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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Danh
Don't leave us in suspense. Without giving away the store, how does a civilian "control" fuel dilution in a modern DI engine and preserve the warranty at the same time? I'd love to have a strategy.


From other threads, I believe that his solution is to go thinner.

So if a 0W20 is too thick to control ring seal, then surely the fuel dilution would be "better" from that perspective and self limiting as it further improved things.

Originally Posted By: danielLD
Because filters do not behave the same way in every engine, in each oil and fuel. We are also missing vital data needed to make those determinations. You have to know and test many combos. Aftermarket filters almost always perform better than their OEM alternatives and tend to be the same price.

From his data, 0.3 at 5,000 miles is too high. What is this 100% related to? No one really knows because we're missing crucial data.

It's likely EGRed fuel residuals, FD, and poor filtration. After a while, you start to see the same trends over and over again.


You don't think the Ceratech solids are part of the high insolubles ?


No, and this is why I can't just give blanket statements and people get all butt hurt because I didn't give them what they wanted to hear but rather the truth. There are many different solutions but without the tests we don't know what the right solution is. For some vehicles, it's a thinner oil, for some it's a different additive pack, or base stock. Some need a fuel additive, some need different filters, so need new spark plugs or O2 sensors. It's like you have cancer but you don't know where it is. You have to target the specific cells right? Same applies here, yet we have limited data so we don't know which way to target it. So I can't and won't just randomly name out oils without knowing what's really happening.

2. oil_film_movies, he is quick to dismiss and say there's nothing, but here's the facts. At 7.62, you're in the 3.5-5% fuel dilution range. How do I know? I've done thousands of full on blast UOA's. I've seen hundreds of civics, kias, fords, and so many other cars. When I left Tribologik, my personal database of UOA on gasoline engines from Lamborghini's to Toyotas was over 18,000 UOA's. Trust me if fuel dilution could be calculated by an equation based on the viscosity at 100C, it would have been done already. We've tried calculating fuel % using every method and proprietary method with little luck. GC is the one and only way.

My civic at 8,000 miles at 7.9cst had 2.7% fuel dilution and it has 170,000 miles(2009) and I use every trick in the book. Best air and oil filters, new plugs, fuel additives, ethanol mixing, decent oil(M1 5W20). It's an old engine I used to stomp on really hard, I'm thinking I should be able to get into the 2% FD on the next test and it's driven for less than 10 minutes at a time now, so this is very good FD readings for that kind of start stop style.

People on here rip on me, but it's hard to defend myself when guys like that think they know something when they don't. The few that know I'm right haven't chimed in, and I think I know why, but it's a shame they won't back what I am saying. When you've done over 1,000 UOA's with GC and not some estimate that is never right and always shows 0, you see the trends over and over again.

I used to fight guys on other forums telling them they had fuel and they said you're wrong, etc. It wasn't until three senior mods sent in samples to both labs but got GC on one and flashpoint on the other. Their eyes opened wide when one sample came back at 7% and Blackstone was saying 1.3%. When you use GC and see what it shows, you'll never go back, it really shows you how flawed flash is.

Blackstone's pentanes insolubles test is probably one of the best out there. It's certainly possible the ceratech is increasing the reading but I doubt it. Again we have no GC or FTIR but we/or at least I know, he's got a good amount of FD going, and until we get a GC reading we don't know how high he is. If he's having high levels of fuel dilution and poor filtration, those EGRed residuals are getting dumped into the oil. He may need a fuel additive to control intake valve deposits, most likely will. deposits will raise fuel dilution readings within a few percentages on a new engine.
 
http://www.insightservices.net/testoil/DataFiles/6594/2040456.pdf

Here that's my civic, check out the data and see for yourselves.

There are times where the viscosity drops and there is little fuel dilution, yes, this happens, but it's very rare and happens with thick oil that don't stay in grade well. AKA Motorcraft 15W50, M1 40 and 50 weights, etc.

With knowing the flashpoint numbers and viscosity drop and having loads of professional experience doing UOA, I can say this viscosity drop is not related to mechanical shear, that Mazda is no track vehicle.
 
I agree with you that quite often some of these Japanese engines on 0w20 show poor flashpoint, poor viscosity rettention, and are reported by Blackstone as AOK.

Also agree that it's not harmless, despite whatever this run's PPMs of Fe/Al/Cu show.
 
Originally Posted By: danielLD
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.


Im quite capable of understanding now that you explained your post and your way of thinking.
Im not a mind reader, but thats ok, I dont hold it against you :eek:)

I am also fully aware of Blackstones issues at times with fuel dilution. You may not know though that not all people properly take an oil sample, oil should be full hot and from the middle of the drain.

Ummm. Yes, dilution is pretty much a given in Mazda Skyactive engines, highest compression mass produced engine on the market and direct injection. I would go as far to say a fact, yet, if the sample is properly taken maybe not as much as what you may consider a problem.
Mazda doesnt think of it as a problem, engines have been rock solid.
With the above said, me personally, I run a 5/30 in our Skyactive because of known bit of dilution and the fact that the same engine any place other then the USA recommended oil/ok to use oil is 5/30.
 
Last edited:
In general, we know manufacturers are probably controlling LSPI with extra fuel. We can argue about that, but it is not worth the time. Fuel dilution is not good. You can freak out and use thick oil, filters, etc. Just change your oil more often.
 
On a separate note apart from FD and what it all means, I emailed Liqui-Moly just for kicks to see what they had to say about using Ceratec in new engines, specifically SkyActiv. Granted, they are not unbiased, but the information is still worth posting. I will say that the most impressive thing is that the first person I heard back from was an Application Engineer, not some copy/paste customer service rep. Here is the email:

Quote:
Dear Redacted,

thank you for your inquiry and your interest in Liqui Moly products.

We recommend the use from our Liqui Moly Cera Tec also for new engines, to protect them against wear from the beginning.
Our point of view is, the best wear is the one that does not arise.
Therefore you can use the Cera Tec without any problems for an new engine.

Freundliche Grüße / Best regards

Redacted
Anwendungstechniker
application engineer
 
Last edited:
I have never conducted studies on aftermarket additives but the studies out there show they increase long term wear for a short term return.

Molakule would be able to explain better here. Or Dr. Gary Barber from Oakland University's ATC.

I think Terry Dyson even recently had something advising against Cera Tec.
 
Daniel, please explain... if there is a short term return that is done over and over, how can there be an increase in long term wear?

Not bashing; just think of it like pocket change. If I throw my pocket change into a jar for 12 months, instead of throwing it out the window while driving over a bridge, at the end of the 12 months I am better off than before, correct? So if I save 2ppm iron here and 5ppm copper there, how is that going to be worse in the long run?
 
From what I understood when I last spoke with Dr. Barber, who was a big resource for me. The premise is that the additive clings to the metal but over time eats away at it, so short term it does reduce wear values but in the long term the metal will wear at a much faster rate.

I'm not claiming to fully understand the concept or grasp it. It is a serious chemical question out of my league. But I did put three people on the last post that do understand it and can explain it. I think Molakule would probably be the only one who would care to teach us on here.

I think Molakule even this week posted something about aftermarket additives and how he would not use them. Again, this is not something that is in my area of expertise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top