Blackstone ZDDP analysis Off

Status
Not open for further replies.
For those of us consumers that choose oil analysis as a maintenance or preventive maintenance tool, it is difficult to choose a lab. Some labs choose to participate in the accreditation process, and some don't. From what I understand (could be wrong), Blackstone chooses not to participate.

My understanding is that labs that participate are sent samples to test and then return the results of their tests for statistical analysis to the controlling authority. Once the numbers are crunched and standard deviations are set, a pass or fail grade will be awarded for each critical category/area. You don't have to pass every critical category to receive an overall passing grade and receive a ISO accreditation certificate number for the year. How many categories can you fail? I'm not sure, but more than one from what I've seen.

So how good is a lab that has attained certification status? Well, we really don't know unless we see the test results. How good is a lab that chooses not to participate in the process? Well, we really have no clue there either.

What is a consumer to do? I think the old rule of thumb of staying with a lab for consistency and trending is probably best. If you want to get a second opinion from another lab, then that's a viable option too.

I personally use two labs routinely. One is certified (I've seen the test results too), and one chooses not to be. There is a significant price difference though. But the difference in value and return on investment is significant too. Like all products for consumers, you have to evaluate your needs and expectations coincidental to your budget. This is the most important thing IMO when you chose a lab to help keep a vehicle well maintained for a long, long time.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Just another reason for me to continue to use TOROMONT, who is accredited.


I use Toromont as well but I don't see at their website any mention of any specific ISO accreditation possessed by their fluid analysis labs
21.gif
.

For example Polaris Labs which has an oil analysis lab in Edmonton (for the Oil Sands?) prominently advertises itself as having ISO 17025 A2LA Accreditation.
 
Last edited:
Some good points from several posters.

I wish I had time to research this in more depth. I don't like to see differences in lab results but how do you know who is right? Logic would say, "Go with the lab that is certified," but my general experience with "certification" is that it often comes down to how much money a company plunked down with some alleged authority and it's mostly done for advertising purposes and is based on a questionnaire, not a physical inspection or a performance test. That's not true in every case but no matter what certification decal is on the stationary, it comes down to the company to do a good job.

SWRI is a great lab, but they are heart-stoppingly expensive and not for ordinary consumers. Even their data can be (and is) manipulated for advertising purposes. Not that SWRI falsifies data, but they are "for hire" and sometime companies go in knowing that certain types of tests will show their product better than others and order those tests just so they can say "50% more" when in reality, they did an oranges to pears test. SWRI runs the tests the customer wants and they will be 100% accurate. The only way to challenge the test results is to look at the tests themselves and know whether the tests were appropriate or not.

When I get around to it, the questions I will ask:

-What does the certification entail?

-Is there a more common certification standard or one specific to oil test labs?

-Is it "honor system" or are these physical inspections or performance standards to meet.

-How does all the above effect the cost of analysis?
 
Good points Jim. My question is one which you asked, but how do you know who is right? My simple answer is, you don't. My recommendation would be the same recommendation I'd give myself or a loved one if a lab report came back showing some medical abnormality. Get a second opinion. If the report is good, maybe get another "check up" in 6 months or a year to be sure there were no changes. If there were major changes, get a second opinion. Expensive, but with the mistakes I've seen in these reports I don't have much faith in them. JMO
 
Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Just another reason for me to continue to use TOROMONT, who is accredited.


I use Toromont as well but I don't see at their website any mention of any specific ISO accreditation possessed by their fluid analysis labs
21.gif
.

For example Polaris Labs which has an oil analysis lab in Edmonton (for the Oil Sands?) prominently advertises itself as having ISO 17025 A2LA Accreditation.


All the reports say they are ISO 9001 registered laboratory, do the Blackstone ones? (I'm asking seriously, I've never got one from Blackstone).

The lab mentioned in the OP states ISO 9001 as well, I assumed this was what we were looking for, LOL!

I can fire off an e-mail and ask them though.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


All the reports say they are ISO 9001 registered laboratory, do the Blackstone ones? (I'm asking seriously, I've never got one from Blackstone).

The lab mentioned in the OP states ISO 9001 as well, I assumed this was what we were looking for, LOL!




ISO 9*** has absolutely nothing to do with accuracy. It just means they came up with their own internal standards, and follow certain procedures to to remedy any problems. If their ISO standard says they can be off by + or - 10,000ppm, and if they are off by more than that, they give you the middle finger, then they are ISO 9*** certified.


ISO_9000.gif
 
Hi,
Loobed - Great answer. Many people do not understand the QA System (whatever Standard) and forget or don't know that they were primarily designed for Production processes (via the USA for Japan in the 1950s)

What matters most perhaps is the level of repeatability and QA System Labs do operate within their agreed parameters therefore you would expect a great level of "predictability" in their results

Perhaps Blackstone do too? - via an in-house Quality Control system including Technician training! Sometimes these can be better than a Registered QA System
 
Yeah, Rouge, that was pretty telling, wasn't it? Pretty hard to counter info like that. Means a lot more than any certification, or lack thereof.

A great deal may depend on how you are using the tests. If you are trending and using the same lab, and that lab's "inaccuracies" are consistent, the results can be useful. Still, if one lab can come close to matching the manufacturers specs, rather than being 50 percent, or so, off, there seems only one logical answer.
 
When I get a UOA, I am more interested in Silicon from a bad air cleaner; Fuel dilution; iron from rings, cam, or valves; lead, tin, or copper from bearings; and potassium from coolant leaks. I don't really care about the viscosity or the ammount of Zinc, Calcium, or Phosphorus unless the wear metals are high.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top