Just a question say for heavy load cargo vans with strain on the engine V-8's of course what oil would give me engine protection since Redline has the Moly and the cost is penny in a bucket. Will use it for business purpose and my engine to last. Change the oil every 6 months say 10,000 miles intervals. I don't want to prove the synthetic can last a year and being conservative, I just want the best protection on a heavy load cargo van.
Amsoil and Redline
- Thread starter '03 EB/B Corvette Z06
- Start date
- Status
There is a neato post in this thread concerning 4 ball and these two brands of oils .
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004038#000009
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004038#000009
I see this is an old thread but I just came across it and I have a comment/question...
Some of the variables that was not discussed in the over the road trucker sections was sump capacity, caoacity of the filtration, oil cooling and load duty. Don't large trucks have 5 gallon sump capacities or something of the sort? Don't they also have thermostaically controlled oil cooling systems? Larger dual full flow filters? These are huge factors in dino oil longevity.
Also, most over the road truckers are on constant cruise mode which is every easy on oil. On the other hand, they idle a lot too.
These variables being the case, is it safe to say that that passenger car applications are significantly different?
Doug, can you comment on this?
Finally relative to the original point of the thread, I agree that both companies in question (along with most every other oil blender) uses purposefully misleading tactics in the marketing efforts to sell oil. The proof is in used oil analysis in real world conditions. There is pretty fair amounts of evidence out there now, thanks to this and other forums, that suggest both companies perform well in their respective niche applications.
Don
Some of the variables that was not discussed in the over the road trucker sections was sump capacity, caoacity of the filtration, oil cooling and load duty. Don't large trucks have 5 gallon sump capacities or something of the sort? Don't they also have thermostaically controlled oil cooling systems? Larger dual full flow filters? These are huge factors in dino oil longevity.
Also, most over the road truckers are on constant cruise mode which is every easy on oil. On the other hand, they idle a lot too.
These variables being the case, is it safe to say that that passenger car applications are significantly different?
Doug, can you comment on this?
Finally relative to the original point of the thread, I agree that both companies in question (along with most every other oil blender) uses purposefully misleading tactics in the marketing efforts to sell oil. The proof is in used oil analysis in real world conditions. There is pretty fair amounts of evidence out there now, thanks to this and other forums, that suggest both companies perform well in their respective niche applications.
Don
Why not do a 4 ball wear test with oil that has 5000 miles of use,then 10000 and 20000 then see who holds up
MolaKule
Staff member
Four ball wear tests really don't show much significant.
4-ball tests are not "ABSOLUTE" tests. What I mean is that they show RELATIVE wear among different oils.
If one takes virgin synthetic base oils, you can obtain wear scars between about 0.5 mm and 1.25 mm. Virgin mineral oils show about 2.5 to three times the wear scars of synthesized hydrocarbons and esters and mixes thereof. PAO's and Esters in mineral oil blends bring those wears scars down about 0.75 mm and below.
When formulating additive packagages or testing additive packages, you want a wear scar baseline for the base oil(s). You then add your add pack in various amounts to determine which combination and or ratios yield the smallest wear scar, relative to your base oil(s). This gives you an indication of the effectiveness of your additive package. One finds that certain AW additives in ratios beyond certain concentrations does not yield better wear numbers.
This way, one can avoid overdosing and extra costs of additives that don't increase performance.
I have never seen Amsoil show a wear scar result with just their base oils versus base oils plus additive package. Hmmm!
[ August 12, 2004, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
4-ball tests are not "ABSOLUTE" tests. What I mean is that they show RELATIVE wear among different oils.
If one takes virgin synthetic base oils, you can obtain wear scars between about 0.5 mm and 1.25 mm. Virgin mineral oils show about 2.5 to three times the wear scars of synthesized hydrocarbons and esters and mixes thereof. PAO's and Esters in mineral oil blends bring those wears scars down about 0.75 mm and below.
When formulating additive packagages or testing additive packages, you want a wear scar baseline for the base oil(s). You then add your add pack in various amounts to determine which combination and or ratios yield the smallest wear scar, relative to your base oil(s). This gives you an indication of the effectiveness of your additive package. One finds that certain AW additives in ratios beyond certain concentrations does not yield better wear numbers.
This way, one can avoid overdosing and extra costs of additives that don't increase performance.
I have never seen Amsoil show a wear scar result with just their base oils versus base oils plus additive package. Hmmm!
[ August 12, 2004, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
On the Amsoil site it shows they use two different RPM speeds and temps even with these two 30wts .
Four-Ball Wear Test (ASTM D 4172: 40kgf, 150°C, 1800 rpm, 1 hr) Scar diameter, mm
Four Ball Wear Test (ASTM D-4172 B: 40 kg, 75°C, 1200 rpm, 1 hour, Scar in mm)
I am curious as to why the tests are not performed equally ?
Four-Ball Wear Test (ASTM D 4172: 40kgf, 150°C, 1800 rpm, 1 hr) Scar diameter, mm
Four Ball Wear Test (ASTM D-4172 B: 40 kg, 75°C, 1200 rpm, 1 hour, Scar in mm)
I am curious as to why the tests are not performed equally ?
MolaKule
Staff member
If you wanted your oil to look better, wouldn't you use the second one?
Seriously, will have to check the ASTM document to see what the context is.
Seriously, will have to check the ASTM document to see what the context is.
Ahh you see, I'm guessing you are talking about the Series 2000 0w30 for with the 1800 and the ASL 5w30 for the 1200.
From what I gather with the New series 2000 product they had to increase the test to even get it to register a number.
Now that's what I call science!
Seriously, I respect Hib Halverson as an automotive journalist, but this should really be taken with a grain of salt.
Think of it this way: Would you trust Halverson to run an objective competitive test between a Vette and any other car?
MolaKule
Staff member
The ASTM 2174 test can identify wear scars down to approx. 0.05 mm, depending on the quality of your microscope.
Just for comparison, here is part of the table in the Addendum of 2174 showing various average wear scars from across the spectrum for a 40kg load and 75 C:
1. 40 cSt (SAE 20 weight) pure mineral oil 0.73 mm
2. #1 above plus 1% ZDTP 0.52 mm
3. #1 above plus 2 % S-P 0.35 mm.
It is also a tribute to Amsoil that Redline would make them their adversary of choice in this article. It's emotional marketing- I'm not impressed, and will bypass the bashing.
MolaKule
Staff member
That should have read:
The ASTM 4172 test can identify wear scars down to approx. 0.05 mm, depending on the quality of your microscope.
This info was from ASTM D 4172-94, Standard Test Method for Wear Preventative Characteristics of Lubricating Fluids (Four-Ball Method).
Another four-ball test method, D 2783, is used for measuring the Extreme-Pressure proprerties of mostly gear oils.
I have looked everywhere and cannot find D-4172 B
I don't know how to word this ...since MolaKule did not mention the B test does it mean there is not one that is used at less RPM and Temp than plain ole D-4172 w/o anything behind it noting different parameters ?
Or am I not searching the right places ?
MolaKule
Staff member
The document I have has two options on how to measure the wear scar.
The B option is similar to A option in that you take two measurements of each scar, one across the scar and one through the axis of the scar (assuming elliptical scars). You then sum all 6 numbers and divide by six for an average wear scar.
The B option is similar to A option in that you take two measurements of each scar, one across the scar and one through the axis of the scar (assuming elliptical scars). You then sum all 6 numbers and divide by six for an average wear scar.
Thanks !
I ran across this .
http://kozmik.guelph.on.ca/gtdproject/fluids/Amsoil_S2000.pdf
Some of Redlines testing
http://kozmik.guelph.on.ca/gtdproject/fluids/Amsoil_S2000.pdf
Some of Redlines testing
MolaKule
Staff member
I just came back from the University Library and the D 4172 - 94 is the latest four-ball test as per the ASTM 2003 publication Vol. 05.02.
The A option is 15 kgf at 75 C, 1200 rpm, 60 minutes;
The B option is 40 kgf at 75 C, 1200 rpm, 60 minutes.
It has the same addendum as above as nothing has has changed there.
I may have to contact the ASTM and find out if the higher temperature test and higher loads and rpm are still valid or have been dropped.
[ August 24, 2004, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
The A option is 15 kgf at 75 C, 1200 rpm, 60 minutes;
The B option is 40 kgf at 75 C, 1200 rpm, 60 minutes.
It has the same addendum as above as nothing has has changed there.
I may have to contact the ASTM and find out if the higher temperature test and higher loads and rpm are still valid or have been dropped.
[ August 24, 2004, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
Thanks, Motorbike. Interesting to read Redline's angle on it, although not very surprising.
Coke says Diet Pepsi not as good as advertised. Film at 11.
Coke says Diet Pepsi not as good as advertised. Film at 11.
Initially I thought the test was intersting bc it was more of a real world test. However, after seeing so many RL UOAs on here, I would have liked to have seen RL actually post the UOAs they took. I'm sure RL probably stayed in grade better, which was their point and strenght of the oil, but was wear better? I doubt it.
Kinda like spy vs. spy....marketing dept vs. marketing dept....
- Status
Similar threads
