2002 Toyota Tacoma V6

[Scooby]

2002 Toyota Tacoma 4wd
3.4V6/ 5 speed
80% highway (50 mile one way commute every third day)
Mobil 1 5w30 SuperSyn
WIX 51516 (slightly oversized) filter
Ran this interval to 7500 miles (plus a few) to see if 7500 was a POSSIBLE interval. What do you guys think. Still waiting on Terry's personal analysis.

code:

---

Total Miles 17,435 22,887 28,112 35,973

Interval Miles 5,557 5,452 5,225 7,861



ALUMINUM 3 3 3 4

CHROMIUM 0 0 0 0

IRON 12 9 7 9

COPPER 48 21 12 9

LEAD 9 7 5 8

TIN 0 3 1 0

MOLY 59 70 72 73

NICKEL 0 1 0 1

MANGANESE 0 0 0 0

SILVER 0 0 0 0

TITANIUM 0 0 0 0

POTASSIUM 0 2 0 0

BORON 123 145 137 114

SILICON 19 17 17 18

SODIUM 8 7 7 5

CALCIUM 2996 3341 2931 3392

MAGNESIUM 14 20 23 17

PHOSPHORUS 718 789 767 740

ZINC 912 988 871 1038

BARIUM 0 0 0 0



VISCOSITY 59.2 64.6 63.2

FLASHPOINT 445 375 385

FUEL
ANTIFREEZE 0 0 0

WATER 0 0 0

INSOLUBLES .5 .3 .4



TBN 9.2 NR 2.7

---

Seems like my truck likes the 5-6k intervals better from the way the TBN looks.

Any opinions welcome

[ January 15, 2004, 10:30 AM: Message edited by: Scooby ]

 

[TooSlick]

If you keep the EOT (end of test) TBN at or above 4.0, the engine willl stay extremely clean indefinitely. That's what I'd recommend, even though the wear rates are still excellent after 7500 miles ....

Another great Toyo motor!

Ted

 

[Alan]

I think the TBN ain't dead yet.Really not bad UOA at all considering the milage

.

 

[Scooby]

Didnt let me edit to post dates. See below:

code:

---

Total Mileage: 17,435 22,887 28,112 35,973

Interval miles: 5,557 5,452 5,225 7,861

Date: 3/19/03 6/11/03 9/08/03 1/06/04

time in svc: ? 84 days 89 days 120 days

---

 

[Jay]

Look at the big range of flashpoints for the same oil in the same engine doing the same service for about the same intervals. It makes me wonder how repeatable this test is.

 

[Al]

These are fine reports. I think the 10w30 would be a slightly better choice in GA. Even though your silicon is not high and per mile has dropped-I would check the air intake/filter/duct from filter to the intake manifold. At 2.6 TBN is OK it might have a bit to do with the colder weather, insolubles, or silicon.

But still-good reports and a nice organized post. I think it really helps to see trends like this.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
I agree with the comments of others on here regarding the TBN result

We should not even get too excited with a TBN in the 1.5 (D4739) region - just change the oil then

If a TBN is above 2 (D4739) or 3 (D2896) the oil will still be servicable until it reaches around those numbers as a minumum. These numbers "live" for most diesel engines so are certainly conservative enough for petrol engines

The overall result looks excellent

Regards

 

[Spector]

IMO you can stay with the 7500 mile OCI. Results good, some TBN left wear is excellent.

 

[Robbie Alexander]

To me, the chicken here, I'd say for sure a 6K oil and most likely I may even go to 7K, but I donno about the 7500 level. Youre change may be more at the 6800-7000 level if it were just up to me.

I note how the trend is down all the way til the last on the more extended drain... But what do I know. I just hang out here.

Nice numbers, I just like more safty. I can not afford to risk anything here and my results take about 3 weeks, so my the time I get them I've put on another several K.
Once youre up and running, you may just set a schedule and sample at drain.

 

[Scooby]

Thanks for the input. My plan was to change right at 7500, but I didn't get a chance until nearly 7900 miles.

My plan is on next change to try some Delvac 1...maybe. Depends on if I can get it pretty conveniently.

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
If you keep the EOT (end of test) TBN at or above 4.0, the engine willl stay extremely clean indefinitely. That's what I'd recommend, even though the wear rates are still excellent after 7500 miles ....

Another great Toyo motor!

Ted

---

Ted,
Let's run a quick comparo:

code:

---

Ajax's LS1 (5.7L) Scooby's Toyota (3.4L)

Miles on oil: 3,994 7861

-Copper 36 (9.01ppm/1k) 9 (1.14/1k)

-Iron 5 (1.25/1k) 9 (1.14/1k)

-Chromium 0 0

-Aluminum 3 (0.75/1k) 4 (0.50/1k)

-Lead 3 (0.75/1k) 8 (1.01/1k)

---

Ok...there are the numbers in ppm/1000 miles:

-The Toyota has the LS1 beat on the copper department. It is widely known that LS1s shed a lot of copper in the first 40-50k miles and then begin to stabilize. Notice how the Toyota ALSO has the same symptoms.
-The iron is ever so slightly higher in the LS1, but considering it is much bigger than the Toyo, I would give the advantage to the LS1.
-The chromium is 0 for both engines......I would consider this another win for the LS1.....since it is much bigger.
-Aluminum is almost identical.....Advantage LS1 due to size??
-The lead is ever so slightly lower in the LS1......does it sound better considering size?

As you can see, many GMs wear as well and sometimes better than your beloved Toyotas. You bashed GM, and I believe you are partially right; but you and JB have gone as far as to totally dismiss their engines.

No "emotions or hand waving" here.....these are FACTS and real data.
You haven't answered my other posts.....and neither has JB. Did I uncover your bias?

What say you?

Rick

 

[Last_Z]

Scooby,

I mean no disrispect to you and do not intend on putting your car down. I also believe it is a very good report. My post is just a simple comparison, just to see how bad GM vehicles sux.

Rick

 

[JohnBrowning]

LastZ, What other post are you talking about that I have not answered?

I think that your use of displacement is as decideing factor is not accurate. Wear rate is not a linear function of displacement! We see this with the Toyota and Lexus V8's wich tend to generate better wear numbers then their smaller V6 and I4 engines! We have also seen Gen I and II small blocks of larger displacemnt then the 5.3 Gen III with lower wear numbers then the Gen III block.

What you are trying to do is like saying that a man that has lived 120 years and is 5 foot tall is not as old as a man that is 100 years old and 6 foot tall. So the 6 foot tall mans years are actualy longer?????? PPM per 1000 miles is either valid or it is not. You can not have a weighted curve based on displacement no more then you can have a weighted curve for age in years based on height!

We all have some bias. If not for bias we would have "group think" and that would be boreing! I am biased towards vechiles that last longer then I want to own them with out the need for constant parts replacement!

Ajax's used oil analysis is one of the best LS1 used oil analysis we have seen and not typical of most of them! If you want pull out a ringer then you must do the same with Toyotas. I doubt you really want to go head to head with the V6 Sieana running Redline 5W30. It is also important to compare used oil analysis of like millage. We know that the first 3000-4000 miles most TOyotas show next to no wear and most of it seems to accumulate rapidly from 4000-7500 miles into the OCI.

P.S. I think that your Carollas used oil analysis of 6000 miles pretty much speaks volumes for Toyotas engine considering this is a C.A.F.E. car !

[ January 15, 2004, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: JohnBrowning ]

 

[TR3-2001SE]

It is a fairly good report for those miles. I don't like to see the lead quite so high and I think the Mobil 1 10w30 would give you slightly better results. Should be fine in GA.

 

[Last_Z]

TS,
I agree with you that this country, for the most part, CAN NOT build a 4 cylinder engine worth a crap. What I am saying is that in the big motor segment (their specialty, IMO), domestic engines are mostly good to very good, reliability wise.
The bottom line I've been trying to get accross for a few days now is: If it lasts 150-200k miles or more, then it's a good engine, regardless of what wear metals look like. Having said that, there are thousands of domestic engines with much more than 200k miles.

Rick

 

[Scooby]

No offense guys, but what does all this have to do with my Tacoma? Sounds like a couple of you are having an issue other than my truck.

Any other opinions or thoughts on my truck are welcomed.

 

[Last_Z]

scooby,
Yes we are having other issues. Sorry to have hijacked you thread

 

[Last_Z]

A Toyota shows good wear and and everybody bows......an LS1 shows good wear, and it must have been a fluke....or it was driven easier.....or it wasn't cold outside...or so and so.
Same scenario is played with Redline oils......excuses are always made for this oil and everybody accepts it.
My point is that you and TS are not giving credit when it is due. Even if you exclude engine size, which I believe is a factor, the LS1 report still is at least as good as the Toyota's

The post I was referring to is the one where you stated that the Corvette that made it to 317k miles and still going was a fluke. You know very well that is just ridiculous!!
Lots of people have posted their mileage on GM, Ford and Chrysler vehicles way past 200k miles and you still ignore that.
You can show me a beautiful report, but what really counts is that the vehicle makes it past 150-200k miles......and it is not unsual one bit for a GM to go that far and much more.

My wife's Corolla calls for 5w30.....what does CAFE have to do with longevety? I'm not following you.

 

[Last_Z]

BTW, this is the thread I'm referring to:

Thread


I can't find the one where you say GMs with high mileage are flukes

 

[TooSlick]

Engine wear is normally a function of both the rpm range of the engine and mean piston speeds.

For example, the average piston speeds, and number of valvetrain wear cycles in a long stroke, 2.0L/SOHC VW engine, cruising @ 3000 rpms; instead of a big V-8 cruising @ 2000 rpms, are 2-3 times higher. Yet these VW/Audi engines easily last for 200k-250k miles.

Four cylinder domestic engines are 5-10 years behind the best Japanese and European designs ....Ford and GM clearly realize this - why do you think they bought Volvo and SAAB, respectively?