I'm a Oil Junkie

**Sarge** · 04-30-2009, 05:31 PM

Royal Purple Racing 41

**Sarge** · 04-30-2009, 05:32 PM

Schaeffers 10-30

**Sarge** · 04-30-2009, 05:38 PM

So in summary (and this isn't all of them by any stretch)
Royal Purple sucks donkey ass.
The "old" Amsoil 0-30" didn't do very well.
Rotella did good.
Shaeffers just kicked that ass.
I have good UOA's from Amsoil 10-30. I have not so good w/ 0-30. I cant find my Pennzoil Platinum...I think I have those w/Terry Dyson...I'll rummage around.
Here is a Pennzoil Platinum UOA from Terry.....The August run was Amsoil 10-30 ( great!) The last run was PP 10-30 (great!)

**Sarge** · 04-30-2009, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by 35thAnniversaryPhil

Well I just put in an order for absolutely everything Amsoil for my 35th 2002 SS. They even had shipping to Quebec from Ontario which avoids me all possible U.S. paperwork fees or duty fees! I also registered for a preferred customer account which saved me quite a bit. Thanks a lot Anthony for all the help, I also referenced your ZO# for the order. The 2004 Commemorative Edition Z06 is soon to follow!

Good man! That's thinking with your dipstick

**Sarge** · 05-01-2009, 08:22 AM

I know you guys get tired of me and my tribology but I do follow the industry closely. Pennzoil has been developing a high horsepower motor oil that is utilizing esters/synthetics for its base oil versus everybody else using mineral oil for it's base oils. Of course they filed a patent. Patent Here
I own patents myself (in technology) and follow the process closely. Looks like the Untied States Patent Office is going to issue the patent.
Why do I bother you guys with all this? Watch for a really really good synthetic coming from Pennzoil this year.

**zmg00camaross** · 05-01-2009, 08:53 AM

I wish I could understand this charts how do I learn and any test on sso 0w30

**Sarge** · 05-01-2009, 08:55 AM

Me too.

**Sarge** · 05-01-2009, 09:00 AM

Lets talk ASTM D 6079 testing. Let's use the latest lab testing utilizing ASTM D 6079 and what it means. This is independent and is comparing friction co efficiencies in Racing Oils.
The friction coefficient produced using the racing oils was determined using a High Frequency Reciprocating Rig (HFRR). The HFRR used an electromagnetic vibrator to oscillate a moving specimen over a small amplitude while pressing it against a fixed specimen. The moving specimen was a 6 mm AISI E-52100 steel ball, Vickers hardness (Hv) 800. The fixed specimen was an AISI E-52100 steel flat, Hv 30. The combination of a hard ball sliding on a soft flat provided acceptable discrimination between good and poor diesel fuels.
The method used was a variant of ASTM D 6079, a HFRR test method used to evaluate diesel fuel lubricity, in which a series of temperature steps at higher temperatures was used in place of a fixed temperature. The wear scar was measured on the ball. The scar diameter measurements made on the ball were an indirect measure of wear that occurred on the flat. The coefficient of friction μ between the specimens is given by: μ = F P
Where F is the friction force and P is the applied load in Newtons. Boundary film formation and the effects of certain friction modifiers occur at high temperatures. Film formation by boundary additives can be observed by electrical contact potential changes. A low or zero film reading means that the potential drop across the contact is low, indicating significant metal to metal contact taking place between the specimens. This is usually associated with high friction force and high wear. A high film reading meant that the metal surfaces were being separated. This may have been by a chemical film formed by additives.
HFRR test conditions were as follows:

- 400 g load (Hertzian contact pressure 1005 Mpa)
- 1000 μm stroke
- 80-180° C.
- 20° C. intervals, 5 minutes per interval
Friction coefficient and contact film resistance were measured at five second intervals and were averaged at the end of each five minute interval. Wear scars were measured at the completion of the test. Measurements in the x- and y-directions were averaged. Although the initial Hertzian contact pressure was very high (1005 Mpa), as the wear increased the contact pressures reduced to less than 100 Mpa.

So everybody is on a level playing field utilizing engineering acceptable standards.
Look at the scar measurements at the bottom for each manufacturers oil under the same conditions.
I'll break it down. This is all included in the Shell Patent document I provided above by the way.
Here is the summary....
Brand/Viscosity/Wear Scar
Mobil1/0-30/220
Mobil1/5-50/265
Valvoline Racing/20-50/145
Lucas/20-50/195
Amsoil Series 2000/20-50/170
RedLine/20-50/170
Royal Purple/5-30/230

So what does this mean? Well it clearly shows a co efficiency of friction. But you must look at the overall package and that is done by engine tear down and measurement and in a lesser intrusive exercise a UOA.
We look at Virgin Oil Analysis to determine add packs/amounts of add etc. We look at various accepted bench testing (as above and on the Amsoil and other marketing materials) also.
But you cannot base your oil decisions on one isolated bench test. It does not reflect the expected results with the overall blenders total package. It is just one piece of the package. Anti Foaming/Shear Resistance/TBN retention etc. etc. are also pieces of the over all package not just friction co efficiencies.
Case in point and from my first hand experience. See the number for Amsoil 20-50? It is 170. Valvoline 20-50 is 145. But the tear down and measurement of the same engine after 3 runs each utilizing both oils clearly showed superior wear (less wear) with Amsoil 20-50 over Valvoline 20-50.
Point is you have to measure the overall packages performance to get where you want.

**CompSyn** · 05-01-2009, 06:48 PM

Sarge,

Thanks for re-posting your UOAs. At your 17.5k-plus posts here on the forum, one can miss out on your earlier data for sure.

Thanks again,

CompSyn

**jambofla** · 05-01-2009, 06:52 PM

Hey Sarge,
Thanks for all the good oil info.
What's up with the pshyco bitch with the panty and boy freind questions?
Keep hammering and I've got your back

**lonewolf37** · 05-01-2009, 07:07 PM

I am up for it! Amsoil is my next two fills after Castrol Edge. Then maybe a case of Shaeffers woul be a good one to follow with. Compsyn/Sarge are you up for it?
Dyson tells no lies.

**Sarge** · 05-02-2009, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by lonewolf37

I am up for it! Amsoil is my next two fills after Castrol Edge. Then maybe a case of Shaeffers woul be a good one to follow with. Compsyn/Sarge are you up for it?
Dyson tells no lies.

I enjoy testing and testing because I am not wired correctly

You should test and find the oil that works best for you and stick with it.
With that said...bet your ass! Test/Post.
I think you will find the result delta's between Shaeffers and Amsoil will be statistically insignificant. Both are top shelf lubes. Pennzoil Platinum is right in there also of course for the top off the shelf I have found.

**CompSyn** · 05-02-2009, 03:13 AM

Originally Posted by lonewolf37

I am up for it! Amsoil is my next two fills after Castrol Edge. Then maybe a case of Shaeffers woul be a good one to follow with. Compsyn/Sarge are you up for it?
Dyson tells no lies.

Well, as you know motor oil shootout has been in the works here on LS1.com. Amsoil, Inc. has agreed to corporate sponsorship of the shootout and is looking forward to the challenge.

Of course a handful of test cars in the shootout may not reflect your same exact application so your own oil shootout would be a great thing.

CompSyn

**Sarge** · 05-02-2009, 05:23 AM

Yup and thank you very much CompSyn for championing the LS1.COM Oil Shootout at corporate. We all owe you one. I am almost there with Shaeffers and we can go head to head with Amsoil/Shaeffers/Pennzoil Platinum. I will be publishing the parameters for all sponsors shortly....this will insure a level playing field.

**lonewolf37** · 05-02-2009, 05:06 PM

This is going to be fun! I will post up all my results, and forward to seeing what Sarge does in the shootout. What oils are going to be tested? Will Castrol have to think with their dipstick?

**gokillyourself** · 05-04-2009, 04:49 PM

is marvel mystery oil worth a shit? i hear so much good things about adding it to oil and your gas. what do you think about it sarge?

**DUBL0WS6** · 05-04-2009, 05:27 PM

Just because Pennzoil has filed a patent and may get it doesn't mean that it will be for consumer use. It may be for racing or heavy truck use. PP was originally a Group V oil and then it was reformulated to a Group III oil from what I've read.

**DUBL0WS6** · 05-04-2009, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by gokillyourself

is marvel mystery oil worth a shit? i hear so much good things about adding it to oil and your gas. what do you think about it sarge?

MMO works great in the gas tank of LS 1/2/6 engines. The only reason to use it in an engine would be for cleaning up older engines. Most synthetics have good detergents and MMO isn't needed as an oil additive.

**Sarge** · 05-05-2009, 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by gokillyourself

is marvel mystery oil worth a shit? i hear so much good things about adding it to oil and your gas. what do you think about it sarge?

Wont hurt anything. AutoRX in the oil and 2Stroke will give you better returns but MMO is good stuff. Just lesser "good"

**Sarge** · 05-05-2009, 02:35 AM

Originally Posted by DUBL0WS6

Just because Pennzoil has filed a patent and may get it doesn't mean that it will be for consumer use. It may be for racing or heavy truck use. PP was originally a Group V oil and then it was reformulated to a Group III oil from what I've read.

No just means they are heading towards a esters based friction modifier versus organic. And this is good for all of us. Amsoil and RedLine utilize esters today. A off the shelf oil with an esters base is a good thing.