2021 Lincoln Navigator L, 3.5L Ecoboost, 3000 Miles, Supertech Advanced 5W30 API SP

Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
714
Location
NYC
Oil: SuperTech (Walmart) Advanced 5W30 API SP
Vehicle: 2021 Lincoln Navigator L
Engine: 3.5L Ecoboost High Output 440 horsepower Generation 2
Miles on oil: 3000

Pennzoil Ultra Platinum 5W30 is the next column over.

3.jpg
 
Last edited:
The cSt 100°c still shows it as an XW-30, even with the inferred dilution from a higher Flashpoint.
Sorry, you are going to have to explain your logic here.

You stated that the ST held its viscosity better, however:
- The ST has a flashpoint of 440F, basically zero fuel, visc is at 9.62cSt.
- The Pennzoil has a flashpoint of 395F, pointing to not-insignificant fuel, visc is 8.87cSt.

How are you concluding that the oil with zero fuel in it held its viscosity better?
 
Sorry, you are going to have to explain your logic here.

You stated that the ST held its viscosity better, however:
- The ST has a flashpoint of 440F, basically zero fuel, visc is at 9.62cSt.
- The Pennzoil has a flashpoint of 395F, pointing to not-insignificant fuel, visc is 8.87cSt.

How are you concluding that the oil with zero fuel in it held its viscosity better?

I'm taking the virgin viscosity (for SuperTech i'm using Mag1 synthetic 5W-30) and subtracting the viscosity drop at cSt 100.

The virgin numbers for ultra...
https://www.shell-livedocs.com/data/published/en-US/b7a53dd0-2f04-4910-b035-c4234c72c0d6.pdf
1667496231502.png



The virgin numbers for MAG1...
https://mag1.com/products/33/pds/

1667496269319.png



The Ultra went from 10.3 to 8.87. A drop of 1.43
The SuperTECH from 10.9 to 9.62. A drop of 1.29
 
I'm taking the virgin viscosity (for SuperTech i'm using Mag1 synthetic 5W-30) and subtracting the viscosity drop at cSt 100.

The virgin numbers for ultra...
https://www.shell-livedocs.com/data/published/en-US/b7a53dd0-2f04-4910-b035-c4234c72c0d6.pdf
View attachment 124388


The virgin numbers for MAG1...
https://mag1.com/products/33/pds/

View attachment 124389


The Ultra went from 10.3 to 8.87. A drop of 1.43
The SuperTECH from 10.9 to 9.62. A drop of 1.29
And the Ultra has considerable fuel and the SuperTech doesn't. So, the Ultra shows viscosity loss from fuel, while the Supertech simply shows loss via mechanical shear. Ergo, you cannot come to the conclusion you've arrived at, as you aren't factoring in the fuel dilution.
 
And the Ultra has considerable fuel and the SuperTech doesn't. So, the Ultra shows viscosity loss from fuel, while the Supertech simply shows loss via mechanical shear. Ergo, you cannot come to the conclusion you've arrived at, as you aren't factoring in the fuel dilution.
It really is all an educated guess wirh BS. They would save us all, all this conjecture and extrapolation if dilution were measured correctly.
 
It really is all an educated guess wirh BS. They would save us all, all this conjecture and extrapolation if dilution were measured correctly.
Well yes, that's the problem, they don't measure dilution at all, they just infer (badly) from FP, but we know that by comparing the flashpoints that with the Ultra sample flashpoint being considerably lower that there's fuel in it, while the high flashpoint of the SuperTech sample shows there isn't.

I've assumed for a while now that the OP has me on ignore, as he doesn't reply to my posts. That's fine, the rest of you see my comments. Given this is a TGDI engine, and his concerns about visc loss across this whole saga, it seems bizarre to continually ignore the advice to use a lab that properly measures fuel, which is having a considerable impact on the final viscosity of some of these samples. 🤷‍♂️
 
More idling and short trips may have increased dilution in the Ultra sample while more heavy throttle usage may have increased load and contributed to more mechanical shear with ST. We just don't know.
 
Last edited:
Nice report. You can certainly extend your OCI if you want.

Did you happen to note the OLM % when you changed the oil?
 
No it didn't, look at the flashpoints.
Well, how should we interpret that? Did @Navi (OP) drive/idle differently, did he fix something on the engine, were climate factors different, or is the Supertech somehow more resistant to FD? Of the 3 UOA’s shown, I would be least happy with the 2nd (PUP). The oldest (QSUD euro 5w40, if I’m not mistaken) is much more acceptable to me, but so is the most recent ST. All that said, he has a gen2 motor, I have gen 1, he runs very short OCI’s, whereas I am trying to go 8-9k over a summer-long RV trip.

but, Navi, any chance you could you send a future sample to Polaris/Horizon (Amsoil) for a true fuel dilution reading? Better yet, take a single larger sample and split it between Blackstone and Polaris. I did something similar once, and I won’t say I was totally happy with Polaris on that run, but they were somewhat consistent with my $$$Dyson/TestOil results on the same sample. IMHO, Blackstone just doesn’t provide a credible reading on one of my hot-button parameters (fuel dilution and effect on viscosity). @OVERKILL, why split hairs between inherent “stay-in-grade“ and viscosity “drop” results which include fuel dilution. I’m not sure some oils don’t withstand dilution better than others.
 
Well, how should we interpret that? Did @Navi (OP) drive/idle differently, did he fix something on the engine, were climate factors different, or is the Supertech somehow more resistant to FD? Of the 3 UOA’s shown, I would be least happy with the 2nd (PUP). The oldest (QSUD euro 5w40, if I’m not mistaken) is much more acceptable to me, but so is the most recent ST. All that said, he has a gen2 motor, I have gen 1, he runs very short OCI’s, whereas I am trying to go 8-9k over a summer-long RV trip.

but, Navi, any chance you could you send a future sample to Polaris/Horizon (Amsoil) for a true fuel dilution reading? Better yet, take a single larger sample and split it between Blackstone and Polaris. I did something similar once, and I won’t say I was totally happy with Polaris on that run, but they were somewhat consistent with my $$$Dyson/TestOil results on the same sample. IMHO, Blackstone just doesn’t provide a credible reading on one of my hot-button parameters (fuel dilution and effect on viscosity). @OVERKILL, why split hairs between inherent “stay-in-grade“ and viscosity “drop” results which include fuel dilution. I’m not sure some oils don’t withstand dilution better than others.
Why would you conclude he fixed something or that Supertech was more resistant? Ultimately, the FP between the two oils was considerably different, pointing to different levels of fuel dilution, hence my comment on the conclusion, which is deeply flawed because it doesn't consider that factor.
 
@OVERKILL I must be missing your point.

What explains the difference between FD readings? If he didn’t: “drive/idle differently, …fix something on the engine, …climate factors different,“ then maybe “the Supertech somehow more resistant to FD?” Note question mark. I guess I should have put multiple ???’s. Or is FD totally random???? Totally irrelevant????

I have a fuel diluter. Ford wouldn’t acknowledge there’s a problem, wouldn't participate in trouble-shooting. Replacing all: injectors, coils, tune, etc etc is $$$daunting. So finding an oil resistant to the FD has become my goal. That plus resistance to all the other TGDI-related vulnerabilities. if finding a better oil isn’t a worthwhile goal, then what the he*l are we all doing here? I can tell you my experience: Cummins/ Valvoline Premium Blue Restore loses very little viscosity, but at great purchase cost, and who knows, perhaps some other issues.

there aren’t many alternatives in the high-roof Sprinter-style van market, and once you’ve invested time and/or money converting one for RV use, you don’t want to chuck it all and start over. Yeah, maybe I should have opted for the non-turbo option. Too late now. I want a 100C cst above 9.3, maybe slightly higher, after a 8-9k OCI, so I’m not having to trust some quickie oil change place 1500 miles from home during my summer RV trips.

I get sucked into Navi’s posts because I have a somewhat similar engine, we’ve had some similar concerns. He approaches it differently than I would, but it’s data For me.
 
@OVERKILL I must be missing your point.

What explains the difference between FD readings? If he didn’t: “drive/idle differently, …fix something on the engine, …climate factors different,“ then maybe “the Supertech somehow more resistant to FD?” Note question mark. I guess I should have put multiple ???’s. Or is FD totally random???? Totally irrelevant????

I have a fuel diluter. Ford wouldn’t acknowledge there’s a problem, wouldn't participate in trouble-shooting. Replacing all: injectors, coils, tune, etc etc is $$$daunting. So finding an oil resistant to the FD has become my goal. That plus resistance to all the other TGDI-related vulnerabilities. if finding a better oil isn’t a worthwhile goal, then what the he*l are we all doing here? I can tell you my experience: Cummins/ Valvoline Premium Blue Restore loses very little viscosity, but at great purchase cost, and who knows, perhaps some other issues.

there aren’t many alternatives in the high-roof Sprinter-style van market, and once you’ve invested time and/or money converting one for RV use, you don’t want to chuck it all and start over. Yeah, maybe I should have opted for the non-turbo option. Too late now. I want a 100C cst above 9.3, maybe slightly higher, after a 8-9k OCI, so I’m not having to trust some quickie oil change place 1500 miles from home during my summer RV trips.

I get sucked into Navi’s posts because I have a somewhat similar engine, we’ve had some similar concerns. He approaches it differently than I would, but it’s data For me.
The oil won't change how much fuel ends up in it. It's likely environmental or driving profile, or a combo of the two that resulted in higher fuel in the one sample than the other.

What I pointed out in another one of these threads, which perhaps you didn't see, was that despite the fuel dilution, the Shell product actually lost less viscosity, percentage-wise, than the SuperTech, despite it experiencing fuel dilution and the SuperTech one didn't. This points to mechanical shear in with the SuperTech.

I've encouraged the OP to use a different lab, but he doesn't respond to my posts, so I suspect he has me on ignore.
 
without doing math on OP’s results, let me mention some of my own UOA KV100 results from my EB as tested by Polaris/Amsoil/Horizon (in sequential order):

8.7. PP SN+ 6150 mi. 4.3% fuel (oldest: 2018)
8.4. PUP SN. 902 mi. 4.7% fuel
10.4. VPBR SN 9630mi. Lab did rerun, I believe 1st was over 4%, and 2nd was 1.6%…so I don’t know what to trust on this, except I sent the same sample to Dyson for an abbreviated “Tuner” test he used to offer which showed 5.3% fuel (at same 9630 miles sampling).
9.3. QSFS SP. 2760 mi. 3.7% fuel (most recent thru Polaris: 2022)

off the top of my head, these Polaris results show approx 12% loss for PP, 15% for PUP (after a mere 902 miles…not a typo), 9% for the VPBR, and maybe 18% for the QS….combined loss from both shearing and fuel.

I have several additional VPBR UOA’s thru Dyson, with varying fuel in the 2%-5% range, with KV100 readings from 10.1 to 10.8. There does not seem to be a clear relationship between fuel %, mileage, and KV100 results on these VPBR UOA’s, though I consider the VPBR viscosity losses to be better than the “normal” synthetic oils. The most recent VPBR, KV100 dropped the least (5%) despite “middle-of-the road” 7550 mi and 3% fuel. Plugs were changed before the OCI with the best fuel result, and HPFP changed before the latest (it was suspect of leaking). The worst loss with the VPBR was ~11%, at 4400 mi and 3.1% fuel…the first time I sampled VPBR in 2019, and not under ideal sampling conditions.

I think percentages matter, but I am more concerned about how thin the oil got on an absolute scale: so even though QS thinned the most (percentage-wise) it ”passes” the stay-in-grade test (or barely fails). VPBR gets an A or A+ Ending up at 10.4cst, and both Pennzoils ”failed.”

next spring, I may have a “short run“ UOA on Castrol Edge 5w30 SP, currently in the sump. if it holds grade, I may use it again. Maybe silly, but I already bought some 5w30 Amsoil SS, for next summer, hoping it will stay in grade during an anticipated 8,000 mi run. If it doesn’t, I may shift my OCI pattern to split the hi-mileage summer usage between 2 OCI’s.
 
without doing math on OP’s results, let me mention some of my own UOA KV100 results from my EB as tested by Polaris/Amsoil/Horizon (in sequential order):

8.7. PP SN+ 6150 mi. 4.3% fuel (oldest: 2018)
8.4. PUP SN. 902 mi. 4.7% fuel
10.4. VPBR SN 9630mi. Lab did rerun, I believe 1st was over 4%, and 2nd was 1.6%…so I don’t know what to trust on this, except I sent the same sample to Dyson for an abbreviated “Tuner” test he used to offer which showed 5.3% fuel (at same 9630 miles sampling).
9.3. QSFS SP. 2760 mi. 3.7% fuel (most recent thru Polaris: 2022)

off the top of my head, these Polaris results show approx 12% loss for PP, 15% for PUP (after a mere 902 miles…not a typo), 9% for the VPBR, and maybe 18% for the QS….combined loss from both shearing and fuel.

I have several additional VPBR UOA’s thru Dyson, with varying fuel in the 2%-5% range, with KV100 readings from 10.1 to 10.8. There does not seem to be a clear relationship between fuel %, mileage, and KV100 results on these VPBR UOA’s, though I consider the VPBR viscosity losses to be better than the “normal” synthetic oils. The most recent VPBR, KV100 dropped the least (5%) despite “middle-of-the road” 7550 mi and 3% fuel. Plugs were changed before the OCI with the best fuel result, and HPFP changed before the latest (it was suspect of leaking). The worst loss with the VPBR was ~11%, at 4400 mi and 3.1% fuel…the first time I sampled VPBR in 2019, and not under ideal sampling conditions.

I think percentages matter, but I am more concerned about how thin the oil got on an absolute scale: so even though QS thinned the most (percentage-wise) it ”passes” the stay-in-grade test (or barely fails). VPBR gets an A or A+ Ending up at 10.4cst, and both Pennzoils ”failed.”

next spring, I may have a “short run“ UOA on Castrol Edge 5w30 SP, currently in the sump. if it holds grade, I may use it again. Maybe silly, but I already bought some 5w30 Amsoil SS, for next summer, hoping it will stay in grade during an anticipated 8,000 mi run. If it doesn’t, I may shift my OCI pattern to split the hi-mileage summer usage between 2 OCI’s.
As you've discovered, the best way to stay within grade is to start with an oil that's heavier for the grade, or heck, even with the next grade up.

Of course, as you've also experienced, dilution levels can vary wildly with the same engine and lubricant. With an engine that is prone to diluting, it's obvious that one should be using a lab that properly measures fuel (like you are doing). An oil that's shearing like SuperTech does here, with significant fuel, will lose a lot of viscosity.
 
As you've discovered, the best way to stay within grade is to start with an oil that's heavier for the grade, or heck, even with the next grade up.

Of course, as you've also experienced, dilution levels can vary wildly with the same engine and lubricant. With an engine that is prone to diluting, it's obvious that one should be using a lab that properly measures fuel (like you are doing). An oil that's shearing like SuperTech does here, with significant fuel, will lose a lot of viscosity.
Maybe I read more into your answer than you intended, but don’t some oils lose more visc than others? Whether they shear more or retain the fuel more, dont know, but I would want to avoid those. I jumped the gun buying the Amsoil for next time because somebody’s Ecoboost UOA showed it stayed in grade, despite starting at mere 10.3, and assume some fuel dilution (I need to find that UOA again…it’s here on BITOG somewhere, but unfortunately, i think it was a Blackstone report).

I wanted to mix a little 0w40 SS, in with the 5w30 SS (ASL), to get a slightly thicker blend, but Amsoil told me I shouldn’t. They also steered me away from their (thicker) Euro 5w30, for this engine. I’m here on BITOG because dodging dilution, LSPI, IVD, chainwear, and moderately long OCI etc is daunting challenge In an Gen 1 Ecoboost.
 
Back
Top