07 Yukon w/183k miles, 6.2L, 8.5k OCI, Amsoil ASM 0w-20

Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
711
Location
San Antonio,TX
Here's the lastest UOA for our 07 Yukon Denali w/all aluminum 6.2L L92 (non-AFM) w183k miles running premium gasoline.

This oil was installed April of 2022. It was Amsoil ASM 0w-20. Full flow oil filter was Fram Ultra XG10575. Bypass oil filter is Amsoil EaBP90.

DIC: 31% remaining. Averaged 17.4 mpg and 47 mph. 50% hwy, 50% local. Burned 491 gals in 182 hrs = 2.7 gph.

Samples #1 & 2 are the same load of Amsoil ASM 0w-20 with a 1/2 qt of makeup oil added between samples
Sample #3 is Kirkland 5w-30
Samples #4 & 5 are different loads of Mobil Delvac1 ESP 5w-30
Sample #6 is Mobil Delvac1 ESP 5w-40

Between samples #5 & 6 a plastic heater hose t-fitting broke which resulted in a short overheat event.

This was my first time to run any 0w-20 oil in anything. Gas mileage locally is 16.0 mpg and 19.0 mpg on the hwy. This is a noticeable improvement. I'm getting 20-30 more miles per tank (25.5 gals). Or it could be that I changed all 4 O2 sensors. I drive the speed limit (conservatively), no towing, no hot rodding.

I changed the oil to HPLoil.com performance synthetic 0w-20, and the full flow filter to Fram Titanium FS10575. The bypass was drained and reinstalled for its fourth run.

What say you?
DSCN0869.JPG
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
5,929
Location
Florida
I'd consider a future run with the Amsoil bypass disabled for comparison.
I don’t see how that will be a pretty report in comparison. That bypass filter is removing A TON of particles from the oil and without it, I’d expect to see quite a jump across the board.

I’m in for the results if the OP decided to grace us with the pleasure…
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2014
Messages
3,752
Location
Paradise of Florida
His intervals aren't too high and really doesn't need a bypass. The full flow will remove enough 'particles' too.

Without particle counts, we don't know what the bypass is removing. But, with the rollercoaster of UOAs, which should also be labelled for bypass run number, it would be interesting to see the engine on a full flow only.
 

jetman

Thread starter
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
711
Location
San Antonio,TX
His intervals aren't too high and really doesn't need a bypass. The full flow will remove enough 'particles' too.

Without particle counts, we don't know what the bypass is removing. But, with the rollercoaster of UOAs, which should also be labelled for bypass run number, it would be interesting to see the engine on a full flow only.
@Artem
@Greasymechtech
Here's a thread I did with pics of the last 2 ff filters that came off the engine: https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2-ultras-cut-open-w-pic.359520/
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
54,594
Location
Ontario, Canada
Other than the surprisingly high iron, report looks good. Some fuel dilution in this sample and #3, but not at the level we see with other vehicles. Clearly, that heater hose incident created an increase, wonder if you ended up with some scuffing?
 

FZ1

Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
5,952
Location
Texas
Looks good. Pay your money and take your choice with a robust 20W or thin 30W. Is the Amsoil thickening?
 
Top