Originally Posted by RDY4WAR
The use of the additives kinda makes this whole comparison null and void. How do you know the additives aren't aiding in lower wear and not the oil itself? The point of direct comparison is to eliminate as many variables as possible.
My initial thought is what is/was unfair or fair for one, is unfair/fair for both since he used the moly in both oils.
Now that said, we know the oil formulators spend a lot of time coming up with the right balance of all the oils constituents so that they work synergistically. The question then is, can we say with confidence that the addtl moly has a similar effect (good bad or otherwise) on both oils???
I suppose if you wanted to get as close as possible to an unvarnished answer you'd have to run at minimum 4 UOA's - #1 PP, #M1, #PP+MoS2, #M1 + MoS2. This doesn't begin to address the other variables like ambient temps, engine load, % @WOT etc...but it would provide better visibility into each oils performance characteristics.
Otherwise, the two UOA's are probably more than enough to win a bar room bet amongst friends.