of the 2 seperate samples I tested how come both are NOT 50wt as the bottle label says?
one was a 30wt and one a 40wt don't you have a vis machine?

quote:

Originally posted by bruce381:
of the 2 seperate samples I tested how come both are NOT 50wt as the bottle label says?
one was a 30wt and one a 40wt don't you have a vis machine?

A good question. But I think you can predict what the answer will be......

Unfortunately there will always be people who will fall for gimicks that never deliver what they claim.

I guess a living can be made doing this but sometime somewere one must answer for their transgressions.

One must be forever vigilant to products or services that are out of the ordinary.

http://www.priveye.com/scams.htm#Con Artists Revealed as the Criminals They Are

quote:

Originally posted by ADFD1:
You don't think Synlube is shady? Did you really read this whole thread? Would you put it in your car? Do you think Miro will give you your money back when you return the oil?

A-rX is a saint compared to this guy, but I still wouldn't use either product.

AD

Really? Would the link below be the saint you speak of?.......saint sludge!!! I would hate to meet him!!

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...er=873562#Post873562

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Captain Kirk,

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Kirk:

quote:

Originally posted by ADFD1:
You don't think Synlube is shady? Did you really read this whole thread? Would you put it in your car? Do you think Miro will give you your money back when you return the oil?

A-rX is a saint compared to this guy, but I still wouldn't use either product.

AD

Really?

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...er=873562#Post873562

YUK!!!

quote:

The report back was Snlube did not meet ITS spec. I mean I can understand moly or other like items being somewhat off.

BUT VISCOSITY AND TBN?


well?

Well.......check this out regarding TBN/TAN....FROM NORIA I SAY WE GET NORIA TO DO ANY TESTING IN THE FUTURE.........FORGET THOSE "OTHER LABS"

http://www.machinerylubricatio.../100/ph-test-tan-tbn

quote:

Originally posted by Taterandnoodles:

quote:

Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:
Taterandnoodles

Anything looked or smelled like "used" oil to you ?

Trajan =Date Registered: Sun March 14 2010
Nucleardawg=Date Registered: Sat March 13 2010
snakedoctor=Date Registered: Fri April 02 2010

(same person really)

Want to know but fear to ask, but can not expain the difference between the LAB results...

(like Viscosity or TBN)

No it does not appear to be used oil. The odor of synlube is indeed like no other oil I have encountered new or used.

As for the TBN bruce uses ASTM 2896 for determining TBN Polaris uses ASTM D4739 there is your variance right there.

As for the fuel I'm not sure where that came from any more then Miro is I am sure. Molakule thinks it might be aromatics and not actual fuel. Miro would know if the formula uses any percentage of aromatics.

To truely evaluate the oil in service besides the spectro and TBN we would need TAN, ferrography and particle count. Low wear metals (ppm) in the spectro can miss larger wear particles. Units have failed even with stellar PPM in the spectro. The reverse would also be true.

Assuming the 100ppm synlube should have native then Budmans numbers would be 66ppm over 19k miles. There is a UOA just posted last night by buster with 34ppm FE at 10500 miles.

It takes several UOA's from the same lab on the same unit to establish a valid trend.

THIS MIGHT SHED SOME LIGHT ON ALL THE CONFUSION OVER TBN/TAN

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


THIS SHOULD MAKE YOU THINK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT TAN VS TBN


http://www3.interscience.wiley...ct?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

quote:

bruce381

What equipment do you have ?

Make, Model, method you use, when calibrated and what standard (calibration) is used.

None of your posts reveal that.

If you are using rotary equipment the results will not match CANNON Fenske for opaque liquids.

Also what is your bath stabilization method and how you determine the sample is at that temperature ?

What cc of the fluid is used ?

Not to atack any of your measurements, just curious to know.

If you need to know we use

Cannon-Fenske Opaque
Viscometers

Calibrated CFOC (9721-F50) Series

150 for 100C and 300 model for 40C

The volume is 24 ml and the stabilization is 15 minutes.

Clock is computer syncho to Colorado clock, on off timing opto electronic.

And the standard:

Mfg. Date: 2/25/2010 CANNON® CERTIFIED VISCOSITY STANDARD
Viscosity Lot Use
Standard: S20 No.: 08104 before: 2/28/2011
Temperature
Kinematic
Viscosity Viscosity Density
Saybolt
Viscosity
°C °F mm2/s, (cSt) mPa ⋅s, (cP) g/mL seconds
20.00
25.00
37.78
40.00
50.00
98.89
100.00
68.00
77.00
100.00
104.00
122.00
210.00
212.00
43.49
33.98
19.65
18.02
12.63
3.797
3.720
37.53
29.22
16.73
15.32
10.66
3.084
3.020
0.8630
0.8598
0.8516
0.8501
0.8437
0.8124
0.8117
96.3 SUS
All data are traceable to the National Institute for Standards and Technology

Calibration date 3/31/2010

When one of the tests was reported as 23.5 we did test the same batch and when corrected for density it for sure is not 9.9. or 10.5 = all those reports reported at different times ON the SAME batch of fluid.

Can you explain why 10.5 and 23.5 and now 9.9 and 9.9 ? Clearly it is not consistent thus

Understanding Significance of Expanded Uncertainty is in order !

Once you have made error, is the first meacurement error, the second, the third, or all of them ? How about the average of the first two ? = 17 ???



All I can say different means of testing result in different values for someting that is NOT absolute like "viscosity".

But then people that claimed SAE 5W-50 is to thick (we always refer to is as "apparent" viscosity) should now have no fears to pour it onto ordinary SAE 30 applications.

We are not fanatics about numbers, just long term performance - test it again USED 5 and 10 years form now and then make up your mind about what really matters - I have only had 32 years of personal use in vehicles of all makes and models - and NO OIL CHANGES - it is what matters to me, what is in the lube or how it looks is of no importance if it works.

And at least 68,000 people could not care less what viscosity you may think SynLube is, really they do not !!!

As of todate 32 people bought SynLube for their vehicles as a result of this insane thread if it was paid for advertisement it would ahve earned $950.40 in commisions (BITOG is only at $$98.50)

Since ALL our sales are direct or through few dealers we do know where every single sale comes from - everyone !!!

Just ask Pennzoil if their $4 million commercial or the $1,500 "donation" to Helen paid of yet ?

ANd do not forget that the best of SHELL the Pennzoil (not penzoil for the few that do not yet understand the difference) is only Warranted for 4,000 miles - not a mile more - they specificaly state so - even when the vehicle has "oil life monitor" SHELL absolutely states 4,000 miles !!!

Read their Warranty.

For SynLube 4,000 miles is a joke, just like the 3,000 mile spark plugs used to be - remember those ?

I do not see everyone yanking out the platinum tipped plugs out of their new vehicles, because everyone knows spark plugs only last 3,000 miles not more than that, just read all the proof published in 1950's to 1970's = 30 years of real experience should scare everyone that does not change spark plugs regurarily !!!

But 200,000,000 + vehicles DID not had any spark plug change last year - someone forgot to tell them how important it is !!!

One day you will feel that way about Motor Oil, just as today most OEM do not bother to even have a dipstick on ATF, eventually the technology will catch up - we are just few decadeds ahead of the BIG OIL, that's all......

http://www.pennzoil.com/#/warranty

Just read it realistically it is only 2,500 miles since the OR 4 MONTHS for 82% of US drivers will apply !!!

That is 3 annual oil changes for next 15 years or 45 per typical vehicle life at about $40 a pop = $1,800 for oil + 45 filters at ???

And you do NOT think you are being SCAMMED by BIG OIL ?

Really give me a break !!!

SynLube for 15 years = NO or at most 2 oil changes and 5 oil filters, money back for the used lube

$400 to $500 at most !!! (Average is actually only $283.78 based on 26 years of experience)

That is as much as $1,500 less that buys you atleast 500 gallons of fuel and if you really feel obligated to give money to SHELL, you can always fill up at SHELL Station (or Turkey Hill, if you insist !).

And do not forget to get some PEP additive, it will improve your acceleration to oblivion !

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Miro Kefurt,

quote:

Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:

I do not see everyone yanking out the platinum tipped plugs out of their new vehicles, because everyone knows spark plugs only last 3,000 miles not more than that, just read all the proof published in 1950's to 1970's = 30 years of real experience should scare everyone that does not change spark plugs regurarily !!!

Holy hamburger, Batman! Ya mean I shoulda changed my spark plugs every 3k miles? Yikes! I owe Champion thousands of dollars! What will NASCAR think? My 2005 Focus has 275 000 kms. Two years ago one of those coily gizmo thingmes went south. Took it to Ford dealer, told them to change plugs if needed at same time (figured better them than me). Nope, Service Salesman sez they are like new. I've driven another 150 000 kms since then. Do you think I should pop one to have a look? Should I send Campion a blank cheque?

And the excuses roll in.

Miro and Captain Kirk, can you guys keep your reply to just one post.

Miro, you posted 3 times in a row.

Captain Kirk, you posted 2 times in a row.