2001 Jeep grand Cherokee - two UOAs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
I am posting two UOAs that I have just had time to post. Not sure what to conclude other than a bearing is going. Test# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mileage 9622 5184 5606 5334 5679 6985 8195 Iron 146 43 26 28 55 50 84 Chrom 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 Nickel 1 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Alum 4 1 1 1 2 3 10 Copper 23 12 16 20 24 17 26 Lead 15 8 4 3 47 31 16 Tin 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 Cadmi 0 0 0 0 0 0 Silv 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Vanad 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Silicon 25 12 13 8 12 13 27 Sodiu 18 6 6 9 15 10 19 Potas 6 1 5 0 0 3 7 Titan 0 1 0 0 0 0 <1 Moly 61 58 67 62 61 46 59 Antim 1 0 0 1 0 1 Mang 2 0 0 0 0 0 Lith 0 0 0 0 0 0 Boron 280 163 30 21 23 8 212 Magn 14 14 892 1041 1049 207 65 Calc 3611 2651 1008 814 737 2170 2928 Bari 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Phos 772 723 868 942 921 721 730 Zinc 923 864 1103 1189 1143 897 914 Fuel <1 <1 2.2 2.0 <1 2.1 Soot <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 .4 Water <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <0.05 [email protected] 11.1 10.2 12.9 13.3 13.5 10.9 10.2 TBN 3.4 4.47 4.22 NES 4.13 3.49 3.0 Oxi 20 25 17 NES 30 18 Nit 16 12 13 NES 14 13 (first to last) (all tests done by Polaris unless otherwise noted) Test#1 PU Test#2 PU Test#3 T6 Test#4 T6 Test#5 T6 Test#6 PP Test#7 PP (test done by NAPA)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
10,434
Location
Champlain/Hudson Valley
Hello, The size of the numbers suggest to my untrained eye that 5,000 mile OCI's are in your future. Of course, I don't know what value of any of the elements is acceptable or normal. The Boron, Magn and Calc numbers seem to jump wildly out of step with the others. The same ignorance applies. Kira
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2013
Messages
3,213
Location
Kentucky
Code:
Test#	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Mileage	9622	5184	5606	5334	5679	6985	8195	
Iron    146	43	26	28	55      50	84
Chrom   4	1	1	1	1       1	4
Nickel	1	0	0	0	0       0       <1
Alum    4	1	1	1	2       3	10
Copper  23	12	16	20	24	17	26
Lead    15	8	4	3	47      31	16
Tin     2	1	1	1	2	2       2
Cadmi   0	0	0	0	0	0	
Silv    0	0	0	0	0       0	<1
Vanad   0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Silicon 25	12	13	8	12	13      27
Sodium  18	6	6	9	15      10	19
Potas   6	1	5	0	0       3	7
Titan   0	1	0	0	0       0	<1
Moly    61	58	67	62      61	46      59
Antim   1	0	0	1	0       1	
Mang    2	0	0	0	0       0	
Lith    0	0	0	0	0	0	
Boron   280	163	30	21	23	8	212
Magn    14	14	892	1041	1049	207	65
Calc    3611	2651	1008	814	737	2170	2928
Bari    0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Phos	772	723	868	942	921     721	730
Zinc    923	864	1103	1189	1143	897	914
Fuel	<1	<1	2.2	2.0	<1	2.1
Soot	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	.4
Water	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<0.05
[email protected]	11.1	10.2	12.9	13.3	13.5	10.9	10.2
TBN     3.4	4.47	4.22	NES	4.13	3.49	3.0
Oxi     20	25	17	NES	30	18
Nit     16	12	13	NES	14      13
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
Originally Posted By: Kira
Hello, The size of the numbers suggest to my untrained eye that 5,000 mile OCI's are in your future. Of course, I don't know what value of any of the elements is acceptable or normal. The Boron, Magn and Calc numbers seem to jump wildly out of step with the others. The same ignorance applies. Kira
I think the wild changes for the additives was going from T6 to PP.
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Code:
Test#	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Mileage	9622	5184	5606	5334	5679	6985	8195	
Iron    146	43	26	28	55      50	84
Chrom   4	1	1	1	1       1	4
Nickel	1	0	0	0	0       0       <1
Alum    4	1	1	1	2       3	10
Copper  23	12	16	20	24	17	26
Lead    15	8	4	3	47      31	16
Tin     2	1	1	1	2	2       2
Cadmi   0	0	0	0	0	0	
Silv    0	0	0	0	0       0	<1
Vanad   0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Silicon 25	12	13	8	12	13      27
Sodium  18	6	6	9	15      10	19
Potas   6	1	5	0	0       3	7
Titan   0	1	0	0	0       0	<1
Moly    61	58	67	62      61	46      59
Antim   1	0	0	1	0       1	
Mang    2	0	0	0	0       0	
Lith    0	0	0	0	0	0	
Boron   280	163	30	21	23	8	212
Magn    14	14	892	1041	1049	207	65
Calc    3611	2651	1008	814	737	2170	2928
Bari    0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Phos	772	723	868	942	921     721	730
Zinc    923	864	1103	1189	1143	897	914
Fuel	<1	<1	2.2	2.0	<1	2.1
Soot	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	.4
Water	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<0.05
[email protected]	11.1	10.2	12.9	13.3	13.5	10.9	10.2
TBN     3.4	4.47	4.22	NES	4.13	3.49	3.0
Oxi     20	25	17	NES	30	18
Nit     16	12	13	NES	14      13
Thanks, I forgot how to do that and was trying to figure it out.
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
Code:
Test#	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Mileage	9622	5184	5606	5334	5679	6985	8195					
Iron 	146	43	26	28	55   	50	84
Chrom 	4	1	1	1	1   	1	4
Nickel	1	0	0	0	0  	0 	<1
Alum 	4	1	1	1	2   	3	10
Copper  23	12	16	20	24	17	26
Lead    15	8	4	3	47 	31	16
Tin     2	1	1	1	2	2 	2
Cadmi   0	0	0	0	0	0		
Silv    0	0	0	0	0 	0	<1
Vanad   0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Silicon 25	12	13	8	12	13 	27
Sodiu   18	6	6	9	15 	10	19
Potas   6	1	5	0	0 	3	7
Titan   0	1	0	0	0 	0	<1
Moly    61	58	67	62      61	46 	59
Antim   1	0	0	1	0 	1	
Mang    2	0	0	0	0 	0	
Lith    0	0	0	0	0	0	
Boron   280	163	30	21	23	8	212
Magn  	14	14	892	1041	1049	207	65
Calc  	3611	2651	1008	814	737	2170	2928
Bari   	0	0	0	0	0	0	<1
Phos	772	723	868	942	921  	721	730
Zinc  	923	864	1103	1189	1143	897	914
Fuel	<1	<1	2.2	2.0	<1	2.1
Soot	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	.4
Water	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<.1	<0.05
[email protected]	11.1	10.2	12.9	13.3	13.5	10.9	10.2
TBN   	3.4	4.47	4.22	NES	4.13	3.49	3.0
Oxi    	20	25	17	NES	30	18
Nit     16	12	13	NES	14  	13

(first to last) (all tests done by Polaris unless otherwise noted)
Test#1 PU
Test#2 PU
Test#3 T6
Test#4 T6
Test#5 T6
Test#6 PP
Test#7 PP (test done by NAPA)
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,856
Location
Texas
You had a lead "spike" and then a decline... I wouldn't conclude that a bearing "is going." I think you had an embedding event (piece of junk got into a bearing) and the scar is wearing back down. Modern bearings have limited embeddability and don't like that kind of thing, but they can tolerate a situation like that once or twice in their lives. I'd keep tabs on it and see if the numbers continue to decline again. And also, use the best filter you can- Fram Ultra comes to mind, I'd lose the M1 filter on cost/benefit alone. If I'm going to pay M1 prices for a filter, it will be a wire-backed synthetic filter and that means Fram Ultra, Purolator Synthetic, or Royal Purple. They really need to get competitive.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
3,117
Location
Virginia
How many miles on this Jeep? What kind of usage? Any makeup oil? Nothing looks critical to me, but there are a few things to monitor. I agree with 440Magnum above that you probably had a dirt event in a bearing to cause the lead spike. All you can do is drive it until it's starts knocking, if it ever does. I think the Jeep 4.0's are durable but I've never owned one long.
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
You had a lead "spike" and then a decline... I wouldn't conclude that a bearing "is going." I think you had an embedding event (piece of junk got into a bearing) and the scar is wearing back down. Modern bearings have limited embeddability and don't like that kind of thing, but they can tolerate a situation like that once or twice in their lives. I'd keep tabs on it and see if the numbers continue to decline again. And also, use the best filter you can- Fram Ultra comes to mind, I'd lose the M1 filter on cost/benefit alone. If I'm going to pay M1 prices for a filter, it will be a wire-backed synthetic filter and that means Fram Ultra, Purolator Synthetic, or Royal Purple. They really need to get competitive.
The first UOA started at around 20,000 miles. So in my estimation, the copper was high as soon as the engine was broken in. BTW - the engine was a REMAN engine.
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
Originally Posted By: Donald
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
I'd keep tabs on it and see if the numbers continue to decline again. And also, use the best filter you can- Fram Ultra comes to mind, I'd lose the M1 filter on cost/benefit alone. If I'm going to pay M1 prices for a filter, it will be a wire-backed synthetic filter and that means Fram Ultra, Purolator Synthetic, or Royal Purple. They really need to get competitive.
As for the current filter I have a Microgreen filter. It claims to go to 2 microns in the section of the filter that is not full flow. So then could I still have a bearing issue putting out copper and/or lead, but the filter picking all that stuff up and my UOA looking very normal. The first UOA started at around 20,000 miles. So in my estimation, the copper was high as soon as the engine was broken in. BTW - the engine was a REMAN engine.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,856
Location
Texas
Originally Posted By: Chris142
IMO iron is out of control. He has to be losing a cam and lifters,rocker etc.
Maybe. Maybe not. A modern engine with iron numbers like that would scare me shirtless, but I've seen pretty high iron numbers sustained indefinitely with no obvious ill effects in some old-school engines. I swear some of it gets in the oil directly from the block, heads, and all the other masses of iron in an engine like that. Yes, it could be cam and lifter wear, but they can tolerate a fair amount of wear for a long time before failure. It could also be something as innocuous as the oil pump itself or the timing chain and gears. He did say its a reman engine, so I also notice that the iron took a dip during the time he was using Rotella. Hmm.... maybe that extra ZDDP is worth it, eh? Sometimes I think UOA's just scare people more than they're worth. If this were my 4.0, I'd go back to Rotella and a Fram Ultra (or similar) and drive on. I might not want to set off cross-country until I saw those numbers come down a little, but I wouldn't hesitate to keep commuting with it. Oh, and I forgot to mention: I'd throw out the most recent analysis from any trend estimate, since he said he changed labs for that one. Notice that almost every component shifted somewhat in that last analysis, whereas the other analyses had iron and copper anomalies, but most everything else tracked with the type of oil changing. For tracking things from here on out, I'd go back to the same lab as the earlier analyses, if possible.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
7,998
The 4.0 does throw a lot of Iron, although that's a bit more than my '04 used to shed at that distance. It does look like from the bump in materials there was some sort of event for #5. Were there lots of winter starts, towing, or did something else happen during that interval?
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2003
Messages
25,181
Location
Apple Valley, California
The universal averages for the 4.0 is about 20ppm. Mine was always much lower than that. His iron is huge IMO and something is failing. If its a can once it gets past the hardening things grind up real fast
 
Joined
Jun 30, 2011
Messages
8,839
Location
Mahzurrah!
I can't speak the gloom and doom over this engine some are, this particular engine has always thrown high wear numbers ever since he started doing UOA's on it. I'd suggest returning to the Rotella 5w40 and the same lab, I bet the numbers will be pretty close to as before.
 

Donald

Thread starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
27,546
Location
Near the beach in Delaware
So what about my idea that going to a MicroGreen will remove the contaminants but the engine will still be wearing. The silicon is higher than I would like to see also.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,856
Location
Texas
Originally Posted By: Donald
So what about my idea that going to a MicroGreen will remove the contaminants but the engine will still be wearing. The silicon is higher than I would like to see also.
I doubt a filter would clean up your UOA, the particle sizes are just not in the same range that UOAs reveal. Silicon doesn't come from inside the engine except for gasket sealants... air intake tract leak? Loosing coolant into the oil?
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
14,898
Location
Indiana
Originally Posted By: Donald
I found the vacuum line to the cruise control servo had fallen off the intake manifold. So maybe that is the cause of high silicon and iron.
Is this the thing right behind the brake fluid reservoir?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top