Don't Always Believe What You See
You Saw WHAT With Your Own Eyes?
Magic sells. And magic is exactly what sells oils "proven" on one-armed bandits and other such unscientific gadgets. Although viewers watch the bandit do its stuff, the stuff it does has no bearing on an oil's performance in the engine.
The one-armed bandit is an extreme pressure tester, but not a very good one. The American Society of Testing and Materials does not recognize it as a useful testing device. Moreover, motor oil is not exposed to extreme pressure in the engine. Motor Oils that "pass" extreme pressure testing contain extreme pressure additives, which actually impair the oil's usefulness in the engine. Extreme pressure additives are not designed for exposure to the extreme head of combustion.
Unfortunately, magic shows performed by snake oil salesmen in garish suits aren't the only oil tests that fool consumers. Television ads featuring scientific-looking men in white lab coats running test engines without oil, claiming such shenanigans prove the oil's anti-wear protection are also misleading.
Well-designed tests have their place in lubricant development, however. Well-designed tests provide useful, repeatable and reproducible results. Repeatability is the difference between successive results obtained by the same operator with the same apparatus under constant operating conditions using identical material.
Reproducibility is the difference between two single and independent results obtained by different operators working in different laboratories using identical materials.
Well-designed laboratory, field and engine tests help lubrication engineers develop products. Lab tests help engineers examine and oil's physical properties. A well-designed lab test has few variables, allowing engineers to study one product feature without interference from other features.
Field tests help engineers examine an oil's actual performance. Field tests allow engineers to study a lubricant interacting with the entire universe of variables to which it is exposed in real world performance, including driver error and adverse environmental conditions.
Engine tests are a hybrid of laboratory tests and field tests. Engine tests are not as expensive as field tests, yet they allow engineers to examine a simulation of an oil performing in an engine.
Engine tests, however, are not a perfect union of lab and field. Test engines are modified in ways to help engineers examine oil characteristics individually. However, all the variables cannot be controlled well enough to keep disparate characteristics from interacting and marring the data. In fact, engine tests frequently don't correspond well with actual, on-the-road oil performance.
For example, the Cummins NTC-400 diesel engine oil test is "out of control," according to engine and lubricant manufacturers. The test is too severe. Oils that perform dependably in the field cannot pass it. The test provides no usable results.
Furthermore, engine tests cannot run long enough to adequately test oil durability. No one could afford to run tests that long. Many oils perform well over the short period an engine test runs, but few endure the entire period between oil changes without significant degedation.
So why do AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils endure extended drain intervals? AMSOIL selects the best raw materials from dependable suppliers, performs through in-house quality control and field test its products.
Most importantly, AMSOIL listens to its customers. Of course, AMSOIL enjoys hearing that its oils work well, but AMSOIL also listens to its customers' problems and concerns and uses that information to formulate new products to meet new challenges, something other oil manufacturers seem unwilling to do.
Other manufacturers may be happy to produce oils that work well in engine tests. AMSOIL insists on producing oils that work well in engines.
