11k UOA PP SN+ 5w30 18 Edge 2.0 Ecoboost

[Hemi_Time]

First UOA! 2018 Ford Edge 2.0 Ecoboost with 5w30 Pennzoil Platinum SN+ run to 11k miles (75% highway driving). Expected the oil to be in pretty bad shape (OLM went to 0% at 10k miles). (Oil ran from 40k to 51k odometer miles) From Blackstone Labs: "Your Ford Edge couldn't have asked for a much better first report. Universal averages show typical wear for a 2.0L EcoBoost that's had its oil changed after about 6,300 miles, and you've got less metal even after a much longer interval, meaning that your engine is wearing with the best of them. No fuel or coolant contamination was detected, and the oil filter earns a great review for keeping insolubles (solids) down to just 0.2%. The 2.7 TBN means the oil still had some active additive left in reserve, so feel free to tap into that by going 13,000 miles next time." Notes: *Took the sample after driving the SUV for 20 minutes or so and fully warmed up *Only 93 octane from Shell/Chevron *Running oversized Purolator PBL20195 filter (about 1 inch longer) *FilterMag SS300 *K&N panel filter (OEM airbox) Cheers, Pete

 

[volk06]

I have the same engine in my 2016 edge. Always enjoy UOAs of the same engine build. Looks like it has broken in nicely. Looks like a good combination - thanks for the uoa.

 

[Virtus_Probi]

I'd say that's a super impressive UOA given that PP 5W30 starts out sort of thin for its grade (9.8 cSt at 100C) and you are still in the 5W30 range after a long run in a turbo engine. Very nice!!

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

A great example of why UOA's should not be done on a relatively new engine. It's refreshing change from the Euro owners who try to draw conclusions switching around with X, Y, and Z oil when the engine has only 25k miles on it.

 

[PimTac]

Good looking report.

 

[SevenBizzos]

Nice UOA there! I'm going to run my first report next change. Lots of discussion about the EB's on this forum.

 

[alarmguy]

Great report. The Filter Mag looks like a great product. I always used Gold Plug oil pan drain plugs, I do like the idea of the metals getting trapped in the filter as with the Filter Mag better. With that said (and keep in mind I use them too) I always wondered if the magnets "skew" the metal PPM in a UOA. Meaning if the filter mag or magnetic oil pan plug is holding metals down to virtually 0 microns, does that skew the "wear numbers" in the report. to what a typical UOA might show?? I have always discounted that it may skew the numbers, as I guess a high efficiency oil filter may do the same, yet a magnet will remove even the finest smallest particles Anyway, just some rambling thoughts, good report by the way!

 

[dnewton3]

The numbers are desirable, for sure. Note ... if you use the filter mag, then you're pulling Fe out of the oil. That's good in that the Fe isn't still going around and around in the engine. But it's bad because it's misleading; some Fe would have ended up in the UOA, and so the really low Fe is a bit low. The mag will not affect non-ferrous metals like Al, Cu, Pb, so those numbers are fairly accurate.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by dnewton3

The numbers are desirable, for sure. Note ... if you use the filter mag, then you're pulling Fe out of the oil. That's good in that the Fe isn't still going around and around in the engine. But it's bad because it's misleading; some Fe would have ended up in the UOA, and so the really low Fe is a bit low. The mag will not affect non-ferrous metals like Al, Cu, Pb, so those numbers are fairly accurate.

If the actual iron level was meaningfully higher than reported, would we see higher levels of other, softer, wear metals or is there no correlation? (more iron floating around in the oil would promote wear in the other softer metals and since we don't necessarily see that, it's a safe assumption actual iron levels are not significantly different than what the analysis reports???)