Amsoil and Redline

Status
Not open for further replies.
The proof is to look at how the test is configured and compare it to the type of lube situation you see in the valvetrain. For example, the type of wear you see between a cam lobe and valve lifter is sliding contact under very high pressures in the 30ksi to 50ksi range. This is exactly what the Four Ball test is supposed to analog. The four ball test has no relevance to bearing wear since that's a full flow situation.

I've been a rocket propulsion engineer for the USAF and NASA for over twenty years and my educational background (MSME, Georgia Tech, 1981) is in materials science. In fact, I taught the subject as a GTA at Georgia Tech. With all due respect, I do believe I'm qualified to evaluate the veracity of a simple lab test. I've spent hours thinking about this test and I believe my conclusions are perfectly valid.

Tooslick
 
quote:

I've been a rocket propulsion engineer for the USAF and NASA for over twenty years and my educational background (MSME, Georgia Tech, 1981) is in materials science. In fact, I taught the subject as a GTA at Georgia Tech. With all due respect, I do believe I'm qualified to evaluate the veracity of a simple lab test. I've spent hours thinking about this test and I believe my conclusions are perfectly valid.

Ok, great, but why are Redline, Neo, Mobil etc. stating it has no relevance? And why doen't UOA's reflect this? And please to say Mobil 1's valvetrain wear is higher because I've gone back through the UOA's and I see no evidence of this at all.
 
Mike,

Please email me off line with your phone # and I'll give you a call. I'd be glad to explain how the four ball test works in detail and why I believe it is relevant ....

thanks,

Ted
 
I should add that I think Redline is an excellent oil and is probably what I'd use in my own vehicles if Amsoil didn't exist. I particularly like the PAO/Ester basestock blend they are using and here in the south I'm not all that concerned with performance in extremely cold weather. They do need to reduce the MoDTC levels by about 50%-75% and the long drain capability would improve ....

I'd feel fine with the Redline 5w-40 and 10,000 mile change intervals in my personal vehicles and lawn/garden equipment ....

Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
 
Ted, if you owned a Corvette and ran it fairly hard, what oil would you use? I kind of diferentiate RL from Amsoil by looking at it from a performance vs long drain perspective, if that makes sense. Look at ATM/ASL and then an oil like RL or Synergyn. Would you not agree that for hard driving, these would be better? With Amsoil, I see ZDDP, 60ppm of Boron and a nice thick base oil, but not enough secondary AW additives?
 
The instant that somebody starts talking about Falex tests or four ball tests I walk away. I still remember a guy at the Colorado State Fair trying to sell an oil supplement. He had a Falex machine to demonstrate tests of motor oils and his oil supplement. He has several brands of motor oil for comparison. I asked him to try Mobil 1 (I think it was 10W-30 but I can't remember for sure). The Mobil 1 actually failed before the conventional motor oils that were tested in the Falex machine. Of course his oil supplement did just stellar.

Well, given a choice, I would still take the Mobil 1 over any of the conventional motor oils.
 
I'd run Amsoil Series 2000, 0w-30 or the Redline 5w-30 - and I'd probably also try the 3w-30 Synergyn racing oil. I like their additive chemistry and the Synergyn 0w-20 stayed exceptionally clean looking in my Tacoma. Royal Purple has also shown excellent results in this application.

I'd run Amsoil synthetic ATF or Redline MTL in the transmission and the Series 2000 gear lube in the axle.

I haven't been able to wear out an engine using Amsoil and I've been trying since 1978! The chassis on my 1976 riding mower rusted apart, but the B & S engine runs like a top.

Ted

[ February 16, 2004, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: TooSlick ]
 
I really appreciate the information supplied by Doug Hillary. He is actually 'in the field' and knows what is going on. I can understand somebody who is the CEO of a large trucking company (worth millions of dollars) wanting to go with what is proven. Of course, when technology moves forward you don't want to get dated.

Another thing I find interesting are claims made by some that this synthetic oil or that synthetic oil is the brand preferred by most truckers. If most truckers are using mineral oil, then the people making those claims must have talked to a very small number of truckers!

I also get tired of hearing that this synthetic oil or that synthetic oil is used by a high percentage of NASCAR drivers, or CART drivers, or whatever. There is no way to determine what the truth is and actually the top teams in racing might be using special oil formulations even for individual races on individual tracks. Who knows what they are using-they may be using oil formulations that will not appear for ordinary vehicles for another 5-10 years, if ever.
 
Mystic,

Many owner/operators have switched to synthetic oil and bypass filters. However, Delo 400, Delvac 1300 and Shell Rotella T still dominate the large fleet market. I expect that to change over the next 10-15 years, when the standard switches from 15w-40 to 5w-40 or even 5w-30.

Ted
 
Ted,
in this country we act as the in field "test bed" for heavy trucks - most NA and Euro prototypes are durability tested here and have been so for many years
This is because DB-Chrysler, Kenworth, Volvo/Mack/Renault, - the owners of the NA Truck Makers, and IVECO etc. have extensive engineering and manufacturing facilities here

By-pass filters:

Most trucking companies here DO NOT USE BY-PASS FILTERS. The use factor here may be 2%-3% at best. This includes a very small minority who use the "toilet roll" type - Franz etc

Their was common place until the mid 1980's when about 20% of heavy vehicles used "Luberfiner" units but it simply does not happen today. They (the Luberfiner) may still be offered as an option by Kenworth but I have not seen one fitted to a new heavy truck in recent years

Some of my customers undertake regularised heavy road train work ( 120-150000 kg GCM )in some of the worlds hottest and most difficult terrain and on gravel( dusty ) roads - they do not use by-pass filters. They get very good first rebuild engine life based on fuel used and they use mineral HDEOs

Even Detroit Diesel stopped fitting the cannister by-pass filter to Series 60 engines nearly 10 years ago

The MANN-HUMMEL ( Spinner 2 ) centrifuge is sold by Detroit Diesel and IVECO. This move was based a lot on my field tesing of extended OCIs and the excellent end results obtained. They are fitted to all bar one of my trucks but very few others use them

DAF ( Kenworth ) also install a centrifuge by-pass on some of their Euro built engines set up for extended OCIs and synthetics. They are very low volume sellers trucks

This by-pass thing may change with the introduction of EGR engines but there are no signs this is happening yet at all

I am deeply involved with the Owner-Driver market and very few use a by-pass filter, if they do it is usually a "toilet roll" type

Synthetic HDEOs:

Some trucking companies have tried synthetics and moved back to mineral oils because it WAS NOT COST EFFECTIVE in their operations. A major customer of mine that I have worked alongside for 20+ years tried Delvac 1 and have recently gone back to Delvac MX. This was due to internal management complications caused by the non standard servicing practices needed. Another fleet I work with on a day to day basis has also gone from a FUCHS synthetic to DELO for the same reason. These fleets are two of Australia's largest.
Some smaller fleets are beginning to follow my five year long example on synthetic oil

I am currently negotiating with ExxonMobil about a possible teardown and measure-up of one of my engines with 1m kms completed on Delvac 1

Our largest fleets will not even consider synthetic lubricants and I do not know of any major Bus/Coach fleets using them except where mandated by the Euro engine suppliers

I know of only a "handful" of Owner-Drivers who use a synthetic HDEO - and this is usually FUCHS or Delvac 1

Regards

[ February 16, 2004, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: Doug Hillary ]
 
An Amsoil dealer on corvetteforum.com posted this response from Amsoil tech. department regarding this Hib Claim.

quote:

Do you know how old this crap is? And it is exactly that. Old crap. You see, it is our corporate policy not to get involved in forums because the people in these forums are rarely “experts” and they are usually in under false or hidden identities and therefore cannot be held responsible for what they say. These statements are false and absolutely absurd. If you have looked at the back label of our Series 2000 oil lately you won’t even see Redline. We are only comparing to the larger legitimate oil companies. I challenge anyone to bring Redline’s statement to any other major lubricant manufacturer and ask them if this so called “scientific study” of theirs is legitimate. You don’t just have to take our word for it! I do not subscribe to this type of desperation marketing by smaller oil companies. If Redline actually gets better with more miles, then I want the old Redline you dump out of your car. Seeing as it is better than a NEW bottle of Redline there should be a huge market for the USED Redline oil!! Think about it!


Pretty hostile.
shocked.gif


I think it's safe to say that Amsoil/M1 are better long drain oils then Redline. Redline however is for the guy that bests the **** out of his car on a daily basis. Thats how I see it at least. Redline has performance written all over it from the website, reputation and formulation. Not that the others aren't performance oriented, but the loads of Moly in Redline are their for a reason. Just my humble opinion.
smile.gif


[ February 16, 2004, 09:16 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
 
Hi,
as Jerry has pointed out before and I also have lots of experience with, the cam wiping pressures in modern heavy diesels is probably the highest in the automotive business - per se
Detroit's Series 60's cam rollers have been ceramic (silicon nitride) since their introduction in about 1988
Many others use similar materials too now

Anybody with exposure to the Cummins 14 litre Big Cam 1, 2, 3 engines will tell you all about rapid camshaft wear!!

So, excessive cam wear is NOT really a problem in heavy diesels today - when using the prescribed mineral HDEOs. And none of the popular brands/types I know of would have been exposed to the four ball test and many of the other tests that apply to the API's "S" ratings either

I believe that in the end the lubricant's REAL TEST is engine durability in service measured in millions of miles of REAL WORLD use. This includes missed gears, missed OCIs, wrong top up oils used ( even ATF and gear oil ), stuck injectors, and very high oil temperatures. And still the engine cranks out its 600k plus without replacement cams etc.

A testament to good design - both the engines and the mineral 15w-40 HDEO

Regards
 
quote:

Originally posted by Doug Hillary:

Some trucking companies have tried synthetics and moved back to mineral oils because it WAS NOT COST EFFECTIVE in their operations. A major customer of mine that I have worked alongside for 20+ years tried Delvac 1 and have recently gone back to Delvac MX. This was due to internal management complications caused by the non standard servicing practices needed. Another fleet I work with on a day to day basis has also gone from a FUCHS synthetic to DELO for the same reason. These fleets are two of Australia's largest.


Why was it not cost effective?

What do you mean by internal management complications?

Is this a political way of saying something else?
 
quote:

Originally posted by Doug Hillary:
[QB
The fear of synthetics is due to entrenched suspicion and the worry that contamination will trash 40ltrs of newly changed high priced lubricant multiplied by the fleet size!
A quick way to blow a maintenance budget!

Regards [/QB]

What is a typical contamination scenario? I have been told of where the wrong oil was dumped into the wrong bulk tank but wasn't aware of a large scale contamination problem at engine. Sounds like the companies have more problems with processes, procedures, and personel.
 
Hi,
yes you are correct Procedures and Processes are in the end one of the problems
As I mentioned earlier contamination occurs in a multitude of ways. Drivers are often 2k+ away from base and needs some oil - sees Delvac - four litres in - "oh sorry its Delvac MX"
Or at an external service point an apprentice sees a low oil level - the Driver is asleep - in goes ??? oil
And such - it is a real problem when trying to keep the oil in the sump for six months ( say 62k )
Professional Drivers are not the calibre they once were

"Politics" - no hidden meanings intended. Some workshop staff fear for their jobs with extended OCIs so they set out to make sure poor results emerge from the testing process
One example may be a fleet that has standardised OCIs of 12k - the synthetics are heading for 48k by UOA but the samples get forgotten or lost!
Or the Fleet manager is "on the take" from an oils ditributor - a free trip to Indy on the Gold Coast etc etc. So they work against the better result from another product rather than for it
Even some older Drivers "don't like thin oils"! One Driver who had worked for me for about four years threatened to resign when he saw how thin Delvac 1 was compared to a 15w-40. It took ages to convince him!

It is a sad but true reality but I've seen it all at one time or another

The other thing is that the correct way to commence synthetics is with each new vehicle leaving the old ones on their original mineral oils. This progressive change is very complex for some people to manage over time as it may take five years or more to replace all highly utilised vehicles in a fleet

Cost effectiveness is a factor of the real cost over the real benefit

If the costs of a synthetic fill is twice that of mineral oil then it needs to go at least twicw the distance. I went for a mineral at 15kkms OCI to a semi-synthetic at about 35kkms. The break even point allowing for labour, filters and oil was 80kkms. My average is about 90kkms so I'm in front
A tangible benfit is reduced down time and this has been a known but not quantified bonus. The unknown is extended life - when a troublefree changeover at 1.2m kkms can be achieved with mineral or synthetic and the benefit may accrue for the next owner it matters less than most people think

One benefit I can attest to is that since using Delvac 1 we no longer adjust the rocker gear after the engine has past 300kkms or is out of warranty. This was a routine job needed every 200kkms or so. Valve train wear with Del 1 is now almost non existant and we monitored it closely before opting not to adjust at all several years ago

I believe it is almost impossibe to measure fuel economy variances - mineral v synthetic - due to the multitude of variables involved. And I monitor every truck and driver for fuel efficiency

This is all part of a very complex Fleet management area and the past is litterd with trashed motors and careers. Just another reason why fleets stay with an old tried and trusted favourite - a mineral 15w-40 HDEO

Regards
 
It sounds like from what you say that the synthetics potentially are better however. People just need to be convinced. I would guess soewhere in the future there will be much more in the way of synthetics in fleets.

But it is still disturbing to me if people are implying that any particular brand of synthetic oil, regardless what that brand is, is the number one synthetic oil used in fleets of trucks. If, say, 90%-95% of the trucks are still at this time using mineral oils, it is easy to see misleading advertising. The people claiming that their synthetic oil is number one in long distance trucks are actually saying that they are number one in 5% of the trucks?
 
Hi,
you hit it correctly from where I sit!

In Australia the "mandatory" move to synthetic engine oils in truck fleets has commenced via new Euro truck sales. Euro drive train trucks are NOT the biggest sellers here however

Mercedes Benz ( in their Actros ), IVECO with their own engine range and DAF ( 530hp only ),and perhaps Scania, are making synthetics manadatory for warranty purposes

As stated earlier though these vehicles are very low volume sellers that end up in certain fleets as replacements for the same Make

Synthetic gearbox and diff oils are a slightly different story with a very slightly better acceptance level

Regards
Regards
 
Doug,

The US market has moved to 50wt, "CD" rated, synthetic powershift transmission fluids and 75w-90 synthetic gear lubes in a major way in the past five years, mainly for extended drains and improved fuel efficiency. I've also seen a number of Owner/Operators using synthetic lubes and bypass filters, where the individual owner has more control over the situation.

Ted
 
Hi,
Tooslick - as I said earlier the use of synthetic gear oils in trucking is indeed a different issue from using synthetic engine oils

"without prejudice"

1 - the use of a synthetic oil in gearboxes and diffs was actively promoted by Eaton-Fuller in the early 1990's after extensive field testing

2 - the NEED for a synthetic gearbox fluid appeared suddenly in the mid 1990's as engine speed dropped and harmonic vibrations started to cause serious gearbox failures when normal highway running speed in OD was done at or near maximum torque#*

3 - certain manufacturers had some "design" problems with other components that were quickly "moderated" by using a lighter diff oil and more so by using a light 75w-90 synthetic#*@

#I was involved in field testing with these issues
* The manufacturers commenced factory filling these components with synthetics several years ago
@ When trialling these in the late 1990's the diff operating temperatures were immediately reduced by 20C>

Still, the most popular gearbox and diff oils in the trucking industry today are mineral oils

I suspect that within the next decade all heavy trucks will be sold as a full synthetically lubricated asset. I believe that many engines will have OCIs nearing 200k if the oil is to be changed at all - some engines as now may be "filled for life". I suspect too that a cleanable oil conditioning unit (OCU) will be a part of the engine's lubrication system. It will include a SS 30micron screen and a centrifuge device. UOAs will become mandatory to confirm the ECM's advice that cleaning the OCU is required. This will be determined by the fuel consumed and by the electronic monitoring of the oil's condition by the ECM to confirm the cleaning requirement
Parameters will be set for a total oil change as a last resort

Gearboxes and Diffs will be filled for life with synthetic lubricants, programmed UOAs will be a part of warranty and durability requirements

Regards

[ February 18, 2004, 12:48 AM: Message edited by: Doug Hillary ]
 
I spoke with Aaron about this test (very nice guy at Amsoil tech.) and he had some interesting things to say. He emphasized over and over that their market is extended drains. He said RL and M1 are great products. He did specifically say that if you are racing a car such as a Vette, very hard, you might want to look at other products. This guys IMO, is too honest! Glad his boss wasn't around. He said with Moly, it doesn't do well over long drains and can have negative impacts on the oil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top