My ONLY suggestion would be to maybe decrease the hours on the oil. I like to change out at 20-25 hours, but I can be hard on the ski and the oil change is so [censored] easy. Enjoy your year-round riding!!!
2019 Yamaha Waverunner FX Cruiser HO - Amsoil Marine 10W-40
- Thread starter jtwrace
- Start date
Originally Posted by Kozman011
My ONLY suggestion would be to maybe decrease the hours on the oil. I like to change out at 20-25 hours, but I can be hard on the ski and the oil change is so [censored] easy. Enjoy your year-round riding!!!
If the fuel issue is a non issue I don't see why decreasing the time on the oil would be beneficial. In fact, the oil can go longer than the 50 hrs based on the TBN results. I pulled my injectors and am going to get them tested today...
My ONLY suggestion would be to maybe decrease the hours on the oil. I like to change out at 20-25 hours, but I can be hard on the ski and the oil change is so [censored] easy. Enjoy your year-round riding!!!
If the fuel issue is a non issue I don't see why decreasing the time on the oil would be beneficial. In fact, the oil can go longer than the 50 hrs based on the TBN results. I pulled my injectors and am going to get them tested today...
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
how in the H E double hockey sticks does the flash go from 380 to 315?????????????????????????????????????
and yes it requires 20 question marks!
steve
how in the H E double hockey sticks does the flash go from 380 to 315?????????????????????????????????????
and yes it requires 20 question marks!
steve
By mistake?
Originally Posted by jtwrace
By mistake?
so then what else in your report should you not trust?
and now you have 2 values. which is the correct one? or is it neither?
By mistake?
so then what else in your report should you not trust?
and now you have 2 values. which is the correct one? or is it neither?
Originally Posted by sunruh
Originally Posted by jtwrace
By mistake?
so then what else in your report should you not trust?
and now you have 2 values. which is the correct one? or is it neither?
Well, I think I have found the root cause so I won't say that the retest isn't correct. I did ask and quite frankly the response is odd enough that it's probably not worth talking about.
My next test will be sent to another lab though for redundancy, I know that!
Originally Posted by jtwrace
By mistake?
so then what else in your report should you not trust?
and now you have 2 values. which is the correct one? or is it neither?
Well, I think I have found the root cause so I won't say that the retest isn't correct. I did ask and quite frankly the response is odd enough that it's probably not worth talking about.
lets just say that i once took 4 samples at the same time.
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
Originally Posted by sunruh
lets just say that i once took 4 samples at the same time.
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
Yikes. Nothing I can say to that.
lets just say that i once took 4 samples at the same time.
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
Yikes. Nothing I can say to that.
Originally Posted by sunruh
lets just say that i once took 4 samples at the same time.
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
Confirmed my suspicions. On top of the new add-pack ingredients used in modern oil that don't even show up on the UOA's
lets just say that i once took 4 samples at the same time.
mixed them to ensure that all were the same.
1 to the stoners and 1 to southwest
not 1 entry in the test was the same on them
waited 2 weeks
sent the other 2 sample...which are the same as the 1st to them again.
same exact results from southwest and nothing the same from the stoners
when 2 samples from the same pull are sent and you get back different results...well
Confirmed my suspicions. On top of the new add-pack ingredients used in modern oil that don't even show up on the UOA's
now you know why i stopped doing my reports and testing.
well, by then i had done 70+ and had determined i had all the info i ever was going to need.
sure i still did some..but not a lot more in comparison
well, by then i had done 70+ and had determined i had all the info i ever was going to need.
sure i still did some..but not a lot more in comparison
What is the opinion in terms of the additive packages that get reported on the Blackstone UOA's?
From my experience every single Blackstone report I have, with regards to zinc and phosphorus, is lower by a large amount compared to what the manufacturers state in their PDS.
Can't comment on the Blackstone wear number ppm accuracy because I don't have anything else to compare to.
From my experience every single Blackstone report I have, with regards to zinc and phosphorus, is lower by a large amount compared to what the manufacturers state in their PDS.
Can't comment on the Blackstone wear number ppm accuracy because I don't have anything else to compare to.
Originally Posted by bulwnkl
I have no confidence in any aspect of BSLabs' reports.
Who do you trust then?
I have no confidence in any aspect of BSLabs' reports.
Who do you trust then?
Wow after reading this thread any intrest ive ever had in doing an analysis is gone. My take on possibilities for the different results could also be they just pour a sample and tested it without shaking the sample up and I would think this would lead to bad results. Perhaps the fuel settled or opposite. Either way they somehow ended up with way more fuel in the second test. These test are only as good as the tester that's taking them. And this alone shows they can't be trusted just like 95 percent of mechanics out there. To lazy to do the job right even when a person is willing to pay for the job to be done right.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by R1jake
Wow after reading this thread any intrest ive ever had in doing an analysis is gone. My take on possibilities for the different results could also be they just pour a sample and tested it without shaking the sample up and I would think this would lead to bad results. Perhaps the fuel settled or opposite. Either way they somehow ended up with way more fuel in the second test. These test are only as good as the tester that's taking them. And this alone shows they can't be trusted just like 95 percent of mechanics out there. To lazy to do the job right even when a person is willing to pay for the job to be done right.
For giggles, my next sample will be sent to two different labs. I've NEVER had this experience with other labs. Very expensive decisions were made on oil analysis so this is new territory for me. If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
Wow after reading this thread any intrest ive ever had in doing an analysis is gone. My take on possibilities for the different results could also be they just pour a sample and tested it without shaking the sample up and I would think this would lead to bad results. Perhaps the fuel settled or opposite. Either way they somehow ended up with way more fuel in the second test. These test are only as good as the tester that's taking them. And this alone shows they can't be trusted just like 95 percent of mechanics out there. To lazy to do the job right even when a person is willing to pay for the job to be done right.
For giggles, my next sample will be sent to two different labs. I've NEVER had this experience with other labs. Very expensive decisions were made on oil analysis so this is new territory for me. If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
Originally Posted by Bonz
What is the opinion in terms of the additive packages that get reported on the Blackstone UOA's?
Also remember that any UOA is not reporting "additive packages", it is reporting a simple elemental analysis. One has no idea really where the elements came from, you can make educated guesses but nothing regarding specific compounds is being reported in that analysis.
Having said that though, I agree that the levels of elements on one sample should be far more consistent that what we see here for Blackstone labs.
What is the opinion in terms of the additive packages that get reported on the Blackstone UOA's?
Also remember that any UOA is not reporting "additive packages", it is reporting a simple elemental analysis. One has no idea really where the elements came from, you can make educated guesses but nothing regarding specific compounds is being reported in that analysis.
Having said that though, I agree that the levels of elements on one sample should be far more consistent that what we see here for Blackstone labs.
Originally Posted by jtwrace
If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
thats a mighty big "IF" you put at the front there.
riddle me this:
why do some reports (from the same motor done dozens of times) show silver and others dont?
how could that actually vary?
or a voa shows no antimony yet the uoa does? and again...not every time.
so just randomly my motor sheds silver and antimony? really?
or better yet, the the above case...fuel dilution vary by 2.5%!!!
If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
thats a mighty big "IF" you put at the front there.
riddle me this:
why do some reports (from the same motor done dozens of times) show silver and others dont?
how could that actually vary?
or a voa shows no antimony yet the uoa does? and again...not every time.
so just randomly my motor sheds silver and antimony? really?
or better yet, the the above case...fuel dilution vary by 2.5%!!!
Originally Posted by sunruh
Originally Posted by jtwrace
If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
thats a mighty big "IF" you put at the front there.
riddle me this:
why do some reports (from the same motor done dozens of times) show silver and others dont?
how could that actually vary?
or a voa shows no antimony yet the uoa does? and again...not every time.
so just randomly my motor sheds silver and antimony? really?
or better yet, the the above case...fuel dilution vary by 2.5%!!!
According to their site, they do test to those ASTM standards. I have no idea why elements should show up that you wouldn't expect. My fuel dilution miss was a big miss but at least it was corrected after I requested a retest. I never did get an answer on how/why it was missed.
https://www.blackstone-labs.com/about-us/astm-methods/
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2019/12/full-55701-39047-screen_shot_2019_12_09_at_7.34.03_pm.png "[Linked Image]")
Originally Posted by jtwrace
If they're testing to the ASTM standards and are accredited this shouldn't be an issue so I'm not sure what the issue is on their end.
thats a mighty big "IF" you put at the front there.
riddle me this:
why do some reports (from the same motor done dozens of times) show silver and others dont?
how could that actually vary?
or a voa shows no antimony yet the uoa does? and again...not every time.
so just randomly my motor sheds silver and antimony? really?
or better yet, the the above case...fuel dilution vary by 2.5%!!!
According to their site, they do test to those ASTM standards. I have no idea why elements should show up that you wouldn't expect. My fuel dilution miss was a big miss but at least it was corrected after I requested a retest. I never did get an answer on how/why it was missed.
https://www.blackstone-labs.com/about-us/astm-methods/
I think it's an honest and realistic question for them to provide more than a canned response or to quote specs that mean nothing in and of themselves unless you look them all up.
Ask them how that type of an error can occur, as in what are the circumstances under which a mis-reading like that comes about. These are just examples but at least it will give them something to answer to: Improper handling of the sample, not using enough sample or not making sure it was mixed and not separated out, contamination of the sample by another sample they were working on at the same time, improper heating of the sample.
Ask them how that type of an error can occur, as in what are the circumstances under which a mis-reading like that comes about. These are just examples but at least it will give them something to answer to: Improper handling of the sample, not using enough sample or not making sure it was mixed and not separated out, contamination of the sample by another sample they were working on at the same time, improper heating of the sample.
Originally Posted by Bonz
I think it's an honest and realistic question for them to provide more than a canned response or to quote specs that mean nothing in and of themselves unless you look them all up.
Ask them how that type of an error can occur, as in what are the circumstances under which a mis-reading like that comes about. These are just examples but at least it will give them something to answer to: Improper handling of the sample, not using enough sample or not making sure it was mixed and not separated out, contamination of the sample by another sample they were working on at the same time, improper heating of the sample.
I did ask. Lame response even though they did admit their massive mistake.
I think it's an honest and realistic question for them to provide more than a canned response or to quote specs that mean nothing in and of themselves unless you look them all up.
Ask them how that type of an error can occur, as in what are the circumstances under which a mis-reading like that comes about. These are just examples but at least it will give them something to answer to: Improper handling of the sample, not using enough sample or not making sure it was mixed and not separated out, contamination of the sample by another sample they were working on at the same time, improper heating of the sample.
I did ask. Lame response even though they did admit their massive mistake.
