Dodge Durango 3.6L - HPL 5w-20 - two samples 2,500 and 1,500 miles - 141,500 total miles

[wwillson]

These are two samples pulled from my Durango 3.6L with 141,500 miles total and 2,500 and 1,500 miles on the oil. The first sample had 2,500 miles, which was only meant to be run for 100 miles and used as a flush, because we are now using the 5w-20 CK-4 based oil and wanted the next base-line sample to be representative of the new oil. It was my fault for letting the flush oil run for 2,500 miles. The weather got cold and I got lazy. The 1,500 mile sample was meant to be sampled at 100 miles to establish a base-line. I forgot to sample until 1,500 miles - totally my fault again. I didn't throw the flush oil away, instead it's running in the Elantra where it will stay for 10,000 miles, I just couldn't throw it away.

It is interesting to see the wear metals and silicon left over in the first sample from the 26,000 mile run and how they decreased in the second sample. The oil filter was changed when I dumped the flush and had zero carbon, so the cleaning appears to be done. The TBN of the 1,500 mile sample is high, but the TBN if the 2,500 mile sample is lower than expected for this oil, maybe both are lab errors, we'll see how the TBN progresses as the miles add up.

Sample Information
Sample Date	Feb 2020	Dec 2020	March 2021	August 2021	October 2021	February 2022	March 1, 2022
Machine Age miles	116,000	122,200	127,420	132,679	137,615	140,000	141,500
Oil Age miles	5,000	11,200	15,820	21,079	26,015	2,500	1,500
Filter Age miles	5,000	11,200	15,820	21,079	4,936	2,500	1,500
Oil Changed	no	no	no	no	yes	yes	yes
Filter Changed	no	no	no	yes	yes	yes	yes
Brand	HPL	HPL	HPL	HPL	HPL	HPL	HPL
Viscosity	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO	5w-20 HDEO
						new formula	new formula
Wear Metals
Iron	5	13	21	42	62	19	6
Chromium	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]2	2	TD] [TD]TD]
Nickel	0	0	0	TD] [TD]0	0	TD]
Titanium	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]2	TD] [TD]TD]
Silver	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]0
Aluminum	3	3	1	5	5	4	2
Lead	0	0	TD] [TD]1	TD] [TD]1	1
Copper	3	10	16	39	66	64	31
Tin	0	TD] [TD]0	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD]
Antimony	0	0	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]not reported	not reported	not reported
Vanandium	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]0	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]0
Cadmium	0	0	0	TD] [TD]not reported	0	0
Additives
Boron	181	81	42	43	23	20	2
Barium	3	0	1	0	2	0	0
Molybdenum	523	521	500	518	545	535	492
Manganese	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]2	3	1	TD]
Magnesium	462	446	430	467	461	1078	1091
Calcium	3422	3237	3203	3379	3562	2812	2431
Phosphorus	788	777	760	754	802	1137	1094
Zinc	948	924	884	949	988	1326	1176
Contaminants
Silicon	11	11	15	25	33	17	12
Sodium	4	4	5	8	8	4	0
Potassium	1	TD] [TD]2	3	4	1	0
Fuel %	TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD] [TD]TD]
Glycol	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG
Soot%	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1
Fluid Condition
TBN	12.3	7.3	5.05	3.985	2.85	12	16.8
Viscosity	8.8	9.1	9.4	9.56	10.6	9.2	9.4

[TD]
[TD]
[TD]
[TD]
[TD]
[TD]

 

[RazorsEdge]

So what's your thoughts on this analysis?

 

[wwillson]

So what's your thoughts on this analysis?

With only 1,500 miles on this sample, there isn't much to see.

 

[JoelB]

Why get the UOA on the 1500 mile oil? Looking for trends in metals after flushing?

 

[wwillson]

Why get the UOA on the 1500 mile oil? Looking for trends in metals after flushing?

No, to establish a baseline, then we don't have to guess.

 

[JoelB]

No, to establish a baseline, then we don't have to guess.

Ah I misunderstood. You sampled, not dumped the oil.

 

[dnewton3]

Cu seems to be very reactive to the formulations, both old and new. Something to be aware of, because that may become an element not able to be used for "wear" determinations in the future.