LSPI w/Direct Injection

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
950
Location
Phila, PA
What additive package or brand of oil may be more likely to create issues with Low Speed Pre-Ignition in a Direct Injection Application?

Is a lower NOACK % the ticket or is it specific ingredients in the base oil or add package that makes one better than the other for Direct Injection Applications?

I understand the causes of LSPI are somewhat uncertain, however some theories relate it to small amounts of oil in the combustion chamber.
 
This is an area that seems not well-understood, at least so far. Lots of discussion, but the only thing semi-agreed (if that) is that oils with calcium-heavy add packs can contribute to LSPI. If you buy into that argument, Mobil 1 seems to be a good choice as it substitutes magnesium for some of the calcium. You can get a sense of different brand's calcium vs magnesium add packs by paging through used oil analyses in this forum.

Iirc, Pennzoil, which relies heavily on calcium, suggested in a Q&A session here that LSPI could be created but was typically engineered-out of production engines making the concern moot.
 
Last edited:
There's a lot of good information in this thread...

LSPI: A Knock On The Newest Engines

There does seem to be a consistent link between LSPI and high calcium detergent concentrations (I think CaSa in particular), but I think there are also findings that suggest that the presence of moly can prevent LSPI even with high calcium levels present.

I am very concerned about this issue in my DIT engine and am using Mobil 1 5W30 largely because it is low in calcium. Mobil 1 ESP 5w30 is a more robust oil that is also low in calcium that I have tried in the past and might go back to for summer usage in the future. The PQIA showed Castrol Edge 5W30 as being even lower in calcium than Mobil 1 back in 2013, but the word on here is that it was reformulated with more calcium...I never bothered to check because I was not impressed with its cold properties.
My Subaru was recalled for a pre-ignition issue that I strongly suspect was LSPI...I think this stuff is real. There are also lots of stories online about Veloster Turbos blowing up due to LSPI. Can't recall anything about Ford Ecoboosts having this problem, maybe their engineers had it figured out...???
 
Last edited:
This is all super high compression and late injection related on 87 octane, afaik. Just add in some good quality premium - maybe 20% 93. Good luck finding "fresh" premium. DP organoMetal compounds have always contributed to preig. There are meatl scavengers which SHOULD be added to gasoline to help with these issues.

Hard to beat WOT on the highway with some H(OH) injection
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
So I gather, as Direct Injection engines age/wear and begin to burn oil these engines with Direct Injection will unavoidably begin to experience LSPI. This burning of oil from worn valve guide/seals and worn ring will cause LSPI, and in short term the destruction will begin. Please tell me my predictions are incorrect. What are the chances of these engines seeing high mileage like we were used to seeing prior to Direct Injection?
 
Originally Posted By: zfasts03
So I gather, as Direct Injection engines age/wear and begin to burn oil these engines with Direct Injection will unavoidably begin to experience LSPI. This burning of oil from worn valve guide/seals and worn ring will cause LSPI, and in short term the destruction will begin. Please tell me my predictions are incorrect. What are the chances of these engines seeing high mileage like we were used to seeing prior to Direct Injection?


DI in gasoline engines isn't that new and there are plenty of high-mileage examples out there. So far, the only major DI issue seems to be intake valve deposits but even this seems mostly confined to early German marque efforts. So I don't think you need to worry about LSPI ultimately destroying your engine, even if it begins to consume oil.

On the other hand, DI is still an evolving and imperfect technology. Intake valve deposits are a concern as is fuel dilution. Whether these make a real difference in longevity is questionable. But it is interesting to note that the 2015 Ford 3.5 EcoBoost engine has been completely redesigned and now includes one direct and one port injector per cylinder. This was not an inexpensive change and we can only speculate whether Ford did this to make a good thing even better or to solve a problem (intake deposits, fuel dilution, driveability, emissions, LSPI).
 
Years ago the choke caused fuel dilution, and walnut blasting was a regular service item and 200 years later we're in the same situation, only with the addition of LSPI.

What exactly was wrong with PFI which didn't suffer any of these issues?

The ultimate solution is ITBs & stand-off injectors which suffer none of the above issues and benefit from more accurate fuelling, more power and better noise.

There's a reason I'm saving up for Jenveys and Motech
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: zfasts03
in short term the destruction will begin. Please tell me my predictions are incorrect. What are the chances of these engines seeing high mileage like we were used to seeing prior to Direct Injection?


I know the GM LLT version of the 3.6l V6 has been DI since Q3 2008 (8 years ago) . And they've sold a lot of those vehicles (Traverse/Enclave/Acadia/V6 Camaro/LaCrosse/CTS). Are the wrecking yards in your area full of these now?
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
OP, you will always get worse case scenario on the Internet. Do these issues exist? Yes. But in fractions of vehicles sold. High mileage DI is not a rare thing.


^this .

Enjoy the reliable torque and mileage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom