M1 5w30 SL+LC 9766km '04 Suzuki Aerio 2.3L

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
457
Location
PEI, Canada
This is my first and last UOA with M1 5w30 SuperSyn (not EP). All the analyses had been done by WearCheck Canada in Mississauga. The engine is 4-cyl DOHC, chain- driven cams. The oil had been in use for four month, from Nov 10, 2005 to March 11, 2006. There were no temperature extremes this winter, unlike last year's OCI on GC. No oil makeup during either OCIs. LC every 1000mi. Amsoil SDF-10 oil filter. Stock paper air filter, changed about 30k km ago. I drive about 70% highway at as low speed as possible, under 100km/h. I am very light on throttle. Prior to this run I've had two 5k km runs on the same oil.
code:
 
Oil          M1 5w30SS    GC       GC     GC
Sample Date 3/11/2006 6/18/2005 2/26/2005 12/30/2004
Unit Age	74713k	50000k	40000k	30200k
Component Age	74713k	50000k	40000k	30200k
Time on Fluid	9766k	10000k	5000k	5000k
Time on Filter	9766k	10000k	5000k	5000k
Fluid Maint	Changed	Changed	Changed	Changed
Filter Maint	Changed	Changed	Changed	Changed
Wear	        NORMAL	NORMAL	NORMAL	NORMAL
Contamination	NORMAL	NORMAL	NORMAL	NORMAL
Fluid         ATTENTION	NORMAL	NORMAL	NORMAL
Iron (Fe)	4.1	4	3.2	3.4
Chromium (Cr)	0.2	0	0.2	0.1
Nickel (Ni)	0	0	0	0
Titanium (Ti)	0.1	0	0.1	0.1
Silver (Ag)	0.1	0	0.3	0.3
Aluminum (Al)	3.6	1.6	2.1	1.7
Lead (Pb)	2.2	0.2	1	0.1
Copper (Cu)	2	5.8	4.2	3.8
Tin (Sn)	0	0	0	0
Silicon (Si)	7	6.8	5.5	5.7
Sodium (Na)	4.2	0.5	1.8	0.6
Potassium (K)	0.3	0	0.6	0
Boron (B)	97	0.9	3.3	5.4
Barium (Ba)	0.1	0	0.2	0.2
Molybdenum (Mo)	59	0.3	0.7	2.1
Magnesium (Mg)	16	118	119	117
Calcium (Ca)	2488	2620	2771	3010
Phosphorus (P)	736	670	733	771
Zinc (Zn)	799	817	874	891
Sulfur (S)	1852	2601	2846	2654
Manganese (Mn)	0.9	1.2	1.3	1.6
Vanadium (V)	0.1	0	0.1	0
Oxid(PA)	68	56	50	53
Nitr(PA)	53	40	36	36
Sulf(PA)	74	41	38	49
TAN	        2.91			
TBN		        4.63		
[email protected]°C	10	11.6	12.1	12.4
White Metal	NONE	NONE	NONE	NONE
Babbitt	        NONE	NONE	NONE	NONE
Precipitate	NONE	NONE	NONE	NONE
Silt	        NONE	NONE	NONE	NONE
Debris	        NONE	VLITE	NONE	NONE
Dirt	        NONE	NONE	NONE	NONE
Appearance	NORML	NORML	NORML	NORML
Odor	        NORML	NORML	NORML	NORML
H2O(Emul)	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG
H2O(Free)	NEG	NEG	NEG	NEG

 

I have to call WearCheck to find out why they performed TAN instead of TBN analysis. May be that's because the oil already became acidic and was pretty much shot before I changed it? I think I'm done with M1. I realize that the chemistry is very different with GC, and I don't mind a change in additive elements distribution. Although increased numbers for Al and Pb (but not iron) does not impress me very much. Although copper decreased... These numbers are rather small, but I'd like them to be within GC performance range. Then again, this TAN instead of TBN. The viscosity @100C is right on the money which makes me wonder... Did it shear down and then thicken up? I know, too much BITOG reading [Smile] Interesting that this UOA did not show elevated iron. I thought it was M1's signature. I'm done with M1 after current run (for 5k km, no more) because it did not provide any advantage over green GC which I have plenty of. The engine has been noticeably nosier, particularly when cold. Somehow my confidence in M1 protection for valvetrain and bearings diminishes. Next thing will be Havoline 5w30 in fall. I got 8 bottles for free with PartSource coupon, and I'm very curious about its performance. Update: I've just talked to the lab, and the technician puzzled me with his reply why he performed TAN instead of TBN. He said that TBN means nothing for gasoline engine oil and any direct comparison with my previous UOA is useless. [I dont know] Makes me wonder... [ March 15, 2006, 02:31 PM: Message edited by: yugrus ]
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
50,362
Location
Everson WA - Pacific NW USA
Your wear metals are at the noise level. Your engine throws so little metal with either oil, comparisons are difficult. The difference in lead is so small this could be accounted for easily by driving or weather or fuel... I don't know why they did a TAN. Havoline will be interesting.
 

Al

Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
19,631
Location
Elizabethtown, Pa
Yea, great numbers, almost no difference between Mobil and GC. I don't think Mobil 1 thins out and then thickens up. It just gets very very slowly thinner. Mobil 5W-30 is pretty close to 10W-30, The only difference may be the color of the botle.
 

yugrus

Thread starter
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
457
Location
PEI, Canada
Thank you all. The lab is currently working on TBN. I hope to get results online by the end of the day. If not- then tomorrow. This UOA took a little bit longer (4 days instead of normal one). From what I can tell from the online progress tracking, they stuck with TAN by machine test. All other tests were done in one day. BTW, for those who wonder, they performed the following analyses: - Infra-red - ICP-AESpectrometric - Viscosity @100C - Visual screening - TAN by machine - TAN by titration - TBN (still IN LAB)
quote:
BTW whats this mean? "Fluid ATTENTION"?
They did not realize that this was different oil. The system indicated that additive values ( for B, Mo, Mg, S) did not match averages for GC and that triggered the warning.
 

yugrus

Thread starter
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
457
Location
PEI, Canada
Update: The TBN turned out to be 5.09. To me, it is either VERY impressive, or something isn't quite right here. WearCheck uses D4739 method... So not too bad for M1, after all. I still like GC more [Burnout]
 

yugrus

Thread starter
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
457
Location
PEI, Canada
Particle Count: A small update. I've just received hard copies of the results and it appears that they actually did a particle count. It is linear logarithmic graph, and the extreme values are: 20um - 650 10um - 5000 Does this tell anything about how good Amsoil filter does its job?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top