5w-30 at 10.2k miles; 230k miles on Villager

[dnewton3]

This is from my wife’s 1995 Mercury Villager with 230k miles on it; it is a clone of the Nissan Quest. These vans utilize the drive-train from the Maxima (engine, tranny, front suspension).

My maintenance plan has always been a 5k mile “normal use” OCI pattern even though many would say it qualifies as “severe” from a usage standpoint. It is the quintessential soccer-mom type vehicle running kids and errands all over town, with lots of short runs, frequent engine start/stop cycles and “city” driving.

This UOA represents a break from my normal pattern; I ran a 10k mile OCI to see if the wear rates would be positively or negatively affected. This particular UOA represents about 6k miles of the “normal” soccer-mom driving, and 4k miles of a round-trip run out to Phoenix and back for Thanksgiving. In the mountains of NM and AZ, I ran with OD locked out (to keep the transmission from hunting back and forth in 3rd-4th gear shifts and to keep the t/c from locking and unlocking). Subsequently, the engine spent a lot of time at 3-4k rpm in the mountains.

I added perhaps 1 quart of top-off fluid over the 10k miles, a little bit at a time as needed.

I have a very good idea of the current condition of the upper end; the front valve cover comes off with reasonable ease. I monitor for “sludge” should a concern arise. At this point, sludge is not an issue; the 10k mile OCI didn’t seem to cause a problem.

I am approaching 450 UOAs for this engine family (VG30E), with over 400 UOAs coming from Blackstone. My engine is very “normal” in that it is right in line with the wear rates of the macro data. Under my 5k mile OCI plan, I usually don’t UOA; it’s just not cost effective. I did do it once to check on the engine after an overheating event (failed water pump); everything was fine. The macro data has everything I need. This UOA (at 10k miles) was to confirm/deny the extension being safe. As can be seen, the wear rates are very controlled.

- The column on the left is the current 230k mile UOA (sample 2) with dino oil. This sample was an experiment to see how well a dino would hold up in “extended” use.
- For comparison/contrast, the UOA on the right is with syn (sample 1) at 160k miles. This UOA was to see how much “better” a syn would be in normal use.
- As you can see, there was no statistical benefit to running syn for the “normal” 5k mile duration, and there was no detriment to running dino for 2x that duration. Both fluids performed well within “normal” expectation for the exposure; they were all within one sigma deviation.

Blackstone comments:
… This sample went nearly twice the universal average. The longer oil run didn’t hurt a thing, in fact, some wear metals got better …. TBN read moderate at 1.9, showing some active additive remaining. TAN read 3.6 showing low acidity (8-10 is bad). Insolubles were low at .4 ….. Try going 11-12k miles next time.

Code:


UOA sample # 2 1

Brand Wm/ST QS?

type dino syn

grade 5w30 5w30

filter Puro clsc Wix

Oil miles 10k 5k

Veh miles 230k 160k

make up oil 1.0 .5





Blackstone Data Blackstone Data

w/ macro analysis w/ macro analysis

10k 10k 5k 5k

My Univ std My Univ std

Sample Avg dev Sample Avg dev

Al 2 7 2 3 4 2

Cr 0 2 2 0 1 1

Fe 7 18 8 8 10 5

Cu 3 7 4 2 4 3

Pb 2 10 8 0 5 5

Tn 0 2 2 0 1 1

Moly 40 55 61

Ni 0 0 0

Mang 0 0 1

Silver 0 0 0

Ti 3 0 0

Potas 0 2 1

Boron 3 21 39

Si 9 6 12

Sodium 39 2 31

Calcium 2253 2760 2073

Magn 13 15 205

Phos 683 694 735

Zinc 937 809 876

Barium 0 0 0





oil properties

Sus V @ 210 57.8 57.6 54-63

cSt V @ 100 C 9.58 9.54 8.5 - 11.3

FP 395 360 > 365

Fuel tr tr
Insol .4 .3 < .6

TBN 1.9 n/a > 1.0

TAN 3.6 n/a



This is a singular example of how capable dino oils really are. Twice the UA OCI, and metals are right in line with normal wear rates, even dropping slightly.

Note that the vis did not get stupid thick, nor thin. So much for those pundits of oxidation risks. The insolubles are well in control even with a normal filter at 10k miles. Hmmmmm ..... guess I don't need a M1, PureOne or Eao, do I?

Of note, I’d like to call your attention to the TBN/TAN relationship. I have always said that TBN depletion is not linear, and that you must also really know TAN to judge if you’re really at risk. Clearly – I’m not. There are some folks that would look at only the TBN, and get the OCI jitters. Well, this is proof that lowly house brand dino oils can go WAY longer than most of you give them credit for. Yes, Virginia, this is (gulp) dino Supertech from Wal-Mart, with a Purolator classic filter.


Given this performance, I am trying to decide if I want to run one more 10k mile OCI for confirmation or just go all the way to 15k miles. I really don’t see much risk in running all the way out. The wear rates are well controlled, the engine is tight with no contaminant intrusion, and condemnation limits are nowhere in sight. Why not?


Your thoughts are welcome. But fair warning – you better be really well prepared to defend your “must use synthetic” or “ran too long” comments if that’s the position you’re going to take.

 

[michaelluscher]

Thats quite a UOA for conventional, but was suprised me was its a '95 Villager with that mileage, I own a '01 so a different engine, but that year I recall there being an issue where a oil squirt hole somewhere was deleted and they rarely made it past 50k, you got lucky ;-) .

 

[pair of Blazers]

very nice. might have to experiment myself.

 

[tig1]

You have paid for 450 UOAs?? Have I read this correctly?

 

[CarbonSteel]

OK; OK...uncle! You have convinced me--I will go 10K on this run of MS5K and see how it looks in my FX4. Of course, 10K on MS5K means that I would have to have run the PU 25K for the ROI on the oil to match up (but then we also have to consider the cost of another FL-820s or a more expensive D+ or the like to ensure the filter lasts).

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: tig1
You have paid for 450 UOAs?? Have I read this correctly?

He has mentioned that he has UOA data from various sources for different engines families. He notes that he has over 400 for this family from Blackstone in this post.

 

[Rob_Roy]

Excellent results. How long did it take to put the 10k on?

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: tig1
You have paid for 450 UOAs?? Have I read this correctly?


No tig. I apologize if I was misleading.

I have over 450 UOAs for this engine family; most of them from Blackstone, but others from various sources. I only have two for our van.

I have literally many thousands of UOAs in my database set, including cars, trucks, tractors, generators, motorcycles, farm equipment, etc, etc. I have worked with Blackstone for my two site articles; they have been good in exchanging data for enhancement of our site; we appreicate that. In addition, I collect UOAs from other websites where people post. I then coordinate to make sure I don't duplicate in my records.

Still - this UOA is pretty impressive for the often-scoffed Supertech, a basic filter, and 10k miles, eh? Pretty much is a personal testament to my full macro-data article and data analysis. We, as a mass market populus, change oil way too often.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: Rob_Roy
Excellent results. How long did it take to put the 10k on?


To be honest, I cannot remember and the wife is out driving around, so I cannot see the logbook (kept in the glove box). I know it was less than a year. The trip to AZ was 4k miles in a week; way over our average.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
OK; OK...uncle! You have convinced me--I will go 10K on this run of MS5K and see how it looks in my FX4. Of course, 10K on MS5K means that I would have to have run the PU 25K for the ROI on the oil to match up (but then we also have to consider the cost of another FL-820s or a more expensive D+ or the like to ensure the filter lasts).

You need to do what you feel comfortable with, but I've seen your data and I think you're in great shape and can extend.

I'm seriously thinking about going to 15k miles on dino oil here. I'm not just out of break down the myths; I'm going to obliterate them out of the water!

 

[yucca]

I love it. Most think you need an expensive synthetic oil and be totally focused on TBN to get those kind of results. 15k should be no problem.

 

[tig1]

I would be concerned with 10-15K OCIs with any dino. All of the engines we see here that have sludged up or have severe varnish was with dino and long OCIs. What you don't see in cheap UOAs may be the very thing that will cause you problems in this area. Ring coking is a big problem with long extended OCIs with dino. But it doesn't occur with one or two of these extended OCIs. This explains a little how sludge forms.


http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Synthetics/What_Is_Synthetic_Motor_Oil.aspx

 

[Turk]

Nice long run & even nicer results.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: tig1
I would be concerned with 10-15K OCIs with any dino. All of the engines we see here that have sludged up or have severe varnish was with dino and long OCIs. What you don't see in cheap UOAs may be the very thing that will cause you problems in this area. Ring coking is a big problem with long extended OCIs with dino. But it doesn't occur with one or two of these extended OCIs. This explains a little how sludge forms.


http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Synthetics/What_Is_Synthetic_Motor_Oil.aspx


I have torn down my fair share of engines over the years; I understand sludge and varnish (which are not the same thing). I understand their lifecycle. But I also understand that those things also occur with disparity in different engine families; some engines have poor designs that encourage problems early in the OCI while others have great ability to resist these issues. The Saturn SL2 and some Toyotas are known to sludge and coke. Others such as the Ford Vulcan 3.0 would have to be severely, grossly neglected before an issue would arise. It is, after all, somewhat situationally dependent.


I'm comfortable with what I'm doing; some are not. But allow me to put a different perspectivce on it ...
Some folks use synthetics because it's "cheap insurance"; how many times have we heard that? THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS, right?
OK - say your "normal" OCI is 5k miles and you plan to stick to it, and not go the dnewton3 route. Ok - fine. But do you "need" a syn? No! Even if you accidentally blow past your 5k miles and have to run to 7k or 8k miles before you change oil, you are fine. There is no "need" for the "cheap insurance" of synthetics because the dino oil is still VERY capable. You have stated (and I agree) that sludge will not just escalate in one OCI; it takes a long time. So does that not completely ruin the whole "need synthetic for cheap insurance in case I over-run an OCI" mentality?
You may not want to extend ALL your OCIs out like I do, but we certainly don't "need" synthetics as insurance for that rare singular event, because the dino is still more than capable for that one isolated over-run in your otherwise ultra-conservative OCI plan!
THINK ABOUT IT! There is ZERO "need" for a syn as protection against an over-run when the typical conventional oil is still VERY capable. (I am excluding the known sludgers here).

But I will say this as I've said before; any lube can be over or underutilized. You have to experiement, and know your equipment. I am breaking down barriers; I know my vehicles and both their individual and design history.

Back to my van:
I have low insolubles.
I can (and have) pop off the valve cover to use visual cues for sludge formation.
I have historical data for cylinder compression, and can track that to check ring pack contamination.

At this point, I'm fine; nothing is out of whack.

I understand your fear; we're all preprogrammed to think this is heresy.

But the FACTS belie the industry-driven short OCI concept.

 

[BearZDefect]

Trivia unrelated to the UOA: The Maxima had the VQ engines (instead of VG) from model year 1995 onward, while the Quest and Pathfinder did not get VQ engines until much later.

 

[fdcg27]

You've practiced what you preach with this van and I'm really impressed with your results.
I would have laughed at you for running ST at all, much less for 10K in an engine that isn't always easy on its oil.
He who laughs last laughs best, and you've clearly shown that this engine in the use it gets was just fine with a bottom dollar conventional for way more miles than I would have considered possible.
It's one thing to give advice and another to put that advice into practice with one's own machine.
You've done the latter and have shown that there is a lot more useful life in this oil than I would have thought.
Very impressive UOA, in terms of observed wear metals as well as TBN/TAN for the miles run.

 

[Sam_Julier]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
You've practiced what you preach with this van and I'm really impressed with your results.
I would have laughed at you for running ST at all, much less for 10K in an engine that isn't always easy on its oil.
He who laughs last laughs best, and you've clearly shown that this engine in the use it gets was just fine with a bottom dollar conventional for way more miles than I would have considered possible.
It's one thing to give advice and another to put that advice into practice with one's own machine.
You've done the latter and have shown that there is a lot more useful life in this oil than I would have thought.
Very impressive UOA, in terms of observed wear metals as well as TBN/TAN for the miles run.


+1 And thank you for the future money I will not spend.

 

[tig1]

As for being"programed" I have been around engines since the mid 60s and have seen many engines sludged. I still feel 10-15 K OCIs with dino will result in problems in most engines if you plan to run it more than 75K. I know of no one promoting these kind of OCIs with dino for the long haul.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Of course you can do longer OCI with dino oils with lower wear. That is a benefit of long OCI. However, the tradeoff is varnish and deposits. You can't evaluate them by UOA.

BTW, compression check will not check the oil control rings.

 

[dnewton3]

Tig - there are some examples now of OEMs doing as such. 10k miles is not unheard of in some vehicles. Diesels are now going up that far; the new Cummins is spec'd at "normal" use intervals at 15k miles, on any lube that meets CES20081 (many quality dino CJ-4 lubes do).

I am not saying that all vehicles can go 15k miles on Walmart dino. That probably would be way too far to stretch.

But what is also true is that dinos are way more capable than folks think.

My thousands of UOAs show it.
The SAE studies show it.
My personal van shows it.

And this is yet more proof that one one "needs" synthetics at short intervals.

Look at my two UOAs side by side. Syn at 5k miles; dino at 10k miles. And yet both were very "normal" in statistical performance and neither was "better" in all measurable criteria.

When you can assure equal performance, and one product costs 1/2 as much, then why not use the lesser cost product? In fact, on a per mile basis, it is actually 4x cheaper for me to do so. The option of syn at 5k miles and dino at 10k miles, when the lube costs 1/2, is a ration of 4:1. And all with the same wear.

I put my money where my mouth is. And it's proving very economical for me to do so!