Skip to main content

Reply to "Amsoil EAO vs PureONE"

So, regarding this wondrous proprietary medium, does Donaldson supply it exclusively to Amsoil, period, or is Amsoil the only automotive marketer? Is Amsoil's exclusively use of this medium based on the fact that no one else finds this medium particularly special for automotive applications? If this stuff is that good, you'd think that Donaldson would have shopped it around to marketers with more market-share so they could sell more of it.

Donaldson isn't the only filter manufacturer with a product development function. Everyone has their own version of state-of-the-art. Some of them may be quite similar, move a methyl group along the chain or rotate an ester to a different carbon on an aromatic ring and voila - a molecule that acts in a very similar manner but is not covered by the other guy's patent.

As for extending drains though UOA monitoring:
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. This sort of activity makes perfect sense in an industrial environment, particularly in industries like utilities steel, mining & paper, where down time is anathema. But pulling samples, shipping them off, spending money on quick-&-dirty auto-flagged analyses that can as easily mislead as illuminate when you only think you know what you're looking at? I don't see where that adds value.

I haven't seen UOA prices recently, but it used to be about a wash - the cost of the analysis ran about as much as the oil & filter, pulling a good, representative sample is only slightly less work than changing the whole charge. I just don't see the benefit.

You might impress your gearhead buddies with this UOA report on a sample that may not be representative and was possibly mis-flagged by a computer that was reading carry-over from a prior sample (very common in assembly-line style UOA testing), which you may have further mis-interpreted because you don't understand the difference between developmental, product certification and UOA testing, but I don't see where it keeps your grocery-getter on the road any longer than just changing the oil for about the same cost & effort. When you change your oil, you know the condition that same day. (It's brand-new!) You'll get the UOA report in a couple of days, and you'll know the condition of the oil after you've run three or four more samples and have gotten an idea of the trend line...

UOA testing involves cutting a lot of corners. There is a lot of bias and contamination. The data is only useful for trend analysis, no individual datum should be relied on as being remotely close to an assigned test value. I've had to peel a few customers off of the ceiling after a scary UOA report, looking in deeper than the scary red, block-lettered alert at the top, finding the anomaly, and saying: "These two data don't make sense together, it looks like carry-over, as long as the machine is running normally, submit a new sample and call me back when you get that result." Usually I'd get a relieved call back (or no call back, as they'd moved on to other issues).

It's motor oil that is going to be in the engine for months, not circulating oil that is going to be in a steam turbine for decades. Try to maintain a little perspective.
×
×
×
×