Amsoil Oil Change

WilliamBos · March 20, 2020

12 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I wouldn't go over 5K but I'm not a gambler. Took me forever to get to 5K from 2K OCI's. I have not heard from anyone doing extended OCI's that they check for or follow any sort of cleanliness testing other than insolubles percentage. That's like moping a floor with dirty water and continuing to believe you can make the floor clean because a test says some detergent is left in the bucket.

With AFM & VVT I will not over extend my OCI either.

Grumpy Bear · March 20, 2020

1 hour ago, Nanotech Environmental said:

This would only be a fair analogy if there weren't oil filters on an engine. Lot's of good filters out there that do a great job of cleaning the oil.

Now change that analogy to mopping a dirty floor with water/detergent that keeps getting cycled thru a good filter.

I understand your point but I do believe you missed mine. Let's look at it again.

13 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I wouldn't go over 5K but I'm not a gambler. Took me forever to get to 5K from 2K OCI's. I have not heard from anyone doing extended OCI's that they check for or follow any sort of cleanliness testing other than insolubles percentage. That's like moping a floor with dirty water and continuing to believe you can make the floor clean because a test says some detergent is left in the bucket.

Please, if will, note that the analogy hinges on doing cleanliness testing? And as I made point, it isn't something anyone does. They assume it based on TBN. The simple insoluble percentage test as well is a poor indicator. If fact it does not correlate well with ISO-4406/2017 results at all. I've seen a fair number of Blackstone and Dyson reports where we declare 'excellent protection' and yet the tester did not run the ISO-11171 or equivalent APC test. How many have you seen that display these test results? Yea....one in a hundred?

There are far more 'bad' filters than there are good ones and the industry does their best to keep the end user in the dark. Simply stating brand X is a good filter, even if it is, will be met with harsh resistance until you have proof. Even then some will doubt your proofs. It's all silliness I know but it is our reality unless you test.

These test exist for a reason. The other test can not accurately infer a clean result or show a filters worth.

A VOA/UOA ISO 4406 compare will. But you have to do them.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Grumpy Bear

Jaychevy81 · March 20, 2020

Project?

An oil change is a 15min job.

And a project can be 15 mins who the **** cares.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nanotech Environmental · March 20, 2020

4 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I understand your point but I do believe you missed mine. Let's look at it again.

Please, if will, note that the analogy hinges on doing cleanliness testing? And as I made point, it isn't something anyone does. They assume it based on TBN. The simple insoluble percentage test as well is a poor indicator. If fact it does not correlate well with ISO-4406/2017 results at all. I've seen a fair number of Blackstone and Dyson reports where we declare 'excellent protection' and yet the tester did not run the ISO-11171 or equivalent APC test. How many have you seen that display these test results? Yea....one in a hundred?

There are far more 'bad' filters than there are good ones and the industry does their best to keep the end user in the dark. Simply stating brand X is a good filter, even if it is, will be met with harsh resistance until you have proof. Even then some will doubt your proofs. It's all silliness I know but it is our reality unless you test.

These test exist for a reason. The other test can not accurately infer a clean result or show a filters worth.

A VOA/UOA ISO 4406 compare will. But you have to do them.

Actually, I didn't miss your point. The way it's worded, it appears to me to be based on the assumption that the oil is likely to be dirty (and that the filter is inneffective), even though there is really no real reason to make that assumption, other than fear. It also appears that you're also assuming that one of the oil's job is to be a cleaner, when it really isn't. It's a carrier. It carries bits of whatever to the filter. The filter in essence, is the cleaner.

If you want to do high frequency oil changes, that's certainly your prerogative, but it's an expensive way to maintain a vehicle. The internet is full of real data of all types that show how well modern oils work in modern engines, along with the filters, including extended OCI's. There isn't any real hard data that show that high frequency oil changes are a good idea. There is a lot of people that believe that though. They are great customers of the oil companies.

My personal experience shows that extended OCI's work, are safe and a good idea. Been doing it for many years. Never an oil related issue and I've saved many thousands of $$$ in unnecessary oil changes.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Nanotech Environmental

TXGREEK · March 20, 2020

Actually, I didn't miss your point. The way it's worded, it appears to me to be based on the assumption that the oil is likely to be dirty (and that the filter is inneffective), even though there is really no real reason to make that assumption, other than fear. It also appears that you're also assuming that one of the oil's job is to be a cleaner, when it really isn't. It's a carrier. It carries bits of whatever to the filter. The filter in essence, is the cleaner.

If you want to do high frequency oil changes, that's certainly your prerogative, but it's an expensive way to maintain a vehicle. The internet is full of real data of all types that show how well modern oils work in modern engines, along with the filters, including extended OCI's. There isn't any real hard data that show that high frequency oil changes are a good idea. There is a lot of people that believe that though. They are great customers of the oil companies.

My personal experience shows that extended OCI's work, are safe and a good idea. Been doing it for many years. Never an oil related issue and I've saved many thousands of $$$ in unnecessary oil changes.

Your personal experiences with extended OCI’s work for you but not others. Oil filters are not all created equal, the majority on this forum look for the cheapest route and not the best. One mans experience doesn’t lay out what needs to be done for the rest of us. DI engines are 100% known to get dirty and fast, a good oil filter can only clean up what it catches and like any filter must be cleaned or replaced. Extended OCI’s are neither required nor recommended but rather operators choice. Grumpy made a very valid point so now to each his/her/its own but anyone interested in short to long OCI’s I’d highly recommend Amsoil products.

Sent from Above

Nanotech Environmental · March 20, 2020

5 minutes ago, TXGREEK said:

Your personal experiences with extended OCI’s work for you but not others. Oil filters are not all created equal, the majority on this forum look for the cheapest route and not the best. One mans experience doesn’t lay out what needs to be done for the rest of us. DI engines are 100% known to get dirty and fast, a good oil filter can only clean up what it catches and like any filter must be cleaned or replaced. Extended OCI’s are neither required nor recommended but rather operators choice. Grumpy made a very valid point so now to each his/her/its own but anyone interested in short to long OCI’s I’d highly recommend Amsoil products.

Sent from Above

To each his/her own. My experience are my own, but are also supported by scads & scads of real data; both from many thousands of others, & also from oodles & oodles of scientific testing. Even Amsoil has successfully built an entire company around the concept.
Like I mentioned, if people want to do high freq changes, that's their prerogative, but it just makes them a great customer for the oil manufacturer.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Nanotech Environmental

TXGREEK · March 20, 2020

Btw, the internet is full of the cheapest and not the best options to OCI’s but then again the internet is mostly full of issues with DI engines running on cheap bastards that push their engines to the limits and later putting the blame on the automobile manufacturers rather than the real culprit, the OPERATOR!

Again, I’ve seen the majority on forums brag about the cheapest lowest required spec oils they’re purchasing but to each their own, buy what you can afford and recycle your oil and filters.

Sent from Above

TXGREEK · March 20, 2020

To each his/her own. My experience are my own, but are also supported by scads & scads of real data; both from many thousands of others, & also from oodles & oodles of scientific testing. Even Amsoil has successfully built an entire company around the concept.
Like I mentioned, if people want to do high freq changes, that's their prerogative, but it just makes them a great customer for the oil manufacturer.

Agreed on purchasing from oil companies making them money but again there is a lot of data out there that proves the point that most people look for the lowest required spec oil at the lowest price and not the highest quality at the lowest price. I personally use Amsoil 20k mile oil and filter every 4-5K miles and no matter what anyone says I change every 4-5K miles and my engine runs absolutely fantastic with zero issues which is more than I can say for our transmissions lol.

We can all go back and forth on Oil and OCI’s which is to be expected but one thing is for certain, Amsoil Signature Series is the best along with its high efficiency filters

Sent from Above

TXGREEK · March 20, 2020

Last, this is why I DO NOT buy used, far more cheap asses out there that either knowingly or unknowingly abuse their engines. Buy a $50 k truck and complain about a few extra dollars at the pump or OCI’s, now this is pathetic. Ok, everyone PLEASE take care and don’t go out unless you really need to.

God Bless The United States [emoji631] of America and all those that defend the Constitution of The United States of America, Amen!

Sent from Above

Grumpy Bear · March 20, 2020

2 hours ago, Nanotech Environmental said:

Actually, I didn't miss your point. The way it's worded, it appears to me to be based on the assumption that the oil is likely to be dirty (and that the filter is inneffective), even though there is really no real reason to make that assumption, other than fear. It also appears that you're also assuming that one of the oil's job is to be a cleaner, when it really isn't. It's a carrier. It carries bits of whatever to the filter. The filter in essence, is the cleaner.

I know you don't know me but I assume nothing. I refrain stating my ideas or opinions as a fact.

I do state lab data I observe as fact.

Reviewing such data over a 40 year involvement in the oil/gas/chemical business.

This particular oil I offer in example is a demonstration of the industry AVERAGE NEW cleanliness.

As poured from the bottle a very popular SN-Plus which is near the industry "unsuitable for any service" numbers. You may be aware that spin on filters are a compromise between filtration and flow capacity. Their efficiency varies with the particle size they attempt to filter and this regard there is a HUGE variation. Mobil 1 M1-212A for example, deviates from efficiency to obtain life by opening the filter media to the point that it is rated at 30 micron while MOST other filters rate to the industry standard 25 micron. Don't kid yourself. There is a great difference in efficiency between 25 and 30 micron. If you would like to see how much email your favorite filter manufacture and get a complete test curve. Many NAME BRAND filters of great construction are literally dog and cat catchers. I don't guess...I test. And yes a 25 micron filter will pass 50 micron particles.

I would invite you to test your oil out of the bottle AND again a hundred miles later to quantify your filters TRUE ability. Then do so about every thousand miles and watch your oil cleanliness.

Forget me...test this yourself. Why believe my data. I assume to much.

Here's a couple more popular Dexos approved name brand oils.

PQI 8 3

ISO code 22/20/17 21/19/15

4 micron 28030 17372

6 micron 9727 3650

10 micron 2803 830

14 micron 821 229

18 micron 383 116

21 micron 251 81

38 micron 52 19

50 micron 34 11

Edited March 20, 2020 by Grumpy Bear

Nanotech Environmental · March 21, 2020

6 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I know you don't know me but I assume nothing. I refrain stating my ideas or opinions as a fact.

I do state lab data I observe as fact.

Reviewing such data over a 40 year involvement in the oil/gas/chemical business.

This particular oil I offer in example is a demonstration of the industry AVERAGE NEW cleanliness.

As poured from the bottle a very popular SN-Plus which is near the industry "unsuitable for any service" numbers. You may be aware that spin on filters are a compromise between filtration and flow capacity. Their efficiency varies with the particle size they attempt to filter and this regard there is a HUGE variation. Mobil 1 M1-212A for example, deviates from efficiency to obtain life by opening the filter media to the point that it is rated at 30 micron while MOST other filters rate to the industry standard 25 micron. Don't kid yourself. There is a great difference in efficiency between 25 and 30 micron. If you would like to see how much email your favorite filter manufacture and get a complete test curve. Many NAME BRAND filters of great construction are literally dog and cat catchers. I don't guess...I test. And yes a 25 micron filter will pass 50 micron particles.

I would invite you to test your oil out of the bottle AND again a hundred miles later to quantify your filters TRUE ability. Then do so about every thousand miles and watch your oil cleanliness.

Forget me...test this yourself. Why believe my data. I assume to much.

Here's a couple more popular Dexos approved name brand oils.

PQI               8                 3

ISO code       22/20/17         21/19/15

4 micron        28030            17372

6 micron         9727             3650

10 micron        2803              830

14 micron         821              229

18 micron         383              116

21 micron         251               81

38 micron          52               19

50 micron          34               11

I'd suggest that you assume a lot more than you think you do.

Like I said earlier, how you do things is your prerogative.
You may spend a lot of time futzing about this stuff & may even enjoy it.........
Myself, I do none of that & my engine will last as long or longer than yours & I'll spend less than half the money on maintenance & less than a 1/4 of the time that you do. No money spent on lab reports, or any time worrying about them.
Once my truck gets to 200k miles or so, it gets replaced with the next one. It will still be running fine at that point & will still have lots of service life left in the engine.

Not sure if you noticed or not, but oil related failures are pretty rare, & almost never happen on vehicles that receive regular basic maintenance. It's been like that for a long time. A very long time. In most cases, the engines outlast the vehicle nowadays, especially in the rust belt. If the engine does fail, it's usually a design related failure.
Despite your best efforts oil just isn't the weak point in the machine.

Just sayin'.

TXGREEK · March 21, 2020

I'd suggest that you assume a lot more than you think you do.

Like I said earlier, how you do things is your prerogative.
You may spend a lot of time futzing about this stuff & may even enjoy it.........
Myself, I do none of that & my engine will last as long or longer than yours & I'll spend less than half the money on maintenance & less than a 1/4 of the time that you do. No money spent on lab reports, or any time worrying about them.
Once my truck gets to 200k miles or so, it gets replaced with the next one. It will still be running fine at that point & will still have lots of service life left in the engine.

Not sure if you noticed or not, but oil related failures are pretty rare, & almost never happen on vehicles that receive regular basic maintenance. It's been like that for a long time. A very long time. In most cases, the engines outlast the vehicle nowadays, especially in the rust belt. If the engine does fail, it's usually a design related failure.
Despite your best efforts oil just isn't the weak point in the machine.

Just sayin'.

Regular basic maintenance? Engine design failure? In case you haven’t noticed, there’s an enormous amount of engine failures on the internet, especially on these forums, especially with AFM and all while using minimum required engine oil but none while using Amsoil or Redline. The answer to this can be simple and yet overlooked, especially with cheapskates, I’ve owned an enormous amount of trucks, mostly for my business and have definitely noticed a difference in smoother running engines when I switched to Amsoil, ZERO carbon build up, engine vibrations and the cost far outweighing the repairs etc etc.

Sent from Above

diyer2 · March 21, 2020

TXGREEK,

FYI

I recently switched from Valvoline motorcycle oil for my ATV to Amsoil oil. Still using a standard oil filter.

I decided to switch due to it's age, mountain trails with lots of steep grades, plowing snow and riding with 2 people putting more strain on the engine.

I have used it twice since the switch to plow snow.

The ATV seems a little quieter. It also idles smoother IMO or it's in my head.

The test will be riding this summer.

Now I still haven't convinced myself to switch my vehicles to Amsoil.

Better than average oil and more frequent changes because I like clean oil works for me now.

Agriont · March 21, 2020

On 3/17/2020 at 12:54 PM, elcamino said:

I have used AMSOIL for 40 yrs and NEVER changed oil less the 15,000 miles. For those who demand the best and KNOW the difference.

I have the same truck. Recent bulletin for 8spd transmission called for a flush and Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP fluid if you've experience rough shifts. Have you changed yours with this juice or have you used AMSOIL for the transmission as well as the engine oil?