G Atsma

Read the rest of the post about it. Pretty obvious you're jumping the gun.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

I see I haven't posted in this thread in a very long time-years even.

I've become a follower of 540ratblog. It's an independent engineer who's tested hundreds of oils.

While he lists Amsoil at the top of the list, coming in very closely behind at # 6 is Mobil 1 European Car Formula, which is a 0W-40 oil. It's 22 bucks for a five quart jug at Walmart. This is all I use now, even in the big block Monte.

Why not the Amsoil? For as highly rated as the top oils are in the list, I can't justify the ridiculous cost (my opinion) for it.

As far as the Joe Gibbs oil, 540ratblog gave it a very good rating-but it's number 39 on the list, meaning that 38 oils tested better.

Also tested are some of the Brad Penn oils (now called Penn Grade) and they tested so-so. Their break in oil tested pretty poorly.

So, folks, forget everything everybody says about some particular oil, look at actual tests. These specialty and "racer developed" oils really aren't all that special-or better. But they are expensive! Spend your money wisely. For break in, I use conventional (non-synthetic) Penzoil then Mobil 1 European for the life of the engine. If it's a flat tappet engine add a bottle of STP zinc additive.

And NEVER any other additive.

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/201...-test-ranking/

Bob570

If I remember correctly, the only thing 540ratblog tests is the film strength in a questionable test. If you spend any significant amount of time on bobistheoilguy.com (no I am not the Bob who started this website) you'll see that this is almost universally dismissed as an inaccurate test of an oil's performance in a car's engine.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

He performs a few tests and some are listed separately.

I've seen it said a bunch of times that BITOG is just a bunch of people without engineering backgrounds with wildly varying opinions. I think I'll go by 540, who is an engineer, he shows his credentials.

sjsingle1

iTrader: (1)

we could always inquire about joe gibbs to our resident oil guy.....

Polyalphaolefin

As a note to start, Joe Gibbs oil is now Driven Racing oil. They've been independent of JGR for about 7 years now, although JGR still uses Driven XP2 0w-20 in their cup engines. This thread was originally asking about LS30. Just to clarify, Driven produces a wide range of oils for many applications. No one oil is going to be ideal in every application. The "LS30" name isn't just about marketing. About 2.5 years of extensive R&D went into that oil with 200+ LS engines and teardowns. It was designed specifically around the needs of the LS platform from sufficient P-V coefficient for proper hydraulic lifter function and bleed down to increased seal conditioning to combat the common rear main seal and pump pickup seal leaks.

Specs on LS30...

Base oil content: Blended trimer PAO and metallocene PAO with <10% polyol ester.

KV100: 12.1 cSt
HTHS: 3.46 cP
NOACK: 6%
TBN: 8.5

Additives...
Ca: 1700 ppm
Zn: 1200 ppm
P: 1100 ppm
B: 120 ppm
Mo: 640 ppm

I've run this oil in a 2002 5.3L at 10k mile intervals and it holds up very well. Note the ester content which gives the oil solvency / miscibility as well as a higher pressure-viscosity coefficient and increased thermal stability. It makes a great street oil.

The Driven XP oils were mentioned in this thread. These are the true dedicated racing oils with very little detergent and dispersant content, a good bit of ZDDP, and loads of moly. The ester content is >15% to maximize thermal stability. These oils are designed for short burst and should be changed after every 250-500 laps or 30-40 1/4-mile hits. In a street car, it won't last very long at all, and in fact could be damaging due to high aniline / miscibility point and low resistance to acidic growth. I'm not a liberty to divulge much more about the specifics of that oil without prior consent, but I'll see what I can post here.


Are you referring to LS30? If you switching to that oil from a non-ester oil, it's not surprising to see increased oil consumption for the first couple of oil changes. This is due to the high surface affinity of ester loading up the film on the cylinder walls and increasing oil transport past the rings. This usually clears up after a couple changes or so once a permanent film is established.

Note that the color of the oil tells you little about the oil's service life. Oil turns dark from oxidation. Ester increases the rate of oxidation (ester is a product of acids reacted with alcohol) which will turn the oil dark sooner, but this doesn't effect the oil's performance. Judging an oil by its color is much like judging a steak by the sear on the outside. It could be well done inside or medium rare. You won't know until you cut into it. I've sampled oil that was clear amber that had completely spent its anti-wear package and also tested oil that was jet black that came back still good to go another 5k miles. I have an oil here on my desk that's near black right out of the bottle because its additive package makes up 30% of the total oil volume and contains around 1.8% sulfur. I have another here that's a bright amber, and it's 100% ester with a bad *** additive package. It costs ~$30/qt and is done after about 30 minutes of idling. It also stinks to high hell like pain thinner.



The 540rat blog is a laughing stock in the tribology community. The blog is mostly opinion with little substance for credibility. The device he uses for testing isn't a legitimate test for engine oils. It's designed for testing the affinity of industrial greases. Oil's with a uniform molecular structure perform better in that test which is why PAO, GTL, and TriSyn oils perform better in his tests. This has no correlation to a running engine and isn't a parameter engine oils are designed around. Something that'll perform very well in that test is shampoo. It'll blow any engine oil out of the water, but your engine won't run long on shampoo. Another note is that most accurate equipment available today for that testing has a 30,000 psi margin of error so there's no way in hell he's able to give exact figures like that. He's just pulling those numbers out of his ***. Now I'm not the saying the oils that top his list are bad. They're quite good, but the test is bogus.

If you want to see how an engine oil actually performs, put in a real engine and send it. That's only way you'll know. The guys that formulate these oils spend years building engines, running the them hard on that oil, tearing them down for inspection, adjust the oil's formula, and repeat. This is true of the smaller performance outfits at least such as Driven, Amsoil, Red Line, HPL, LAT, Extreme, Schaeffer's, and so on. With Driven's R&D on their new GP-1 oil, I remember Billy Godbold at Comp Cams feeling relieved at the end cause he was tired of inspecting cams. That's over 2 years of running engines in hard and tearing them down every day. That's how you make a good product.

However, I do somewhat agree with you about BITOG. That place was a good hangout back in the early days (2002-2006) when there were a lot of tribologists, petroleum engineers, and oil formulators on there. Sadly, a few passed away and many others left. There's a few of us still lingering around over there. You have to figure out who you can follow, and who's just full of it. Many members on there today are just looking for whatever oil is the cheapest and can be used for longer. There's nothing wrong with that except that they often spread misconceptions in an effort to defend their cheap ways.

I'm still lurking occasionally. Life keeps me busy so I don't have much time for forums.

G Atsma

Polyalphaolefin- Your input here is much appreciated! No bullshit, just straight facts that CAN be backed up, which you do on the spot.
THANK YOU!!

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

Polyalphaolefin, thanks for stepping in here with the facts. I like what you said about shampoo!

Agreed, it's always better to long term test lubricants in an engine.

We still see many people using racing oil for extended use in non-racing engines, many people over at the Chevelles forums do this.

I will note that 540's testing does result in what is considered the best oils, Amsoil, to have the highest rating with Mobil 1 just behind it. And Mobil 1 is recommended and often factory fill in many vehicles today. Regardless of how he gets his results, he does manage to get to the right conclusions.

Polyalphaolefin

No problem.

Let's say for the sake of argument that the testing measures are accurate. The pressure seen in an engine are significantly lower than the pressure in that test. Even NHRA nitro engines making 10,000+ hp might reach 50,000 psi load on the oil film in the bearings. The oil used in these engines is a straight 70 grade conventional oil that would probably perform rather poorly in that test.

To add to that, the base oil has little impact at that point. At those pressures, you're well into the elastohydrodynamic lubrication regime which is where the additive package is king. The additives make the oil as the best base oils are useless without good additives. Formulating an oil is a lot like formulating an army. You can have the most well trained and motivated soldiers (base oils), but if you don't equip them with proper weapons (additives), they're just cannonfodder.

As for racing oils... there's a difference in marketing here. Valvoline VR1, for example, isn't a dedicated racing oil. It's the same as Valvoline conventional oil with about 80% more ZDDP and a different sticker on the bottle. It contains all of the same detergents and dispersants as Valvoline conventional so it can go for the same 3-5k mile intervals. Amsoil Dominator, Mobil 1 Racing, Red Line HP, and others like them all contain high amounts of detergents for street use. Driven XP series is a dedicated racing oil with very little detergent content. It actually has less ZDDP of any others mentioned, but it has a different type of ZDDP that's more reactive so it doesn't need as much.

sjsingle1

iTrader: (1)

i like the ratblog.....so many things about rats i never knew

i almost got some joe gibbs the other day shopping at summit ( joys of them having a store nearby ) but after the sticker shock and the fact that they dont have it in gallon jugs at a discount.....i went back to my mobil 0-40

Polyalphaolefin

Yes, the price is high, but it's all in the contents. The metallocene PAO base oil in LS30 is ~4x more expensive than standard homopolymer PAO used in Mobil 1 EP and ~7-8x more expensive than the GTL base oils in Mobil 1 0w-40. The additive package is also around 1.5-2.0x more expensive. The quality comes at a hefty cost. There's also the cost for R&D where as Mobil 1 is only concerned with meeting API standards.

The formulators at Mobil 1 are given a budget and told to make the best oil they can that fits that budget and is compatible across all common applications. The guys are Driven are given an application and told money is no option, give me the best you got for that application. Different business models for a different market.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

Polyalphaolefin, say a person has a car typical to this forum, an LS1 Camaro. It’s pretty much his daily driver but keeps it nice and has some goodies on it, tires, headers, a tune, intake, etc. It’s a good running car, no oil burning, no noise, gets up and goes when he steps on it.

He uses a quality oil filter like a Wix or K&N and does an oil & filter change about every 3,000 miles.

What advantage would an expensive boutique oil like Joe Gibbs have over a quality off the shelf oil like Mobil 1 for this car?

huggerls1

I like what the youtube channel projectfarm did. He had like a playoff of many favorable oils and tested them in heat and cold and other tests like film strength. It really showed some good results at least to me. If you haven't seen it, or his channel, he does a lot of no B.S. testing on a lot of different everyday products.

Polyalphaolefin

The higher end group IV and V base oils offer a lower friction coefficient which frees up a few hp. The lower volatility of these oils means less oil consumption (overall). They are less susceptible to aeration and foaming. They can also go longer oil change intervals. I use Driven LS30 5w-30 with a Fram Ultra XG9837 filter in my 2002 5.3L with 257k miles and change it every 10,000 miles. The days of 3k mile oil changes is long gone, even with conventional oils.

Project Farm is up there with 540rat on the wall of shame. The device he uses for "film strength" is a Timken device which was designed around testing the scuffing resistance of industrial greases. It was never designed for engine oils and doesn't replicate any parameter an engine needs. In fact, the device was abandoned by SAE decades ago due to a lack of repeatability with the results. It doesn't matter how well you control the variables, it gives a different result every time you run it. Whether one oil does better or worse in that test means nothing in the real world. It's kinda like testing to see whether a Camaro or Mustang makes a better tow rig. It's not something either one are designed to do and the results hold little to no value. He also doesn't heat the oil when doing this which also defeats the point. You have to reach the oil's aniline / miscibility point to obtain proper additive dispersion and activation which doesn't occur until well above 200*F unless the oil is 100% ester.

The cold pour test is also useless as cold pour isn't useful information. Oil pumps are positive displacement and therefore cold cranking viscosity is measured in dynamic viscosity, not kinematic viscosity. In order to actually test which oil pumps easier, you need a multi-rotary viscometer. An oil that's 1,000 cSt will pour much easier (kinematic viscosity) than one that's 6,000 cSt, but they'll pump at about the same rate.

The hot evaporation test is the only one that's somewhat relevant from a volume standpoint, but it's still not very accurate. The margin of error with two pots on a hot plate is extremely large due to lack of control of variables. In fact, it's so large that the results have little value. Proper volatility testing is done per ASTM D5800 with NOACK S2 test equipment which controls an exact temperature throughout the oil (250*C) for one hour with constant air flow under vacuum. Placing two oils of different chemistry on a hot plate isn't going to be very accurate since they both have different heat values, different capabilities of dispersing heat, and different amounts of viscosity modifiers and light hydrocarbons.

Basically take anything you see in those videos with a grain of salt. It's just for entertainment purposes only. I think he actually even states that as a disclaimer in a few of his videos. I wish oil testing was that easy as it would make my life a hell of a lot easier.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

So for the average user that does an oil & filter change at 3,000 miles there's no advantage to using a highly rated but very expensive oil vs. another highly rated oil that's reasonably priced?

Polyalphaolefin

Even changing every 3k miles, you still get a lower friction coefficient, lower average oil temperatures, less oil consumption, and less aeration/foaming concerns. Whether that's worth the added price is up to the individual.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

I'm doing a rebuild of my big block. It'll see an engine dyno when I'm done-which may be late winter.

I'd like to do a power comparison with Joe Gibbs (Driven) oil to the Mobil1 0W-40.

Which oil would you recommend I test with?

Polyalphaolefin

What's the specs on the BB?

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

All they say.

Polyalphaolefin

I meant the specs on the big block. lol

I know what's in M1 0w-40. It's TriSyn base oil with an Infenium SN+ additive package that's boosted with ~25% more ZDDP.