Hocus-Pocus?
Thread Starter
|
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,068
Likes: 1,477
From: Texas! Ya mean there's someplace else?
Hocus-Pocus?
Found some info on the dreaded "4-ball wear test" so loved by some. Ain't tryin' to stir up anything, just put out information. And it is possible that the test procedures utilized may have changed since the article was written, so take it with caution. Additionally, the article references "SH" oils, which are not the latest API ratings of oils. One final caveat; I do not know exactly where this material came from, except that it is from "Nutz & Boltz".
(My note: Portions of the following are edited for brevity, but nothing relevant has been omitted.)
This test has four metal *****, about the size of grapes, put under pressure and rotated against each other. They are bathed in the lubricant to be tested and put under about 130 pounds of pressure for an hour while the ***** are rotating. The purpose of the test is to measure the scar created by the ***** moving against one another. The bigger the scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the test oil. Some people claim the ASTh4 test is able to imitate the metal to‑metal contact that takes place inside an engine. The D‑4172 test procedure, set forth by ASTM, call for oil temperatures of 90 degrees C I was curious as to why 150 degrees C. was used by Amsoil to conduct their testing.
I discussed this question with a lubriÂ*cant engineer (a tribologist who asked to remain unnamed because he has worked for many large oil companies, as well as for the world’s largest seller of chemical oil additives. He said the reason for choosing a higher temperature was beÂ*cause this temperature would make Amsoil's oil additive package perform better than other brands of oil. Certain additives will "beef‑up' film strength when heated up. These same additives may not necessarily provide added protection when run at lower temperatures.
(Snip some material)
Castrol took issue with the test. Castrol representative, Alice Fisher, responded with a letter that said:
"In answer to your [questions} about Amsoil's testing results on Amsoil's 2000 Synthetic l0w‑50 vs. Castro! GTX convenÂ*tional non-synthetic oil, we would like to point out several factors:
1. The ASTM procedure (D4172) is a method used primarily in testing industrial lubricants, not automotive engine lubriÂ*cants.
2. The ASTM procedure (D1472), used in Amsoil's comparison, is not a part of API SH or automotive manufacturers specified performance testing methods. This should not be considered a basis for wear protection claims in the absence of relative field performance in automotive engines and test precision documentation. This is not a recognized testing method for automotive engine lubricants and may not represent the conditions found in your veÂ*hicle.
3. API SH performance determines the appropriate wear characteristics of pasÂ*senger car automotive engine lubricants.
Based on the above information, we have no plans to test Castrol SYNTEC or Castrol GTX under these test conditions (Different D4172 test temperature noted).
As expected, the Amsoil 2000 Racing Oil performed better than Red Line's street oil, but produced about the same results when compared to Red Line's Racing Oil. These were brand‑new oils right out of the container. The big differences are seen with used oils. As expected, Amsoil Series 2000 oil deteriorated rapidly after as little as 338 miles. Using this ASTM test, the additives in the Red Line products showed an improvement in the ASTM wear test, while Amsoil deteriorated. Red Line's oil looked better after 20,342 miles than AmÂ*soil did after just 338 miles. Howe said, "We find it very curious that Amsoil chose not to compare their Series 2000 Race Oil with Red Line Race Oil. Red Line Race Oil right out of the bottle provides signifiÂ*cantly better results than even the unused Amsoil... and what is unique with the Red Line is the results improve with engine operation instead of rapidly degrading as with the Amsoil product."
(My note: Portions of the following are edited for brevity, but nothing relevant has been omitted.)
This test has four metal *****, about the size of grapes, put under pressure and rotated against each other. They are bathed in the lubricant to be tested and put under about 130 pounds of pressure for an hour while the ***** are rotating. The purpose of the test is to measure the scar created by the ***** moving against one another. The bigger the scar, the poorer the lubricating ability of the test oil. Some people claim the ASTh4 test is able to imitate the metal to‑metal contact that takes place inside an engine. The D‑4172 test procedure, set forth by ASTM, call for oil temperatures of 90 degrees C I was curious as to why 150 degrees C. was used by Amsoil to conduct their testing.
I discussed this question with a lubriÂ*cant engineer (a tribologist who asked to remain unnamed because he has worked for many large oil companies, as well as for the world’s largest seller of chemical oil additives. He said the reason for choosing a higher temperature was beÂ*cause this temperature would make Amsoil's oil additive package perform better than other brands of oil. Certain additives will "beef‑up' film strength when heated up. These same additives may not necessarily provide added protection when run at lower temperatures.
(Snip some material)
Castrol took issue with the test. Castrol representative, Alice Fisher, responded with a letter that said:
"In answer to your [questions} about Amsoil's testing results on Amsoil's 2000 Synthetic l0w‑50 vs. Castro! GTX convenÂ*tional non-synthetic oil, we would like to point out several factors:
1. The ASTM procedure (D4172) is a method used primarily in testing industrial lubricants, not automotive engine lubriÂ*cants.
2. The ASTM procedure (D1472), used in Amsoil's comparison, is not a part of API SH or automotive manufacturers specified performance testing methods. This should not be considered a basis for wear protection claims in the absence of relative field performance in automotive engines and test precision documentation. This is not a recognized testing method for automotive engine lubricants and may not represent the conditions found in your veÂ*hicle.
3. API SH performance determines the appropriate wear characteristics of pasÂ*senger car automotive engine lubricants.
Based on the above information, we have no plans to test Castrol SYNTEC or Castrol GTX under these test conditions (Different D4172 test temperature noted).
As expected, the Amsoil 2000 Racing Oil performed better than Red Line's street oil, but produced about the same results when compared to Red Line's Racing Oil. These were brand‑new oils right out of the container. The big differences are seen with used oils. As expected, Amsoil Series 2000 oil deteriorated rapidly after as little as 338 miles. Using this ASTM test, the additives in the Red Line products showed an improvement in the ASTM wear test, while Amsoil deteriorated. Red Line's oil looked better after 20,342 miles than AmÂ*soil did after just 338 miles. Howe said, "We find it very curious that Amsoil chose not to compare their Series 2000 Race Oil with Red Line Race Oil. Red Line Race Oil right out of the bottle provides signifiÂ*cantly better results than even the unused Amsoil... and what is unique with the Red Line is the results improve with engine operation instead of rapidly degrading as with the Amsoil product."
Cruiser
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Hocus-Pocus?
Your information is over 10 years old and is flawed in many ways. Anyone interested in the facts can email me at skylane19641@mac.com and I will send you the information. It is in PDF format.
I tried inserting it here but no luck.
To start with 4 ball wear test is for Virgin oil samples ONLY. There is no way to control contaminents introduced by the engine during operation and all engines are different in that respect.. Used oil sample analysis is the only tried and true way to analyze used oil. Email me if you want the rest.
I tried inserting it here but no luck.
To start with 4 ball wear test is for Virgin oil samples ONLY. There is no way to control contaminents introduced by the engine during operation and all engines are different in that respect.. Used oil sample analysis is the only tried and true way to analyze used oil. Email me if you want the rest.
Thread Starter
|
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,068
Likes: 1,477
From: Texas! Ya mean there's someplace else?
RE: Hocus-Pocus?
I was wondering about the age of the article, since I only had some pieces of it. One thing I do remember them talking about was the virgin vs used part. One guy said there is nothing in the ASTM procedure that says it is for virgin oil, though.
I answered your e-mail and am looking forward to getting the rest of the report. Thanks.
I answered your e-mail and am looking forward to getting the rest of the report. Thanks.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
nrg2brn
General Harley Davidson Chat
32
Sep 25, 2018 07:48 PM
