I did find his blog a bit ago. I'm not sure about him, particularly when he won't disclose his testing methods. Not doing that shields them from critical reviews, especially from those who would tend to agree with him. In this life and country no one person can be 100% correct about any subject. A big question that comes to my mind is the affect of smoothness of the surfaces being lubricated. If they are mega super smooth there is no roughness to hold onto and push oil molecules around, so I'm not sure that film strength is the absolute best measure, especially with regard to engine to engine results.
He may not reveal his actual test apparatus, but explains the test focal point, plus what test methods he does not use. Add to this, his logic of the testing in regards to temps and reaching ultimate failure is important. Going further, he may not give specific details of his equipment, but reading between the lines, his method is the same for each specimen tested, and his knowledge / background leans towards having correct micro inch finished test panels.
A while back, a person here led me to his blog. That person and I were discussing the importance of zinc in oil. I had always been led to believe zinc was critical as a high pressure additive. After reading his blog, what I thought was true for decades, I no longer endorse as correct.
Myself, I see the merits in his blog / test results. In his blog he clearly states many people oppose his testing, but also states that people within the industry, not merely internet gurus, endorse his methods and parameters. Seems those opposing his data have no facts to support their opposition. Merely a speculated reason, but done so without common sense reasoning as to why his tests are not valid. Oil industry professional and oil end product users have validated the test results match real world testing, where as ASTM tests seem less real world.
Also stated is the information is factual data. Repeatable factual data, and sadly, not everyone is open to seeing, reading or wanting to understand facts.
If someone here can suggest a better source of information regarding oil performance, I would enjoy seeing it.
If someone here can explain why his methods are not accurate and fair, I would enjoy that.
At this point, yes, I drink his Kool Aid. 540rat is far smarter than me regarding oil film strength, and testing for it.
Below, I copied sections of his blog and placed them in bold / italics for others to read.
“My testing is a dynamic friction test under load, similar to how an engine dyno test is a dynamic HP/Torque test under load. Both tests show how their subjects truly perform in the real world, no matter what Brand names are involved, no matter what outrageous claims may have been made, and no matter what their spec sheets say.”
”METHODOLOGY
The details of the specific test equipment set-up I developed, as well as the details of the specific test procedure I developed, that provide the accuracy and repeatability that I demand, are Proprietary Intellectual Property. But, I can share the following:
The test methodology or test procedure I use at a representative operating oil temperature of 230*F, is a dynamic rubbing friction test under load, which generates a wear scar on a test specimen that is bathed in the oil being tested. This procedure, which is performed exactly the same for every motor oil tested, provides excellent repeatability, which is critical to validate the methodology. And as shown above, my test data EXACTLY matches real world severe over-heating experience, real world race track experience, real world flat tappet break-in experience, and real world High Performance street experience. No matter what any critics may say, with my test data exactly matching real world experience, that absolutely PROVES and VALIDATES that my data is the real deal. You cannot get any better than that, so you will not find better motor oil comparison data anywhere. The test result is “pounds” of force being applied over the wear scar “area”, which is in square inches (the size of that “area” is of course is determined by the oil’s film strength/load carrying capability/shear resistance capability). So, the result is pounds per square inch, which of course is just shortened to “psi”. The better an oil’s wear protection capability, the smaller the wear scar will be on the test specimen, and the higher the resulting psi value will be. Multiple tests are performed on each oil, and the resulting values are averaged to arrive at the most accurate possible value for comparison. And the motor oils are ranked, based on the average psi value they generated.
.
The motor oil “Dynamic Wear Testing Under Load” I performed to generate my “Wear Protection Ranking List”, is worst case torture testing, using oil testing equipment that is for the record, NOT a “One Armed Bandit” tester and NOT a “4-Ball Wear Tester”. My testing subjects the oil to far more severe loading than even the most wicked flat tappet race engine ever could. So, since my oil testing compares various oils under worst case conditions, absolutely no further testing is required in a running engine. If oils rank higher in my “Wear Protection Ranking List” than the oil you currently use, those higher ranked oils will provide a HIGHER LEVEL OF WEAR PROTECTION than your current oil. It’s really that simple.
.
My test equipment is NOT intended to duplicate an engine’s internal components. On the contrary, the test equipment is specifically designed to cause an oil to reach its failure point, in order to determine what its capability limit it is. And every oil I test is brought to its failure point, that’s how it works. The difference in the failure points, is what we compare. And in addition to that, my equipment’s calibration is checked and adjusted if required, each time the testing switches to a different oil. That keeps the final results accurate at all times.”
hyea:
….. After learning that it Shears sooner than some others, when I change out my oil ( 1330 eng. ) I then began using One Qt. of 20W50 ( Valvoline 4-stroke ) and Four 5W40 T-6 ….. both are full syn…… plus I change at approx. 5000 mi. …… Thanks …. Mike 
