Amsoil and the API

[amsoilman]

DonM,

Just to set the record straight here. My truck is certainly NOT STOCK! It has more done to it than my signiture would suggest. I do have larger injectors as well, and a few other things to bring up the power. On the dyno I used, I was putting 305 HP to the wheels, so the truck is definately not stock!

Now let me tell you what my soot levels were at each oil analysis since the Series 3000 5W-30 was installed. At 115,000 (10,000 on oil) it was 1. 0 Percent.

At 120,000 miles(15,000 on oil) it was 1. 0 Percent. The last one taken on 1-3-2001, showed 1. 2 Percent with 31,000 on oil. In talking to the chemist at "Oil Analyzers", Soot particles are somewhere in the 1/4 of 1 Micron in size. In other words, 1/4 as small as 1 Micron... ..... Thats pretty small! He went on to say that as the oil accumulates miles or hours, these small particles become "Aglomerated" (big word) and become larger particles. The Magnesium, Calcium and Barium in the oil as additives, is what helps to keep the particles from "Aglomerating". He said when the soot level reaches 3 Percent, then the oil should be changed. I might also tell you, my Fuel percent was less than 1 Percent as well, and he said if it got to 3 Percent the oil should be changed as well. Now he also said this! Divide any of my numbers by 8 to 10 as this would be the numbers for a "Normal" oil drain, since I have more miles than a "Normal" 3-4,000 drain interval. This would mean at 1. 2 percent, which is the last figure, my soot level would then be around 0. 12 Percent soot. I do indeed know the oil is doing a great job in protecting my engine, like every other engine I have used these products in API Certified or NOT!

And yes, I have posted on other topics many, many times, and I do not get on here to sell this oil. I do however have an ad in the TDR Magazine with other people, and have had for many years, as I have been a member of the TDR since its inception in 1993. Most of my contacts have come from the many TDR rallies I have attended.



And you still haven't responded to the E-mail I sent!



Best regards,



Wayne

 

[Don M]

You guys have the answer in your own paragraphs.



Poste by Riflesmith:

"I will await your explanantion of how this is bad for an engine"



By-pass filters can remove the evidence of internal engine wear, i. e. (iron, copper,etc. particles). The tests can come back showing lower wear indicating metals than is actually occuring internally.

You could be wearing your engine internally and thinking your oil tests are showing little to no wear. You are removing the tell-tale signs of engine wear with the by-pass filtration. Your oil tests are meaningless if the stuff you are looking for is being hi-jacked out the back door, so to speak. You cannot determine wear rates of internal parts if you are removing the wear rate indicators with the by-pass filter. You cant conduct a proper investigation or scientific test if the stuff you are trying to test for is being removed.





Manufacturers and developing engineers know this and they use differing tests to come up with wear rates for oils. Cummins and other manufacturers use an oil test were the internal engine parts are weighed before and after the test is conducted. The resulting tests are not skewed by oil filtration. The wear rates are indicated by measuring weight. Not oil tests that can vary from brand, type, by-pass or not, etc.



Do you really feel that you are getting an accurate wear indicator of your engine by analyzing oil that has had particles removed from an apperatus like the by-pass filter? You are not. Part of the puzzle or evidence is gone.



Now, that being said: I still feel that by-pass filters are helpfull in lowering engine wear rates as long as you follow the manufacturers oil change intervals. Of course removing the particles is the better way to maintain the oil. The cleaner the oil the better. Manufacturers have done the homework for us. They have performed ten of thousands of labratory and controlled tests to determine the oil change intervals. If you overfuel your engine or extend oil drain intervals with by-pass filtration you are throwing all the wear data out the window. I feel that overfueled engines should have oil changes more often than the manufacturer asks.



Don~

 

[NVR FNSH]

Don (or anybody else) - does any one offer a reasonbly priced filter analyisis? That's the info we are really after.



Brian

 

[Don M]

Wayne,



I posted sometime earlier that I do not have an e-mail from ya. Please re-send it.



Your soot levels are skewed by your by-pass system. You are nearly at the maximum levels allowed by Cummins for soot. Since you use the by-pass system for oil filtration I could be safe in saying your engine is producing more than 1% of soot in your oil and the evidence is going into the by-pass filter as well as wear metals.

Soot levels are linear. I have said it many times. More fuel, more soot. Normal wear coefficients go up as soot levels increase. Manufacturers use real time soot loading tests. The amount of soot loading is a key factor in determining the oil change interval. Running a by-pass filter and extending oil changes is not in line with the data from the manufacturers. Many more things are involved of course like ring wear, piston wear, crosshatch pattern wear, etc.

Soot can cause severe engine wear on boundary lubricated surfaces, including: top ring reversal area, rocker levers, crossheads, cams, tappets, etc. Our Cummins use high injection pressures and this results in very hard particles of abrasive soot.

Once it enters the sump through the rings the soot rapidly mixes in the oil and is transported or circulated throughout the engine.



Now... here is where the problem lies. The soot is circulated as a larger particle before it is ground into a finer particle as small as 1000 Angstroms from the rotating assembly, cam and tappet area, etc. The oil makes its way around in the engine a long time as the larger and more damaging size of particle before the additive package has the abiltiy to disperse it or before the by-pass can trap it. The particle has to be very small before the package can do its job.



Wayne, the soot levels you report are meaningless because you have not taken into consideration the by-pass filter you run. That dude is pulling the evidence outta' the court room. Your soot levels are actually higher than your tests report.



There is no MAJIC oil that has been developed to the manufacturers satisfaction to date, to extend drain intervals past their requirements. Just imagine if the Ford and Chevy truck makers had an engine oil out there or a system out there that would allow an oil change every 50,000 miles. People would buy the ford or chevy over the dodge with its 7500 mile change intervals for that reason alone.

Ford, Chevy, Dodge, etc all have roughly the same intervals.

Not a conspricay Wayne... its backed up by data everyday in their tests. They all come up with about the same dern intervals. Funny isnt it? Thumbing your nose at the manufacturer with pityful little oil analysis tests is junk science and some guys will pay the price with decresed engine life and durability.



Don~

 

[Don M]

Brian,





the filter analysis is available from many oil analyzing outfits. The By-pass filter would be tough to analyze because of its composition. There are not pleates to magnify. It might be a challenge to try it. I have cut my own full flow filter apart and checked the pleates from time to time. I was surprised in the amount of crud in them.



Don~

 

[Mark_Kendrick]

DON,

The rason there's no soot in the oil is . . like you said, the filter takes it out. . ITS WORKING AS DESIGNED.



When you test oil out of a regular car you don't get it out of the filter and if you checked the inside of a filter your numbers would be skewed in the other direction.



When looking at oil analysis you should be looking at ratios to determine wear no actual ppm. If the ppm is high then change the bypass filter more often.



the numbers should show that most of the metal is copper, tin, lead ect. . (stuff thats on the wear surfaces) If you see lots of iron and aluminum. . then worry. Lots of fuel means excessive blowby or too much fuel/timing etc. . soot has similar meaning, but if you have too much soot change the filter more often or bite the bullet and change the oil.



WITH THE BYPASS FILTER THE AMOUNTS OF CONAMINANTS SHOULD CHANGE BUT THE RATIOS SHOULD NOT.



I've seen you repeat yourself over and over. . everyone that believes in extended drains seems to have similar views about this. If you just don't get it, fine, but quit harping on it because we're not gonna change until you show PROOF that extended drains don't work.



I know of lots of people that have had good experience w/exptended drains. I know lots more that have had bad experience with regular intervals on mineral based oils.

 

[Todd T]

Don your last few posts have been very intelligently written. well said and well thought out.



it sounds to me that in your quest to expose or investigate Amsoil's product, you have inadvertently educated yourself.



and us as well... good job, I'm in your corner

 

[Mark_Kendrick]

I almost forgot. . the 'MAJIC' oil. . in europe the drain intervals are already twice what they are here. using the same engines and similar oils.



Longer intervals are better for the environment and are better use of limited resources. The best part of synthetics are that they don't come from a middle eastern oil well.

 

[Don M]

Brian wrote:





"Not sure I follow why the acceptable soot level will change between standard & extended drain intervals? I'm guessing it's because an oil designed for extended intervals can 'hold' more soot w/o failing the API test for a given rating. Although this would require an extended drain test to determine. I'm starting to confuse myself"



DC actually does not have an extended drain program in place. Other manufactrers(MACK, Detroit, etc) seem to all have about the same data for extended drain intervals. They have about a 50% lower acceptable level for soot for extended drain oil that is intended to go back in. So,if the acceptable level was 2% for normal drain intervals then for oil that will remain inservice it would be 1%. The actuall numbers are lower or higher depending on the test data they have obtained for that engine.



Brian wrote:



"Yes, I'm a mechanical engineer by education/profession. Went to Cal Poly, SLO. Current job is Product Mfg Engineer for Agilent (split from HP). Our group is responsible for the DFM, all aspects of tooling, supplier mgt, etc, etc on sheetmetal, machined, die cast, injection molded, extruded et al (mechanically fab'd) parts. "



Being an engineer you know how important it is to have consistant products and materials to work with. Personally I design (using performance based and prescritive based methods)

fire protection systems for DOE and Industrial customers. During my analysis process I evaluate the design situation, define client loss objectives, develope scenarios (possible design fires) I then determine if the design fires could/would exceed the the criteria of the customer or design for safety. I then document the findings and prepare a final design that will work for the safety and performance set forth from the customer. There are many variables we have to face. To limit the unknowns in the process I select products with a known design that does not change and is always gonna be the same. Smoke detetection devices, UV/IR detectors, etc are all certified by the UL to meet certain detection requirements and the certification is audited from the certifying entity. If I used a product with a different detection thresholds (from an inconsistant product) I could, in effect dump thousands of gallons of foam on an aircraft or hanger facilty with heavy financial loses as an example.

Limiting the unknowns in a test or in the design of life safety is critical to quality and functionality of the overall picture.

A recent DOE accident at the INEL in Southeast Idaho resulted in loss of life from equipment that failed from a poor maintenance program and people not following instructions written in advance.

The resulting discharge of Co2 was the killer.



Of cousre oil in our trucks is nowhere near as important as the above, but I have learned that the OEM's are not stupid and have done the homework for us in asking for the API certification to assure the consistancy is there and will be there with an audit policy in place as well. Just a little insurance policy for me.



The above design is/has extended to nuclear weapons facilties, nuclear material storage facilties and the 30 building complex in Russian for storage of fissile material from the Soviet Union nuclear arsenal disassembly. Your not gonna get a product or component in the mix without having a 3rd party verifier for quality and consistancy.



When I went to using Amsoil I was ignorant the API license did not exist. I checked the bottle and read the API wording and assumed. I was under the impression the homework was done for me by the TDR members. Come to find out many TDR members did not know the diesel fully synthetic oil was not.



Don~





sorry so long

 

[NVR FNSH]

Don,

You've probably read some of my posts regarding overweight towing etc. I'm fully aware of the use of assumptions when designing a product. We don't like to use them but sometimes we don't have a choice - lack of real world data Sounds like you have a pretty interesting job.



"I know of lots of people that have had good experience w/exptended drains. I know lots more that have had bad experience with regular intervals on mineral based oils. " - Mark_Kendrick



What's the definition of good vs bad experiences in this case? I run Premimum Blue and a Stratopore filter on my truck because I don't think the 'benefits' of extended oil life/bypass filters are economically justified in my case. The engine in my truck may only last 300k on mineral oil (vs 500k on synthetic) but I can guarantee that I won't be the owner of the truck at 300k - maybe 200k but by that time my needs will have changed &/or I'll be sick of the truck not the engine. Unfortunately, I can't drive an engine to work



Brian

 

[Don M]

Mark,



Im not trying to change your position. I just do not agree with it.

Let me qualify the statement above.

Extended oil drains are not my idea of smart with engines that have modified fueling levels. I do agree that extended oil drains are a prudent behavior with the proper program in place following the manufacturers requirements. Dodge has no program for extended oil drains in our trucks.

Do what you will. Use your oil for however long you would like.

Makes no difference to me. I provided you with information I have found out. Toss it out as nonsense as you will.

The FACT still remains that extended oil drains are not part of the Dodge/Cummins, Ford/Navistar or GM/Isuzu intervals as far as some of you guys are taking them. 57,000 miles on the same oil is out of line with the guidelines set forth. The guidelines are not there for the fun of it. They are backed up with data Mark. Not silly little 20 dollar oil analysis. Millions of dollars are spent in developement and oil change interval programs. You choose to reject the data and do it your way by using extended oil drains past factory guidelines and using an oil that is not licensed by the API.

If an airline pilot was about to fly you to your destination without a license, but you had a test he had taken and graded himself to view would you get on the plane? I would hope you would not and go fly with a pilot that was tested and graded from a third party.



Don~

 

[fest3er]

Originally posted by Don M

... 4. Soot produced during combustion is scraped from the cylinder walls by the piston rings and moves into the oil pan. There it is quickly circulated through the engine way before it is ever filter from by-pass or full flow filters. ...

Hmmm. Doesn't the oil that gets picked up by the pump go through the filter(s) *first* before getting to the engine? Thus soot particles larger than about 20 microns should be grabbed by the full-flow filter, and soot particles larger than about 5 microns should be trapped by the bypass filter before the oil gets to lubricate any part of the engine. Of course, there is the possibilty that *some* parts may be lubricated via splashing, thus won't be getting the cleanest oil. But then, they'd get dirty oil regardless, and I would hope Cummins doesn't use splash lubrication anywhere.



Fest3er

 

[Sled Puller]

Don,

Come clean with us- where are you copying your information from?



Or, who?

 

[amsoilman]

Don,

You simply amaze me!



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[amsoilman]

fest3r,

Soot particles are very small in size... ..... I mean less than 1/4 of 1 Micron! The particles that do the most damage to your engine are in the 2 to 22 Micron range.



I recently read an interesting article on Engine oil filtration, so I am going to include the article.

According to the (SAE) Society Of Automotive Engineers paper 881825, AC Spark Plug and Detroit Diesel Corp. performed a joint study of the relationship between the level of engine oil filtration and Engine wear rates, and found finer filtration reduced the rate of Engine wear.



Diesel and Gasoline Engine wear rates were established by building a Diesel and Gasoline Engine with fully inspected wear components and inspecting them after the test. In both Engines, the upper and lower main bearings, oil rings and compression rings were inspected. In the Diesel Engine, the cam lobe profile and cylinders were also inspected, while the piston pin bushings, piston pins and cylinder liners of the Gasoline engine were inspected.



The total test duration was eight hours. To accelerate wear, 50 grams of AC Fine Test Dust was added, in slurry form, to the crank case every hour.



Diesel Engine wear tests were performed using filters with high efficiency ratings for particle sizes: 40 Microns, 8. 5 Microns and 7 Microns.



Gasoline Engines wear tests were performed using filters with high efficiency ratings for particle sizes of the following sizes: 40 Microns, 30 Microns and 15 Microns.



ANALYSIS



The researchers found clearances in the Diesel and Gasoline Engines varied between 2 and 22 Microns during engine operations. That means particles in the 2 to 22 Micron size range are most likely to damage Engine parts. Particles smaller than 2 Microns will slip through the clearances without damaging bearing surfaces.



CONLUSIONS



The researchers drew the following conclusions:



Abrasive Engine wear can be substantially reduced with an increase in single pass efficiency. Compared to a 40-Micron filter, Engine wear was reduced by 50 percent with 30-Micron filtration. Likewise, wear was reduced by 70 percent with 15-Micron filtration.



Controlling the abrasive contaminants in the range of 2 to 22 Microns in the lube oil is necessary for controlling Engine wear, and "The Micron rating of a filter as established in a single pass efficiency type test, does an excellent job indicating the filter's ability to remove abrasive particles in the Engine lube oil system.



The smallest particles most popular "full Flow" filters capture with high efficiency are sized 25 to 40 Microns, depending on the filter brand. [End Quote]



I'm here to tell you the Amsoil brand "by-pass" oil filter achieves high efficiency. For particles of 3 Microns and greater, they are 98. 6 %! At 1 Micron, they are 71. 2 %! Their "Full flow" oil filter achieves high efficiency for particles of 20 Microns and greater. In fact, its efficiency for 10-Micron particles is 65 percent and its efficiency for 20-Micron particles is 98 percent! The tests I am referring to are the SAE J806 and SAE J1858. Together, the "By-pass" and the "full-flow" filters offer significantly greater protection than that of a conventional filter system.



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[SteveH]

Don~ [/B][/QUOTE]

If the thread was so boring to everyone why is there over 3100 views and more than 160 replies?

Don, its because about 145 of those replies are yours. Duh!

Steve H.

 

[drawson]

I have a solution to all of this... Don your truck and mine are almost fueling the same. And I think we both probibly drive the same. And hopefully I'll have my #4 plate by then which is almost as much fueling as your #().



I am going to be switching over too Seri 3000 5W/30 AmsOil. I'll way until you do your next change and change mine at the same time. At your next oil change we'll both send in oil samples. A copy of the results of my samples will be sent back to you and yours to me and then we'll post them to the world at least our little world here at the TDR.



What do ya say bud??



Hey not to get off this subject but i want to hear more about where your boost comes on with the 18 housing??????

 

[Diesel Freak]

14 friggin pages on oil!

This is rediculous! It is JUST oil! By now you guys should have the Molecular formula for AMSOIL posted for the world to see, but all I see is opinion. Who cares whether is is made from dino juice or is made in a test tube. If the process is consistent, reliable, and recorded so the consumer can see it... GREAT. If it is hidden behind the "proprietary secret" guise... I usually call BS.



Get a life, it is just oil!

 

[illflem]

Diesel Freak, it's not just oil, it's Amsoil. That statement can go both ways...

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

Is anyone still reading this thread?

How many posts can we make before falling off the edge of the planet???



LOL





Well all I have to say is the API means nothing to me since you can find it on oil such as Pennzoil and Castrol and other brands I wouldn't put in my truck (or gas vehicles). Someone said this a few pages ago so whoever you are, I'm with ya buddy.



As far as soot and bypass filtration, my soot level at 20,000 miles using just the Stratapore came back "<1. 0%" I am running DD2s, and CPC box part of the time. Oil Analyzers always do soot level for no extra charge if you indicate your rig is diesel.



Vaughn



ps . . . Don, I do have a concern about oil coming down the pike soon that will deal with high soot in EGR engines: will its lubricating qualities be compromised (not due to soot, but the oil itself) in an attempt to formulate an oil that can suspend large quantities of soot?