What is this dexsil? is this dont by hand or is this the KIT you buy and send off for 10.00
16,000-mile results are in!
- Thread starter 3 Mad Ponchos
- Start date
- Status
Re: TBN
I only have four remaining Dexsil kits so I am spacing them out for particular points of interest. In particular I want to see how Amsoil tests with the Dexsil kits, as we will no longer get Dexsil-type readings from Blackstone after M1 is done.
Blackstone currently tests both the "old" and the "new" method, where the old one is a Dexsil kit and the new one is their new D-4739-variant machine.
Robbie, the Dexsil is a field test kit for TBN. You can do it yourself, or pay a lab to do it for you. It uses a color change to indicate TBN. The thing is a little involved to use, so I am sure an amateur such as myself is a bit hamfisted with the thing compared to Blackstone. Dexsil kits tend to produce higher numbers than other methods such as D4986 and D2739 (I think those are the numbers... away from my refs right now).
Terry, thanks for watching my back... I was thinking about 2k more would probably be it.
I'm still unresolved on the matter of viscosity, but currently leaning toward a 20% rule. Frankly as the viscosity has increased the engine has not been as smooth. I am looking forward to draining this stuff.
Cheers, 3MP
Patman
Staff member
I wonder how much of that oil was drained out just before he takes his sample though. Perhaps getting a Fumoto or similar device would be better, as then he could drain out a little bit into a clean one quart bottle first, then take the sample, and then pour the one quart back in. That way only the 100ml for the sample is lost each time.
I think this is the way to go, even if it's not consistent with the testing method here. At least then all the future tests will show a truer behavior of the oil with much less makeup added.
Just MHO.
Strangely enough, if I view his page from home, I still can't see the 16k results! It stops at 15k. But I did see them from work the other day.
I think this is the way to go, even if it's not consistent with the testing method here. At least then all the future tests will show a truer behavior of the oil with much less makeup added.
Just MHO.
Strangely enough, if I view his page from home, I still can't see the 16k results! It stops at 15k. But I did see them from work the other day.
Patman
Staff member
You're right, I guess I don't want to make more work for you. It's too bad you can't get any of the oil pumps to work, as taking samples from the dipstick would be SOOOOOO MUCH easier for you every 1000 miles. You'd never have to jack the car up.
As far as engine smoothness, it could be time for plugs though. The OEM plugs don't last anywhere near 100k before the engine starts running rough. I bet if you swapped in some fresh NGK V-power plugs your engine would be much smoother. Mine got a lot smoother with the switch to NGKs, even though I put them in well before I even hit 15k on the engine!
As far as engine smoothness, it could be time for plugs though. The OEM plugs don't last anywhere near 100k before the engine starts running rough. I bet if you swapped in some fresh NGK V-power plugs your engine would be much smoother. Mine got a lot smoother with the switch to NGKs, even though I put them in well before I even hit 15k on the engine!
I was thinking that. The ones I can get are 10.00
and they only do TBN, correct and I think 6 at a clip minimum order, so why spend that much money just to check TBN only. If it were a 1.00 I'd have me a case, and do all sorts of nifty tests.
What about Olive oil?
Hey thats an idea, just What food and or animal OIL would work (with and without refining)?
Hummmm...?
MP3,
I'd set a limit of +/- 20% on viscosity change, although it's doubtful you'll hit the -20% limit on any of these oils, except perhaps M1, 0w-40. I normally use a limit of + 20% for an extended drain application, where I am running a 15k-25k oil change interval. If you run any oil long enough it will experience significant oxidative thickening ....
BTW, with seven quarts of makeup oil, you may be running the same batch of Amsoil for several years ...
Tooslick
I'd set a limit of +/- 20% on viscosity change, although it's doubtful you'll hit the -20% limit on any of these oils, except perhaps M1, 0w-40. I normally use a limit of + 20% for an extended drain application, where I am running a 15k-25k oil change interval. If you run any oil long enough it will experience significant oxidative thickening ....
BTW, with seven quarts of makeup oil, you may be running the same batch of Amsoil for several years ...
Tooslick
Patman
Staff member
That's not fair, because Mobil 1 needs to go from 10 cst to 12.5 cst to thicken out of grade, but Amsoil only needs to go from 11.9 to 12.5 to thicken out of grade. So why penalize the oil so early when going from 11.9 to 12.5 is such a small difference compared to the other one.
Percentage is the only way to go.
patman,
With the amount of makeup oil being added in this test, I actually don't expect the Amsoil 5w30 to thicken out of grade for a long time. However, I'd agree that the percentage change from the original viscosity is the most unbiased way to go. As you mentioned, M1 is formulated at the very bottom of the 30wt range, so it will rarely thicken out of grade. It is much more likely to shear down to a 20wt than thicken to a 40wt, at least in the case of the 0w30 and 0w-40.
Tooslick
With the amount of makeup oil being added in this test, I actually don't expect the Amsoil 5w30 to thicken out of grade for a long time. However, I'd agree that the percentage change from the original viscosity is the most unbiased way to go. As you mentioned, M1 is formulated at the very bottom of the 30wt range, so it will rarely thicken out of grade. It is much more likely to shear down to a 20wt than thicken to a 40wt, at least in the case of the 0w30 and 0w-40.
Tooslick
Is 3MP going to keep the 1000 miles intervals between UOA's, or switch to longer intervals between tests?
It definitly has to be a % change or it won't be fair at all. I think once the oil is 1cSt above from where it started, it's time to flag it. If Amsoil starts at 11.7 cSt and it hits 12.8 cSt then it should be ruled out. Technically thought if wear numbers are not effected, it really doesn't matter. I believe Amsoil told me that one grade up or down is acceptable, as long as everthing else is stable.
[ September 21, 2003, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
All right, I think I'll go with the 20% rule.
Though it annoys me that Amsoil is likely to prematurely thicken out of grade, it seems like a lousy reason to end the study early.
I'm going to keep with the 1k sample intervals.
Cheers, 3MP
Though it annoys me that Amsoil is likely to prematurely thicken out of grade, it seems like a lousy reason to end the study early.
I'm going to keep with the 1k sample intervals.
Cheers, 3MP
Patman
Staff member
One interesting note. If you go by the SUS viscosity, 20% thicker in this case ends up being 72.36 SUS, which is about 13.5 cst.
But if you went by 20% thicker of the cst value, it would fail at only about 12.2cst.
[ September 22, 2003, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Patman ]
But if you went by 20% thicker of the cst value, it would fail at only about 12.2cst.
[ September 22, 2003, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Patman ]
You'd have to use cSt value, because that's the value the SAE grades are measured in.
It is odd though that a 20% shift in one scale does not equal a 20% shift in the other. But I checked all the calculator's numbers against the official ASTM conversions, and they're all accurate. The scales must not be linear.
Cheers, 3MP
It is odd though that a 20% shift in one scale does not equal a 20% shift in the other. But I checked all the calculator's numbers against the official ASTM conversions, and they're all accurate. The scales must not be linear.
Cheers, 3MP
Something just isn't correct...but I don't have the magic answer. Either use a percent or arbitrary grade change - BUT we need to use the same units.
An oil shouldn't fail when it has moved ONE SAE grade in either direction. Now if the oil does move two (like from an SAE 30 just into an SAE 50) then it has "failed" for viscosity change. Terminate the test? Again a separate decision.
An oil shouldn't fail when it has moved ONE SAE grade in either direction. Now if the oil does move two (like from an SAE 30 just into an SAE 50) then it has "failed" for viscosity change. Terminate the test? Again a separate decision.
Well, I don't know, Pablo, as a consumer I tend to expect the oil to stay in the grade on the label. If I wanted to run 10W40 in my LS1 I'd have bought it.
I'm thinking I'll use out-of-grade or 20%, whichever is GREATER.
Cheers, 3MP
I'm thinking I'll use out-of-grade or 20%, whichever is GREATER.
Cheers, 3MP
Patman
Staff member
If you're going to use % based on cst and not SUS though, then this oil failed already, and you've gone beyond that, so you'd have to set the percentage for all future tests to 25% instead of 20.
IMHO, I wouldn't even have viscosity as a failing factor, because we've seen many reports where the viscosity thickened up on an oil but it still showed excellent wear numbers and a very strong TBN.
IMHO, I wouldn't even have viscosity as a failing factor, because we've seen many reports where the viscosity thickened up on an oil but it still showed excellent wear numbers and a very strong TBN.
Yea, that's why I included the "greater" component, because even though it's thickened up beyond 20%, it's still in grade. It's still the same oil I expected to have in there.
My beef with wandering viscosity is purely a consumer beef. If I've carefully selected 5W30 as the appropriate oil for my car, I'd be really peeved to find out it snuck up to a 40 weight early on, or thinned down to a 20 weight.
Hm.
Perhaps the best solution is to simply post a warning when the oil has left its grade, but continue with the test as long as other factors are still reasonable.
If we do that though, then M1 has a better chance of hitting the one-year cap.
Cheers, 3MP
My beef with wandering viscosity is purely a consumer beef. If I've carefully selected 5W30 as the appropriate oil for my car, I'd be really peeved to find out it snuck up to a 40 weight early on, or thinned down to a 20 weight.
Hm.
Perhaps the best solution is to simply post a warning when the oil has left its grade, but continue with the test as long as other factors are still reasonable.
If we do that though, then M1 has a better chance of hitting the one-year cap.
Cheers, 3MP
Hi,
3MP - I totally agree with your comments;
"Hm.
Perhaps the best solution is to simply post a warning when the oil has left its grade, but continue with the test as long as other factors are still reasonable.
If we do that though, then M1 has a better chance of hitting the one-year cap."
This has been a great "real world" test and to get hung up in the "Academics" will miss the point.
The one year cap is meaningful. I am using it in the test on my Porsche - that is the maximum time limit they recommended all else being reasonable
Regards
3MP - I totally agree with your comments;
"Hm.
Perhaps the best solution is to simply post a warning when the oil has left its grade, but continue with the test as long as other factors are still reasonable.
If we do that though, then M1 has a better chance of hitting the one-year cap."
This has been a great "real world" test and to get hung up in the "Academics" will miss the point.
The one year cap is meaningful. I am using it in the test on my Porsche - that is the maximum time limit they recommended all else being reasonable
Regards
- Status
Similar threads
