Engine oil dyno test BPenn & Driven

[pamotorman]

watching a dyno test at GM St Catherin plant on a corvette ZO-6 engine they told me that the oil temp has to be within 2 degrees and the fuel temp within 5 degrees to get comparative readings.

[Newold1]

History, testing and experience has always shown that there are a lot of good oils and additive packages out there and there are some bad ones too! The proper application of oils, viscosity and additive packages in particular engine types is the very important for proper lubrication and engine protection.
The claims that some oil brands offer large increases in performance is a stretch and hype in my opinion and experiences. Do some brands of premium oils offer better lubrication characteristics and wear reductions from applicable additive packages- You bet! Do they make a lot more measurable power when the oil viscosity is proper for the usage, I don't think so and no one has proven to me otherwise.
If you've got that proof collected in independent industry standard scientific tests, lay it on us! We're all eyes and ears here. Please try not to reprint or quote some of the hype that has been used in the lubricating oils industry for years to sell that hype. I've got some ocean front tropical beach properties in Nebraska that I need to sell! Any takers?

[statsystems]

You should spend some time on research. It's worth more that an improperly constructed dyno test.

You mean like reading propaganda from JGR, Lucas, and other people that stand to profit from peddling snake oil? That kind of research?

If you are telling me additives have more impact on power that viscosity, I don't think I'm gonna believe anything else you tell me about oils. I can't see where 5 pulls on each oil in 900hp test is a GIGO test, and I also don't believe that any dyno is going to pick up more than a statistically insignificant < 5 hp between 2 oils of the same viscosity. I'd love to see your real scientific data that proves the contrary. Please share with us so we can all learn something.

If you spend a little money, you can buy the buy the technology from Mobil or Stauffer chemical. They won't give it to you for free.

As to the OP's test, would you test an intake that way? Or cams? Or fuel? If so, you don't know dick about testing. The OP's results at best, are flawed. He knows less now than he did before. And so do you.

[900HP]

You should spend some time on research. It's worth more that an improperly constructed dyno test.

You mean like reading propaganda from JGR, Lucas, and other people that stand to profit from peddling snake oil? That kind of research?

If you are telling me additives have more impact on power that viscosity, I don't think I'm gonna believe anything else you tell me about oils. I can't see where 5 pulls on each oil in 900hp test is a GIGO test, and I also don't believe that any dyno is going to pick up more than a statistically insignificant < 5 hp between 2 oils of the same viscosity. I'd love to see your real scientific data that proves the contrary. Please share with us so we can all learn something.

If you spend a little money, you can buy the buy the technology from Mobil or Stauffer chemical. They won't give it to you for free.

As to the OP's test, would you test an intake that way? Or cams? Or fuel? If so, you don't know dick about testing. The OP's results at best, are flawed. He knows less now than he did before. And so do you.

I went from a break-in oil, to a oil that was supposed to make more power than any other oil with hydraulic roller lifters, to a std. 10w30 race oil and I saw no magic changes.

I will tell you from experience that when I have seen differences in performance from oil it was immediate and I didn't have to do 3 flushes to get the results.

So what if the additive package diluted oil B from A or oil C from A+B?? if oil B was really that good with hydraulic lifters it should have shown some change after 5 pulls and it didn't.

This was an average street engine with average oil in it, no more no less. I don't buy that if I had changed out the 10w40 again and pulled it 5 more times and changed it and pulled it 5 more times that it would have all of a sudded picked up 15 or more hp out of the blue.

[66Vette]

Kudos 900HP, thanks for running the tests and sharing the results.

statsystems was probably more accurate in his first post saying that the data could be "influenced" by the previous oil. But his later posts suggesting this is GIGO is.....well.....GIGO. The fact that these oils made no difference on the dyno and that they are from two different manufacturers and different viscosities is certainly noteworthy ("influence" aside).

Now I'd like to see what a 10 weight would do in the back to back.

[user-612937456]

Right lots of propaganda and statistical noise on a Dyno sheet

[Kevin Johnson]

Contact our fellow lister that works at SWRI (Notchback) and find out what their protocol is for testing different oils on a given engine.

[statsystems]

Contact our fellow lister that works at SWRI (Notchback) and find out what their protocol is for testing different oils on a given engine.

I'd like to see what protocol they use.

What's your opinion Kevin?

[Walter R. Malik]

Let me try to understand ... going from an oil with no performance additive package and changing it to an oil known to have a really good performance additive package makes NO horsepower gain.
AND, even though it is diluted with maybe 8 ounces of the no additive package oil, should there not be at least SOME power gain ...?

The test may not be absolutely perfect but, certainly good enough to draw an educated conclusion about whether or not it is worth any positive horsepower.

[roc]

watching a dyno test at GM St Catherin plant on a corvette ZO-6 engine they told me that the oil temp has to be within 2 degrees and the fuel temp within 5 degrees to get comparative readings.

I'd take that statement with a grain of salt. It sounds more like an engineer showing off.

[statsystems]

Let me try to understand ... going from an oil with no performance additive package and changing it to an oil known to have a really good performance additive package makes NO horsepower gain.
AND, even though it is diluted with maybe 8 ounces of the no additive package oil, should there not be at least SOME power gain ...?

The test may not be absolutely perfect but, certainly good enough to draw an educated conclusion about whether or not it is worth any positive horsepower.

Walter, it's not the amount of residual oil retained in the system. It's the fact that RACING oils have an additive package that stays on parts for quite a few pulls. I have personally seen crap oils tested as the A oil perform as well as the B oil for several pulls. That's why I said the OP testing is flawed. He should have tests the break in oil as the A oil, picked whatever oil he wanted for the B and then went back to the A oil to verify. That wasn't done. Three oils were tested and not as an A- B -A test. So we have no real idea what the actual results are.

To get accurate testing on oils and fuels requires very stringent test protocols. The OP didn't follow them. GIGO.

[Strange Magic]

No. What I am saying is you will skew the results doing it the way the OP did it. I have done it many times. Run a shit oil for the A test and then a good oil for the B test. When you go back to the A oil it will pretty much lay curve on the graph exactly like the B oil for 3-4 pulls until you use up the residual oil (it's the additive package that makes HP) and then the A oil will test like the A oil.

I stand by what I posted. That is exactly why the OP got the results he posted. Don't take my word for it. Call LAT or Lucas and see what they say about testing three oils with 3 pulls each.

This is true.

[digger]

Let me try to understand ... going from an oil with no performance additive package and changing it to an oil known to have a really good performance additive package makes NO horsepower gain.
AND, even though it is diluted with maybe 8 ounces of the no additive package oil, should there not be at least SOME power gain ...?

The test may not be absolutely perfect but, certainly good enough to draw an educated conclusion about whether or not it is worth any positive horsepower.

Walter, it's not the amount of residual oil retained in the system. It's the fact that RACING oils have an additive package that stays on parts for quite a few pulls. I have personally seen crap oils tested as the A oil perform as well as the B oil for several pulls. That's why I said the OP testing is flawed. He should have tests the break in oil as the A oil, picked whatever oil he wanted for the B and then went back to the A oil to verify. That wasn't done. Three oils were tested and not as an A- B -A test. So we have no real idea what the actual results are.

To get accurate testing on oils and fuels requires very stringent test protocols. The OP didn't follow them. GIGO.

it sounds like you have tested different oils using a sound scientific testing methodology and have seen some impressive hp gains, please post your results so we can see what oil is good for hp.

[Kevin Johnson]

Contact our fellow lister that works at SWRI (Notchback) and find out what their protocol is for testing different oils on a given engine.

I'd like to see what protocol they use.

What's your opinion Kevin?

If you look at an ASTM standard for evaluating an engine oil in situ, a flush procedure and method to evaluate the flush procedure is mentioned (see below).

This being said, consumers are generally not told that a flush procedure will be required to see the benefits.

That being said, the attachment below is a report by Torco on research performed for them by a university. They do not mention flushing but that does not mean it was not performed. If you have all the time in the world to hash this over you can read through approximately twenty years of internet argument over the results.

Enjoy.

dyno_univ_florida.pdf

https://www.astm.org/Standards/D7589.htm

ASTM D7589 - 16
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Effects of Automotive Engine Oils on Fuel Economy of Passenger Cars and Light-Duty Trucks in Sequence VID Spark Ignition Engine


...

Routine Test Operation
11.6
Start-Up and Shutdown Procedures
11.6.1
Flying Flush Oil Exchange Procedures
11.6.2
Test Operating Stages
11.6.3
Stabilization to Stage Conditions
11.6.4
Stabilized BSFC Measurement Cycle
11.6.5
BLB1 Oil Flush Procedure for BL Oil Before Test Run 1
11.6.6
BSFC Measurement of BLB1 Oil Before Test Oil
11.6.7
BLB2 Oil Flush Procedure for BL Oil Before Test Oil Run 2
11.6.8
BSFC Measurement of BLB2 Oil Before Test Oil
11.6.9
Percent Delta Calculation for BLB1 vs. BLB2
11.6.10
Test Oil Flush Procedure
11.6.11
Test Oil Aging, Phase I
11.6.12
BSFC Measurement of Aged (Phase I) Test Oil
11.6.13
Test Oil Aging, Phase II
11.6.14
BSFC Measurement of Aged (Phase II) Test Oil
11.6.15
Oil Consumption and Sampling
11.6.16
Flush Procedure for BL Oil (BLA) After Test Oil
11.6.17
General Test Data Logging Forms
11.6.18
Diagnostic Review Procedures
11.6.19

[peejay]

Hold the phone a moment.

There are people who believe that changing the oil brand has a measurably significant affect on engine output? So same oil pump, same pressures, same clearances, same piston ring tension... just the OIL would make a difference?

WOW!

Can we do A-B-A testing on different driveshaft paint next? White driveshafts have less resistance to centirfugal force so they can spin easier. You'll need a chassis dyno to test this one.

I still believe in using high performance oils engineered for the engine's operating conditions, for longevity reasons, but NOT for power!