wouldnt the oils have different protection on different vehles? or do they individually test each type of vehicle?

As for charts, i always trust until i find lies, so if i see chats, i will follow the charts to see if there are improvements...and they dont just mak all that up cuz they could be sued for false advertisement.

 

And the charts are right because you say so. Listen like I said before the cheapest oil was used in that Corrola for 25 years and the engine ran perfect. I think the whole this oil is better thing is a placebo. People will believe anything that someone tells them. This is why lucas oil and slick 50 got so popular. If all oils aren't the same then how can a car run on the crappiest oil for 25 years and show no issues?

 

You can't test a product on each vehicle due to every vehicle being different. You wouldn't get accurate results due to variation in the engine. What may be measured on one vehicle may not be repeatable on another vehicle of the same type, make and model.

What we end up doing to qualify a product or, to test a product, is we put it through rigorous environmental tests that are accelerated. It's called accelerated age testing.

There's an industry standard ASTM D-4172 that is used to test motor oils for wear. This is the best way to test without inducing variation. It's tested in the same environment with a fixed set of parameters that are not changed / deviated from. The only thing that changes (variable) in your test plan is the oil itself. No other changes are made.

It's like when your troubleshooting your truck. Let's say for the sake of argument that it ran poorly and, in order to isolate the root problem, you wouldn't want to change five things on the vehicle. If changing five items it ran fine, how would you know what the root cause was? You wouldn't. It could have been five different things or, it could end up being a matrix of 25 possibilities but, in the end, you would have no way of knowing what the root cause was.

Same thing applies when testing products such as motor oil. If all the parameters are the same e.g.- the test time is kept the same, the pressure is kept the same, the rpms are kept the same, then, the amount of wear is factored down to one variable and that is the brand of motor oil.

This is a fair test and, this particular test is chosen because it has proved to be a reliable means of testing motor oils accurately. It's an industry standard that all use to test their products to. This is why we have test standards and, whether it's a MIL STD or a DoD STD or ASME or ASTM etc, they all serve the same purpose: to accurately test the product.

This is part of reliability engineering.

 

Your argument is missing a point and, the point was, which engine oil provides the best protection. That's what's being asked.

What your focused on is motor oil protecting an engine. All motor oil protects an engine. Even the old Penzoil paraffin based oil ran engines up into high mileage. I am not sure if you recall this type of oil but, it was made from paraffin and, while it protected the engines, it would clog up and envelope the entire head in a solid block which had to be cleaned out.

We have come a long way from that point in time in regards to chemistry and chemical developments. So, when someone asks which motor oil provides the best protection, that person should get an answer that addresses the question.

I think it is safe to assume that most know that any motor oil is better than none at all and that, even the cheapest of motor oils will prevent engine failure.

So, the question remains, which product protects against wear the best and, the only way of knowing this is by using a standard test period. It can not be quantified by your Toyota's high mileage.

 

So, how do you know that Lucas works? Not to be an *** here, but did you take 2 trucks drive both of them for 1,000,000 miles, and the only difference between the two was that one was using Lucas?

 

That's true...all I know is go with the old adage: "You get what you pay for",..and even sometimes that isn't true. I used to use cheap oil and "STP" for years,...now I use "Lucas",..the reasons, 1) some of the more expensive motor oils' viscosity levels are higher,..hence it takes longer for them to break down,...lasting longer before it looks and feels like water, (and being black...the only "black" BTC don't like!). 2) My "Lucas" usage,.. is a safety precaution...it coats/puts a film of "protection" on all metal parts in your engine, allowing for longer lasting parts due to the fact that thier more protected from heat friction breakdown/weardown. Plus...if by some dumb luck fluke..your motor popped an oil plug or sprung a leak or ???, the "Lucas" 100% petroleum oil protects your engine from seizing if you lose all your motor or tranny oil!...wouldn't you want to make it home after being on the road or hot trail all day?, instead of walking...if all your oil were to "disappear" due to a mishap? *(less friction means lower operating temperatures...which means longer engine life...saving you $$$ in the long run).* PS..PURPLDODGE...In fact,..I have 5 cars and trucks and the ones with "Lucas" lasted longer,.. about 325,000 kilometers longer,...(that's 195,000 MILES for you!)

 

so much information to take in lol

 

The truth here is that he doesn't have any proof. Both of these people use the same ad- verbage that they obtained from reading the S&M pitch from the product carton or website. That is where this is stemming from. Terms such as less heat means longer wear. How does he know it's running cooler? He doesn't. He only is reading what he read off the site or package. Has he taken a thermocouple and attached it to the piston walls and run tests of with and without it, the answer is no, he has not. There's absolutely no proof with any of those claims. If the theory is that running the engine cooler means it lasts longer, than, why, for sake of argument, it should last really long when running a 180º T-stat vs a 200º T-stat. The answer is that's not true. The engine parts are rated above and beyond the normal range of use. All the materials in the engine have a large tolerance for heat above the normal operating range.

Same with motor oil viscosity. Just because it's thicker doesn't mean it's going to last longer or that it's not going to break down. It's the chemical bonding at the molecular level that determines how long it will last before breaking down not the viscosity. And, the better the formulation and raw materials and testing, the greater the heat range, cold range and lubrication properties.

Here we have one that claims that the tests and graphs are total BS along with another poster who throws out a number First, there's no hard numbers nor any data for wear which is what we are discussing. How do we know that this not some made up or exaggerated statement. The fact is that we don't. For all we know it was fabricated. Third, we have no way of knowing what motor oils were run. Multiple brands of oils may have been using along with varying brands of filters.

The other cars mentioned can not be included with the test as it's irrelevant and I will tell you why. Due to varying designs, one car may outlast another by 400K regardless of the motor oil used. I have seen brand new engines go south after a few thousand miles due to defect in manufacture and defective parts. Had nothing to do with lubrication.

In this case, we have no way of knowing what the other vehicles were subject to and, we also have no way of knowing what kind of maintenance was done. In the end, it is inconclusive and should be thrown out.

 

^What books you been readin, i want to get my hands on those, this is all good info.

 

LISTEN..........NO...I'm not getting kicked off DF because someone thinks I'm full of SH*T, I've rebuilt 36+ motors..complete and you don't need graghs and numbers, 'an frick'in charts to show scoring on cylinder walls,..all I can say is,....arghhh!!! accused of...OF.. "package label reading"??? come on now boy....you ma boy....are in dire need of sum "POON"!!!..... oh yeah,..CMCKENNA, I'm also a certified mechanical engineer, (I just work as a Natural Gas-Well Tester/Class 1 Tanker Driver because the pay is phenominal!!)+ I live by the rule..."why buy new..when old will do...except for"POON"!!!...u want me fax U my diploma?