2004 Saab 9-3 Amsoil SSO 14433mi

[JHZR2]

This is my run of Amsoil SSO in my 2004 Saab 9-3. The car sees almost 100% highway use, year round. I changed it when the OLM recommended, just like the Mobil1 0w-40 before it.

Code:




Unit Age 46716 32283m 16883m 11193 8482m

Comp Age 46716 32283m 16883m 11193 8482m

Time on Oil 14433 15400m 5690m 11193 8482m

Time on Fltr 14433 15400m 5690m 2711 8482m

Fluid Amsoil SSO M1 0w-40 Mobil 1 0w-40 Elf Evo0w-30 Elf Evo 0w-30

Fe 13 14 9.8 38 38

Cr 0 0.5 0.2 1.1 0.8

Ni 0 0.6 0.2 1.2 1

Ti 0 0 0 0.3 0

Ag 0 0 0 0 0

Al 4 3.8 3.3 6.9 2.4

Pb 2 2.3 1.3 7.9 9.3

Cu 2 1.7 1.4 8.9 9.3

Sn 0 1.1 1.2 7.7 5.2

Si 9 9.3 4 51 60

Na 12 6.2 4.8 9.6 6.7

K 0 0.6 1.4 13 13

B 18 131 128 160 199

Ba 0 0 0 3 3.1

Mo 5 78 58 1.8 0.7

Mg 17 25 32 227 230

Ca 2883 2910 2355 2962 3235

P 622 891 799 1089 974

Zn 818 966 869 1105 1095

S N/A 2655 2349 3816 3665

Cd 0 0 0 0.2 0.2

Mn 0 0 2.1 18 18

V 0 0 0 0 0

Sb 0 0 0 0 0

Soot(%) 0 0 0 0 0

Nitr(PA) N/A 136 80 100 70

ZDDP -0.07 -0.07 -0.05 -0.05

TBN 7.19 8.31

TAN 3

Kv@100°C 10.53 12.9 11.4 10.1 9.24

White Metal NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Babbitt NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Precipitate NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Silt NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Debris NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Dirt NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE

Appearance NORML NORML NORML NORML NORML

Odor NORML NORML NORML NORML NORML

H2O(Emul) NEG NEG NEG NEG NEG

H2O(Free) NEG NEG NEG NEG NEG

 

[KLowD9x]

Was there a decimal removed in the iron readings for the Elf oils!?

 

[JHZR2]

Nope. The elf oil was breakin from the factory. Funny that Fe didn't increase from the one UOA to the other... while other wear metals increased.

 

[pzev]

You seemed to have had good luck with the SSO and the M1. How much was the SSO? I say go with the cheapest.

 

[pickled]

Hey was that your first TAN analysis? I have no idea of what the virgin TAN of SSO is...I just know the TBN of 13+ is stout. All and all I'd say this vehicle's engine will run forever if you keep feeding it the SSO and/or M1. I'd give the SSO one more interval to let the chemistry stabilize.

 

[JHZR2]

I agree that I should have - but I had GC to use, so Im running that.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: pickled
Hey was that your first TAN analysis?


The services I use, wearcheck and Napa seem to interchangeably do TBN or TAN. I request TBN specifically, but do not always get it. That annoys me a lot...

 

[addyguy]

Nice numbers - if you do another UOA, it will be interesting to see the comparo between M1 0W-40, SSO, and GC. So far, M1 and SSO seem to be dead even.....

 

[JoeFromPA]

Look at the M1 0w40 TBN after a 15k run. I don't think that's right.

 

[JHZR2]

I would agree, but look also at the reading for the Elf factory fill after 11k miles... 8.31.

Perhaps it has something to do with the method that wearcheck uses?

 

[JoeFromPA]

It's interesting...I find these results almost completely meaningless to me (sorry JHZ, just my opinion). There is some information, but it's not much.

Wear metal analysis is almost useless unless the same oil is used consecutively on a broken in engine in good tune, and the results so far here have used several different oils and the initial 2-3 results were not fully broken in.

The TBN is provided, but it seems tremendously out of whack vs the known beginning TBNs of these oils. TAN is sometimes provided, but without TBN. Nitration is sometimes provided.

Insolubles? Flashpoint? Fuel?

So what am I learning when I look at these analyses....a brand new engine is spitting off normal levels of wear metals (i.e. there are no ridiculous spikes in anything). That's normal and expected, not exactly needed to be done by UOA.

How's the oil doing? I'm not so sure. Seems to have done fine for as long as it's run. Could it be run longer? Maybe. According to the TBN, you should be able to run that M1 0w40 for 25,000 miles. Who knows how the SSO is doing, but the TAN is not too high.

Just my .02 after looking at this more...

 

[JHZR2]

IMO, trends ARE indeed very important, and there are lots of variables that can play within the noise and +/-5ppm, however, even multi-variable UOAs with multiple changes still give you an idea of what as a whole is good.

Across all the engines we see here, and all the oils we see, scientific or not, and correct or not in the big scheme, it seems that we can all make the comment of what seems to be good or not good based upon similar data. Is it 100% right? likely not, but it offers insight based upon what we know as relative ranges. It is no different than saying that $2/gallon of gas is cheap, $3/gallon is a little high, and $4/gallon is expensive.

I agree that the job that wearcheck does is lacking in some regards. That said, if I see no consumption, viscosity is within range and wear metals are all within check, do I care that much?

 

[pickled]

I like the wearcheck report formats. Are they registered to ISO17025?? Just wondering because if they are they would be a decent lab to use.

 

[buster]

Looks good. I would personally stay with the M1 0w-40. Can't beat that oil for the price.

 

[buster]

Sticking with the SSO is a good idea. SSO has a starting tbn of 13.2 vs 11.5 for the M1 so I'd expect the SSO to hold up a bit longer.

 

[Jax_RX8]

Conflicted, we are.

Cake or Pie?

 

[JHZR2]

Problem with the SSO is that it is not ACEA A3 rated, lt along GM-LL-025-A rated. Those are what saab specs. Seems to be OK, at least wear-wise using the SSO, though of course I do not know that there wasnt varnishing or gumming up at the turbo bearings.

The other thing is that I drive conservatively trying for best fuel economy. For people who slam the go pedal and don't really care about economy or physics, this may not be the right oil for them... they probably should have an A3 rated oil, since they will be spooling the turbo more often, etc.

 

[Saab9000]

Looks like the oil sheared to a 30w, but thats typical with Saabs, apparently they are tough on viscosity. My 9k has essentially the same motor as yours and the oil generally shears one grade. The only time it didn't shear is when I used Rotella Syn.

Definitely keep using an X-40w oil. If you start with a 30 it will shear to 20w, probably not good.

 

[Jax_RX8]

Originally Posted By: Saab9000
Looks like the oil sheared to a 30w, but thats typical with Saabs, apparently they are tough on viscosity. My 9k has essentially the same motor as yours and the oil generally shears one grade. The only time it didn't shear is when I used Rotella Syn.

Definitely keep using an X-40w oil. If you start with a 30 it will shear to 20w, probably not good.


SSO is a 30 weight, and stayed in grade. M1 0W40 does tend to shear back a little to around low 40 weight over the OCI, but not bad.

 

[JHZR2]

Yeah, the M1 0w-40 is known to shear down a bit, and SSO stayed solid in grade.

The engine in my 9-3 is a 2.0L ecotec-derived turbo (207L), and I think it would be quite different from the engine in a 9000????