2021 Lexus ES300h FF Toyota oil for 10188 miles

[deven]

Factory fill 0w16 Toyota oil ran from February to August for 10,188 miles. Oil was changed at the dealership since it was a free service and assuming the new oil is Toyota 0w16. 90% is city driving.

So far the car has been great. Been getting anywhere from 52-55mpg and this is the first year Toyota has used the lithium ion battery in the ES.

 

[UG_Passat]

Cue the people that are going to tell you that your engine will burn oil with 10,000 mile OCI

 

[Imp4]

It's not worth while to get a baseline UOA before 2-3 full OEM recommended OCI's because the data is clouded by remnants from the manufacturing process.
This UOA is a great example of why that is the case.

 

[deven]

It's not worth while to get a baseline UOA before 2-3 full OEM recommended OCI's because the data is clouded by remnants from the manufacturing process.
This UOA is a great example of why that is the case.

Doing a UOA has just become a hobby of mine so I just do it every oil change.

 

[Imp4]

Doing a UOA has just become a hobby of mine so I just do it every oil change.

That's great that it is your hobby and I hope that you enjoy it.
My point was that the UOA data from the first 2-3 full OEM recommended intervals is not valid as a baseline nor should that data be used as a justification to take any kind of action.

YMMV.

 

[ad244]

Doing a UOA has just become a hobby of mine so I just do it every oil change.

You run 0w10 in your Camry?

 

[UG_Passat]

You run 0w10 in your Camry?

Probably meant 0w-20

 

[deven]

That's great that it is your hobby and I hope that you enjoy it.
My point was that the UOA data from the first 2-3 full OEM recommended intervals is not valid as a baseline nor should that data be used as a justification to take any kind of action.

YMMV.

I totally agree with you. That's why I like to do UOAs so I can trend them. Honestly FF UOAs are meaningless in my opinion.

 

[deven]

You run 0w10 in your Camry?

Well I did until I traded it in for the Lexus. The next oil change this car will get 4 quarts of Royal Purple XPR 0w20 and 1 leftover quart of 0w10 RP XPR.

 

[deven]

Probably meant 0w-20

It wasn't a typo. I'm comfortable using thin oils.

 

[UG_Passat]

Royal Purple doesn't list a 0w10 for the XPR oil on their website

 

[deven]

Royal Purple doesn't list a 0w10 for the XPR oil on their website

You are correct. It's a discontinued viscosity. You can still find it on eBay though.

 

[himemsys]

That's great that it is your hobby and I hope that you enjoy it.
My point was that the UOA data from the first 2-3 full OEM recommended intervals is not valid as a baseline nor should that data be used as a justification to take any kind of action.

YMMV.

I think he was just sharing results. Not looking to "take any kind of action." Would you rather people didn't post their UOAs until they were fully out of the break-in period?

 

[Imp4]

I think he was just sharing results. Not looking to "take any kind of action." Would you rather people didn't post their UOAs until they were fully out of the break-in period?

People can do whatever they want.
My point was that the data is useless because it is confounded by external uncontrolled variables.

It can't be used to establish trends.
It can't be used to diagnose issues.
But it can be misinterpreted by those that don't notice that it's a FF UOA.

So if bad data is your thing then I guess it's a good thing.

This is not an indictment of the OP or his intentions, it was only meant to point out the reality of the circumstances.

 

[dnewton3]

People can do whatever they want.
My point was that the data is useless because it is confounded by external uncontrolled variables.

It can't be used to establish trends.
It can't be used to diagnose issues.
But it can be misinterpreted by those that don't notice that it's a FF UOA.

So if bad data is your thing then I guess it's a good thing.

This is not an indictment of the OP or his intentions, it was only meant to point out the reality of the circumstances.

I disagree with your assessment, but more so on technicalities.

UOAs are useful for many reasons. But the data which is gleaned from the UOA needs to be properly delineated in context.

FF UOAs generally are going to show large amounts of residual metals from machining fragments, etc. Also the silicone sealers present in most all new assemblies will show up as Si and be confounded with silica. These issues we all know. This isn't, however, as you call it, "bad data". Rather, it's data which has little use. If we wanted to know the marco analysis means and std devs for this engine series FF (which I don't know why we would), this data would be incredibly helpful as a contribution.

I am on board in that FF UOAs have little use; this is pretty much true.

I don't agree that this is "bad data". Bad data to those of us who do statistical analysis is data which is tainted by improper set-ups, errant processing, mistaken anomalies which result in skewed results, etc.

All these FF UOAs we see have minimal value. But they aren't "bad" UOAs; the data isn't flawed.

 

[deven]

Royal Purple doesn't list a 0w10 for the XPR oil on their website

My lone quart of 0w10 left

 

[Imp4]

FF UOAs generally are going to show large amounts of residual metals from machining fragments, etc. Also the silicone sealers present in most all new assemblies will show up as Si and be confounded with silica. These issues we all know. This isn't, however, as you call it, "bad data". Rather, it's data which has little use.

If you'd like to delineate between my terminology of 'bad data' and your terminology of 'data of little use', especially in the context of a what-if scenario that you readily admit is implausible and/or unlikely, then go right ahead.

My focus here is on the quality of the data.

If we wanted to know the marco analysis means and std devs for this engine series (which I don't know why we would), this data would be incredibly helpful as a contribution.

Typically a person seeks means and standard deviations of data sets that exhibit a normal distribution (unless you're using non-normal analysis techniques such as Box-Cox, Johnson transformation, Weibull, etc....) By definition, the data in question is skewed and can be considered a statistical flyer.
Statistical fliers are never deleted from the data set. They are identified as such and removed from the analysis. The problem though is that you don't know how much of the wear numbers are from true wear on the engine and how much is from the manufacturing process.

You have zero insight as to the quality of your data. So you're darned if you leave it in (and over report true wear) and you're darned if you take it out (and under report true wear).

Like I said earlier, the data is confounded by uncontrolled external variables. It is bad data.

 

[deven]

People can do whatever they want.
My point was that the data is useless because it is confounded by external uncontrolled variables.

It can't be used to establish trends.
It can't be used to diagnose issues.
But it can be misinterpreted by those that don't notice that it's a FF UOA.

So if bad data is your thing then I guess it's a good thing.

This is not an indictment of the OP or his intentions, it was only meant to point out the reality of the circumstances.

Just one question for you, why do you say it can't establish trends? I've been doing UOAs on on every oil change since I joined BITOG in 2005(all have been posted here) and I can definitely see a trend from FF onwards. For example my next uoa I am expecting all the high values to go down significantly and if that does happen I look at the values as "trending" downwards or in the right direction and so on so forth with all subsequent analysis.

 

[MacManus99]

Glad to hear your (short) thoughts on the new ES. This is a car that I've been watching closely, even though it is outside of my norm, and my budget. Enjoy the car, and please don't hesitate to share more details and experiences with it.

 

[Imp4]

Just one question for you, why do you say it can't establish trends? I've been doing UOAs on on every oil change since I joined BITOG in 2005(all have been posted here) and I can definitely see a trend from FF onwards. For example my next uoa I am expecting all the high values to go down significantly and if that does happen I look at the values as "trending" downwards or in the right direction and so on so forth with all subsequent analysis.

Cu 71
Si 180

As I stated earlier, the data in question is confounded by uncontrolled external variables (the manufacturing process).

Because we cannot determine the amount of the Cu or Si numbers occurred as part of normal operating conditions and how much are from manufacturing, we cannot analyze the data and make informed decisions based on that analysis.

You can certainly plug and chug the data through any number of analytical tools but the results you get aren't based on sound reasoning or analysis.