Common sense has to prevail here. You are talking about oil that is heated and cooled repeatably, sheared, pumped full of combustion by-products from emmission equipment, that dumps the pollutants back into the engine,hence oil and fuel dilution versus virgin oil choked full of additives, with no contaminates, this is a no-brainer, regardless of what the white paper claims.
Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages
- Thread starter Bluestream
- Start date
- Status
I think all that it proves is that engine wear is not linear.
With some thought, the engines that last the longest are the ones that have had proper maintenance. Ya know I read an article and I have no clue or idea on the subject but I believe it.
Originally Posted By: Burt
Originally Posted By: tig1
Everyone thinks a few PPM with a UOA translates directly to engine wear. I don't believe that to be so.
Agreed. I would like some chemist to take the PPM per oil change and calculate the amount of loss of a particular metal overtime and then compare that with the amount of metal loss needed for an engine to lose compression or wear out its bearings. Maybe someday I may take a stab at it.
Good call. There's even more to it than that, though.
A change in the numbers could mean that the little particles of metal coming off the engine are getting bigger or smaller, and thus moving into or out of the range of sizes detectable by the UOA equipment. This is why you can have an okay-looking UOA from an engine that is failing, for example.
Originally Posted By: tig1
Everyone thinks a few PPM with a UOA translates directly to engine wear. I don't believe that to be so.
Agreed. I would like some chemist to take the PPM per oil change and calculate the amount of loss of a particular metal overtime and then compare that with the amount of metal loss needed for an engine to lose compression or wear out its bearings. Maybe someday I may take a stab at it.
Good call. There's even more to it than that, though.
A change in the numbers could mean that the little particles of metal coming off the engine are getting bigger or smaller, and thus moving into or out of the range of sizes detectable by the UOA equipment. This is why you can have an okay-looking UOA from an engine that is failing, for example.
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
Common sense has to prevail here. You are talking about oil that is heated and cooled repeatably, sheared, pumped full of combustion by-products from emmission equipment, that dumps the pollutants back into the engine,hence oil and fuel dilution versus virgin oil choked full of additives, with no contaminates, this is a no-brainer, regardless of what the white paper claims.
Common sense cannot prevail over complex organic chemisty - IGNORANCE will prevail
Hey all you High TBN/ High-detergency fans (Ca, Bo, NA) They surface compete with the Polar naphthenes and Esters and ZDDP AW agents. High initial detergency = High initial wear. Why do you think Race and break in oil is low detergency? So for short 3-4K OCI guys, the EXxon Superflow would be better than MC5K for wear given the only difference in the visible package is increased CA based detergent.
Common sense has to prevail here. You are talking about oil that is heated and cooled repeatably, sheared, pumped full of combustion by-products from emmission equipment, that dumps the pollutants back into the engine,hence oil and fuel dilution versus virgin oil choked full of additives, with no contaminates, this is a no-brainer, regardless of what the white paper claims.
Common sense cannot prevail over complex organic chemisty - IGNORANCE will prevail
Hey all you High TBN/ High-detergency fans (Ca, Bo, NA) They surface compete with the Polar naphthenes and Esters and ZDDP AW agents. High initial detergency = High initial wear. Why do you think Race and break in oil is low detergency? So for short 3-4K OCI guys, the EXxon Superflow would be better than MC5K for wear given the only difference in the visible package is increased CA based detergent.
Last edited:
that's the reason that i always buy cheap oil
cheap oil = fewer additives = fewer engine wear accelerators = better oil PLUS i save money.
house brand oil, no name brand oil, anything not premium = best.
i've known this all along.
cheap oil = fewer additives = fewer engine wear accelerators = better oil PLUS i save money.
house brand oil, no name brand oil, anything not premium = best.
i've known this all along.
Cheaper oil can also = Less cleaning, less EP additives, less anti-wear additives, etc. As a result a less costly subpar add pack. Now for short OCI's in a car that sees normal use the cheaper oil might just be the ticket.
Agreed than in std pass car interval of 4-7K OCI that cleaning must be balanced with wear rate. Dirty rings and pistons will accelerate wear and sump contamination. It's a balancing act.
Possibly changing oil with the same kind would help? But as we have seen oil within the same brand changes specs all the time..so...who knows?
Quote:"can the manufacturer zone rep deny warranty coverage due to the oil being out of spec?"
Unless things have changed greatly, the lead tech and service manager at the dealership might do a visual inspection of the oil, but they are not going to typically do a UOA or anything for a warranty repair unless the warranty is from an outside source and they request it before any repair. They don't have time for all of that and if there is a warranty they are going to repair or replace.
Move 'em in, move 'em out, YAH!!!!
Unless things have changed greatly, the lead tech and service manager at the dealership might do a visual inspection of the oil, but they are not going to typically do a UOA or anything for a warranty repair unless the warranty is from an outside source and they request it before any repair. They don't have time for all of that and if there is a warranty they are going to repair or replace.
Move 'em in, move 'em out, YAH!!!!
I was going to post a similar subject when I came across this one.
I performed an analysis on the modular data from dan the oil man for 5w20 vs 5w30. There was no conclusive evidence that either one is better than the other.
But when I looked at the graphs for wear metals vs OCI length, I found a trend of declining wear rates as the OCI was extended beyond 3000 miles. This was true for every oil grade. The wear rates appear to drop exponentially from the shortest OCI to around 8,000 miles. Then the curve (wear rate) goes flat, no change in wear rate beyond 10k miles. Strange.
Anyone know why this occurs? I know additives deplete over time, but the only one I know of that diminishes at this rate is the TBN (metal hydroxide). I also wondered if this is some detection characteristic related to the UOA analytical equipment rather than the oil itself. Better filtration as the oil filter ages?
I did come across several studies showing 100k+ OCI that lead to decrease wear rates and consequently retained engine efficiency/fuel economy. The engineers used a 3 micron bypass filter system that maintained the TBN; otherwise it was the same oil for the entire 100k+. Any ideas?
I performed an analysis on the modular data from dan the oil man for 5w20 vs 5w30. There was no conclusive evidence that either one is better than the other.
But when I looked at the graphs for wear metals vs OCI length, I found a trend of declining wear rates as the OCI was extended beyond 3000 miles. This was true for every oil grade. The wear rates appear to drop exponentially from the shortest OCI to around 8,000 miles. Then the curve (wear rate) goes flat, no change in wear rate beyond 10k miles. Strange.
Anyone know why this occurs? I know additives deplete over time, but the only one I know of that diminishes at this rate is the TBN (metal hydroxide). I also wondered if this is some detection characteristic related to the UOA analytical equipment rather than the oil itself. Better filtration as the oil filter ages?
I did come across several studies showing 100k+ OCI that lead to decrease wear rates and consequently retained engine efficiency/fuel economy. The engineers used a 3 micron bypass filter system that maintained the TBN; otherwise it was the same oil for the entire 100k+. Any ideas?
Quote:"The engineers used a 3 micron bypass filter system that maintained the TBN; otherwise it was the same oil for the entire 100k+. Any ideas?"
The SAE says that in an internal combustion engine, any particle smaller than 5 microns is deemed as non-abrasive.
Bypass filtration that works that well would leave a perpetually "clean" lubricant. Probably whatever oil the engine used, the added oil would boost the package.
The SAE says that in an internal combustion engine, any particle smaller than 5 microns is deemed as non-abrasive.
Bypass filtration that works that well would leave a perpetually "clean" lubricant. Probably whatever oil the engine used, the added oil would boost the package.
Bluestream did some homework, and therefore exposed and nullified those tests in real conditions.
what is the detection range for UOAs again? in microns
could it be that they are being ground into smaller micron particles and escaping detection as OCI increases?
could it be that they are being ground into smaller micron particles and escaping detection as OCI increases?
Well anyway, the data is based on the Ford modular engine. The data has many variances in terms of oil type and brand used, time of year used, engine condition/age, etc. Despite all this, there is a trend toward lower wear rates as the OCI is extended.
I find it hard to believe that this is true. I think there is some factor not being accounted for, I just don't know exactly what it is. The comment regarding the Ford study showing similar results is interesting, but would like to read the actual paper on it.
I find it hard to believe that this is true. I think there is some factor not being accounted for, I just don't know exactly what it is. The comment regarding the Ford study showing similar results is interesting, but would like to read the actual paper on it.
With less active detergent you have less suspended material and sludge precursers. But I would suspect the study analysis would go beyond your typ UOA that has SO MANY pitfalls. How many check mass of metallic material trapped in the filter?! - this is wear material not seen in the UOA.
I already started this same thread a few months ago...
"Does oil need to be "worn in" before it starts to work better?"
It is just simply UNBELIEVABLE that new oil is worse than oil oil. If that was the case, then I would just refill the crankcase with filtered re used oil, maybe with a bit of 20w50 thrown in to boost the viscosity. The fact is, from my brother's Dodge Colt, with 1.5l 4 banger, spirited driving, at 300,000 miles, the engine is like new, PARTLY because my brother insisted on changing the oil EVERY 3000 miles AT MOST. If new oil was so bad, then this tiny Mitsubishi engine would be toast, after all the ?abuse from (ha ha) "too frequent" oil changes.
"Does oil need to be "worn in" before it starts to work better?"
It is just simply UNBELIEVABLE that new oil is worse than oil oil. If that was the case, then I would just refill the crankcase with filtered re used oil, maybe with a bit of 20w50 thrown in to boost the viscosity. The fact is, from my brother's Dodge Colt, with 1.5l 4 banger, spirited driving, at 300,000 miles, the engine is like new, PARTLY because my brother insisted on changing the oil EVERY 3000 miles AT MOST. If new oil was so bad, then this tiny Mitsubishi engine would be toast, after all the ?abuse from (ha ha) "too frequent" oil changes.
Originally Posted By: Captain_Klink
that's the reason that i always buy cheap oil
cheap oil = fewer additives = fewer engine wear accelerators = better oil PLUS i save money.
house brand oil, no name brand oil, anything not premium = best.
i've known this all along.
Maybe we found someone to try PittPenn motor oil!!!!!!!!!!!
that's the reason that i always buy cheap oil
cheap oil = fewer additives = fewer engine wear accelerators = better oil PLUS i save money.
house brand oil, no name brand oil, anything not premium = best.
i've known this all along.
Maybe we found someone to try PittPenn motor oil!!!!!!!!!!!
I would guess that the wear and particle levels are high at first because the new oil is cleaning out the old oil and anything it left behind. All this test does is state that the oil is cleaning and that it stops cleaning and the wear/particle level stops. Anybody that would believe this needs look at engines with 3000 mile oil changes and 10,000 mile oil changes(with the same oil). Dump synthetic oil in a sludged engine and the initianal wear/particle level will be off the charts and then level off. I guess this is another conspiracy people can blame on the oil companies.
- Status
Similar threads
