2000 Tundra V8 M1 0w40 144k total 10k on run..yawn

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cheetahdriver

Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
561
Location
springdale, ar
yet another fantastic toyota V8 uoa.

note that this one compares my 2006 run of 5w20 with my current run of 0w40. i am not sure what the difference was, although this run had my ~3700 mile high speed run to CA on it. the rest of the duty was light towing. approximate time in service was a yr on either. since i have never had a TBN issue on this truck, i have stopped running it. current fill is M1 0w40, thinking about going to Delvac1 and pushing 15k next time.

Code:


OIL M1 0w40 M1 5w20

MILES IN USE 10,000 13,301

MILES 144k 112.3k

SAMPLE TAKEN



ALUMINUM 4 3

CHROMIUM 0 0

IRON 23 13

COPPER 6 5

LEAD 1 0

TIN 1 0

MOLYBDENUM 69 65

NICKEL 0 0

MANGANESE 0 0

SILVER 0 0

TITANIUM 0 0

POTASSIUM 3 2

BORON 104 36

SILICON 16 18

SODIUM 7 4

CALCIUM 2636 2078

MAGNESIUM 14 47

PHOSPHORUS 740 588

ZINC 909 723

BARIUM 0 0



INSOLUBLES 0.3 0.3

WATER 0 0

FLASHPOINT ºF 390 365

SUS VIS 210ºF 72.3 59.2

cSt @ 212ºF 13.57 9.98

TBN not run 2.8
 
The run with the 5W-20 was a LOT better....3k more miles, and ALL wear metals are lower. I know it's by a very small amount, but when you take the extra miles into consideration, it's a better run.
 
right. i am normally a member of the "thinner is better" crowd, if somebody made a 0w20 that was as good as Delvac1, i would probably be using it. i was thinking about trying the toyota or honda 0w20...
 
The 5w20 did spectacularly. No need for the thicker oil, especially if it's spec'd for the 20 weight. Nice engine there!
 
I wonder what the Tbn would have been for the 0w-40 though? I bet it was a bit higher.
 
Originally Posted By: cheetahdriver
this run had my ~3700 mile high speed run to CA on it. the rest of the duty was light towing.


How does that compare to your other run on the 5W-20? The towing could have been what increased the wear numbers.

If all variables are practically the same... I'd definitely go back to the 5W-20 for your driving style.
 
I don't know that I'd try Devlac 1. Not that it's a bad idea, but perhaps the second UOA is trying to tell you something? Perhaps a bit thick, and the resultant Fe is a bit higher? Regardless, all other criteria look great.

Why not try 5w-20 M1 EP or perhaps the same in 5w30? You might find the sweet-spot? With the EPs, I'd think 15k mile OCIs would be quite possible, given the performance of the 5w-20.
 
Last edited:
5W-20 additives were lower than the 0W-40. But produced slightly less wear metals. Interesting report.
 
I agree. I'd go back to the 5W20 and the 10K mile OCI. The TBN was 2.8 with it and I think that is a more sensible limit. A lot of sources say TBN should be at 3 or above. Blackstone says 1 but I don't know where they get that idea.
 
I'm not sure what you mean? I thought TBN is TBN. Do you mean he could go 20k-26k miles on the oil no problem?
 
Thanks.

Quote:
ASTM D-4739 should be used when testing the TBN of used (in-service) oils as opposed to ASTM D-2896, which may be used when testing TBN in new oils. ASTM D-4739 uses a weaker acid for titration than does ASTM D-2896 and, therefore, produces slightly lower TBN results


So even if Blackstone is using D-2896 protocol should their results and recommendation really be that much lower?

That article says when TBN drops below 4 acid starts to increase. I know it is mostly talking about diesels, but keeping TBN between 2.x-3 seems like a good idea to me.
edit: all right that threads says the D-2896 B-stone uses gives a lower reading of TBN and you should add 1.5-2 to it so 4-5. Why does B-stone say 1 then
54.gif
.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
I'm not sure what you mean? I thought TBN is TBN. Do you mean he could go 20k-26k miles on the oil no problem?


Okay, I mixed responses there. Blackstone switched from one protocol to another back somewhere in 2003-2004. It cut the number by about 2/3. Hence a TBN of 5 may be a 7 by the older (for them) protocol. If you look up my 0w-10 tests, Bruce's lab got 7.X after 5k ..Blackstone something like 4.xx and Terry Dyson's lab another number.


My "you could double everthing" comment was on the metals. Even doubled it would still lock good (boring).
 
Originally Posted By: sunfire
5W-20 additives were lower than the 0W-40. But produced slightly less wear metals. Interesting report.


It's not uncommon for higher ZDDP levels to produce higher wear numbers via emission spectroscopy. It doesn't mean more wear is occurring, only that more of the wear metals are within the range of detection.
 
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
Originally Posted By: sunfire
5W-20 additives were lower than the 0W-40. But produced slightly less wear metals. Interesting report.


It's not uncommon for higher ZDDP levels to produce higher wear numbers via emission spectroscopy. It doesn't mean more wear is occurring, only that more of the wear metals are within the range of detection.



Don't let the M1 bashers see your post. All these guys predict engine wear by a couple PPM numbers that they see from a UOA. Doug Hillary has been saying this for as long as I have been here that actual wear can only be determined by engine tear down for the most part.
 
Originally Posted By: webfors
The 5w20 did spectacularly. No need for the thicker oil, especially if it's spec'd for the 20 weight. Nice engine there!

4.7L is speced for 5W30.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
M1 5w20 04Civic, M1 5w30 04 SRT4
Replies
0
Views
1K
heyleescomet
D
  • Locked
M1 0w40 / 2011 BMW M3 / 5,920 mi
Replies
17
Views
5K
Patman
B
  • Locked
M1 0w40 9.3K Porsche Cayman 2.7L 29.5K Total
Replies
18
Views
4K
yvon_la
C
  • Locked
Motomaster F1 Syn|5w30|10k KM|Olds Regency 3.8 S/C
Replies
6
Views
2K
wing0
R
  • Locked
M1 5w-30 4,613 mi
Replies
15
Views
4K
bigt61
Back
Top Bottom