Amsoil SS 0W-16 5k mi; Rav4

[OVERKILL]

I imagine there could be a direct comparison, my wife's RAV4 is used for what the average person does, taking kids to school, grocery shopping, to/from work. The only time it sees the pedal go more than halfway is when I'm the one driving and merging or passing on the highway.

I don't disagree with your post, but I feel that given the vehicle's consistent use regarding miles/engine speed, there's a valid comparison.

Remember, we are talking parts per MILLION in a narrow band of particle sizes, the tool lacks the accuracy and resolution to be used in this way, it's like trying to shoot precision long range with a 12-gauge shotgun.

The purpose of the tool is to determine the condition of the LUBRICANT, and its suitability for continued use. While some inferences can be made about the health of the equipment if there's a significant deviation in trended data, one-off data points or data points within the range of statistical norms for the equipment cannot be used comparatively with any degree of confidence.

 

[ekpolk]

Amazing. Both the great results, AND that seemingly nobody can just come out and say it: a terribly “thin” oil performed superbly. If an oil as “thin” as a 0w-16 is incapable of protecting an engine properly, as so many endlessly insist, it should be showing up as objectively measurable damage. I strongly suspect the next post will be an attempt to explain why this engine is a special case…

 

[SR5]

That is a rich add pack:
Zinc 969 ppm,
Moly 244 ppm,
Boron 123 ppm.

With a TDI friendly Ca + Mg detergent package.

Very nice.

 

[kschachn]

Amazing. Both the great results, AND that seemingly nobody can just come out and say it: a terribly “thin” oil performed superbly. If an oil as “thin” as a 0w-16 is incapable of protecting an engine properly, as so many endlessly insist, it should be showing up as objectively measurable damage. I strongly suspect the next post will be an attempt to explain why this engine is a special case…

On the other hand, Blackstone themselves have noted that no oil they have tested gives statistically significant wear differences over any other oil. The reason for that is because it’s an inadequate and improper tool for that determination.

 

[BigBlockSteve]

Amazing. Both the great results, AND that seemingly nobody can just come out and say it: a terribly “thin” oil performed superbly. If an oil as “thin” as a 0w-16 is incapable of protecting an engine properly, as so many endlessly insist, it should be showing up as objectively measurable damage. I strongly suspect the next post will be an attempt to explain why this engine is a special case…

I wouldn't say it's a special case. All I can say is Toyota is known for their reliability, though I've heard it's gone down recently, especially considering Tundras have major recalls with their engines eating their main bearings.

The UOA tells me that despite my previous beliefs, thin oil can protect well.

 

[ekpolk]

I wouldn't say it's a special case. All I can say is Toyota is known for their reliability, though I've heard it's gone down recently, especially considering Tundras have major recalls with their engines eating their main bearings.

The UOA tells me that despite my previous beliefs, thin oil can protect well.

I appreciate and respect your straight-shooting open mindedness.

I heard (on the internet, so of course, it MUST be true) that the issues with the Tundra engines are stemming from machining debris left in the engine during manufacture. Of course, if true, that’s still a grievous error on the part of car maker known for solid quality. But at least it would not be something inherent in the design of the engine and its critical components. Let’s hope they get this squared away ASAP.

 

[Sienna dude]

It wasn't impressive at all in my case. And their claim of 25,000 miles is also bogus. That remaining 6.1 TBN is not good enough for 19,000 more miles. Not good enough for 9000 more miles either as they claim for severe use.
Pennzoil, on the other hand, did a fantastic job for only $24. Oil filters were very clean in both cases.

Right to left:
Mobil 1 AFE 0w-16, TGMO 0w-16, Pennzoil Platinum 0w-16, Amsoil Signature Series 0w-16

 

[Sienna dude]

Remember, we are talking parts per MILLION in a narrow band of particle sizes, the tool lacks the accuracy and resolution to be used in this way, it's like trying to shoot precision long range with a 12-gauge shotgun.

The purpose of the tool is to determine the condition of the LUBRICANT, and its suitability for continued use. While some inferences can be made about the health of the equipment if there's a significant deviation in trended data, one-off data points or data points within the range of statistical norms for the equipment cannot be used comparatively with any degree of confidence.

If fuel is 6% and viscosity below grade, don't you think wear metals will be high? I think they will be. And in that case UOA is very helpful.

 

[OVERKILL]

If fuel is 6% and viscosity below grade, don't you think wear metals will be high? I think they will be. And in that case UOA is very helpful.

The UOA might be helpful if it tells you about the fuel, but no, the metals will likely not be high, as numerous Honda 1.5L engines with huge amounts of fuel in the oil have demonstrated.

 

[OVERKILL]

It wasn't impressive at all in my case. And their claim of 25,000 miles is also bogus. That remaining 6.1 TBN is not good enough for 19,000 more miles. Not good enough for 9000 more miles either as they claim for severe use.
Pennzoil, on the other hand, did a fantastic job for only $24. Oil filters were very clean in both cases.

Right to left:
Mobil 1 AFE 0w-16, TGMO 0w-16, Pennzoil Platinum 0w-16, Amsoil Signature Series 0w-16


View attachment 275381

TBN depletion isn't linear, so you can't draw that conclusion from this UOA, sorry. Also, you have some serious fuel dilution issues here with those flash point figures. That 2% is probably more like 5-7% for that AMSOIL run, as Blackstone doesn't properly measure fuel via GC.

 

[Sienna dude]

The UOA might be helpful if it tells you about the fuel, but no, the metals will likely not be high, as numerous Honda 1.5L engines with huge amounts of fuel in the oil have demonstrated.

So how can we prove fuel is causing excessive wear or other harm if it can't be tested?

 

[Sienna dude]

TBN depletion isn't linear, so you can't draw that conclusion from this UOA, sorry. Also, you have some serious fuel dilution issues here with those flash point figures. That 2% is probably more like 5-7% for that AMSOIL run, as Blackstone doesn't properly measure fuel via GC.

Weather was warm and I did tons of highway driving. Can't believe fuel ended up there.

 

[OVERKILL]

So how can we prove fuel is causing excessive wear or other harm if it can't be tested?

Fuel is a contaminant, so high levels of it are undesirable, as they reduce viscosity and increase the rate at which the oil degrades. If you get to the point where you are seeing actual damage (bearing material for example) you've already gone too far.

There was an interesting series of issues (including a stop sale by the Chinese government IIRC) over the Honda 1.5L's, that were "making oil" via fuel to the point that engines were stalling from being over-filled and various other issues. It was pretty impressive.

 

[OVERKILL]

Weather was warm and I did tons of highway driving. Can't believe fuel ended up there.

You should switch to a different lab, one that uses GC for fuel. That's a surprising amount of fuel in the oil for your application.

 

[Sienna dude]

If a guy like me can have fuel in the oil, then Lord help those who drive these things 50 miles a week.

 

[Sienna dude]

You should switch to a different lab, one that uses GC for fuel. That's a surprising amount of fuel in the oil for your application.

What lab do you recommend?

 

[OVERKILL]

What lab do you recommend?

I've been using OAI/Polaris, they are reasonably priced, the reports are detailed and they use GC for fuel.