2008 Ford F-250 10,028 miles Shell Rotella T 5W40

Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
50
Location
DFW
2008 Ford F-250 6.4L 10,028 miles on oil, 20110 on engine, 1qt. Makeup Oil Factory oil/filter changed at 5k w/ Mobil 15w40 and this oil was put in at 10,028 miles. There is no DPF filter on this truck, so there are no regens. The truck does run a tune to disable the regens, but it is not raced, hot-rodded, etc. There was about 1,000 miles or 10% towing a 12k 5th wheel. Comments on the Aluminum, Iron, Potassium, and Silicon? Blackstone told me the potassium could be from the solider flux in the EGR cooler and that it should go down. The sodium levels are low, so they don't suspect coolant. From my calculations, the aluminum is lower than the universal averages, but the Iron is higher. I will check the air intake and filter, for a leaking connection. The air filter is original, but according to Ford doesn't need replacement until the "filter minder" says??? I put more Rotella 5w40 Synthetic in and plan to run another 10k and sample. I won't go past the 10k oil changes as this is a requirement of Ford's warranty. Blackstone Comments: Universal averages show typical wear levels for the 6.4L PSD at ~4,400 miles on the oil. Aluminum and iron counts suggest excess wear at pistons and cylinders. Note: iron typically tracks directly with miles on the oil, and since this oil was run more than twice average, this can account for much of the excess iron. Potassium is likely from the EGR cooler, and it's harmless in that form. Silicon could be dirt, so checking air filtration is suggested. The 6.0 TBN (1.0 is low) shows lots of active additive left. Stay at 10K mi next fill; if wear improves, we'll suggest a longer oil run then. UOA/Univ. Averages Aluminum: 19/12 Chromium: 2/1 Iron: 83/28 Copper: 3/2 Lead: 5/2 Tin: 1/1 Moly: 63/20 Nickel: 1/1 Manganese: 1/0 Silver: 0/0 Titanium: 0/0 Potassium: 41/13 Boron: 30/60 Silicon: 21/8 Sodium: 5/3 Calcium: 948/1816 Magnesium: 1200/169 Phosphorus: 1055/899 Zinc: 1375/1098 Barium: 1/2 SUS Viscosity @ 210: 73.2 - 66-78 (Values Should Be) cSt Viscosity @ 100: 13.78 - 11.9 - 15.3 Flashpoint: 425/>410 Fuel%: <.5/<2.0 Antifreeze: 0/0 Water: 0/<.1 Insolubles: .3/<.8 TBN 6.0
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
80
Location
princeton fl
I see coolant leaking into engine, in all the UOA posted from the 6.4 including both of mine. Javier For instance, sodium, boron, potassium and silicon are commonly found in antifreeze formulations (Figure 8). In order to know specifically which additive elements and their concentrations are found in new or used antifreeze (included blends containing SCAs), a sample could easily be analyzed in the same way as used oils. Of the different compounds that make up antifreeze additives, sodium and potassium compounds are the most stable, even though there is risk that they will precipitate and be removed by the filter. Boron presents a risk of evaporating at typical crankcase sump temperatures, while silicon from a coolant leak may be confused with dirt ingression or oil antifoam additive. See the sidebar for developing a calibration curve for glycol contaminant levels using sodium against various antifreeze concentrations. Quoting again from the report by the Fleetguard division of Cummins Engine, “Oil samples will sometimes have several hundreds parts per million sodium, yet there will be no moisture or glycol present. The amount of sodium indicates that at least a gallon of coolant has leaked into the crankcase, but there is no sign of it (other than the sodium).” Cummins summarizes by saying, “Our experience is that the most reliable indicator of coolant leakage is the sodium level of the filter paper ash followed by the level of the sodium in the oil.” Due to the loss of sodium from oil consumption or by insoluble sodium captured by the oil filter (80 to 90 percent of the total sodium that has leaked into the crankcase in some instances), an increase in sodium in the oil by as little as 50 ppm can mean as much as one gallon of coolant has leaked into a 10 gallon (38 L) lube oil system. When a sudden increase in sodium is observed, the analyst needs to be aware of other common sources. These include: salt and saltwater, grease, dirt, fly ash, sodium hydroxide, etc. For this reason, other members of the coolant additive family may be needed to confirm the contaminant is antifreeze, such as boron, potassium, silicon and phosphorous, bearing in mind that some of these elements may also be oil additives. Limits and Alarms Setting alarms and limits for glycol is difficult because of the different oil analysis instruments in use and the transient states of glycol in the lubricant. To the extent that the analyst can confirm a coolant leak, no matter how small, the matter is of serious concern. However, false positives can occur if the alarm limits are set too low for the reasons previously discussed. Likewise, if the alarms are set too high, the actual coolant leakage levels could be several times higher than the measured amounts and the engine may be dangerously close to catastrophic failure. In the case where false positives occur as a result of new oil chemistry associated with additive manufacturing and base oil refining, the interferences that cause these false positives often burn off during service. Hence a new reference oil or an oil placed into service a short period of time may test positive for glycol, then later test negative. When a false positive due to oil chemistry occurs in labs that report the result of a glycol test (Schiff’s reagent, FTIR and GC) they are typically bound to place a positive indication on the report. However, based on their review of other indicators (including coolant additive elements) as previously discussed, the analyst commenting on the oil analysis data should emphasize that the positive glycol result is not a cause for concern. Some labs use the approach of reporting coolant or antifreeze contamination instead of glycol to eliminate this potential cause for unwarranted concern. The same principle holds true in the case of a negative glycol test where its presence is disguised by the fact that it has converted to by-products. Looking at other indicators such as sodium and potassium, the analyst should report a positive for coolant contamination despite the fact that no actual glycol was detected. In such instances, the lab analyst is making a contamination entry determination based on review of multiple factors. In general, glycol above 200 ppm in most cases is considered reportable. Levels greater than 400 ppm should be regarded as significant and levels as high as 1,000 ppm flagged as critical. source http://oilanalysis.com/article_detail.asp?articleid=193
 

scottjima

Thread starter
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
50
Location
DFW
The VOA from this oil shows the following: UOA/VOA Sodium - 5/4 Boron - 30/61 Potassium - 41/1 Silicon - 21/3 My coolant level dropped about 1" in the degaus tank, when the truck was very new. I believe there was air in the system because I topped it off and marked it and it hasn't dropped any more. My oil level was getting close to the add line when I changed it, so it is actually burning some oil. Your truck w/ the bad turbo and gummed up oil had much higher sodium levels. I really don't think here is coolant in my oil, but I will resample in another 10k, or perhaps after two changes in 20k.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
418
Location
San Diego, California
 Originally Posted By: scottjima
My coolant level dropped about 1" in the degaus tank, when the truck was very new. I believe there was air in the system because I topped it off and marked it and it hasn't dropped any more.
My same issue and result. I will be sampling every 2,500mi to keep an eye on things. I'm not one to concern myself with extended runs on my oil. $100 a year for an oil change is easy to handle. Any real damage is my fault anyway. The Maxxforce7 was only designed for 250hp IIRC. Ford took it and slapped sequential turbos on it for 350. Now I am probably ~600 at the crank. Thanks for the UOA scottjima.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
47,452
Location
Ontario, Canada
The Maxxforce 7 is 300HP for the 2010 MY, so not THAT far off ;\) Ford did the same thing with the VT365 (minus the sequential turbos of course).
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
418
Location
San Diego, California
 Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
The Maxxforce 7 is 300HP for the 2010 MY, so not THAT far off ;\)
Interesting. They must have uprated it recently. I had the old sheet that showed 230hp and 620ft/lbs as the max. Thanks for the update!
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
47,452
Location
Ontario, Canada
 Originally Posted By: Jim_Truett
 Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
The Maxxforce 7 is 300HP for the 2010 MY, so not THAT far off ;\)
Interesting. They must have uprated it recently. I had the old sheet that showed 230hp and 620ft/lbs as the max. Thanks for the update!
They did. They have '07 and '10 numbers for it on internationaldelivers.com and the '07 numbers match the ones you cited.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
47,452
Location
Ontario, Canada
 Originally Posted By: scottjima
Anybody have comments on the high Iron, Aluminum, and Potassium numbers?
With only 20K on it, some of it may be break-in wear.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
259
Location
Richmond, VA
x2 on the break-in wear. Fe and Al could also be from added stress or overfueling at a particular engine speed and load due to the tune. My cousin was running an "economy tune" on his 7.3PSD and it too created some unusual wear, local PSD guru attributed the wear to the tune injecting fuel a little earlier than optimal. The extra advanced injection timing created higher stress loads on the skirts and cylinder walls. Bought a differnt tune and all is well now. I will try to email him for the brand/name of the tune he was running.
 

scottjima

Thread starter
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
50
Location
DFW
thanks for the replies. I don't want to give up the tune as it is giving me an additional almost 2mpg, and is much more fun to drive. I don't really go adound gunning it, but it is nice to pass people up a 6% grade with a load and no downshfting...
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
18,449
Location
East of IGO
 Originally Posted By: scottjima
thanks for the replies. I don't want to give up the tune as it is giving me an additional almost 2mpg, and is much more fun to drive. I don't really go adound gunning it, but it is nice to pass people up a 6% grade with a load and no downshfting...
Do you moniter the ehaust gas temps?
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
418
Location
San Diego, California
 Originally Posted By: Steve S
Do you moniter the ehaust gas temps?
I have on mine. The DashDaq unit reads directly from the OBD-2 port, and the EGRTA signal is a thermocouple on the crossover pipe that connects the two exhaust manifolds to the turbos and EGR system. Average driving with the Spartan 210 runs 750 to 850*F. Pulling 13,500# up a 3% grade and maintaining 70mph I was at 950-1000*. I had to step into it pretty hard to hit my self imposed towing limit of 1250*. The 210 defuels for safety, my 275 does not. I can hit 1650+ with that one pretty quickly.
 

scottjima

Thread starter
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
50
Location
DFW
Sorry for the delay. I've been up in the Colorado mountains! Left yesterday morning at 30 degrees and returned today to 97! Anyway, I do monitor the temps, just as Jim Truett mentioned. I typically see 400 cruising with no load. I did see 600+ running 70 - 75 up some steep grades on our trip. This was with 1000 pounds in the bed and no trailer. I've see 1000 - 1200 with my 5th wheel maintaining 65 up a 5% - 6% grade into a 30mph headwind. FWIW, my understanding is that the regen process produces exhaust gas temps about 1000 degrees with no load at all... I do try to keep mine well under 1000, and the saftey measures is the main reason I run the 210 tune.
 
Top