6 months on PP 5W30 for Vibe

Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
July 7/09 (Jan 10/09) Oil.............PP 5W30 (GC 0W-30) Filter..........AC Delco(Toyota filter) Total Miles.....50,475 (47,000) Miles on oil....3660 over 6 months (4200 over 5 months) probably considered close to severe service over both intervals i.e mostly short trips over the winter Make up oil.....200 mls (0) Aluminum.......3 (2) Chromium.......0 (0) Iron...........11 (6) Copper.........1 (1) Lead...........0 (1) Tin............0 (0) Moly...........49 (3) Nickel..........0 (0) Manganese.......1 (1) Silver..........0 (0) Titanium........0 (0) Potassium.......1 (1) Boron...........12 (1) Silicon.........9 (13) Sodium..........3 (2) Calcium.........2628 (2707) Magnesium.......42 (134) Phosphorus......732 (709) Zinc............957 (890) Barium..........0 (0) Flashpoint F....390 (320) Fuel............<0.5 (3.3) Antifreeze.......0.0 (0.0) Water............0.0 (0.0) Insoluables......0.4 (0.3) SUS [email protected] (60.6) cST [email protected] (10.38) I am still under warranty so a 6 month OCI is maybe a bit pushing it given its short tripping coupled with winter. I was wondering about the slight rise in iron (it is the highest in many UOAs; unit average is 7) and I now recall that I used a half bottle or so of GM injection cleaner at some point in this most recent interval . After draining the PP I am back using GC, using up my supply.
 
Last edited:

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
Silicon was the lowest ever this past OCI i.e 9 versus unit average of 15. TBN for the PP run was 3.2. I didnt test TBN for the 5 month GC run.
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: addyguy
Even withe fuel contamination and shearing, results were better with the GC.
That was tons of fuel but I know that was my fault. I changed the oil on probly the coldest day of the winter after only a very short drive to the shop. This time I made sure it had a solid hwy run before draining.
 
Joined
May 4, 2003
Messages
6,614
Location
southeast US
 Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
 Originally Posted By: addyguy
Even withe fuel contamination and shearing, results were better with the GC.
That was tons of fuel but I know that was my fault. I changed the oil on probly the coldest day of the winter after only a very short drive to the shop. This time I made sure it had a solid hwy run before draining.
Idling in cold can dump a lot of fuel into oil. I experienced it once (4% IIRC) in subaru. Good results for severe service. GC did much better though. But wait, wasn't thinner supposed to be better? Are you planning to go to 7000 miles/12 months outside warranty with synthetic?
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
620
Location
Texas
Have them run the numbers again and things might look different. Well within the limits of "noise" when your talking about 1 and 4 ppm. That said, GC looked good!
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Are you planning to go to 7000 miles/12 months outside warranty with synthetic?
Actually GC isn't an approved oil for this car as it is not energy conserving . (But I do have enough receipts for PP/QH to squeeze by if push came to shove.) But it does look like even with (semi) severe service it could go closer to a year with GC (or even PP) (I wish I had done a TBN of that GC run ).
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
7,242
Location
Michigan
Not bad. Looks like PP could easily run 5,000 and maybe 6,000 miles no problem. Insolubles up a little for short run. Maybe a better filter is needed.
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: ZZman
Not bad. Looks like PP could easily run 5,000 and maybe 6,000 miles no problem. Insolubles up a little for short run. Maybe a better filter is needed.
And 6k miles would translate to about 1 year of service. The oil filter used this past PP run was the AC Delco (all other times I believe it has been the Toyota YZZF1 or YZZF2). (But I am sure the AC Delco is just a rebadged YZZF1). So I am not sure what a next step up would be in terms of an oil filter .
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,172
Location
Great White North.. eh
How did GC win this one? Because of 5ppm iron? Redo the samples and you could easily get different values for fe. I'd be more worried about the fuel and flash than 5ppm of iron
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: webfors
How did GC win this one? Because of 5ppm iron? Redo the samples and you could easily get different values for fe. I'd be more worried about the fuel and flash than 5ppm of iron
The fuel dilution isn't a fault of the oil but is explained by the circumstances under which I changed the oil i.e. around -15F and the shop was 2.5 km from my home...almost no warm-up. I think the iron shown with the PP could in part be attributed to the use of injector cleaner. The GC was run an extra 600 miles. All things considered I think between GC and PP it is 6 of one a half dozen of the other. Either does a good job protecting this engine.
 
Joined
May 4, 2003
Messages
6,614
Location
southeast US
 Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
Actually GC isn't an approved oil for this car as it is not energy conserving .
I guess that is true. Now, how much MPG difference did you see? In short tripping, the difference should be noticeable as we are dealing with HTHS of ~3 VS 3.5. Also, can you explain how injector cleaning increases wear metals?
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
I guess that is true. Now, how much MPG difference did you see? Also, can you explain how injector cleaning increases wear metals?
I started using GC off and on several years ago. With consistently good UOAs (I bet I have had at least 3 runs of GC analyzed) I set aside any concerns re a hit in fuel economy and to be honest I dont recall anything terrible in this regard. I thought I recall reading on BITOG that the use of injector cleaner, depending when it was used in the interval, could affect some UOA #s...but maybe it would be the viscosity reading and not any metal #s . I'm not sure now.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,172
Location
Great White North.. eh
 Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
 Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
I guess that is true. Now, how much MPG difference did you see? Also, can you explain how injector cleaning increases wear metals?
I started using GC off and on several years ago. With consistently good UOAs (I bet I have had at least 3 runs of GC analyzed) I set aside any concerns re a hit in fuel economy and to be honest I dont recall anything terrible in this regard. I thought I recall reading on BITOG that the use of injector cleaner, depending when it was used in the interval, could affect some UOA #s...but maybe it would be the viscosity reading and not any metal #s . I'm not sure now.
It can skew the results, in what direction I'm not sure. Both oils are fantastic and you simply can't go wrong with either of them in this application.
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: webfors
Both oils are fantastic and you simply can't go wrong with either of them in this application.
What appeals to about using GC with my 1ZZFE is that there is *no* detectable oil consumption for any OCI I have done with it. That isnt true for any 5W30 I have tried including PP and M1.
 

21Rouge

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
2,230
Location
Southern Ontario
 Originally Posted By: buster
11 ppm is not significant FE!!
For sure. But it does standout just a bit given that I have many UOAs for this car...but it could be noise/error: Fe 11, 6, 5, 6, 5, 7
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 4, 2003
Messages
6,614
Location
southeast US
 Originally Posted By: buster
11 ppm is not significant FE!!
 Originally Posted By: 21Rouge
 Originally Posted By: buster
11 ppm is not significant FE!!
For sure. But it does standout just a bit given that I have many UOAs for this car...but it could be noise/error: Fe 11, 6, 5, 6, 5, 7
Blackstone is known for high precision of their reports. 11 vs 6 is almost doubling Fe per mile. If OP repeated the PP run and came with a similar value, it would be statistically significant. There is a similar finding in 1ZZ-FE showing thinner oil producing more wear: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1536598#Post1536598 Looks like 1ZZ-FE likes thicker oils.
 
Top