demarpaint]
Pablo Offline


Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 46783
Loc: Duvall WA - Pacific NW USA
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Man that sucks, no clue what to believe. Some of these UOA reports leave a lot to the imagination, even what appears to be a good UOA could be wrong. confused



Agree. I must admit when I first saw that I thought BLACKSTONE particle count.

First of all, contact the lab. Find out the method. I have very little (NO?) faith in low cost particle counts. So as screwy as the results look, it's not necessarily a sample mix up. Ask a mess of questions and have them repeat.

Top