High Silicon/Thin oil normal for new engine

[Greg Bohn]

Hi;

I just changed the oil in my 2002 Toyota Avalon for the first time V-6 (1MZ-FE) engine. The manual says an early first oil change is not needed, but I usually change my oil every 3-4 months so I was only up to 1,500 or so miles.

The results came back with 'Abnormal Silicon' levels, and low viscosity. The suggested limit for silicon was 20, but my oil had 264 ppm.

The engine takes 5W-30 oil, but the 100 degree C cSt viscosity was 8.46. Would I assume that they used a thinner factory fill oil, or that the engine thinned it out in only 1,500 miles?

If it's the former, I wonder if I messed up by changing the oil before 5,000/7,500 miles (the 'normal' and 'severe' service change intervals).

Results were:

code:

---

TBN: 3.06 mg KOH/g

Vis @100C: 8.46 cSt

Oxidation: 3 Abs/cm (30 Max. allowed)

Water FTIR: Less than 0.10 %

Nitration: 6 Abs/cm (30 Max.)

Percent Fuel: < 2.0 %

Glycol: < 0.10 %

Iron: 18 ppm

Aluminum: 8

Chromium: 1

Copper: 12

Lead: 6

Tin: 1

Nickel:
Silver: Less than 1

Silicon: 264 (Max. of 20 suggested)

Sodium: 8

Boron: 21

Zinc: 857

Phos: 843

Calcium: 1604

Magnesium: 15

Barium:
Molybdenum: 45

Vanadium: pre>

---

Thanks;

 

[TooSlick]

Greg,

I see this all the time in new Toyota engines with oil analysis....The silicon (silicone actually) is from the "Permatex" type oil pan gasket used on these engines. These levels will drop over time and are nothing to worry about, provided the wear rates are okay. Excessive silicone will cause the oil to foam however, so a couple of frequent changes are a good idea. Most of this will have leached out by the time you have 10,000 miles on this engine.

This oil probably started out around 10.0 centistokes, so it has sheared by about 15%. This engine is known for this (just ask Bob), due to the cam drive design.

TooSlick

 

[Greg Bohn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ted Kublin:
Greg,

I see this all the time in new Toyota engines with oil analysis....The silicon (silicone actually) is from the "Permatex" type oil pan gasket used on these engines. These levels will drop over time and are nothing to worry about, provided the wear rates are okay. Excessive silicone will cause the oil to foam however, so a couple of frequent changes are a good idea. Most of this will have leached out by the time you have 10,000 miles on this engine.

This oil probably started out around 10.0 centistokes, so it has sheared by about 15%. This engine is known for this (just ask Bob), due to the cam drive design.

TooSlick

---

Hmmmm. If it shears down that fast, I wonder if the engine is happy with thinner oil, or if I have to change the oil much more frequently (mile wise) than even the 'severe' 5,000 Mile schedule, or if I should use a different oil?

Any suggestions?

Thanks;

 

[Al]

I would suggest a 10W-30 Syn Oil. I do use Mobil 1 but I'm sure Amsoil is good. a 10W-30 oil will not Shear down as much as a 5W due to less VI improver. Bob will probably recommend one of the Shaffer oils which are just as good and possibly better. I do know that the Mobil 1 10W appears to holdup very well in terms of viscosity.

 

[TooSlick]

Greg,

I think running a 10w-30 synthetic is a good idea ...I have a number of Amsoil customers with this engine who run 7500 mile change intervals (the max recommended by Toyota) with no problems. If you want something off the shelf I'd recommend Mobil1, 10w-30 with a 5k-7.5k change interval.

Ted

 

[Spector]

I have a 92 Camry V6, basically the same engine except for the alum change in 97. My lab has a cut off of 32 ppm of silicon. In addition to your break in of seals and silicon Amsoil may still have some as an additive, it did in the mid 90s. Also, I have consistently had iron in the 15-25 ppm over the life of this car and silicon at the 20-30 ppm and for past 6 years have changed the oil and filter every 7500 miles. (more frequently before that) Amsoil 10W30 with SDF 57 filter. I went 15,000 miles once, didn't like results. I concur with Bob that these engines (due to design of the OHC) just beat the hell out of oil. So, the 7500 miles is about my limit on my V6 and get good wear results. Again, this is trend analyis, comparing to other engines or averages is only good as a comparison. Even with what many on this board would consider high iron and silicon numbers my V6 has been consistent in the results for 10 years and now has 147,000 miles on it. Uses under a quart in 7500 miles but this has been constant for many years as well. Sometimes we read way too much into oil analysis and make quick changes instead of looking over a longer period for the trend.

 

[GeorgeCLS]

Another aspect of your high silicon (dirt) may be from the method used to capture the sample and that it may have been contaminated.. It does not take much dirt to skew an analysis result. Which is why it is of utmost importance to use good sterile techniques and the same procedure each time a sample is captured.
HIGHLY suggest running a synthetic oil especially given Toyota's engine heat problems/oil cooking problems..
George

 

[Greg Bohn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by GeorgeCLS:
Another aspect of your high silicon (dirt) may be from the method used to capture the sample and that it may have been contaminated.. It does not take much dirt to skew an analysis result. Which is why it is of utmost importance to use good sterile techniques and the same procedure each time a sample is captured.
HIGHLY suggest running a synthetic oil especially given Toyota's engine heat problems/oil cooking problems..
George

---

I'm thinking that the silicon is probably from the gasket material, as apparently others frequently see this in new engines.

I used suction to pull the fluid out of the oil pan through tubing into a bottle, so I wouldn't have expected a lot of opportunity for dirt contamination. (I've used the same style procedure before and haven't had a problem in the past...).

As far as the engine goes, it does look like the oil was thinned and had a low TBN for only 1,500 miles.

I was kind of expecting the low TBN to pair up with a high sulfination/nitration reading (assuming these were from acid formation/neutralization). But, since it seemed like these values weren't too bad I guess that it doesn't work that way.

(Oops, I see that I didn't post a sulfination reading. I'll have to check my report and see if I left it out or if I only got oxidation/Nitration)

I'll have to see what the next change looks like.

Thanks;

[ August 22, 2002, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: Greg Bohn ]