Kendall 5w20 Blend 3856 mi. 2012 Hyundai Accent

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
516
Location
TX
Blackstone Comments: Thanks for the note about switching back to the OEM air filter. The K&N filter was working well, as seen by the low silicon readings, but there's nothing wrong with going back to the factory spec. Wear metals were fairly steady compared to the last sample, so your engine didn't mind the extra miles on the oil. In fact, we wouldn't be surprised if things held this steady after a longer oil run. Maybe even after a 5,000 mile interval. Iron might increase (normal), but all else should stay around average. The TBN was good at 2.9, so try 5,000 miles next. Nice job! What is interesting is that I was reading/posting in the air filers section. People here really don't seem to like K&N and I saw some UOA's where they were not fitlering well at all....so I decided to get an OEM Hyundai filter and switched it back in after I took the sample. However, according to this sample, my K&N seemed to be doing just fine....Si was decently low....What do you all think?? Also I am a little concerned about the lead increase. Bearings? or is 1 ppm nothing to worry about? thanks!
Code:
MI/HR on Oil 3,856 
MI/HR on Unit 42,967  
Make Up Oil Added 0 qts 

ELEMENTS IN PARTS PER MILLION
		 Previous Sample  Current Sample
ALUMINUM 		2 		3
CHROMIUM 		0 		0
IRON 			7		5
COPPER 			1		1
LEAD 			0		1
TIN 			3		0
MOLYBDENUM 		19		15
NICKEL 			0		0
MANGANESE 		0		0
SILVER 			0		0
TITANIUM 		93		83
POTASSIUM 		0		0
BORON 			82		71
SILICON 		11		5
SODIUM 			4		5
CALCIUM 		2604		2248
MAGNESIUM 		12		11
PHOSPHORUS 		861		656
ZINC 			920		694
BARIUM 			0		0


PROPERTIES 		Last Values	Current Values		Averages
SUS Viscosity @ 210°F	49.8		50.2			46-57 
cSt Viscosity @ 100°C 	7.22 		7.32			6.0-9.7 
Flashpoint in °F 	385		380			>355 
Fuel % 			<0.5 		<0.5			<2.0 
Antifreeze % 		0.0 		0.0			0.0 
Water % 		0.0 		0.0			<0.1 
Insolubles % 		0.3 		0.3			<0.6 
TBN 			3.5 		2.9			>1.0 
TAN 
ISO Code 
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
5,433
Location
Midwest
That moly is low for the typical Kendall uoa. 1ppm of anything is nothing to worry about at all.
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Joined
Jun 5, 2002
Messages
23,037
Location
Iowegia - USA
Quote:
Also I am a little concerned about the lead increase. Bearings? or is 1 ppm nothing to worry about?
Nothing to worry about. Most likely due to instrumentation variability and in the noise floor. Looks like it's playing well with this engine.
 

650NutKase

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
516
Location
TX
Originally Posted By: volk06
That moly is low for the typical Kendall uoa. 1ppm of anything is nothing to worry about at all.
Glad you mentioned the 'typical' UOA for Kendall. My local Firestone guys looked at the bottle that they used on my car. This is the SM gf-4 formulation. Maybe more moly was used in the gf-5 SN flavor? Also, keep in mind that this is the synthetic blend, not the full synthetic smile
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
5,433
Location
Midwest
Originally Posted By: 2012AccentSE
Originally Posted By: volk06
That moly is low for the typical Kendall uoa. 1ppm of anything is nothing to worry about at all.
Glad you mentioned the 'typical' UOA for Kendall. My local Firestone guys looked at the bottle that they used on my car. This is the SM gf-4 formulation. Maybe more moly was used in the gf-5 SN flavor? Also, keep in mind that this is the synthetic blend, not the full synthetic smile
The full syn and synblend have the same visible additive package. Usually has around 75-80ppm moly.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
4,573
Location
Merritt Island FL, USA
Originally Posted By: 2012AccentSE
What about SM vs SN?
The additive pack in the SN version appears to be a little more stout. Either way this oil, whether SM or SN, has a very nice additive mix.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
12,968
Location
Northern Kentucky
The 11 silicone with the K&N installed isn't high, but you see already on the first change with OEM you went down to 5 which is more than 50% difference. Also it could go even lower in the next sample. I think you made a good choice ditching the K&N but it wouldn't have hurt very much either.
 

650NutKase

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
516
Location
TX
Originally Posted By: 901Memphis
The 11 silicone with the K&N installed isn't high, but you see already on the first change with OEM you went down to 5 which is more than 50% difference. Also it could go even lower in the next sample. I think you made a good choice ditching the K&N but it wouldn't have hurt very much either.
Actually the kn was still in for this sample. I switched it after sending this sample in smile the only reason why I think that I got a lower reading is because the filter is slightly dirty so less particles get through.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
12,968
Location
Northern Kentucky
Yes the filters do better after loading up but once you clean them and re oil I don't believe you ever achieve the same efficiency as when from the factory. From a thread I saw recently washing it opens more pores. I that was your reading with the kn it's not bad. Have you ever washed your filter or was it still on the factory oil?
 

650NutKase

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
516
Location
TX
I cleaned it 3100 miles before the original UOA. That might explain the higher than normal Si. I have not cleaned it since then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top