Castrol Syn 0w20, 5434mi OCI, 20196mi 2017 Mazda 6

Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
789
Location
Lynchburg, VA, USA
Castrol Syntec Black Bottle. 150ml of Ceratec (let the additive bashing begin!). Replaced with M1 AFE. I'll probably stick with that as long as I can find it cheap.
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,965
Location
Kansas
I think additives are great for older cars. But why are you using it in a 2017? VW says warranty will be voided with the use of a additive. I also think Honda says the same thing. I would make sure Mazda wont trash your warranty using it.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
226
Location
Chicago
This UOA is not good, that UOA is concerning. 1. Viscosity is too low and it is diluted, likely from fuel. 2. Flashpoint is too low, needs to be higher, another fuel dilution issue. 3. Your insolubles in a brand new engine are too high. 0.1 tops in a new engine, this is from EGRed residuals and deposits, as well as fuel dilution. 4. Control the issue, improve power & fuel economy.
 

SF0059

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
789
Location
Lynchburg, VA, USA
Thanks for the feedback, all. I am personally happy with this UOA as well as the last one. Let's answer a few questions! Additive in a new car: Mazda's OEM oil has a metric ton of molybdenum in it. So, if anything I am getting closer to the OEM spec. I am also using this as an experiment to see how quickly wear can stabilize in a new engine. I may have started too late, because the metals in both UOAs look stellar. I can't scientifically support that Ceratec had anything to do with that, but that engine is wearing very well regardless. Warranty: I'm not concerned with warranty issues. There is no way they could determine that Ceratec was used. If they could prove it... well, they deserve a gold star. Honestly, if warranty comes up I could just dump the oil, refill and take it in. Viscocity, flashpoint, dilution and insoluables: The viscosity is on the lower side, but not drastically out of spec. Flashpoint is lowish and this may very well be due to fuel. I can't know that until I start getting my UOAs through Polaris, so we will see. I'm not concerned with the insoluble level. It is still fairly low. Until I see a trend, this could even be attributed to a contaminated sample. I'll just keep on testing to determine trends. In any case, the vehicle is highway driven about 85% of the time. Oil level doesn't change at all during service. It could be possible I am seeing some minor fuel dilution, but for now it is not having a negative impact on wear. I'll keep up the testing until I have enough data to determine trends. Overall, I'm thrilled with these two early samples.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
226
Location
Chicago
Ah yes everything looks great and shiny!! But alas this UOA for you may look good from far, but it is far from good!! The fact is trending is useless for automotive tribology. In my time with Tribologik, I argued every day how trending is the key to nothing. Here is the problem, you're trending continues right, so we then use those trends as a "safety baseline" but what happens when the safety baseline wasn't safe to begin with? If you need to trend in this industry, you're not an analyst. Trending is ok on a locomotive engine or a turbine, not on a vehicle with irregular conditions on the daily. 1. viscosity, it is very low, especially at 5,000 miles your ethanol usage and your highway miles. 2. you have fuels dilution, flash point is not "lowish". It is low, address it or why even do UOA. 3. you're insolubles is not from contamination, this is from EGRed deposits and FD. 4. You can dismiss every notion I have mentioned to feel good about the test, but at a minimum consider reevaluating how easy you dismiss everything. Tests to get done at Polaris. I know they use a PE gas chromatograph as I've spoked with Brett Minges on the accuracy of PE vs. some other brands.(surprised no one ever debates machinery for tests on here) 1. Fuel by GC 2. Water by KF. I strongly suggest the acid number as well if you can afford it.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
21,853
Location
...
Running Ceratec in these new engines might be borderline experimenting. Mazda has incorporated a lot of anti friction methods into these SkyActiv engines including coatings, superfine polishing and new designs on certain parts. For 2017 for example the piston rings are completely new. New design and shape. How will Ceratec work with or react against these new technologies? If a part is already DLC coated does the Ceratec hinder the effectiveness of that coating? There are lots of questions here. I would stop using the Ceratec. Castrol is a great oil in its own right.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
7,769
Location
Wet side WA
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Super low to almost no wear metals. Looks great imo! thumbsup
That's my thought. I wouldn't change a thing and see what the next UOA looks like.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,162
Location
.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Ah yes everything looks great and shiny!! But alas this UOA for you may look good from far, but it is far from good!! The fact is trending is useless for automotive tribology. In my time with Tribologik, I argued every day how trending is the key to nothing. Here is the problem, you're trending continues right, so we then use those trends as a "safety baseline" but what happens when the safety baseline wasn't safe to begin with? If you need to trend in this industry, you're not an analyst. Trending is ok on a locomotive engine or a turbine, not on a vehicle with irregular conditions on the daily. 1. viscosity, it is very low, especially at 5,000 miles your ethanol usage and your highway miles. 2. you have fuels dilution, flash point is not "lowish". It is low, address it or why even do UOA. 3. you're insolubles is not from contamination, this is from EGRed deposits and FD. 4. You can dismiss every notion I have mentioned to feel good about the test, but at a minimum consider reevaluating how easy you dismiss everything. Tests to get done at Polaris. I know they use a PE gas chromatograph as I've spoked with Brett Minges on the accuracy of PE vs. some other brands.(surprised no one ever debates machinery for tests on here) 1. Fuel by GC 2. Water by KF. I strongly suggest the acid number as well if you can afford it.
Cripes, look at a UOA of any DI Honda using 0w-20: you'll find viscosities below 7.0 in almost every case and below 6.0 in some cases. As an owner of such Hondas I'd be delighted with this UOA. DI engines are just prone to fuel dilution and shedding 1 - 1.5 points of cSt at 100C during an OCI from dilution and shearing is in the good side of normal.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
7,086
Location
South Carolina
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This UOA is not good, that UOA is concerning. 1. Viscosity is too low and it is diluted, likely from fuel. 2. Flashpoint is too low, needs to be higher, another fuel dilution issue. 3. Your insolubles in a brand new engine are too high. 0.1 tops in a new engine, this is from EGRed residuals and deposits, as well as fuel dilution. 4. Control the issue, improve power & fuel economy.
Im assuming he has the Mazda Skyactive engine (please confirm), the highest compression mass produced engine in the world (and its awesome) which is also direct injection. Anyway, there is always fuel in these engines, no big deal but its a good idea with any UOA to truly bring the oil up to operating temperture before taking a sample. One thing for sure, it beats anything in its class (and more) for fuel economy and power. Again, assuming he has the Skyactive engine which I can guess he does. But would be great to know for sure, its an awesome engine. Personally I think its crazy to add an oil additive to any modern engine, even more so in such a specialized engine as the Skyactive which is unmatched in the automotive world. I agree with the other poster in here, he is experimenting for no good reason. He doesnt know what he is experimenting with, even if it led to a trace lower wear rating, who isnt to say this additive will not build up on the pistons and rings over time? Leading to far more wear or failure? (just some things to think about)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
4,666
Location
MN
I'd use just LiquiMoly MOS2 which is just moly with no hexagonal boron nitride like Ceratec has.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This UOA is not good, that UOA is concerning.
Its a very good UOA, no problems, low wear, etc.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
1. Viscosity is too low and it is diluted, likely from fuel.
Not diluted much at all. Viscosity normally drops about 3 to 6 thousand miles into an oil change due to Viscosity Index Improver (VII) chemicals polymer coil breakage. https://www.oronite.com/paratone/calcviscosity.aspx
Originally Posted By: danielLD
2. Flashpoint is too low, needs to be higher, another fuel dilution issue.
Flashpont is close to 400, which is enough.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
3. Your insolubles in a brand new engine are too high. 0.1 tops in a new engine, this is from EGRed residuals and deposits, as well as fuel dilution.
Not from fuel dilution at all. I agree insolubles could be lower. I'd suggest trying a Fram Ultra or MicroGreen oil filter to clean out more soot and conglomerates than normal all-paper oil filters can do. Also a Dimple or GoldPlug strong magnet drain plug helps.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
4. Control the issue, improve power & fuel economy.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
226
Location
Chicago
ahhh, I wish people had to post their job title and field in their signatures. I challenge the OP to actually get a half way decent UOA. It's a new engine. One thing many here (who ARE NOT UOA analysts) miss, is in a brand new engine, FD won't cause much wear. Just wait till later on when ferritic micro corrosion becomes present. Oil_film_movies. A magnetic drain plug won't do diddly in a modern engine, yes it's fuel dilution causing that filter to load.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
7,086
Location
South Carolina
Originally Posted By: danielLD
ahhh, I wish people had to post their job title and field in their signatures. I challenge the OP to actually get a half way decent UOA. It's a new engine. One thing many here (who ARE NOT UOA analysts) miss, is in a brand new engine, FD won't cause much wear. Just wait till later on when ferritic micro corrosion becomes present. Oil_film_movies. A magnetic drain plug won't do diddly in a modern engine, yes it's fuel dilution causing that filter to load.
To me, it seems you are conflicting with yourself. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. Your going on about people who are not UOA analysts and FD wont cause much wear etc. Yet the UOA does not show FD. So which is it? For me, I assume fuel, even though the UOA does NOT show it, because EVERY Skyactive engine seems to shows fuel since it was produced starting around 2012. No big deal, direct injection engine like others and has been rock solid.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
4,666
Location
MN
danielLD, I found that people with just a little tech training, without a deeper engineering or chemistry degree, can draw the wrong conclusions on UOA evidence. That kind of thorough background keeps the misconceptions you have out of the picture. It explains why we see some of the dumbest things said by "oil analysts" at Blackstone on many occasions. It takes a deeper understanding of the fundamentals. Read the Oronite web page I posted and you'll begin to realize visc normally drops a bit, then rises as oxidation takes hold later in the OCI.
 

SF0059

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
789
Location
Lynchburg, VA, USA
This has to be the most normal UOA with the most controversy in quiet a while! For the poster who asked; yes it is a Skyactiv. For those that think I'm crazy for using Ceratec, you can continue to think that. That being said, the predominant ingredient is molybdenum. As I pointed out, Mazda's OEM oil has tons of moly in it. So I really don't think that the "it could harm the engine because it's so high-tech" argument holds water. If you can come up with a better argument, I'd like to hear it. danielLD, I hear a lot of warnings and no solution. DI engines dilute, it is just a given. I am changing it before it is out of spec and Skyactivs tend to dilute less than some DI engines. I only run top tier (Shell) gasoline, drive mostly highway, don't idle, etc. I'm not sure what you would have DI owners do other than change grades, which would not change the % of dilution, but would protect against shear. In any case, I'm not in a position to change grades due to warranty. Next time I'm going to try to pull together the money for the Polaris testing package and get the TAN numbers. True dilution and TAN numbers are really the only elements missing from this equation. Barring those, I'm still happy with the way this engine is performing.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
226
Location
Chicago
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
Originally Posted By: danielLD
ahhh, I wish people had to post their job title and field in their signatures. I challenge the OP to actually get a half way decent UOA. It's a new engine. One thing many here (who ARE NOT UOA analysts) miss, is in a brand new engine, FD won't cause much wear. Just wait till later on when ferritic micro corrosion becomes present. Oil_film_movies. A magnetic drain plug won't do diddly in a modern engine, yes it's fuel dilution causing that filter to load.
To me, it seems you are conflicting with yourself. Unless I am misunderstanding your post. Your going on about people who are not UOA analysts and FD wont cause much wear etc. Yet the UOA does not show FD. So which is it? For me, I assume fuel, even though the UOA does NOT show it, because EVERY Skyactive engine seems to shows fuel since it was produced starting around 2012. No big deal, direct injection engine like others and has been rock solid.
No contradictions here. You don't understanding the testing methods which is ok, but it's why you and most people are confused and should listen. It should be well known by now that Blackstone says 0.0% fuel when often times it's as high as 5% before they detect. Many of my little side project UOA's (race cars) were having Blackstone say 1.5% when GC revealed 8-10%. Flashpoint is not an accurate way to read fuel dilution. Many more issues with that UOA from a testing stand point. Water is another one that is definitely not at 0.0. Fuel Dilution is one thing most people here don't know how to solve. So people accept it as normal, even though it's not. Address the ring seal and your fuel economy and power will rise. Leave FD uncontrolled, it creates micro corrosion, wear, and a lot of other bad things. Most here just say "oh, FD is ok, nothing wrong", yet that is the number one cause of engine wear or any wear for that matter. Track time and prolonged redline creates little to no wear. FD is what destroys engines. One study I did with Subaru, showed when we controlled the FD in the tracked STI's, wear almost instantly disappeared even though these cars were hitting redline for prolonged hours. We then started pushing the cars even harder. There's more to FD, but you can get an idea.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
226
Location
Chicago
I disagree. Well noted, the Blackstone Analysts are not really UOA Analysts. I trip them up all the time. They just look at wear values and see if they're "high". It's ok Blackstone is trying to make money, they can't pay $$$ to analysts and stick around. UOA in my opinion is usually disappointing. You need mechanical experience, and a whole lot more to really understand it. It's definitely not something you learn in a little bit of time, it takes years and years. SF, ok to address your question. No, we can use different formulas, fuels, additives, filters and a few other things to combat your issue. Here is the problem, your UOA is missing 75% of the info we need to make those decisions. It's not a guessing game and I'm not in the guessing business. When you get a better UOA, then we can start addressing it. PM me, I can get you quality UOA's for as much as Blackstone. If you want to go to a different lab.(I get commercial prices because it's what I do for work) Here are the minimum tests needed. ICP Spectro + FTIR + Viscosity 40, 100, Index + TBN/AN + Fuel % by GC + Water % by KF.
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
3,595
Location
pa
an interesting article for sure. many here like myself are rookies for sure + i enjoy learning from those "in the know" we all have opinions but thats all they are, i for one DON'T buy into the xxW20 oil hype for the 1/4 mpg get to add to their test scores while adding less protection in the long run!!
 
Top