Amsoil SS 5w-30 15.5k; 2016 F150 3.5 88k

[Crusher]

These are 3 UOAs I ran on a family members 2016 F-150 3.5 EB over the last few yrs
I wanted to see how far I could extend the OCI
The Oil had no problem going 12.5k miles,
However I determined that 15.5k miles was too far.
I also wanted to see what if anything a Catch Can would do for fuel dilution.
You can clearly see the difference between the 2nd UOA and the 3rd UOA.
When I saw the the post from
brandon9715 today, I thought of these UOAs that I had not posted.
I know that it's a 2.7L EB vs a 3.5L EB, but they're both 1st Generation motors
Good Luck brandon9715

 

[ltslimjim]

Oxidation is the primary factor to consider when looking at the two most recent reports. I think 15k is a reasonable limit to be safe. Run looks good otherwise.

 

[buster]

I agree this is the limit. I'd maybe drop down to 12k. Oxidation jumped from 48 to 60 (+17) and viscosity is on the rise. TBN depleted too.

 

[6.7 CTD]

I assume they estimated (instead of gc) the fuel dilution (on last sample) because the KV100 was higher than previous samples? However, the viscosity increased due to prolonged use/degradation. I’m curious about the actual fuel dilution of the 15k sample. I’d assume it’s similar to the 12k-mile sample, but it may be even greater considering the increase noted from 10k to 12k miles. Thanks for posting.

 

[jetman]

somewhere in the 12 to 15k range looks right.

 

[ltslimjim]

I assume they estimated (instead of gc) the fuel dilution (on last sample) because the KV100 was higher than previous samples? However, the viscosity increased due to prolonged use/degradation. I’m curious about the actual fuel dilution of the 15k sample. I’d assume it’s similar to the 12k-mile sample, but it may be even greater considering the increase noted from 10k to 12k miles. Thanks for posting.

Different OCIs … maybe fuel dilution just wasn’t an issue on this last interval?

 

[ltslimjim]

I agree this is the limit. I'd maybe drop down to 12k. Oxidation jumped from 48 to 60 (+17) and viscosity is on the rise. TBN depleted too.

I agree closer to 12k is probably safest. Was it +18 or +25 oxidation increase over baseline that is considered the limit?

Edit: looks like Under +20 is generally okay. Roughly +25 or +27 is the limit; WearCheck vs OilAnalyzersInc.

 

[6.7 CTD]

Different OCIs … maybe fuel dilution just wasn’t an issue on this last interval?

Fair question, but unlikely given the results at 10k and 12k. Unless something drastic changed, like climate (from cold to warm) or a significant decrease in idle time. I can’t say for certain but would like to see them run it again using GC.

 

[MVAR]

Fair question, but unlikely given the results at 10k and 12k. Unless something drastic changed, like climate (from cold to warm) or a significant decrease in idle time. I can’t say for certain but would like to see them run it again using GC.

Didn't @Crusher mention the addition of a catch can between OCI 2 & 3? I'm unsure how a CC will help fuel dilution but that was th eonly stated difference in the OP. Possibly additional highway usage prior to taking the sample?

 

[Pablo]

All that fuel and the viscosity didn’t budge

 

[6.7 CTD]

Didn't @Crusher mention the addition of a catch can between OCI 2 & 3? I'm unsure how a CC will help fuel dilution but that was th eonly stated difference in the OP. Possibly additional highway usage prior to taking the sample?

Valid point, I overlooked that aspect of the post. I wonder if it significantly affected fuel dilution. If so, that’s great, but I don’t think a catch can would cause a substantial decrease as shown here. I’ve been wrong before, but don’t tell my wife I said that.

 

[Crusher]

Valid point, I overlooked that aspect of the post. I wonder if it significantly affected fuel dilution. If so, that’s great, but I don’t think a catch can would cause a substantial decrease as shown here. I’ve been wrong before, but don’t tell my wife I said that.

6.7 CTD
Respectfully, that's the point of a Catch Can.
The lack of fuel dilution between UOA #2, and UOA #3 after the Catch Can install clearly showed that.

 

[6.7 CTD]

6.7 CTD
Respectfully, that's the point of a Catch Can.
The lack of fuel dilution between UOA #2, and UOA #3 after the Catch Can install clearly showed that.

They did not use GC to determine fuel dilution on the third sample. You can’t base the “estimate” fuel dilution on OP installing a catch can. A catch can is primarily designed to capture oil vapors and other contaminants, preventing their entry into the intake system. Although this may include fuel, its primary objective is not to reduce fuel dilution. Fuel dilution has become more prevalent since the introduction of direct injection (DI). Catch cans have been in use for a significantly longer period than DI. Carbureted and port-injected engines can experience fuel dilution as well; however, it is not as frequent. Consequently, I don’t believe a catch can serve as a magical solution for fuel dilution and do not think that’s the case here either.

 

[Brons2]

The iron wear per 1000 miles was very similar on all three runs. 1.7, 1.83 and 1.76 respectively. The other wear metals low enough to not merit discussion, at least, at these sorts of mileages. So it's hard to condemn even the 15,900 run based on wear metals alone.

However, the oil thickening up 10% on the longest run is of note. Maybe aim slightly lower than the 15.9K run due to the fairly rapid increase in viscosity between running it 12000 and 15900. Me personally I'd probably spilt the difference and try 14K next. $0.02.

I appreciate people running edge of the envelope OCI with boutique synthetics, it seems like there's less of it than there was 20 years ago when I joined BITOG. I guess many people have decided that the Group III synthetics at Wally World are "good enough". Anyway...

 

[Overfill]

How many hours-in-use? What's the avg mph from the vehicle?