Basing Oil Selection on UOAsl

[olympic]

UAO was pioneered by industrial users like truck fleets and locomotives. The engines can cost tens of thousands to millions of dollars and they can hold 10-200 gallons of oil, so UOA makes perfect sense to them. It's mere pocket change compared to replacing the engine or even just changing the oil.

To the average passenger car driver who does 12000 miles/year and changes the oil every 3-5k, UOA probably has little value. The engine will outlast the life of the vehicle. Heck, my previous employer used the cheapest oil and filters he could find and routinely ran 12000 mile OCI and he never had an engine failure that I recall.

I run a fleet of high use passenger cars and swithced to synthetic to save money, downtime, repairs and fuel. I'm going to do UOA's for 1 year to determine how long the oil will last and then discontinue doing them. So rates of wear are not the primary concern for me as long as they are acceptable. I'm pretty confident that the engines would last the 300k miles I need out of them with almost any oil.

With the Amsoil synthetic and bypass filters I could probably go alot further than 300k miles on the same engine but by 300k the rest of the car has usually fallen apart so it's time to get rid of it anyways.

My personal car sees 5000 miles/year and I use Castrol GTX and a Motorcraft filter and change them yearly. I have no interest in doing UOA's on this car because it would be a waste of money.

 

[nascarnation]

quote:

---

Originally posted by olympic:

Heck, my previous employer used the cheapest oil and filters he could find and routinely ran 12000 mile OCI and he never had an engine failure that I recall.

---

Interesting....what type of duty cycle, climate, and terrain if I might ask. Thanks

 

[Brian Barnhart]

quote:

---

One can turn the question around. If not based on UOA results, how should a person choose an oil?

---

If the desirable traits of an engine oil are known, I would suggest that VOAs might be a better tool than UOAs for choosing an oil.

 

[jthorner]

quote:

---

To the average passenger car driver who does 12000 miles/year and changes the oil every 3-5k, UOA probably has little value.

---

Perhaps the greatest value is in detecting small problems before they become big problems. For example, UOA caught the intake manifold coolant leak on our Oldsmobile at 42,000 miles before any internal engine damage was done *and* while the car was still covered by an extended warranty. The $80 I had spent on occassional UOAs was repaid many times over.

quote:

---

If the desirable traits of an engine oil are known, I would suggest that VOAs might be a better tool than UOAs for choosing an oil.

---

VOAs tell us almost nothing as they don't tell anything about the quality of the base oils and only give a hint at what additives are used. I think they are almost worthless.

John

 

[Brian Barnhart]

quote:

---

VOAs tell us almost nothing as they don't tell anything about the quality of the base oils and only give a hint at what additives are used. I think they are almost worthless.

---

VOAs measure the same things as UOAs. Therefore, UOAs don't directly measure anything about the quality of the base oil or additives either.

It's sometimes assumed that if a UOA shows "low" levels of trace metals, the oil/additives are good. Given all the variables and assumptions involved in UOAs, it may be a stretch to claim lower trace metals equals a better oil. The UOA is a good window into an engine's condition and a good tool to establish an oil's useful life. But it may not be a reliable tool when carried a step further to rate or compare oils.

[ June 25, 2004, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Brian Barnhart ]

 

[Brian Barnhart]

quote:

---

Brian, this question reoccurs periodically on this and other forums.

---

Thanks for the brief, yet detailed, response. Sorry if I'm bringing up a worn out subject. I've been a member for about a year, and don't recall the issue addressed directly (though I don't spend a great deal of time here).

Let’s take look at a real world situation and apply the knowledge gained from the numerous UOAs posted here.

I have a 4.0L 1996 Jeep Cherokee with 92,000 miles and a 3.4L 2001 Chevy Venture Van with 49,000 miles. Both vehicles see very little city/stop-and-go driving. Jeep recommends 10W30 for most temperatures. Chevy says 5W30 is good for all temps. I’ve owned both vehicles since new, and both have had regular oil changes at approximately 4 months/4500 mile intervals.

Question 1: Which name brand 10W30 and 5W30 over-the-counter oil(s) should be avoided because they have demonstrated excessive measured engine wear when changed at the intervals given above?

Question 2: Which name brand 10W30 and 5W30 over-the-counter oil(s) are to be preferred because their use has led to significantly less measured engine wear when changed at the intervals given above?

 

[Terry]

Brian, heres the free answer to your query.

The current propensity to use GRPII or higher base oils in the mix has made the current "name brand" oils a good value.

1) None currently that are SL/SM rated 10w-30 and most 5w-30's.

Most will perform fine in those engines for that interval, IF it is internally clean, is well tuned, is not ingesting contaminants through the the air intake, has no hidden coolant leakage internally, and has good enough combustion chamber seal that excess blowby isn't slowly carboning up the engine.

2)Any name brand 10w-30 SL/SM rated oil using Lube control at 2 ounces per qt initial fill, then 1 to 3 ounces every 1000 miles or so. This will stabilize oxidation and eliminate the oil fighting carbon buildup and allow it to lubricate for lower wear and better rings seal,resulting in improved performance and lower operating costs.

Use Fuel Power from Lube Control also to clean the upper engine and fuel side, 1 oz to 5 gallons of regular gas.

The Chevron Supreme/Havoline formulation currently in 10w-30 is showing well in both those engines. Pennzoil,Schaeffers,Motorcraft/Conoco are good choices too. For a higher stress level on the engines, i.e. towing, hard driving for the money Chevron Delo 400 10w-30 or Conoco hydroclear HDD 10w-30 are excellent lower cost alternatives. With LC even a poor oil will perform better.

3) before doing any of these pre clean with Auto-RX, a bottle each engine for 1500 miles using the current oil and a fresh oil filter then begin the LC/FP regime.

4) your jeep is a dirty engine wear wise and in insolubles generation.

5) Your Vans engine is probably leaching out coolant from the intake manifold and doing damage you may not be away of. If you haven't had it repaired already. Without oil analysis most would not even know of this TSB problem since many times it affects only one cylinder and is slow.


6) the only way to be sure things are clean and operating the best they can is at least an annual analysis.

7) Keep in mind that oil formulations change frequently and so does oil quality, what works well today may not in a year. You obviously drive your cars for the longer haul and keeping them in top shape would save you fuel and mainatenance costs over the time you own the vehicles.


Thanks for being a part of the BITOG forum !

Terry

[ June 25, 2004, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Terry ]

 

[olympic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by nascarnation:

quote:

---

Originally posted by olympic:

Heck, my previous employer used the cheapest oil and filters he could find and routinely ran 12000 mile OCI and he never had an engine failure that I recall.

---

Interesting....what type of duty cycle, climate, and terrain if I might ask. Thanks

---

This was another taxi fleet. I hired on with him just after he had picked up a huge contract with CN Rail. He had some cars that were seeing 1000 miles per day!

(all hiway, summer and winter) But he also had other cars that saw extensive town driving and extended idling times. I know he had some sludging problems on the older cars and some valve seal replacements but never a total failure like spun bearings. 300-500k on the original engine was no problem

I now service this contract but the work load has lightened up considerably. My highest use cars still average 6000miles/month and as much as 15000miles/month in the winter(all long hiway trips). Under these ideal conditions I think synthetic oil and a bypass filter will really prove their worth.

 

[Brian Barnhart]

Terry, thanks for the free advice. Somehow, I don’t think you are basing your recommendations on actual engine wear data or from the UOAs posted here.

I’m in the middle of a Chevron/Texaco/Auto RX treatment on the Jeep right now. Can’t see that it’s doing much. Oil isn’t turning dirty. Rear main is still seeping slightly (same as before AutoRX). I think that in my case it might turn out to be a waste of money.

Neither engine uses much oil over their change interval. Except for a worn distributor shaft, the Jeep engine has been trouble free so far. It’s had 10W30 M1 for most of its life (the last 6 years). The Chevy van is another story. It’s had more than it’s share of problems and its value has plummeted so fast, I can hardly afford to sell it.

In addition to regular maintenance, I typically run Techron/PI/SI a few times a year to clean the intake/fuel system. Interestingly, except for the use of AutoRX, I’ve changed nothing regarding my vehicle maintenance since joining BITOG last year.

I’d do UOAs if I thought they provided some needed benefit. But since they appear to be of little or no value in selecting an oil, and since I’ve yet to experience any internal engine problem in 30 years/600,000+ miles of real world driving, I’m not going to bother. Especially if the results are so “complex” that an expert is required for proper interpretation/understanding. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but too many “professional” auto mechanics have neglected or damaged my vehicles and misled me.

 

[Gene K]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Barnhart:
Terry, thanks for the free advice. Somehow, I don’t think you are basing your recommendations on actual engine wear data or from the UOAs posted here.

I’m in the middle of a Chevron/Texaco/Auto RX treatment on the Jeep right now. Can’t see that it’s doing much. Oil isn’t turning dirty. Rear main is still seeping slightly (same as before AutoRX). I think that in my case it might turn out to be a waste of money.

Neither engine uses much oil over their change interval. Except for a worn distributor shaft, the Jeep engine has been trouble free so far. It’s had 10W30 M1 for most of its life (the last 6 years). The Chevy van is another story. It’s had more than it’s share of problems and its value has plummeted so fast, I can hardly afford to sell it.

In addition to regular maintenance, I typically run Techron/PI/SI a few times a year to clean the intake/fuel system. Interestingly, except for the use of AutoRX, I’ve changed nothing regarding my vehicle maintenance since joining BITOG last year.

I’d do UOAs if I thought they provided some needed benefit. But since they appear to be of little or no value in selecting an oil, and since I’ve yet to experience any internal engine problem in 30 years/600,000+ miles of real world driving, I’m not going to bother. Especially if the results are so “complex” that an expert is required for proper interpretation/understanding. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but too many “professional” auto mechanics have neglected or damaged my vehicles and misled me.

---

Brian its your dime. But I would do at least a annual UOA on the 3.4L. The intake leaking coolant into the engine is a well known problem with these engines.

 

[Brian Barnhart]

Let's say the intake starts to be a problem. Granted, I would probably find out sooner with an annual UOA. But how long before it shows up in other ways? In most of the cases I'm familar with, the intake problem was discovered without the use of UOAs. How much additional damage is likely to be done before it shows up in other ways? And how much more will it cost if the repair is put off until it shows up in other ways?

 

[Terry]

Brian, obviously you are convinced of the efficacy of your maintenance regime.

No, I didn't base my comments on the data only from this site as BITOG is not a broad enough spectrum of the analysis universe.

Maybe some of the folks here that have the GM intake leak can share their experiences and what wear looked like as the coolant slowly leached into, then reacted with the engine bearings and metals.


Works for you, Cheers and Best wishes.

Terry

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

One of the weakness's of this board and others is that not every analysis posted here can be properly interpreted and explained, add the noise of commenters that write with authority but really are guessing and it confuses the point of oil analysis.

---

I agree with Terry here. Some of of use the words "I recommend" a lot. Those that "recommend" really don't know the first thing about analysis and all that's achieved is chaos and confusion. I always try to use the words "I think", "It seems to me", or "you might need". I don't recommend anything because I don't know much.

quote:

---

I would be happy to publicy interpret here but I can't afford to do it for free. If someone can come up with a way for Dyson Analysis to interpret on BITOG real time and make it worth the companies time please let me know.

---

Terry,
-You were gonna give us the "insight" on Red Line oil and the "bad" UOAs....it never happened. Same for the GC test.
I'm willing to pay (with the help of others) to gain a bit of knowledge and just because it is very interesting. I know it isn't your fault.....just trying to bring those very good ideas back to the table!

ps; I'm doing my wife's oil (

) pretty soon, so get ready!

 

[thedawk]

quote:

---

One can turn the question around. If not based on UOA results, how should a person choose an oil? Certainly the ideal statistical report correlating wear metal levels to engine lifetime is well beyond the resources of consumers.

---

Well I guess you would just buy the oil in the prettiest bottle or the oil that sponsors your favorite race car driver. Richard Petty won all those races using STP and now they call him The King!

 

[Gene K]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Barnhart:

quote:

---

One can turn the question around. If not based on UOA results, how should a person choose an oil?

---

If the desirable traits of an engine oil are known, I would suggest that VOAs might be a better tool than UOAs for choosing an oil.

---

I agree whole-heartedly.

Now if we could just get someone to step up to the plate for the thousands of dollars necessary do a decent VOA on only one oil.

Gene

 

[Terry]

Brian, this question reoccurs periodically on this and other forums. I try not to sound like a broken record.

UOA,VOA's are both very useful but ONLY if you have the experience and background including a proprietary data base to interpret them.

Problem with that data base and the one that 427Z06 wants to see is that the manufactorers, both engine and lubricant won't GIVE it out.

You can purchase a BIBLE of lubricants tested independently and updated annually, it was $10,000 a copy last time I checked. You then must be able to intepret the reams of data that is in it. Misinterpret the data and its useless.

Oil analysis is a tool and we are talking about spectrographic analysis mostly here. Thats what most of us can afford. There are other more costly and accurate testing procedures but they are cumbersome and since I work with most of them, I specifically can correlate the more exotic to the basic spectro allowing some increase in accuracy and efectiveness in proactively diagnosing problems or tuning with a analysis result.

Certainly testing a lube and host machine for $35 and getting a good picture of health or issues that need addressed is better than teardown and visually searching for problems ?

Oil analysis for 25+ years in my case has been used to diagnose, predict, prevent,repair and tune racing engines and street vehicles. Before the cute terms of preventative,predictive maintenance became accepted by bean counting managers to cut costs !

If it didn't work I would not have asked BITOG to start this board so folks like you could learn about it.

One of the weakness's of this board and others is that not every analysis posted here can be properly interpreted and explained, add the noise of commenters that write with authority but really are guessing and it confuses the point of oil analysis. That is; in a cost effective and timely fashion ,to shed light on an unknown, unidentified issue without ripping the engine apart.

I would be happy to publicy interpret here but I can't afford to do it for free. If someone can come up with a way for Dyson Analysis to interpret on BITOG real time and make it worth the companies time please let me know.

Terry

 

[jthorner]

Brian, if you think that catching a 3.4l coolant leak early is of little value than there really is not much point in continuing this discussion.

In my case catching it early meant if nothing else that the replacement was covered by the extended warranty rather than being out of pocket.

It is a free country, so do whatever you like.

Signing off from this thread,
John

 

[OlManRivah]

Very good discussion.

I'm not an additive adding guy.

For 63 years I've done well without them by just sticking to regular oil changes and no testing.

Alas, I just started the Auto-rx treatments on 2 of my vehicles, only because of this Board's feedbacks. Haven't been sold on oil analysis yet.

I agree with the fella that commented that his cars fall apart before the engine goes. Mine too!

We need a RUST Forum............lol!

 

[TooSlick]

If wear rates are within 15%-20%, I don't think it will affect ultimate engine life. If wear rates are 30% to 50% lower, it most certainly will.

The main advantage of synthetic lubes for the average driver is the ability to safely run much longer drain intervals in all your lubricated components. In addition, you will see a small but measurable increase in performance and fuel efficiency, particularly in extreme temps - both hot and cold.

Changing conventional oils every 3000 miles is wasteful and time consuming, but it will certainly get you consistently long engine life ....

Tooslick
www.lubedealer.com/Dixie_Synthetics

 

[427Z06]

Terry, just wanted to say thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience with us. I will send all my future UOAs through you just out of principle, since I detect a man of principle behind the curtain. (Hope you see this.)