Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 21:44:53 GMT From: "Robert L. Davis" <iclicknopsam.com> Subject: Re: Engine Oil
> To run actual fleet tests, comparing a bunch of different oils, would be > incredibly expensive.... Of course it would be, but without having a representative sampling of the contenders you don't have a valid test. > Any decent independent laboratory would not begin to compromise it's reputation > by putting out skewed test results. I'm not trying to be nit-picky here, but how does one know that the lab is decent? If you'll go check an old Slick 50 ad sometime, you'll notice a number of independent lab references about the miraculous nature of the additive, but you won't catch me putting that stuff in my vehicles. > I suspect that, in most cases, a company which is willing to publish > "indpendent lab reports" already knew the answer, from in-house testing--but > wanted the non-biased documentation. I think you have a good point here, where the product company already knows the answer (positive) and simply wants it verified. > The Falex wear test was designed to test for extreme pressure, such as in gear > boxes. The one-armed bandit, or pressure testing machine with a torque wrench > and spinning bearing, was intended for the same purpose. Impressive, but flat > coke will usually give the same type result--and I wouldn't recommend using > Coca-Cola in the engine as a lubricant. The tests done at independent labs are > standardized tests, reproduceable by any other lab. The Falex test is also reproducable and doesn't require any manual interference, as is the case with your torque-wrench example. Have you seen a Falex tester work? You apply weights to a bearing surface and try different types of oil. It is very reproducable and I can't see where it wouldn't be totally objective and accurate. It is, by your description, a "test for extreme pressure," so why would this not be a good test for automotive oils? I haven't seen Coke tested yet, but would be very surprised if it beat the cheapest motor oil in this test. You say it "will usually give the same type result." What do you mean exactly? What oil will Coke beat in the Falex test? > As far as the test comparing RP and AMSOIL 20W-50, at that time AMSOIL only > made one 20W-50 oil, which happened to be labelled as a racing oil. It's been a few years since I saw this test, put out by Amsoil, but I'm sure it was the best oil they could put up against others. The RP sampled was not their most expensive product, and Amsoil should've used a product comparable in price with their own. This RP sample cost about half of the Amsoil example. > > The RP sample was/is priced at half the Amsoil price, but performed almost as > well > > ..."almost as well" can mean a lot of things. A Yugo can perform "almost as > well" as a BMW to drive 3 blocks to the Metro station<g>. Almost means almost, and I shouldn't be so vague, but I really don't recall the numbers. It was an Amsoil test in an Amsoil literature packet, so I thought probably you would have access to it. The RP sample was a close second with Mobil 1 and a few others falling in behind them. I think I can get my hands on a copy of it, so I'll report back when I do. > >> I have seen Amsoil's comparisons on their labels, but not against a comparable > Royal Purple >> sample. > > I don't think AMSOIL considers RP to be a major competitor-- RP isn't as well-known in the marketplace as Amsoil, mainly because they haven't been there as long and do no advertising. They are, however, well-known in the racing business, as I'm sure you are well aware. If you are not, take a trip to a regional drag strip, NASCAR, or motorcycle race and ask around. Don't be fooled by what's written on the bodies of race machines, as they often use whatever they want despite who sponsors them. Go to www.synerlec.com and read some of the testimonials from the racing community. > If your RP rep is interested enough, he can have that same test run using his > oil and show you the results. (I doubt he will) You mean testing RP against Amsoil on a Falex tester? If so, I am very sure that he would be happy to do it, as he does have a Falex tester, and if you like I'll ask him and get back to you. I will have a RP racing product (probably 41, a 10w40 equivalent) and a non-racing product (20w50 multigrade) tested against Amsoil's Series 2000 20w50. Is that a fair comparison? If Amsoil doesn't out-perform RP, will you believe it or accede to its credibility anyway? I pledge that I will report back the results exactly as I see them. If you don't feel the Falex test is a valid way to test Amsoil, is there a purpose for me to engage in this project?
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
