Skip to main content

Read our primer articles on High Mileage Oil, Synthetic Oil and Kinematic Viscosity

I was asked how I messured 2 different synlube samples both labeled 5w50.

I use like most oil mfgs ASTM D 445. Look up routine it is very detailed as to test setup and protocol I follow it exactly with cannon calibrated tubes etc give me credit for doing this right. Question still stands I have 2 different samples that are NOT 50 wt why?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

This is what I meant. A reply from the DoE.

Your email to the Secretary of Energy requesting information on public access to Mercury, Nevada has been forwarded to me.

Mercury serves as the "base camp" for operations of the National Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Test Site. As such Mercury is not open to the general public. Further, there are no private businesses operating within Mercury or the Nevada Test Site. There is not a "Mirox Corporation" operating a business in Mercury or the Nevada Test Site.

I hope this answers your question. If you have further questions please feel free to contact me either by email or the phone numbers listed below my signature block.


Darwin J. Morgan, Director
Office of Public Affairs
NNSA-Nevada Site Office
702-295-1755 (O)
702-630-0120 (C)
702-794-6255 (P)
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
How do YOU NOT KNOW IT???

Perhaps it was just a lack of quality control at the Mercury, NV facility????...What a joke Synlube turned out to be. And now it's all over the web.


You didn't answer the question. How could you? You know that it's not true. Another example of your lack of knowledge on the subject.
The question I believe Inhaliburton is why are 2 different Synlube samples not there stated viscosity????????????

If the consumer cannot rely on this companies product, to meet its stated viscosity, why should they trust anything about Synlube. ANSWER: You can't believe anything the 'Synners' say about the product, as it is all lies. You can't truthfully answer the question, so the 'synlube shuffle' starts as always. what a joke
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Yeh I read that as well. Good to post though Trajan, as people need to know the depths of Synlubes lies.

The thing is, these guys are awfully ignorant, as they don't think anybody will catch on, and when they do, the Synlube shuffle starts, and the insults are hurled.


Before this thread gets locked down like the other maybe this might explain the viscosity question.

By the way nuke.....talk about insults.........have you read some of your very insulting post lately?? You're the best!!!

Miro Kefurt
Level 3 - 101 to 250 posts

Posted Fri April 16 2010 02:15 AM Hide Post

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.
So the synlube shuffle starts...Deny, Deny, Deny. Captain Kirk who is this 'WE' who refers to it as 'apparent' viscosity? Miro, is that you?

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER'? ok, if thats what you want, thats what we shall call it...

Why don't you be truthful, to the people who buy it, expecting what is advertised. Some un-suspecting person may view it as FALSE ADVERTISING.

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER' was on sale at Wally World
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
So the synlube shuffle starts...Deny, Deny, Deny. Captain Kirk who is this 'WE' who refers to it as 'apparent' viscosity? Miro, is that you?

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER'? ok, if thats what you want, thats what we shall call it...

Why don't you be truthful, to the people who buy it, expecting what is advertised. Some un-suspecting person may view it as FALSE ADVERTISING.

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER' was on sale at Wally World


Read this coming from noria about vis

http://www.machinerylubricatio...-kinematic-viscosity

and this....

Helps Engines Start Easier

The Cold Crank Simulator Test determines the apparent viscosity of lubricants at low temperatures and high shear rates. Viscosity of lubricants under these conditions is directly related to engine cranking and startability. The lower a lubricant’s cold crank viscosity, the easier an engine will turn over in cold temperatures. The low cold crank viscosity of AMSOIL Synthetic 10W-30 Motor Oil reduces drag on moving engine parts and allows engines to achieve critical cranking speed in extremely frigid temperatures. Engines turn over quickly and dependably in the coldest winter temperatures.


and this.......

http://www.cannoninstrument.co...ty%20definitions.pdf

K38500 Apparent Viscosity of Engine Oils
Test Method
Determines the measurement of the Yield Stress, Apparent Viscosity and Borderline Pumping Temperature (BPT) of engine oils. Borderline pumping temperature is a measure of the lowest temperature at which an engine oil can be continuously and adequately supplied to the oil pump inlet of an automotive engine. Provides a correlation between the temperature at which the viscosity of engine oils reaches a critical value and the borderline pumping failure temperature in engines at the test method specified shear stress.



http://www.koehlerinstrument.com/products/K38500.html
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
So the synlube shuffle starts...Deny, Deny, Deny. Captain Kirk who is this 'WE' who refers to it as 'apparent' viscosity? Miro, is that you?

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER'? ok, if thats what you want, thats what we shall call it...


Why don't you be truthful, to the people who buy it, expecting what is advertised. Some un-suspecting person may view it as FALSE ADVERTISING.

Synlube '5W-WHATEVER' was on sale at Wally World


LOL remember Synlube is magic oil, there is no testing equipment except equipment in Mercury NV that is capable of testing this stuff. But remember only Miro and Kirk occupy that neck of the woods. The viscosity is whatever Kirk/Miro state it is. Take that as Gospel!

AD
Guys, let's not get carried away and get another locked thread. (And I include myself.)

The question is, why are two different samples from a VOA come up out of weight?

They are sold and labeled as 5w-50, and yet neither sample has that weight.

I'm not a tribologists, but it seems to me that an oil labeled as Xw-XX should indeed be Xw-XX. Not Xw-YY or Xw-WW.

I take it that what ever is being blended is not consistent?

If so, that's fine. But if you're selling a 30w oil as a 50w, that's rather dishonest.
Per the synlube PDS bruce tested both samples using the same standard used by synlube.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SynLube Lube-4-Life® INITIAL FILL - Motor Oil (Universal Version)

GENERAL INFORMATION
Physical State: Viscous Liquid
Color: Opaque Black
Odor: Characteristic
Odor Threshold: N/D

Viscosity, ASTM D 445
cSt @ 40º C; (mm2/sec) 100.4
cSt @ 100º C; (mm2/sec) 17.55


HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, ASTM D 4683 5.0
Viscosity Index 201
SAE Viscosity (J300) 5W-50
ISO Viscosity 100
MRV at -35ºC 27,653
Viscosity Index 201
SAE Viscosity 5W-50
ISO Viscosity 100


Sulfated Ash, wt%, ASTM D 874 0.02
Phosphorous PPM 1000

Pour Point, ºC, -45
Boiling Point, ºC, 316
Flash Point, ºC, ASTM D 92 275.8



Density @15º C kg/l, ASTM D 4052 0.926
Vapor Density (Air = 1): > 2 at 101 kPa
Vapor Pressure: at 20°C < 0.013 kPa (0.1 mm Hg)
Total Base Number (TBN) 11.8
Solubility in Water: Negligible
Last edited by taterandnoodles
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
quote:
Originally posted by Taterandnoodles:
Viscosity, ASTM D 445
cSt @ 40º C; (mm2/sec) 100.4
cSt @ 100º C; (mm2/sec) 17.55



Taterandnoodles, not having attended a school of higher learning on this subject, can you decipher for me?


ASTM D445

http://www.astm.org/Standards/D445.htm

quote:

ASTM D445
Significance and Use

Many petroleum products, and some non-petroleum materials, are used as lubricants, and the correct operation of the equipment depends upon the appropriate viscosity of the liquid being used. In addition, the viscosity of many petroleum fuels is important for the estimation of optimum storage, handling, and operational conditions. Thus, the accurate determination of viscosity is essential to many product specifications.

1. Scope



1.1 This test method specifies a procedure for the determination of the kinematic viscosity, ν, of liquid petroleum products, both transparent and opaque, by measuring the time for a volume of liquid to flow under gravity through a calibrated glass capillary viscometer. The dynamic viscosity, η, can be obtained by multiplying the kinematic viscosity, ν, by the density, ρ, of the liquid.

Note 1—For the measurement of the kinematic viscosity and viscosity of bitumens, see also Test Methods D 2170 and D 2171.

Note 2—ISO 3104 corresponds to Test Method D 445.


1.2 The result obtained from this test method is dependent upon the behavior of the sample and is intended for application to liquids for which primarily the shear stress and shear rates are proportional (Newtonian flow behavior). If, however, the viscosity varies significantly with the rate of shear, different results may be obtained from viscometers of different capillary diameters. The procedure and precision values for residual fuel oils, which under some conditions exhibit non-Newtonian behavior, have been included.

1.3 The range of kinematic viscosities covered by this test method is from 0.2 to 300 000 mm2/s (see Table A1.1) at all temperatures (see 6.3 and 6.4). The precision has only been determined for those materials, kinematic viscosity ranges and temperatures as shown in the footnotes to the precision section.

1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.

1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.




Viscosity as measured by Bruce and Polaris after personal reruns for viscosity verification using the same ASTM test method listed on the PDS the viscocity measured vice the quoted spec is different by a wide margin.

Bruce----Polaris

Vis@100C-9.9---9.9
Vis@40-58.7----55.0
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Synlube recipe: Wally world oil 'on sale' + witches brew of additives, shake well...Voila, Synlube.

Can you tell us where you got this info? Is it accurate?


I received this information from the 'Top Secret' files of, The Mirox Corporation, corporate headquarters at Mercury, NV.

Also in the files were the KFC recipe. Are any of YOUR wild claims verifiable? No of course not.

But we do have verifiable data from two noted Tribologists, who's information is accurate.

So when does that wild jig of yours start? 'The Synlube shuffle'.
Nucleardawg, I heard that you were banned. I'm glad for you that you were given a second chance. Nice work. Don't blow it!

Wild claims? Not from me. I have not made any claims at all. I don't use the stuff, remember? Therefore, I do not have an axe to grind.

Viscosity, shmiscosity. Who care? The stuff works. Certainly not the thousands of satisfied users who have posted their IN-ACTUAL-USE RESULTS unlike the few naysayers who base their opinions on test tube results. Amsoil had the same naysayers way back when their products first appeared on the open market. Look at them now. Bonzai!
Banned? As usual Inhaliburton...your wrong.

I don't believe, I have ever heard a 'oil company' state so clearly it's...'philosophy'.

"Viscosity, shimcosity. Who care?"

Where are the 'Thousands' of customers?

Where are the test results? I mean you like to compare it to Amsoil, and they have verifiable test results.

I like Synlubes 'Philosophy' so much I am going to save that quote, It's clear, and concise...I like it.
quote:
Originally posted by bruce381:
I was asked how I messured 2 different synlube samples both labeled 5w50.

I use like most oil mfgs ASTM D 445. Look up routine it is very detailed as to test setup and protocol I follow it exactly with cannon calibrated tubes etc give me credit for doing this right. Question still stands I have 2 different samples that are NOT 50 wt why?


Bruce....Did you purchase the initial fill,universal,or the add oil for this test.

I do know the universal fill is the slightly more fuel efficeint formula according the website........so it may be a tad thinner.

Most motorists use the initial fill because it has the longer life span,and then top off with the add oil if needed. The add oil will measure a little thinner because this is meant to be part of the overall system of how it works by treating the bulk oil. Makeup oil is always good with any brand of oil,but the add oil here is specifically dedicated for that purpose.

If the engine uses no oil,then add the add oil when the filer is changed. There is also a service fill for cars that go over 20,000 miles and use no oil. The service fill is just add oil on steroids in a sense.

The add oil 'conditions' the bulk oil with additional antioxidents and will boost the anti foam agents........and is meant to be used only after at least seveal thousand miles has been put on the initial fill.

The alternative would be to just drain and change out every 50k and send back for full credit,especially if the car uses ZERO OIL,like many do. The 50k drain out is optional and would adhere to the MAXIMUM LIFE SCHEDULE if one chooses that 'option'....

I am surprised that you would have tested the univeral fill version very few people use....because the initial fill/add oil system is what almost all seem to be using,like myself.

The univerasl oil is the lower cost version and make up oil is with only that product,no separate add oil is needed.....so it must changed on occasion and has a lower lifespan,and lower initial cost.

People who lease a car might use it I would guess.......and then return for the full credit.

Did you test the other products as well??
Last edited by captainkirk
Captain Kirk: According to my understanding of english, the Synlube bottle reads 'INITIAL FILL' Please see the attatched photo which was taken to show that Synlube was purchased for the VOA test to be performed.

So your going to need another excuse, of why Synlube, cannot meet it's advertised viscosity.

Or do you follow the same 'Philosophy' as the other 'Synner' Inhaliburton who states profoundly, "VISCOSITY SHIMCOSITY, WHO CARE/"

Attachments

Images (1)
  • synlube
quote:
Originally posted by Taterandnoodles:
Per the synlube PDS bruce tested both samples using the same standard used by synlube.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SynLube Lube-4-Life® INITIAL FILL - Motor Oil (Universal Version)

GENERAL INFORMATION
Physical State: Viscous Liquid
Color: Opaque Black
Odor: Characteristic
Odor Threshold: N/D

Viscosity, ASTM D 445
cSt @ 40º C; (mm2/sec) 100.4
cSt @ 100º C; (mm2/sec) 17.55


HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, ASTM D 4683 5.0
Viscosity Index 201
SAE Viscosity (J300) 5W-50
ISO Viscosity 100
MRV at -35ºC 27,653
Viscosity Index 201
SAE Viscosity 5W-50
ISO Viscosity 100


Sulfated Ash, wt%, ASTM D 874 0.02
Phosphorous PPM 1000

Pour Point, ºC, -45
Boiling Point, ºC, 316
Flash Point, ºC, ASTM D 92 275.8



Density @15º C kg/l, ASTM D 4052 0.926
Vapor Density (Air = 1): > 2 at 101 kPa
Vapor Pressure: at 20°C < 0.013 kPa (0.1 mm Hg)
Total Base Number (TBN) 11.8
Solubility in Water: Negligible



Here it is again....Universal,not initial fill.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Banned? As usual Inhaliburton...your wrong.

I don't believe, I have ever heard a 'oil company' state so clearly it's...'philosophy'.

"Viscosity, shimcosity. Who cares?"


Exactly, Nucleardawg. Now you are finally getting it. Who cares (except for a few negateers) about test results, when Synlube WORKS. I don't care about Amsoil test results. I never read that stuff. It gives me a headache. It's user experience that counts, not laboratory-controlled experiments that can vary from lab to lab, day to day, etc. Heck, my blood sugar monitor varies with every strip. As long as it's in the ballpark, who cares?

quote:
Where are the 'Thousands' of customers?

Dozens were kind enough to post their personal experience with Synlube over the years on the former Synlube thread. Not one person posted a negative experience. How can you lose? Send back the old, used oil, and they send out new Synlube for free. They even pay the freight! Again, how can you lose? Name any oil company who will do that. By the way, up here Amsoil engine oils retail in the $14 to $18 range. Synlube is $32. About 2.5 Amsoil oil changes equals Synlube oil. The longer you keep a car, the bigger bargain Synlube becomes. Forget about tests. They are meaningless when you factor-in Synlube against any Big Oil.

quote:
Where are the test results? I mean you like to compare it to Amsoil, and they have verifiable test results.

Again, who cares? You and the other negateers on here would never (admit) using Synlube no matter the results, and you know it. Read the above until it sinks in. Test results don't mean a darn thing. There are NO REPORTS of engines containing Synlube having exploded, seized up, or sludged up. Forget about testing oil while using Synlube. It's a pointless expense.

quote:
I like Synlubes 'Philosophy' so much I am going to save that quote, It's clear, and concise...I like it.


Right on! "Viscosity, shimcosity. Who cares?" Now you're getting it!
Last edited by inhaliburton
You guys crack me up!! So the pictures show INITIAL FILL. So there is a UNIVERAL version of the INITIAL FILL? On page 66 of the original SYNLUBE thread even MIRO acknowledges, that he sold the bottle of INITIAL FILL to Tatar. that was tested by BRUCE.

Why do you constantly lie? Even MIRO says he sold the INITIAL FILL.

This info is on page 66 as I mentioned.

So the 'SYNLUBE SHUFFLE' continues.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
You guys crack me up!! So the pictures show INITIAL FILL. So there is a UNIVERAL version of the INITIAL FILL? On page 66 of the original SYNLUBE thread even MIRO acknowledges, that he sold the bottle of INITIAL FILL to Tatar. that was tested by BRUCE.

Why do you constantly lie? Even MIRO says he sold the INITIAL FILL.

This info is on page 66 as I mentioned.

So the 'SYNLUBE SHUFFLE' continues.



Now for the next test.........Let Bruce do the best test.........put the stuff in a sound engine and run it 3000 hours...........that's the Synlube 3000 hour Shuffle.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Mods since the lies from Captain Kirk continue, perhaps it's time to ban, any mention of Synlube on this site, along with the cheerleader's for this product.


This is not my thread......I did not open it and only posted later on......

I will now stop posting because you are now once again hurling insults..........and you guys can now entertain yourselves once again............later!!!

HAVE FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
er the synlube PDS bruce tested both samples using the same standard used by synlube.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SynLube Lube-4-Life® INITIAL FILL - Motor Oil ( UNIVERAL VERSION )

GENERAL INFORMATION



This shows universal nuke!!


Read the words in red and get back to us.

It is labeled as 5w-50. Why does it not test as 5w-50.

IF-U or regular IF. There is no difference between the two weight wise.
quote:
Originally posted by vitual_mage:
User ? Where on the magic synlube site? Yeah right…..try harder; funny if I check your post you join only 2 month before Miro during the same year.....and in 5 year did almost only talk about synlube.

I hope mods will close this one quick; even Fox Mulder in x-files was more credible when he was saying do you believe.


Yes, yes. Of course, shut 'er down. You don't like what you are reading, is that it? What is it with you two always wanting to shut down a thread. I really don't get it. Go start your own Board so you can shut everybody down. What fun you'll have. Are you downwind from the sour gas again?
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Mods since the lies from Captain Kirk continue, perhaps it's time to ban, any mention of Synlube on this site, along with the cheerleader's for this product.


quote:
This is not my thread......I did not open it and only posted later on......

I will now stop posting because you are now once again hurling insults..........and you guys can now entertain yourselves once again............later!!!

HAVE FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Captain Kirk, try not to get too upset. The links and explanations that you supply here are quite useful to me. Hard work on your part. That's been the outcome for every poster who has used the product and had the audacity to explain their experience with Synlube. They became fed-up and frustrated with the nonsense posted by the likes of Nucleardawg and Vitual and stopped posting. Remember Annie_Oakley? Trajan does ask some pertinent, intelligent questions and is usually fair. If you, a user, stop posting on the subject, who's left? Have a cold one and think things over.
Inhaliburton since you haave never used the product, or personally know anbody who uses the product, what is your stake? Miro is that you?

You continually side step any questions, while hurling your insults.

Inhaliburton why does Synlube, not meet it's advertised specifications>

If Synlube cannot truthfully answer ANY questions, this thread along with any further Synlube threads, should be permanently locked and its backers banned, as this site is not in the business of giving FREE advertisements.
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×