168 replies to this topic

[68fastback]

Red Line is group-V ...does that make it far superior to Amsoil and does the UoA data support that?  

Edited by 68fastback, 29 September 2011 - 07:09 PM.

[Boss Hoss 540]

Redline is good stuff and is what I would run if Amsoil was not available.

Edited by Boss Hoss 540, 30 September 2011 - 06:21 AM.

[Torch40]

I have not read this in a while. The fools are leading the pack in oil usage.  I guess all those dopes don’t care about “shear”.

This has to be one of the most entertaining threads ever. (Not counting the Girls in Mustangs thread)

[68fastback]

Boss Hoss 540, on 30 September 2011 - 06:20 AM, said:

Redline is good stuff and is what I would run if Amsoil was not available.

So Amsoil, a group-IV, is somehow beter than RadLine, a group-V?

---

I would run RedLine over Amsoil in a dedicated racer, but I'd run MC 5W50 over both in a GT500 that seens regular street use -- even if it makes 700rwHP (for all the reasons I've previously stated in this tread an d others)..

[UnleashedBeast]

68fastback, on 29 September 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

Red Line is group-V ...does that make it far superior to Amsoil and does the UoA data support that?  

So Amsoil, a group-IV, is somehow beter than RadLine, a group-V?

---

I would run RedLine over Amsoil in a dedicated racer, but I'd run MC 5W50 over both in a GT500 that seens regular street use -- even if it makes 700rwHP (for all the reasons I've previously stated in this tread an d others)..

Red Line so far in their 5W-50 formulation has shown me that TBN doesn't last very long. I know the experts agree that group V esters make up for this, but we shall see. Red Line performed WELL in wear metal readings. Is it better than Amsoil, no....is Amsoil better than Red Line, no again. They both have their place in the industry.

You choosing Red Line for racing is smart. Choosing MC 5W-50 for street instead of Red Line, well...that's a horse of a different color. I guess if you do not have the desire to gain maximum efficiency, power, and mpg from your engine on the street, please...keep using MC. I challenge you sir....use a true synthetic 10W-40 from Red Line, Amsoil, or Royal Purple....you WILL experience a noticeable difference.

If you fail to accept my challenge, then you honestly have no right to debate this topic with me, or anyone else, anymore.

Torch40, on 30 September 2011 - 06:49 AM, said:

I have not read this in a while. The fools are leading the pack in oil usage.  I guess all those dopes don’t care about “shear”.

This has to be one of the most entertaining threads ever. (Not counting the Girls in Mustangs thread)

MC 5W-50 is used more not because it's the BEST for these cars.....it's only because Ford directly endorses the use of it with scare tactics. Honestly, the scare tactics come from those who have no clue how engine lubricants are spec'd, tested, and measured. Most have no clue about the technology the physics involved, and just ride the "Ford doesn't recommend it, then it must be bad".

If people were more open minded, and not just ready to jump on the "Ford approved sufficient" bandwagon....MC would be dead last in the poll. If someone could drive a car with fresh MC 5W-50 and fresh true synthetic 10W-40....they would never get back into the 5W-50 car.

Edited by UnleashedBeast, 30 September 2011 - 09:06 AM.

[butch12573]

Just curious how many engine failures have been caused by using MC 5W-50 or any engine oil for that matter

[UnleashedBeast]

butch12573, on 30 September 2011 - 04:17 PM, said:

Just curious how many engine failures have been caused by using MC 5W-50 or any engine oil for that matter

"sufficient" doesn't mean engine failures, do not make it out to be more than it is.

Now had you asked me how much oil I have found in superchargers and upper intake manifolds in cars that are using MC 5W-50...., now that is something of significance. NOACK Volatility

[jerseygator]

UB...
Got a great pm from Boss Hoss. Thanks Boss...

UnleashedBeast, on 30 September 2011 - 08:52 AM, said:

I guess if you do not have the desire to gain maximum efficiency, power, and mpg from your engine on the street, please...keep using MC. I challenge you sir....use a true synthetic 10W-40 from Red Line, Amsoil, or Royal Purple....you WILL experience a noticeable difference.

If you fail to accept my challenge, then you honestly have no right to debate this topic with me, or anyone else, anymore.

So... You mention "noticeable dfference" would you elaborate more than above?

Will accept your challenge the next time I change the oil. Can't hurt anything...

JG

[UnleashedBeast]

UOA chart updated yet again in post #1

I'm shocked at how fast the results are in. The sample was just sent off via UPS on Tuesday afternoon. WOW! Good job Polaris Labs. :thumbsup:



Lab technicians do not think sometimes, but I can't blame them....they don't know the vehicle as well as I do, and have to test so many samples, so I decided to clarify some things.

Quote

Abrasives (silicon/dirt) are at a MODERATE LEVEL;

Really? If you would look at the three previous samples taken from this engine, you would have seen that the silicon levels are declining after every oil change. This is due to the sealants used to assemble the engine, and not dust contamination from a faulty air filter.

Quote

Infrared results indicate OXIDATION is
MODERATELY HIGH;

How can you make that assumption without a virgin sample from the same batch? This is the normal range for PAO synthetics. :dw:

Quote

Flagged additive levels are different than what should be present for the lubricant that is identified for
this unit. (This does not imply that the lubricant does not meet proper API, SAE, or ISO classifications.);

That's because you have the virgin specs for the old Amsoil 10W-30. The new signature series 10W-30 had a big change in the additive package. ZDDP was reduced, Moly and Boron were added to compensate. If they had the new specs...Moly, Boron, and Magnesium would not be flagged, as it's native to the virgin sample. Finally I have more solid proof that Moly and Boron is a great substitute for lower levels of ZDDP.

Manganese is flagged for a good reason. This is what happens when you use Torco. The more you use, the higher ppm this will be.

Now that we have that out of the way....check out how beautiful the metal wear numbers are. I'm very happy with these results, and so far are the best from any sample in the list, my previous samples included. Amsoil 10W-30 is dominating the performance in my engine, and the oil pressure in my car is slightly improved over 10W-40. I can only imagine the improvement over un-sheared 5W-50.

Virgin Amsoil 10W-30 viscosity is 10.5 cSt...and it remained exactly that...10.5 (zero % shearing).

TBN is still over 8, so that means this lubricant could be used for many more miles.

Retesting when the car is slightly over 12,000 miles.

[Secondo]

UnleashedBeast, on 30 September 2011 - 06:37 PM, said:

Lab technicians do not think sometimes, but I can't blame them....they don't know the vehicle as well as I do, and have to test so many samples, so I decided to clarify some things.

  

Too much.




And why would anyone put 10W-30 in a high-HP engine that requires 5W-50?

[68fastback]

Secondo, on 30 September 2011 - 06:50 PM, said:

  

Too much.




And why would anyone put 10W-30 in a high-HP engine that requires 5W-50?

Secondo, it is because we are witnessing the hazing ceremony of an fraternity Amsoil ...I can see it in the eyes of the beast, I tell ya  ....those words -- especially in the last few posts but also in many others over the oil ages -- are the words of someone hypnotized by UoAs.  An AMsoil zealot!   They are dangerous -- not just content to make their own oil choices, they relish Amsoil proselytizing.  They will only be satisfied when they have converted all you pathetic non-believers into 'enlightened' practicing Amsoil zealot drones!  Amsoil proselytizing is in their oily blood -- it is a sacred obligation coded in DNA and passed down from generation to generation -- on the SAE chromosome.  It compells them to save all others from logic and self-thought ...the drive comes from deep within.  It is not their fault.  They cannot help themselves -- they are driven by mysterious forces and selective beliefs thought to eminate from the great Am -- the Savior of the Oil universe -- out just beyond the great Group-X ring, in the additive cluster known as 10W30.  Yes!  It is planet Amsoil.  Believe and heall thyself, oh disbeleivers!!  All bow the great Am!!   Ammmmmm.  Ammmmm.  Ammmmm  















  ...sorry, it came to me in a dream

[UnleashedBeast]

Awesome sarcastic humor....but any true synthetic 10W-30 in Royal Purple, Red Line, Amsoil, or even Mobil 1 EP would have yield similar results....so that makes your comedy, just that...comedy.

and to better answer Secondo's question....obviously because I understand the physics and know that the cooling modifications I have done to my engine do not require as viscous of lubricant. It's OK....you do not have to listen to me, but my challenge to you still remains.

Let's not forget about a great motto from the BITOG forums. "As thin as possible....as thick as necessary."

Edited by UnleashedBeast, 30 September 2011 - 11:34 PM.

[Boss Hoss 540]

UnleashedBeast, on 30 September 2011 - 11:20 PM, said:

Awesome sarcastic humor....but any true synthetic 10W-30 in Royal Purple, Red Line, Amsoil, or even Mobil 1 EP would have yield similar results....so that makes your comedy, just that...comedy.

and to better answer Secondo's question....obviously because I understand the physics and know that the cooling modifications I have done to my engine do not require as viscous of lubricant. It's OK....you do not have to listen to me, but my challenge to you still remains.

Let's not forget about a great motto from the BITOG forums. "As thin as possible....as thick as necessary."

Don't worry about these folks---they are the same ones who use Turtle Wax on their cars LOL!!

[UnleashedBeast]

Boss Hoss 540, on 01 October 2011 - 10:07 AM, said:

Don't worry about these folks---they are the same ones who use Turtle Wax on their cars LOL!!

on their body....Ben Gay and Viagra. lol

[68fastback]

- doh! ;-)

[Secondo]

  savior of the oil universe!!

Wow its getting pretty deep in here.

The only challenge here is for the OP snake-oil salesman to provide real-world performance and MPG tests. I believe the simplistic used-oil tests don't mean much at all, especially coming from someone who puts the incorrect weight oil in his GT500, throws Ford and its engineers under the bus and calls anyone fools for using Motorcraft oil.  Oh, and for bragging in his signature that he puts Amsoil in his 94 Corsica.

And what do you use for an oil filter? Let me guess- anything but Motorcraft?

[UnleashedBeast]

The Motorcraft FL-820 oil filter is fine for shorter oil change intervals, and offers a lot of back for the buck. It doesn't have the ability to filter as small of particles like the nano fiber of the Amsoil EaO or the Royal Purple micro glass oil filters. The MC filter is built by the Purolator guys. No harm no foul there.

and for the last time....how many times do I have to tell you that MC 5W-50 doesn't remain a 50 weight lubricant? It shears to a heavy 30 weight lubricant.  

Truth of the matter is...I have far more evidence to support my "Snake Oil" claims than you have to deny them. All you have is..."because Ford said so!" Yeah, that's really weak. Not to mention....the UOA results of every MC 5W-50 sample I have ever seen...SUCKS!

Gawd...that signature is so old, I don't even use it anywhere else. Please allow me to upgrade that to my new one.

Edited by UnleashedBeast, 03 October 2011 - 05:23 PM.

[UnleashedBeast]

Since you brought up the subject....yes I use the Amsoil EaO11...and for darn good reason. Filters smaller microns more efficiently and offers better flow at the same time. They are built far superior to the MC 820, have a higher burst pressure strength, and offer longer periods of use.

Used Vs. Used







New Vs. New (I know they are not the exact part numbers, but the same material...just different sized media.)






and for the facts that matter most....Amsoil compared their filter in the 20 micron test, even though it scores the same in the 15 micron test. The 820 only scores ~80% efficiency in the 15 micron test.

Edited by UnleashedBeast, 03 October 2011 - 05:51 PM.

[68fastback]

UnleashedBeast, on 03 October 2011 - 05:47 PM, said:

Since you brought up the subject....yes I use the Amsoil EaO11...and for darn good reason. Filters smaller microns more efficiently and offers better flow at the same time. They are built far superior to the MC 820, have a higher burst pressure strength, and offer longer periods of use.

Used Vs. Used







New Vs. New (I know they are not the exact part numbers, but the same material...just different sized media.)






and for the facts that matter most....Amsoil compared their filter in the 20 micron test, even though it scores the same in the 15 micron test. The 820 only scores ~80% efficiency in the 15 micron test.

Pardon my french, but what a load of crap!


In that first pic it's very clear that the Amsoil filter has considerably fewer pleats (and they also appear somewhat shorter too) for considerably less total filter-media area.  Now you're saying they also filter finer particles too.  Clearly that must result in more material being removed from the oil, so the Amsoil filter would have to clog up earlier *or* go into bypass *or* both -- *OR* the magic filtering is bogus ....or Amsoil filter meida is made from unobtanium from planet Am which defies the known laws of terrestrial physics for filter media.  Then, at the bottom you show an MC FL1A which is not even for these cars and is a much larger filter -- which is why it can have less pleats in the media and still have plenty of filter area.   And clearly Toyota and Honda also don't know what they're doing from that chart -- only the great Am does -doh!

I've had enough snake-oil BS for the day -lol.  You are proselyetizing a brand and likely have some affiliation or personal involvement/benefit -- direct or indirect -- with Amsoil.  You've crossed over the line from discussing to blatantly 'pushing' a product/brand without paying a vendor license fee to the site -- in violation of your site registration agreement?  I think so.  

Clever how some products use advocates to get around the FCC internet 'shill' disclosure rules of recent.

[Grabber]

68fastback, on 03 October 2011 - 06:37 PM, said:

Pardon my french, but what a load of crap!


In that first pic it's very clear that the Amsoil filter has considerably fewer pleats (and they also appear somewhat shorter too) for considerably less total filter-media area.  Now you're saying they also filter finer particles too.  Clearly that must result in more material being removed from the oil, so the Amsoil filter would have to clog up earlier *or* go into bypass *or* both -- *OR* the magic filtering is bogus ....or Amsoil filter meida is made from unobtanium from planet Am which defies the known laws of terrestrial physics for filter media.  Then, at the bottom you show an MC FL1A which is not even for these cars and is a much larger filter -- which is why it can have less pleats in the media and still have plenty of filter area.   And clearly Toyota and Honda also don't know what they're doing from that chart -- only the great Am does -doh!

I've had enough snake-oil BS for the day -lol.  You are proselyetizing a brand and likely have some affiliation or personal involvement/benefit -- direct or indirect -- with Amsoil.  You've crossed over the line from discussing to blatantly 'pushing' a product/brand without paying a vendor license fee to the site -- in violation of your site registration agreement?  I think so.  

Clever how some products use advocates to get around the FCC internet 'shill' disclosure rules of recent.

I will send him Robert Lanes e-mail so he can sign up to be a site vendor.