Well, I put the M1R 0W30 in today. It is only 4 days away from the new month. I decided it will be run from 10/04 to the end of 04/05.
Started 0W30 Experiment!
- Thread starter JohnBrowning
- Start date
- Status
What is your null hypothesis?
I got it on order and will be putting it in my 02 Maxima. Will do a UOA at 5K and 6K miles and see if it does better then the currnet Amsoil 0w30. My reasoning is I just want to see a UOA of this oil on my vehicle. I am just lucky my electricity and cable didn't go out completely with this Jeanne phenomenon. About four hours to go...
Pedro
[ September 26, 2004, 05:59 PM: Message edited by: pruizgarcia ]
Pedro
[ September 26, 2004, 05:59 PM: Message edited by: pruizgarcia ]
Well I am going to run it for 6 months and then sample! Then I am going to run a 40Wt or 50wt. oil for 6 months and sample. We can then compare the difference.
I am proposeing that an oil with an HTHS of 2.9 is going to provide less anti-wear protection then an oil with an HTHS above 3.5.
I selected the M1R due to it's higher level of anti-wear additives. I figured that the synthetic selected should at least have close to the same level of AW additives as any of the 40Wt. and 50Wt HDEO's that I might use for comparison purposes. Possable comparison oils are 5W40 Redline, Delvac-1, Amsoil 15W40, Delvac 1300 15W50, Delo 400 15W40, Delo 5W40, M1 15W50. Royal Purple Long Rider 15W40.
The vecile being used is a 2003 Toyota Camry with the 2AZ-FE engine. It is a 5spd manual trans and is a ULEV certifed powertrain. The car has aproximately 18,000 miles. I drive the exact same millage every day and every week with very few exceptions. It is used for a mix of high speed interstate and city driveing. I drive it like I just stole it and am running from the law!
I have often sited a personal belief that M1's lack luster UOA in some cases was due to lack of solvency and low amounts of AW additives. The M1R solves the AW additive shortage. I am also running 4 onces of LC and 2 once per 1000 miles. I will use the LC at the same treatment rate for all experiments.
I am proposeing that an oil with an HTHS of 2.9 is going to provide less anti-wear protection then an oil with an HTHS above 3.5.
I selected the M1R due to it's higher level of anti-wear additives. I figured that the synthetic selected should at least have close to the same level of AW additives as any of the 40Wt. and 50Wt HDEO's that I might use for comparison purposes. Possable comparison oils are 5W40 Redline, Delvac-1, Amsoil 15W40, Delvac 1300 15W50, Delo 400 15W40, Delo 5W40, M1 15W50. Royal Purple Long Rider 15W40.
The vecile being used is a 2003 Toyota Camry with the 2AZ-FE engine. It is a 5spd manual trans and is a ULEV certifed powertrain. The car has aproximately 18,000 miles. I drive the exact same millage every day and every week with very few exceptions. It is used for a mix of high speed interstate and city driveing. I drive it like I just stole it and am running from the law!
I have often sited a personal belief that M1's lack luster UOA in some cases was due to lack of solvency and low amounts of AW additives. The M1R solves the AW additive shortage. I am also running 4 onces of LC and 2 once per 1000 miles. I will use the LC at the same treatment rate for all experiments.
So far so good. The M1R is no noiser then any of the other oils both synthetic or dino. The only exception is the Redline 5W40 I used once. The engine feels more responcive with the 0W30. It also feels like it might have picked up some power (5HP-10HP acording to the butt dyno) as compared to the Havoline Synthetic 10W30 that was in it before. The engine is easier to take off with from a standstill.
John, you seem to be familiar with Toyota. How is the 2.4L 4cyl Camry engine that they just recently put in the Scion Tc? Is this engine known for buring a bit of oil like the Corolla 1.8l? I might look into this car for my wife who has the Focus. I still have a 10k mile Amsoil sample from her car that I'm waiting to send off. (waiting for $$$).
Is it safe to run a racing oil for such a long time period? Aren't they supposed to be short on detergents.
I going to do the M1R 0w30 without any LC. If this oil needs LC to perform, then it isn't worth it's expensive price. I might as well stay with the M1 5w30/10w30, add some M1 15w50 and use LC then, or even stick with Redline 5w30. I am spending to much money on oil. I now have Amsoil 5w30, 0w30, M1 5w30, 10w30, 15w50,Halvoline 5w30, Redline 5w30 and by the end of the week M1R 0w30 in my garage. My wife thinks I am going nuts with this oil thing...
Pedro
[ September 27, 2004, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: pruizgarcia ]
Pedro
[ September 27, 2004, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: pruizgarcia ]
I think the Cat. will suffer but not sure how long it needs to be run for that to happen.I think the RL 10/30would work as well it is a race oil like Synergyn.I have the same engine in my Totota 03 4cy.I am looking foward to the RL Mobil 1 mix but thats a ways away.I too am a 0/30 fan I have 24 qts of GC and 4 gals. of AMSOIL. The Synergyn 3/30 I feel will do as well as the M1 0/30.This is all speculation on my part but like you the trial period should be 6 months.
buster, The engine in the SCION tc is the same engine that is in my Camry. In the close to 20,000 miles I have drive it I have only burnt any oil once. When I first switched to true synthetic it was Redline 5W40 I burnt 1/3 of a quart over a 6000 mile OCI. THe 1/3 of a quart was burnt the first 2000 miles and it has never burnt any more since. 20,000 miles is too soon to tell. With my daily revlimiter sesions I would think that it would have started burning oil buy now if it was going to due to poor design.
They have a super charger for this engine as a factory option on the Scion tc that brings it up to 200HP.
This engine is heavily influenced by Yamaha's work on the celicas HO 1.8 4Cylinder but it is biased towards durability and fuel efficency. It uses cast iron sleves instead of the fiber ones the HO 1.8 uses.
I do not plan on running this oil ever again. I am running the M1R strictly for testing purposes. Another member of this site was kind enough to sell me a case of the M1R for $25 includeing shiping and tax's. It is due to his generiosity that I am running this oil. I would never pay the price for this oil that most places want for it. If it was available localy and not more then $5 a quart I would consider it for regular use assumeing it does well.
I am able to get good priceing on Synergen's oil and Royal Purples oils. M1 SS 10W30 and 15W50 are always great buys at Walmart in the 5Quart Jug. When you consider that M1 can be had for $3.38 to $3.88 a quart at a number of locations the added price for LC is insignificant when compared to the $6.95+ tax and shipping or $8 a quart localy for Redline. All PAO oils have poor solvency.
They have a super charger for this engine as a factory option on the Scion tc that brings it up to 200HP.
This engine is heavily influenced by Yamaha's work on the celicas HO 1.8 4Cylinder but it is biased towards durability and fuel efficency. It uses cast iron sleves instead of the fiber ones the HO 1.8 uses.
I do not plan on running this oil ever again. I am running the M1R strictly for testing purposes. Another member of this site was kind enough to sell me a case of the M1R for $25 includeing shiping and tax's. It is due to his generiosity that I am running this oil. I would never pay the price for this oil that most places want for it. If it was available localy and not more then $5 a quart I would consider it for regular use assumeing it does well.
I am able to get good priceing on Synergen's oil and Royal Purples oils. M1 SS 10W30 and 15W50 are always great buys at Walmart in the 5Quart Jug. When you consider that M1 can be had for $3.38 to $3.88 a quart at a number of locations the added price for LC is insignificant when compared to the $6.95+ tax and shipping or $8 a quart localy for Redline. All PAO oils have poor solvency.
That's a hypothesis, but not a null hypothesis. A null hypothesis would be that there will be no significant difference between the wear metal accumulation among the 3 oils.
Like most other "experiments" proposed and conducted on this board, you will not be able to conclude anything meaningful from the results since nothing will be repeated. You can't do statistics when N=1.
Call it a test, not an experiment.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Oh, as someone who doesn't trust oil with an HTHS < 3.5, I'm inclined to go along with your claim, but how will you prove it?
In this particular engine, I believe you may see some evidence that the opposite is true. If it likes the heavy weights, I'd be very surprized.quote:
Originally posted by moribundman:
Oh, as someone who doesn't trust oil with an HTHS < 3.5, I'm inclined to go along with your claim, but how will you prove it?
It will be interesting.
I want to clarify that the post bellow is not written in an inflamatory tone. I am not angry or trying to come off that way. I am writeing in a gentel tone!! I wanted to make that clear so as not to start any trouble.
Drstressor,
An experiment does not need to be repeatable and no statistics need to be generated. The experiment can be simalar and still be valid. Many forms of science can not be controled to the satification of all. Their have been many times when one or two tests were all that could be performed.
We would have to have a fleet of enignes running on dyno's under close to identical conditions in each data set and a control group for each oil tested.We would have to weight each part before the start of the exercise and then weight them after the exercise was over. We also need to use the electron microscope, a regular microscope, x-ray do some UOA to corralet to the above results. Then we would have to either reassemble some of the engines and test to failure or test some of the individul parts to failure. After that was done we would do the same thing with the control group.
You are not going to see that type of experiment here. If someone wants to see this experiment, test, lab or exercise repeated send me a case of M1R and I gladly do it again. M1R is not available here and the price to order it online is too high! If Walmart or Autozone start to carry it in my area I would be willing to do it again.
Even if the same type,brand and weight of oil is used again it is meaningless by your standards if it is not the same lot number because the formula might not be identical.
When the data set is one vechile that creats problems. I could never do enough oil changes with M1R to produce a data set.
Another point to consider is that the difference in wear will probably not exceed the margin of error for the testing procedure. We do not normaly concern ourselfs with this fact as any improvment is a step in the right direction on this site. We are in the habit of splitting hairs or 1-3 PPM difference in alot of cases!
If the word experiment bother you I am sorry. I am sure we can agree that their are multiple definitions of the word experiment. The word experiment is in common vernacular in the english launge with some very different meanings depending on context.
I think that alot can be seen from one test. One member ran a 20Wt. oil in a vechile not recomending a 20 wt. oil. The UOA from the vechile was horrable. He has plenty of other UOA's on this truck to show that the oil did not perform well in it. Is it statisticly significant no. If is meaningful yes!
If no staticly signifacant results were ever generated on this site it would fine by me. I come here more for the friendship and fellowship then anything else. I actualy miss all the guys on this site when I am gone for a few days.
Drstressor,
You are absolutely right! I had about 60 seconds to type up a responce before I had to power down the system and go home. I do not have internet access at home anymore. I figured that it was more important to respond with my general intent then it was to make it a text book perfect outline for my "EXPERIMENT". I did not know how many days or weeks it would be before I was able to post again. I would hate for someone to think I was ignoreing them or their question.
An experiment does not need to be repeatable and no statistics need to be generated. The experiment can be simalar and still be valid. Many forms of science can not be controled to the satification of all. Their have been many times when one or two tests were all that could be performed.
We would have to have a fleet of enignes running on dyno's under close to identical conditions in each data set and a control group for each oil tested.We would have to weight each part before the start of the exercise and then weight them after the exercise was over. We also need to use the electron microscope, a regular microscope, x-ray do some UOA to corralet to the above results. Then we would have to either reassemble some of the engines and test to failure or test some of the individul parts to failure. After that was done we would do the same thing with the control group.
You are not going to see that type of experiment here. If someone wants to see this experiment, test, lab or exercise repeated send me a case of M1R and I gladly do it again. M1R is not available here and the price to order it online is too high! If Walmart or Autozone start to carry it in my area I would be willing to do it again.
Even if the same type,brand and weight of oil is used again it is meaningless by your standards if it is not the same lot number because the formula might not be identical.
When the data set is one vechile that creats problems. I could never do enough oil changes with M1R to produce a data set.
Another point to consider is that the difference in wear will probably not exceed the margin of error for the testing procedure. We do not normaly concern ourselfs with this fact as any improvment is a step in the right direction on this site. We are in the habit of splitting hairs or 1-3 PPM difference in alot of cases!
If the word experiment bother you I am sorry. I am sure we can agree that their are multiple definitions of the word experiment. The word experiment is in common vernacular in the english launge with some very different meanings depending on context.
I think that alot can be seen from one test. One member ran a 20Wt. oil in a vechile not recomending a 20 wt. oil. The UOA from the vechile was horrable. He has plenty of other UOA's on this truck to show that the oil did not perform well in it. Is it statisticly significant no. If is meaningful yes!
If no staticly signifacant results were ever generated on this site it would fine by me. I come here more for the friendship and fellowship then anything else. I actualy miss all the guys on this site when I am gone for a few days.
I also have noted the quick responsiveness of my Max with M1R. I thought the engine would be nosier (ala M1 5w30) but it is not. Sending out a sample for a VOA analysis.
Pedro
Pedro
Good luck trying to inspire people here to use proper scientific terminology.quote:
Originally posted by Drstressor:
That's a hypothesis, but not a null hypothesis. A null hypothesis would be that there will be no significant difference between the wear metal accumulation among the 3 oils.
Like most other "experiments" proposed and conducted on this board, you will not be able to conclude anything meaningful from the results since nothing will be repeated. You can't do statistics when N=1.
Call it a test, not an experiment.
On the other hand, once you get past that, I agree with JB, it's fun just to hang out here and shoot the breeze.
And JB, if you some big cajones, you'd would of tested some 0w20 instead.
[ October 02, 2004, 02:14 AM: Message edited by: 427Z06 ]
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked