Redux:

 

Interesting.... I'd never drive my 8 in these conditions anyways but nice to see a comparison for my DD.

 

The coldest it gets where I live is in the single digits (like, 8 degrees F). Glad to see the oil I run in my vehicles perform so well in this test.

 

Yeah I think the biggest issue is that the oils that did not perform well should have, especially in the second test with 5W-30 Synthetics.

 

Nice to see what I felt a couple of years back when we hit 20 below for a few days, my furnace was working so hard that I think it ran for 2 days straight non stop to keep the house at 65/67 . The cars started, but I had to let them run for like 15 to 20 mins before the defrost would actually push warm air.

 

^ Hahaha, welcome to 6 months of my life every year! -40c (happens to be -40F too) isn't an every day occurrence here but it sure isn't uncommon either. -20f (-28C) is a regular winter day.

 

Good info

 

It never gets ridiculously cold here.

But I am VERY, VERY fed up with the never-ending winter rain.

 

Haha, yeah I can't imagine, I actually just move from Sask to Edmonton, I'm expecting my winters to be a bit more mild than I described above now

 

Assuming every bottle flows the same is not very scientific ....

 

Apparently they refilled a few bottles in order to attempt to get them as close as possible. They went into it in the comments after someone pointed out a quaker state bottle. Though there's definitely much better and more consistent ways it could've been done.

 

You need to use the same bottle or container regardless of oil brand/type or the validity of the test is in question. Otherwise they often aren't identical and could have influenced the results.

 

May be this kind of set up...

 

It obviously was not a scientific test, but certain conclusions can still be drawn. Wally world conventional oil sucks, for example.

 

as does the wally world synthetic.