Add engine oil!!!

diyer2 · March 3, 2023

I will never buy the extended OCI's. Oil and filters can be cost effective or expensive, your choice. I believe oil and filter changes are directly related to engine longevity and performance. So I will change my oil/filter more often than some because it has served me well for many years.

CHEAP INSURANCE! YMMV

Grumpy Bear · March 3, 2023

10 hours ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Hey customboss, what if the oil flowed through a tiny tube so a sensor could figure how thick it was. Would that be ‘nuf info to cross reference remaining life?

What you are describing is Kinematic viscosity apparatus. I post the picture to show that this type of measurement relies on exact control of temperature. EXACT. AND GRAVITY. Point of fact is all viscosity measurements rely on exact control of temperature. The oil being sampled in this machine will also be measured for density at the EXACT same temperature and these two pieces of information are used to report to the commercially used cSt units.

While viscosity is useful in determining the end life of an oil it is but one of many ways oil can be 'spoiled'. For example, an oil may test fine for viscosity as the result of soot increasing viscosity while at the same time fuel dilution lowering it viscosity. You now have a lubricant that has little lubricity and is quite abrasive but in spec on viscosity.

Grumpy Bear · March 3, 2023

44 minutes ago, diyer2 said:

I will never buy the extended OCI's. Oil and filters can be cost effective or expensive, your choice. I believe oil and filter changes are directly related to engine longevity and performance. So I will change my oil/filter more often than some because it has served me well for many years.

CHEAP INSURANCE! YMMV

YMMV is as accurate a statement as can be made. I've used short and sweet most of my life as it too has not failed me......until recently. Even with that the odds are still in my favor with short and sweet. Once in a lifetime is a good horse to bet against.

This self-reliance is the direct result, for me, of an industry that cannot agree on anything but disagreement. Condemnation points vary wildly from lab to lab. 0.2% soot to 2.0-5.0%. Viscosity from 0.5% deviation from new to one SAE grade. TBN from 40-60% of new to an absolute unit of 1 mgKOH/g to using the BN/AN crossing point. And all guarding their "proprietary' information and "intellectual property". Oh, and the mudslinging.

Formulators, OEM's and government are NOT helping either having all decided you need to know bupkis. Adding to that mix nearly annual now changes in formulations destroying continuity. I guess the idea is to get you to trust blindly a system that goes out of its way to destroy trust by creating the illusion of last man standing. And now the green renewables movement is attempting to destroy the credibility of the SAE and ASTM.

Somewhere between the family million-mile club that relied on 500-to-1000-mile oil changes and my work mates Monte Carlo going 100,000 miles with zero oil OR filter changes.....is the truth.

customboss · March 3, 2023

11 hours ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Hey customboss, what if the oil flowed through a tiny tube so a sensor could figure how thick it was. Would that be ‘nuf info to cross reference remaining life?

Thats one reading. Viscosity. It was tested. Not enough data.

customboss · March 3, 2023

15 hours ago, customboss said:

Its possible but IR, near IR, or Ramen sensors are not durable enough/cheap enough to stand the heat yet. Trust me I worked on it for 30 years.

13 hours ago, Jettech1 said:

So I had an idea concerning oil monitoring. Why is that so much of a stretch for technology these day.s? We have cars that drive themselves...Seems to me the money and technology for something like that is way higher than an oil monitoring sensor. I mean why not? If you could get say 15 or even 20k miles out of your oil with a sensor knowing when it's going bad or has too much iron or whatever else in it....wouldn't that save a ton of money and oil usage? Why isn't that possible in the days we are living in. Hell I have a phone that knows exactly what I'm saying and knows exactly where I am at all times. The technology has to be there...and I think it would be super cool if our vehicles would tell us that.

Jet, the IR detectors are too sensitive and can't consistently read the used oils in situ ( in operation) at the temps and contaminants levels. By the time anyone comes up with a unit we'll all be more worried about our hydrogen alkaline or PEM electrolyzers working right to onboard make electricity from water.

customboss · March 3, 2023

7 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

YMMV is as accurate a statement as can be made. I've used short and sweet most of my life as it too has not failed me......until recently. Even with that the odds are still in my favor with short and sweet. Once in a lifetime is a good horse to bet against.

This self-reliance is the direct result, for me, of an industry that cannot agree on anything but disagreement. Condemnation points vary wildly from lab to lab. 0.2% soot to 2.0-5.0%. Viscosity from 0.5% deviation from new to one SAE grade. TBN from 40-60% of new to an absolute unit of 1 mgKOH/g to using the BN/AN crossing point. And all guarding their "proprietary' information and "intellectual property". Oh, and the mudslinging.

Formulators, OEM's and government are NOT helping either having all decided you need to know bupkis. Adding to that mix nearly annual now changes in formulations destroying continuity. I guess the idea is to get you to trust blindly a system that goes out of its way to destroy trust by creating the illusion of last man standing. And now the green renewables movement is attempting to destroy the credibility of the SAE and ASTM.

Somewhere between the family million-mile club that relied on 500-to-1000-mile oil changes and my work mates Monte Carlo going 100,000 miles with zero oil OR filter changes.....is the truth.

Fully agree with your comments Grumpy except that there is a standard for labs to produce and in peer reviewed work we accept that standard not cookie cutter labs that the consumer has access to. There is a repeatable, repreducable, consistent result if the lab is ISO certified like Nicks @Black02Silverado why I suggest folks use his lab. He contracts with an industrial lab that give him a specified product run and they non compete with HIM ONLY. I have seen people go directly to that lab and buy their industrial product and its sucks. LOL .... Only product that people see here from SyntheticAdvantage ISO CERTIFIED OIL ANALYSIS is available from Nick.

customboss · March 3, 2023

46 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

What you are describing is Kinematic viscosity apparatus. I post the picture to show that this type of measurement relies on exact control of temperature. EXACT. AND GRAVITY. Point of fact is all viscosity measurements rely on exact control of temperature. The oil being sampled in this machine will also be measured for density at the EXACT same temperature and these two pieces of information are used to report to the commercially used cSt units.

While viscosity is useful in determining the end life of an oil it is but one of many ways oil can be 'spoiled'. For example, an oil may test fine for viscosity as the result of soot increasing viscosity while at the same time fuel dilution lowering it viscosity. You now have a lubricant that has little lubricity and is quite abrasive but in spec on viscosity.

Indeed. There are plenty of flowmeters that are used on aircraft and high end applications for fuel usually but also for lubricants. Still not cost effective for consumer vehicles and you really only get the viscosity trend.

Kinematic viscometers like Grumpy shared cannot read water or be permanently damaged.

Grumpy Bear · March 3, 2023

I had the good fortune to work for Chevron Research and Chevron USA Refining Division. First site with Research I lived right across the street from the University of Utah's library with a complete catalogue of SAE papers and published doctoral papers. Five cents a page. In El Paso it was UTEP. When I wasn't working, I was neck deep in the library and when I was working any idle time was neck deep in the Chevron Research library or spent in the Engine and research/QC labs. I have always been an information sponge in my field. Later on, near the end of my career I worked in Research at Eastman/Hexion Chemical. Not lubricants or fuel but much exposure to method/practice and ISO-9000 and a half dozen PhD's with backgrounds in hydrocarbon chemistry that I milked like cows. :crackup: I learned two really important things during those experiences.

1.) ASTM tests are a method of acquiring data. Have nothing to do with interpreting it. Statistics organize it. Researchers test that data against field work to find correlations. PhDs publish those results and conclusions. If you want the what's what, find the SAE or Doctoral Published peer reviewed papers/documents that deal with you interest. You WILL find that the absolute results are always much narrower and inflexible than the commercial spin. The truth is too expensive to use. :rollin:

2.) ISO does NOT insure anything, but the paperwork is being filled out. Most of it pencil whipped (boiler housed) by tired over worked techs that have been assigned a task that is a job to itself. It assigns a direct but fuzzy path to blame BUT does not ensure quality. The tech logs he did the test, but it is not a guarantee he did that task or used the standard. No amount of paperwork and bureaucracy can assure compliance. Mostly it protects the bosses head from rolling and assures someone's below him will. Lab results are not like looking at a fine piece of furniture where quality is evident by inspecting the finished product.

In a shift of a dozen techs or operators only 1 or 2 are holding up the standards required. The other rest on their work. It is sad and it is true.

customboss · March 3, 2023

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I had the good fortune to work for Chevron Research and Chevron USA Refining Division. First site with Research I lived right across the street from the University of Utah's library with a complete catalogue of SAE papers and published doctoral papers. Five cents a page. In El Paso it was UTEP. When I wasn't working, I was neck deep in the library and when I was working any idle time was neck deep in the Chevron Research library or spent in the Engine and research/QC labs. I have always been an information sponge in my field. Later on, near the end of my career I worked in Research at Eastman/Hexion Chemical. Not lubricants or fuel but much exposure to method/practice and ISO-9000 and a half dozen PhD's with backgrounds in hydrocarbon chemistry that I milked like cows. I learned two really important things during those experiences.

1.) ASTM tests are a method of acquiring data. Have nothing to do with interpreting it. Statistics organize it. Researchers test that data against field work to find correlations. PhDs publish those results and conclusions. If you want the what's what, find the SAE or Doctoral Published peer reviewed papers/documents that deal with you interest. You WILL find that the absolute results are always much narrower and inflexible than the commercial spin. The truth is too expensive to use.

2.) ISO does NOT insure anything, but the paperwork is being filled out. Most of it pencil whipped (boiler housed) by tired over worked techs that have been assigned a task that is a job to itself. It assigns a direct but fuzzy path to blame BUT does not ensure quality. The tech logs he did the test, but it is not a guarantee he did that task or used the standard. No amount of paperwork and bureaucracy can assure compliance. Mostly it protects the bosses head from rolling and assures someone's below him will. Lab results are not like looking at a fine piece of furniture where quality is evident by inspecting the finished product.

In a shift of a dozen techs or operators only 1 or 2 are holding up the standards required. The other rest on their work. It is sad and it is true.

When it comes to Nicks service you’re wrong. That lab is ISO certified annually.

Every day they run internal test standards fluids BEFORE running anyones samples. Good labs in the 2020’s do that.

Cookie cutter labs like Bklabs, Titan etc don’t.

On non certified labs you’re right.

Grumpy Bear · March 3, 2023

8 minutes ago, customboss said:

When it comes to Nicks service you’re wrong. That lab is ISO certified annually.

Every day they run internal test standards fluids BEFORE running anyones samples. Good labs in the 2020’s do that.

Cookie cutter labs like Bklabs, Titan etc don’t.

On non certified labs you’re right.

Not telling you what I think. Relating firsthand ISO research lab experience. Eastman was ISO certified annually. Analytic balance for example. Test weights are sent out periodically for verification to a third party. Scale has an expiration date for service with a tag linked to a notebook the operator fills it out when he does the scale check. When done and adjustments are made the book is filled out and initialed by the operator. What part of this hasn't a snowballs chance of being verified? Not one thing.

That the operator did ANYTHING but write his initials in the book and the standards tags are in place. Catch that man on a busy day understaffed and overworked and pencil whipped is what the notebook gets. After he does it a few times it becomes the practice. IF and inspector checks his scale and it's off. So, what......it's why you check them and being in today doesn't mean they are fine 10 minutes and a sample drop to the table later.

I've never seen a fully filled out book get a writeup. I have seen a Bureau of Standards tag get missed or equipment not be sent out on schedule and that is supposed to trigger retesting every sample in-between that time and last certification. It rarely does.

customboss · March 3, 2023

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Not telling you what I think. Relating firsthand ISO research lab experience. Eastman was ISO certified annually. Analytic balance for example. Test weights are sent out periodically for verification to a third party. Scale has an expiration date for service with a tag linked to a notebook the operator fills it out when he does the scale check. When done and adjustments are made the book is filled out and initialed by the operator. What part of this hasn't a snowballs chance of being verified? Not one thing.

That the operator did ANYTHING but write his initials in the book and the standards tags are in place. Catch that man on a busy day understaffed and overworked and pencil whipped is what the notebook gets. After he does it a few times it becomes the practice. IF and inspector checks his scale and it's off. So, what......it's why you check them and being in today doesn't mean they are fine 10 minutes and a sample drop to the table later.

I've never seen a fully filled out book get a writeup. I have seen a Bureau of Standards tag get missed or equipment not be sent out on schedule and that is supposed to trigger retesting every sample in-between that time and last certification. It rarely does.

What year was that last? Things are tighter spec'd now. R&D labs don't operate like blenders internal confirmation labs do.

Third parties come in like bureau veritas and confirm what ISO demands.

EPA even came in to confirm our exhaust bag chem analyses compared to engine stand tests and oil analysis teardown confirmations. Thats R&D not a production facility blending chems.

Grumpy Bear · March 4, 2023

2 hours ago, customboss said:

What year was that last? Things are tighter spec'd now. R&D labs don't operate like blenders internal confirmation labs do.

Third parties come in like bureau veritas and confirm what ISO demands.

EPA even came in to confirm our exhaust bag chem analyses compared to engine stand tests and oil analysis teardown confirmations. Thats R&D not a production facility blending chems.

You have more faith in people than I do. That inspector would have to watch you do it. People don't do what you expect, they do what you inspect, and this isn't possible on the ISO weekly checks.

It was an R&D lab. I retired 15 years ago. Yesh!! :crackup:

Jettech1 · March 4, 2023

This turned into a very informative thread. There's a lot of smart people out there that know way more than I do. So it's been a great educational experience to read the replies. And the best part is everyone is keeping it informative without personal attacks. I for one love that!!! Please continue all, this has been quite an education for me and I'm sure for others too. I really appreciate it all....