2007 Mazda CX-7, 2.3L Turbo, MotorCraft 5W-20

[Last_Z]

2007 Mazda CX-7, 2.3L Turbo
Oil: MotorCraft 5W-20
Air Filter: Original Mazda
Oil filter: Mazda replacement
Miles on the oil: 4404
Miles on vehicle: 9744


Here is the second report. Notice the Motorcraft 5W-20, which is a grade below the recomended 5W-30, held up extremely well, even after being diluted cosiderably by excessive fuel in the oil. Engine wear is the same even after more than twice the miles. The only thing I didn't like was the lead; which isn't high at all, but high compared to their averages, which is "0".
I will not panic about their comments on the insolubles as this interval was the "rinse" phase of an engine cleaning cycle from a product called Auto RX. One thing is certain, this engine is running way rich, likely as someone here stated, due to the direct injection system.
Also, I'm glad to see silicone (dirt) at this low level. I just recently chaged the air filter, and the air box was very dusty inside. It seems no major damage was done from dirt ingestion. I also removed the air deflector inside the air box and the baffle from the bottom of the box, opening up another entry point for the airflow. I hope that alleviates some of the fuel richness, increases power (which I think it may have) and gives me better mileage!

Bottom line is, engine is doing "ok" and Motorcraft 5W-20 is a great oil, even in this turboed SUV!

Anyway, enjoy!

 

[Auto-Union]

Vehicle has 9k and you are doing ARX rinse?

 

[blackdiamond]

I second the question.

 

[Last_Z]

Yes!

 

[JAG]

Not many oil enthusiasts seem to know it but fuel dilution chemically degrades the oil. Rinse phase of Auto-RX does not usually show higher insolubles. You went much longer than that but engine is quite new so there was not much if anything to clean out of it. So the Auto-RX even during long rinse phase is not cause of high insolubles, IMO. I think the oil was that degraded from the fuel dilution in combination with all else it had to go through in that engine. The bottom line is that I think if you keep getting results like these, you will have big problems later on as varnish/sludge develop. Use something like Pennzoil Platinum and shorten the OCI considerably the first time and get a UOA (with TBN) of it. Better yet, hire Terry Dyson.

 

[Last_Z]

-I know fuel breaks down oil.
-ARX suspends dirt and sludge in the oil, thus showing higher insolubles......otherwise, it would all stay stuck to the metal.
-I agree the oil was degraded from fuel dilution, per the viscosity and flash point. Insolubles could be the ARX suspending stuff in the oil and/or fuel related. Yes, new engines are dirty, otherwise your wear number would be great from day one!
-I agree fuel could cause a lot of wear and varnish down the road.
-Why change oil brands when MC did beautifully, despite the fact a lower grade (5W-20 vs recommended 5W-30) was used and 2% fuel was dumped in it? Oil isn't the problem here....fuel is.

You guys have to refrain from sending someone on a wild goose chase by switching oils for no reason. Again, oil is NOT the problem.

Bottom line: This is a turboed car with a "Central Injection System" that seems to be running very rich, likely washing the oil film past the piston rings. Either there is a mechanical problem or the PCM needs a new tune. I hope is the latter!

 

[Last_Z]

It seems the link crapped out. Here are the numbers!

Oil-------Havoline dino 5W-30, Motorcraft 5W-20 blend
Aluminum-----3----3
Chromium-----1----1
Iron---------17----18
Copper------107----72
Lead---------0----2
Tin-----------2----0
Molybdenum-374----44
Nickel--------0----0
Manganese---2----0
Silver--------0----0
Titanium-----0----0
Potassium---0----1
Boron-------49----105
Silicon------15----5
Sodium------0----3
Calcium----1618----1852
Magnesium--41----8
Phosphorus--758----622
Zinc---------903----768
Barium-------2----7

Viscosity: 49.1
Flashpoint: 330*F
Fuel: 2.0%
Antifreeze: 0%
Water: 0%
Insolubles: 0.6%

Blackstone comments: RICARDO: Wear generally improved after the longer oil run but insolubles were high. Insolubles were at limits and may show some sludge in the block. We suggest a few short oil runs (~2,500-3,000 miles) to wash the excess wear metals and insolubles from the system. Fuel was present at 2.0%, which is just into our cautionary range. This level may indicate a fuel system problem developing. Fuel likely caused the high insolubles and no other contaminants were found. Check back to monitor after a shorter oil run. Neither fuel nor insolubles should be this high.

 

[JAG]

There are many points I could make but it sounds like you have your mind made up already.

 

[Last_Z]

Please share your thoughts! I guess my point was, I've been around for a while, since 2002. At this point, I know what works and what doesn't. Sorry if I offended anyone!

If you notice, we share the same thoughts on the fuel problem. I think it is prudent to "wait and see." We differ in regards to the oil.

 

[JAG]

Examine other Auto-RX rinse UOAs and see if you think it significantly affects the insolubles. I've done it and say no. You decide yourself after looking at data. I like and use Auto-RX so am not biased against it or ignorant of it. When you did the treatment on the nearly new engine, there must have been next to no carbonaceous deposits which are the only thing that ARX can dislodge better than motor oil in general.

Fuel in oil at this level greatly increases the aging of the oil as said before. That aging causes insolubles to form when the base oil molecules are chemically reacted with. The additives are the first line of defense against the molecules in the fuel that want to react with the base oil. They achieve that by being more reactive than the base oil molecules are and by surrounding the offending molecules in micelles. But the additives can get used up and by the time a UOA or whatever shows signs of base oil degradation, the additives have long given up the fight. Some motor oils are more resistance to the attack that the fuel causes to the additives and base oil. It's cliche but true that these certain motor oils are the better performing synthetic oils that have both stronger additive packages and more chemically inert base oils. You are right that oil is not the source of the problem but a more appropriate oil can deal with the problem better by keeping the engine cleaner in the long term and allows for longer OCIs. Long terms loss of cleanliness increases wear and decreases performance and the conditions that cause it attack rubber parts such as valve seals.

 

[greenjp]

Why the 5W-20? Mazda calls for 5W-30 correct?

No TBN?

What's the average mileage on those universal averages?

Are there enough UOAs on this engine to make an educated guess about when break-in wear tapers off?

You seem quite enamored with the performance of the oil, but I'm not so sure. If it's done breaking in (can't really make any conclusions if it's not), you're looking at somewhat elevated iron and drastically elevated copper. Also, it's at the bottom end of the xW-20 viscosity range - in an engine the manufacturer says ought to be running xW-30.

Just some thoughts, I'm no expert

jeff

 

[Eddie]

I agree with greejp. Most modern engines take ~5,000 miles to fully stabilize the wear-in process. Most is accomplished in the first 1500 miles. I'd say this UOA looks pretty bad, especially the Cu and to a lessor but, still poor Fe level. Your vehicle to do with as you please of course but, I wouldn't used my new car to test oils other than those recommended. Ed

 

[Cicero]

"Notice the Motorcraft 5W-20, which is a grade below the recomended 5W-30, held up extremely well, even after being diluted cosiderably by excessive fuel in the oil."

If you had some TBN left then I might agree. I would get this number next time in case your fuel dilution remains high. Your TBN could have been seriously depleted.

 

[Max_Wander]

5w20 is too thin for this engine. Look at those numbers, youre chewing up your bearings!

 

[foxer]

I know its your car and all, but why change from what the manufacturer specifies? Especially if its still under warranty.

 

[sky jumper]

whatever you do, don't show this report to Mazda when you decide to complain about the fuel dilution problem. they will void your engine warranty. wrong viscosity, forbidden oil additives, and 7x normal bearing wear...

 

[Last_Z]

JAG,
I agree with your post. From what I've seen from other Mazda owners, these engines run very rich. Paired with Direct Injection, the oil can have a very rough time. MC 5W-20 did put up a good fight though. Wear is still very good!

greenjp,
MC 5W-20 was installed by the dealer.....likely because it's a Ford/Mazda dealer. See the connection?
No TBN!
I'm not enamored with anything. Just looking at the numbers: Copper was high, although much less than Havoline Dino 5W-30. All other wear is essentially the same, despite more than twice the miles and more gas in the oil. Lastly, as you stated.....not enough numbers to make a conclusion. Blackstone did not give me a mile number for their average.

Eddie,
If you say it's bad, then it is! Obviously you looked at everything except the actual report and Blackstone comments.
BTW, both rows of numbers are from this vehicle....neither is Blackstone's averages.

Cicero,
I'll likely do a TBN next time. I do doubt very much it was below 2.0.

You guys say the copper is high, but GM vehicles shed a lot of copper, just like this car has. GM vehicles shed copper up to the 50-60k mile mark. This vehicle has barely got 10k miles.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, READ ALL THE INFORMATION I'M GIVING YOU, OR DON'T POST AT ALL!


Again guys, boths rows of numbers are from this vehicle. I did not post blackstone's averages. Wear DID improve despite the longer mileage and the added fuel. The oil was installed by the dealer.....NOT ME!

 

[greenjp]

Whoa dude, if you don't want anything except "yes every conclusion you made is correct" responses than you shouldn't bother posting. Settle down, ditch the sarcasm, and open your mind up.

Ok, so the dealer for some reason installed 5W-20 when the manufacturer recommends 5W-30. My question still stands. Why? Has Mazda issued a TSB changing the recommendation?

What's the recommended OCI?

We don't have any information in this thread about the wear trend for this vehicle. Thus, you cannot just say "it did better than the previous fill of motorcraft" and dismiss concerns about the wear numbers. If the other vehicles that Blackstone got their 11 ppm Copper average from were showing 11 ppm at the 10k mark, then your values are cause for concern. If this car commonly shows high copper numbers through 40k or 50k (Honda V6s do this) then you're correct and there may be no issue. But we don't have that information! Heck I don't even know how many turbo 2.3 Mazdas are out there with mileage that high

Regardless, with a universal average of 11 ppm, I do not believe you can safely assume that this vehicle just sheds a lot of copper.

You agree with my statement that it's hard to make conclusions based on what we have here. Yet you're quite insistent that the wear is good and the oil performed great.

I've got no dog in this fight, just trying to point out that you've got a copper reading way above the UA which may be a cause for concern, and there's some crucial facts that we don't know here, and thus we shouldn't be jumping to conclusions - either "this oil's no good for this car" or "this oil is great!".

I second the recommendation to ask Terry for his thoughts. It'd be $15 or whatever well spent.

jeff

 

[Last_Z]

greenjp,

-I answered to your post specifically "without" sarcasm or ill intended responses. My comments in bold and caps were meant for others who don't read "all" the information. You made those comments your own!

-I don't believe I was sarcastic or anything of that matter....I guess I was wrong!

-In case you don't know (no sarcasm) Ford uses 5W-20 in most their vehicles. Since the dealer is a Ford AND Mazda dealer, they likely order bulk 5W-20 and use it for everything.

-Again, you guys are not reading the information. It did better than the previous fill of HAVOLINE 5W-30 with less than half the miles and less gas in it. COCLUSION: THIS vehicle, and this vehicle only has improved its wear rate. Wear is indeed DROPPING!

-This vehicle can NOT be compared to Blackstone's averages. This vehicle is still in the break-in process, thus the higher levels of metals. Many vehicles don't settle until they reach 30-60k miles. It is a Mazda afterall, not a Toyota, which usually settle after 5-10k miles.

-The only value flagged by Blackstone was lead at 2ppm and obviously Fuel, Viscosity, Insolubles and Flash point. All degraded by the excessive fuel. WEAR wise, it is not a bad report compared to the previous one.

-There are many 2.3L Mazdas out there; but NOT very many 2.3L TURBO with "Direct Injection" Mazdas. This alone invalidates Blackstones averages for this engine.

-I insist in the wear is good "compared" with the previous smaple of Havoline 5W-30. I am not referring to other vehicles.

 

[blackdiamond]

The dealer put 5w-20 in my Speed 3 (same basic engine) even though the owners manual calls for 5w-30. My wife made them switch it out and when I spoke later with the service manager we determined that the online application that the techs reference was wrong for my engine. He said the only reason they stocked 5w-30 was for the turbo engines. I know service managers are not "gods" but he did agree with the owners manual and admitted there was an error.