2019 RAM 1500 Sport 5.7L - HPL "overkill" 0W-20 10,876km

[OVERKILL]

Sample #1 was M1 EP 0W-20
Sample #2 is the VOA (that they accidentally haven't flagged as the VOA, I've reached out to them to correct)
Sample #3 is my most recent run. This is the 2nd run of @High Performance Lubricants "overkill" 0W-20, but the first sample was damaged in the mail, so it was lost.

- TBN is lower and oxidation slightly higher than the Jeep UOA.
- Copper looks better than the Jeep, which makes sense, the truck has almost 4x the mileage on it.

Iron is 3.699ppm/1,000 miles, which is pretty typical for this engine family.

- Viscosity has increased by 1cSt, which makes sense, this oil probably has next to no VII in it.

 

[himemsys]

Am I reading this right? Copper is 5.16ppm per 1000 miles on the M1 sample, but 12.73ppm per 1000 miles on the HPL?

 

[fantastic]

10,876 Kilometers equals to 6,758 Miles for those that need a conversion. Sucks that they lost a sample in the mail. Baseline + 18 puts you at 1 over "Normal" range for Oxidation (18-20 Puts you into the "Elevated" category). Nitration is Normal not sure why they flagged it in Green. Copper is high for the run & Mobil is showing almost x3 times lower wear on the previous sample. 70% BN depletion is a spec above "Normal" & into the "Elevated" category.

Your Virgin oil Viscosity is 0.8 cST lower than the max cST for a 20 grade at 9.3. IMO allowing another 0.8 above the Minimum of a 30 weight would put you at 10.1 & I think that would be the condemnation point for viscosity. However, that would put you at 17,401.6 Kilometers or 10,812 Miles & put you well over the Oxidation limit I set below.

If you wanted to push this oil to right below "Abnormal" & put your oxidation at 22 over baseline that would allow you 13,292.88 Kilometers or 8,259 Miles

You could push your BN down to 2.23 & that would put you at 12,816.79 Kilometers or 7,963 Miles.

So, BN would limit you first, Oxidation Second, & Viscosity Third. You can find where you draw the line but since Oxidation is only an extra 476 Kilometers it shouldn't hurt BN that much.

Let's hope this is the last we hear of the oil sample lost in the mail though. Good run & thanks for sharing your oil tests.

 

[OVERKILL]

Am I reading this right? Copper is 5.16ppm per 1000 miles on the M1 sample, but 12.73ppm per 1000 miles on the HPL?

Copper is high for the run & Mobil is showing almost x3 times lower wear on the previous sample.

Totally normal with esters and this engine. This engine family throws copper, for quite a while, but it does it quite a bit worse with an oil with ester content. It will eventually settle down. My Jeep was 126ppm on the first sample (Ravenol) and 118ppm on the 2nd (HPL).

 

[OVERKILL]

Your Virgin oil Viscosity is 0.8 cST lower than the max cST for a 20 grade at 9.3. IMO allowing another 0.8 above the Minimum of a 30 weight would put you at 10.1 & I think that would be the condemnation point for viscosity. However, that would put you at 17,401.6 Kilometers or 10,812 Miles & put you well over the Oxidation limit I set below.

If you wanted to push this oil to right below "Abnormal" & put your oxidation at 22 over baseline that would allow you 13,292.88 Kilometers or 8,259 Miles

You could push your BN down to 2.23 & that would put you at 12,816.79 Kilometers or 7,963 Miles.

So, BN would limit you first, Oxidation Second, & Viscosity Third. You can find where you draw the line but since Oxidation is only an extra 476 Kilometers it shouldn't hurt BN that much.

Let's hope this is the last we hear of the oil sample lost in the mail though. Good run & thanks for sharing your oil tests.

I change it when the OLM hit 0%, this engine family runs pretty dirty, so it's not the best candidate for extending the drain intervals.

 

[RDY4WAR]

Am I reading this right? Copper is 5.16ppm per 1000 miles on the M1 sample, but 12.73ppm per 1000 miles on the HPL?

Copper is high for the run & Mobil is showing almost x3 times lower wear on the previous sample.

The copper isn't from wear. This is leaching of copper oxides from cleaning action. It settles down with subsequent samples.

If you were to take a penny, place it in a highly polar ester, heat it to ~200°F for several hours, and then sample the ester, ICP would show a lot of copper and zinc even though no abrasion nor corrosion is happening.

 

[fantastic]

The copper isn't from wear. This is leaching of copper oxides from cleaning action. It settles down with subsequent samples.

If you were to take a penny, place it in a highly polar ester, heat it to ~200°F for several hours, and then sample the ester, ICP would show a lot of copper and zinc even though no abrasion nor corrosion is happening.

Understood. I've heard the word here used when seeing these higher ester oils resulting in increased copper as Chelation?

 

[Slick3914]

I would say, for the average driver, Mobil 1 is more than sufficient

 

[KEVINK0000]

I'm going to get flamed for this.

My view:

In these Dodge engines, which slough off a fair amount of iron consistently in these UOA, and some (most) have chocolate valvetrains, I would go to a mineral 20w-50, like GTX, and see how the UOA results look. Since Overkill is up North, I would change that to Redline 5w-50, which has been known to me, and others, to be a very good oil for mitigating (yes, I said mitigating) undue wear issues in certain engines.

I think that amount of iron is too much, and efforts should be made to try to mitigate it. It may work, and it may not, but it would be worth a try, and would certainly not be detrimental in any way.

And let me state at the outset that I have seen wear show up in UOA. Not just here but elsewhere. It can be a lubricant guide, given certain caveats. That idea is torpedoed around here way too much, in my view.

I doubt Overkill will attempt this, or even consider it, but I am willing to wager $100 (for real) that if he did, the iron would drop to single digits on a similar OCI.

And since pigeonholing is so common here:

I am not a thickie, or some Neanderthal that thinks the old ways are best, I have seen beneficial effects of what I propose in certain engines with my own eyes. So have others.

Nomex on.

 

[Artem]

I’m willing to throw $100 into that bet bucket as well. Would be an interesting side by side.

 

[The Critic]

I’m willing to throw $100 into that bet bucket as well. Would be an interesting side by side.

I have never seen a UOA from any big block pushrod V8 with the wear rates being described.

 

[OVERKILL]

I doubt Overkill will attempt this, or even consider it

No, I won't, and I'm not. The ECM would also stroke-out because this would definitely throw a viscosity CEL.

This is also wild speculation about:
A) that the UOA PPM figures directly correlate with wear (they don't)
B) that an insanely heavy oil will reduce that figure
C) that B would result in lower actual wear, something that is only discernible via tear-down.

My 6.4L, on 0W-40 (so, considerably heavier, now, caveat that it has lower mileage and arguably probably still breaking-in) its most recent UOA was 4.93ppm/1,000 miles.

This engine family, the GM small blocks, the Ford large V8's...etc, they all throw more iron per 1,000 miles than most of the small bore V and inline engines.

The 3.699ppm/1,000 miles from this run compares well with these:

2016 Corvette, 20W-50, average 6.04ppm/1,000 miles in the most recent run:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...w50-118-mi-oci-10k-mi-c7-corvette-z06.370288/
Previous run was 6.12ppm/1,000 miles

2013 Cadillac CTS-V, M1 0W-40, 3.57ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...6k-mi-oci-150k-mi-2013-cadillac-cts-v.370284/

2010 Land Rover Range Rover, LM Synthoil 0W-40, 4.39ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...ange-rover-5-0-v8-naturally-aspirated.369743/

2022 Ford F-250 7.3L, 5W-20/0W-40 mix, 3.25ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...-0w-40-mix-4k-miles-22-f-250-7-3l-gas.368939/

2007 GMC Yukon 6.2L, various oils, various results, 4.8ppm/1,000 miles on 5W-40:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2007-gm-6-2l-w-186k-hpl-pd-0w20-w-3400.366806/

200? Honda S2000, Penrite 10W-40, 3.13ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...iles-1k-miles-on-penrite-racing-10w40.320914/

1995 Jeep XJ w/4.0L I6, M1 10W-30, 9.00ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/mobil-1-fs-10w-30-jeep-4-0l-3000mi-oci.364107/

2019 Kia Stinger, Motul Sport 5W40, 4.00ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/motul-5w40-1500-miles-1-track-day-kia-stinger.358807/

2016 GMC Suburban 5.3L, AMSOIL 0W-20, 3.02ppm/1,000 miles:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2016-suburban-amsoil-asl-0w-20-5-300-miles.360842/
Previous run was 4.33ppm/1,000 miles

 

[56Cummins]

Thread '2002 Tahoe 5.3L - HPL HDEO 10W-30 - 9,748 Miles' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2002-tahoe-5-3l-hpl-hdeo-10w-30-9-748-miles.345112/

1.74ppm/1000 miles

Post in thread 'Mobil 1 EP 5w-30 @ 13k mi; GM 5.3L 238k mi' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...30-13k-mi-gm-5-3l-238k-mi.319609/post-5628925

2ppm/1000 miles

It would be fun to try the same Overkill formula in a 30 or 40 wt. On you hemi.

 

[OVERKILL]

Thread '2002 Tahoe 5.3L - HPL HDEO 10W-30 - 9,748 Miles' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/2002-tahoe-5-3l-hpl-hdeo-10w-30-9-748-miles.345112/

1.74ppm/1000 miles

Yes, but his previous OCI was 4.12ppm/1,000 miles

Post in thread 'Mobil 1 EP 5w-30 @ 13k mi; GM 5.3L 238k mi' https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...30-13k-mi-gm-5-3l-238k-mi.319609/post-5628925

2ppm/1000 miles

That guy has a dual remote filter mount and has increased his sump volume to 9 quarts. Therefore, the iron is significantly diluted (lower PPM) than with a factory setup.

It would be fun to try the same Overkill formula in a 30 or 40 wt. On you hemi.

That's what the 0W-40 that's in my 6.4L is.

 

[KEVINK0000]

I didn't think you would do it, and your response indicates, again, that you do not see my point. You contradict yourself in your own post, and don't see it. Therefore debating this is fruitless.

If its a yes, then fine, and if its a no, then also fine. Its your engine. Either do it, or don't. Case closed. My offer still stands if you change your mind.

I'm not going to debate, however, as it always proves to be a waste of time on BITOG. If someone wants to look into what I am proposing, and the thought process behind it, with evidence, they can find it, on this site in fact, and elsewhere.

 

[Tachyon]

Like every boutique oil I've encountered, it serves the owner's ego more than their engine. In this instance, it underperformed compared to Mobil 1, even when considering that Mobil 1 faced severe fuel dilution. Why persist with it? Switch back to Mobil 1 and rest assured, knowing your engine is safeguarded by a proven lubricant.

 

[OVERKILL]

Like every boutique oil I've encountered, it serves the owner's ego more than their engine. In this instance, it underperformed compared to Mobil 1, even when considering that Mobil 1 faced severe fuel dilution. Why persist with it? Switch back to Mobil 1 and rest assured, knowing your engine is safeguarded by a proven lubricant.

Severe fuel dilution, were you drinking before writing this post?

 

[fantastic]

Severe fuel dilution, were you drinking before writing this post?

You may need to offer HPL's finest brew. Maybe they'll switch.

 

[Tachyon]

Severe fuel dilution, were you drinking before writing this post?

Let's keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand. Can you provide specific data or evidence to counter the claim about Mobil 1 being the better option for you? Personal remarks don't contribute to a constructive conversation. Let's stick to the facts and share knowledge for the benefit of all readers.

 

[OVERKILL]

Let's keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand.

That's rich coming from a guy whose first post in the thread claimed the choice of lubricant was driven by ego.

Can you provide specific data or evidence to counter the claim about Mobil 1 being the better option for you? Personal remarks don't contribute to a constructive conversation. Let's stick to the facts and share knowledge for the benefit of all readers.

You claimed there was severe fuel dilution, how about we start there? Pretty hard to have a constructive conversation when the person claiming this is their intent, invents operating conditions and makes claims about performance not supported by the data.