02 Explorer 4100 miles 5W-30 Hav Syn

[FordSVTGuy]

Here is the first oil analysis on my 02 Explorer with a 4.0L V6. This OCI had 4100 miles during the winter months. There were a lot of really cold days this year. My wife takes a fair amount of short trips down the street for cleaners, bakery. ect...

Miles on Unit 44,100
Oil - 5w-30 Havoline Synthetic
Oil Filter - Napa Gold Air Filter Puralator
Dates - Jan 04-Apr 04

ALUMINUM 4
CHROMIUM 1
IRON 8
COPPER 4
LEAD 0
TIN 0
MOLYBDENUM 10
NICKEL 0
MANGANESE 0
SILVER 0
TITANIUM 0
POTASSIUM 0
BORON 27
SILICON 10
SODIUM 2
CALCIUM 1913
MAGNESIUM 9
PHOSPHORUS 649
ZINC 743
BARIUM 0

TBN 2.2
Flash Point 415
SUS Viscosity @ 210 F 58
Fuel Antifreeze 0.0
Water 0.0
Insolubles 0.4

Black Stones Comments: Wear looks good in this sample from your Explorer. The universal averages column shows
typical wear from this type of engine after 4100 miles on the oil. Your oil was in use 4114 miles, and
wear levels read right at, or below, averages for this type of Ford engine. The TBN read 2.2, so the oil
still contained some active additive, though not a lot. We consider anything over 1.0 to be an
acceptable reading, so if you wanted to run this oil longer, we think you could do it. The engine can
certainly take it. Try 5000 miles next time.

I think that the only concern was the TBN. Looks kind of low to me. All comments welcome...

 

[SSDude]

Your report looks good. My only concern is that it seems that this oil is not very durable. It has such a low TBN after only 4,000 some odd miles. It did a good job while it lasted. If you like this oil, you might want to give Lube Control a try so that you can do extended drains.

 

[Patman]

Even though TBN is low, the wear numbers are excellent! Group 3 synthetics can still get the job done!

 

[Motorbike]

Look at that Phos .......can you say API SM GF-4?

 

[mikep]

Agreed that this oil didn't hold up all that well after only 4K miles. Excellent wear protection but still I'm surprised at the tbn drop on a pretty pricey group III synth (about 4 bucks /qt. near me). I guess the winter months and short trips (probably some "warm up" idling in the too?) took its toll.

 

[427Z06]

Look at that 0 Lead....can you say "hard Aluminum bearings"

 

[Schmoe]

Hard aluminum bearings?? What? Am I missing something here? No more lead bearings? Great report. Those Ford engines of lately are really cranking out some low wear numbers with almost any type of oil, as long as it's Grp. III and above.

 

[Whimsey]

Back in March I posted an UOA for my wife's 2002 Explorer. I had a very similar OCI mileage and even the results are similar. Although I have to say your's appear to be slightly better in some areas. I used The Schaeffer 5W-30 Blend. It was dated March 8 "Schaeffer's Blend 5W-30, 4.0L 2002 Explorer". Sorry but I'm to old to learn how to add links and other things to a post

. I'm just lucky I can even turn the computer on

. As far as for the TBN being "low", mine was 2.0 and Terry didn't seem upset at all. Isn't more important to really know what the TBN started out as and how much it dropped. Is the drop of the TBN a linear function with the mileage usage or can it drop and then stay at a certain level even with accumulating miles. Of course up to a certain point than the TBN will finally give up "the ghost". And in different oils can't the TBN's degree of depletion vary. Is a lower initial TBN always indicative of a "poor" oil? I believe Schaeffer's Blends are initially only about a 7 in the TBN scale and they are considered to be very good oils.

Whimsey

[ May 05, 2004, 11:26 AM: Message edited by: Whimsey ]

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schmoe:
Hard aluminum bearings?? What? Am I missing something here? No more lead bearings? Great report. Those Ford engines of lately are really cranking out some low wear numbers with almost any type of oil, as long as it's Grp. III and above.

---

Ford switched over to "hard" aluminum bearings in most of their engines over the years.

 

[MNgopher]

I agree with Whimsey here. Using Blackstones methodology, a TBN of 2.2 is not the end of the world. While perhaps not as good of retention as seen in some other synthetics, the oil still has life left here.

Fine, so pb is zero using Al bearings. The Al number certainly is fine in this case.

Wondered how long folks would go on believing all main bearings are made the same...

 

[tec97]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MNgopher:
I agree with Whimsey here. Using Blackstones methodology, a TBN of 2.2 is not the end of the world. While perhaps not as good of retention as seen in some other synthetics, the oil still has life left here.

---

This oil in my Mitsubishi 4-cyl had a TBN of 4.1 at 3500 miles in my application... Interesting. In a couple of weeks, I should have a UOA of said Havoline w/ a 5K mile OCI from my Protege.