quote:
Recently Red Line Synthetic Oil Corporation mailed an article to AMSOIL Dealers outlining results of testing done on AMSOIL Series 2000 Synthetic 20W-50 Racing Oil and Red Line products. AMSOIL finds the article flawed in both its marketing approach and scientific methodology.
Initial Red Line testing of an unused sample of AMSOIL Series 2000 20W-50 Racing Oil in the ASTM D4172 Four Ball Wear Test yielded results consistent with those appearing on the Series 2000 label. That is, AMSOIL Series 2000 20W-50 provided nearly three times better wear protection than Red Line 20W-50.
The article, however, goes on to report results of used oil testing using the ASTM D4172 Test. ASTM tests, as any informed entity in the lubricants industry knows, are designed for use with new (unused) lubricants, not used oil.
There are two problems with testing used oil. First, the conditions of testing are uncontrollable. While Red Line states the service conditions under which the samples operated were the same, variables including fuel and glycol dilution, contaminant levels, filtration, driving conditions sampling techniques and many more are virtually impossible to control.
The second problem is repeatability. AMSOIL attempted to replicate Red Line's findings by testing samples of used oil. The results were inconsistent with Red Line's and failed to meet the repeatability requirements of the ASTM D4172 test method. This failure is the result of testing an oil along with its contaminants.
Red Line's claim that their oil is designed to become more effective as it reacts with blowby gases is absurd. Clearly, if blowby gases improved the anti-wear characteristics of lubricants, then lubricant manufacturers would expose their products to such gases during the manufacturing process. The fact is, lubricant performance should not depend on the uncontrollable reactions of blowby gases with the oil.
Amsoil and Redline
- Thread starter '03 EB/B Corvette Z06
- Start date
- Status
Buster - where did you get that?
Buster's post when talking to Amsoil Tech said:He said with Moly, it doesn't do well over long drains and can have negative impacts on the oil. I see a lot of sparing how much is real is hard to figure.Building a oil to hold up to the rigors of racing and trying to make it extended drain may not be possible.Then you have soot and oxidation to worry about it is a real struggle to go long these days.
MY BS meter went off, that's why I asked. I never got a letter....
I wonder if they are saying the corrosion particles of copper and lead along with the longer the oil is ran , the more particles , is used as solid type anti-wear ?
MolaKule
Staff member
Amsoil missed the point here about blowby gasses. Redline's additve package may react with blowby gasses to show short-term improvements.
I agree, the Redline comment sounds somewhat off-the-cuff, and I would like to see this effect for myself, but stranger things have happend in oil chemistry.
I would love to see someone take 6 cars of the same brand/make/engine and 2 use RL and 2 use AmsoilMobil 1 and run them under the exact same track conditions. Put the cars under severe racing conditions and then do a used oil analysis on on 4 cars. A nice real world test. If I were Redline, I would have showed a particle as well.
If Redline says it is fact then it must be! or was it Amsoil or Castrol or Chevron etc. Don't remember.
- Status
Similar threads
