NEO 0w5 Racing Synthetic, 25K, VW Golf 1.9TDI, ALH

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 2, 2007
Messages
1,236
Location
Phoenix AZ
The car:

photo-vi.jpg


The engine:

photo-vi.jpg


The current odometer as of 1/8/2013:

photo1-vi.jpg


Miles on car 275,880 at UOA, miles on oil 24,988 miles

Total oil used was 8 quarts of Neo 0w5 Racing synthetic. One VW full flow filter and a new Amsoil BE-90 were used. I used 8oz of 2T oil in the tank per fill up, usually Phillips 66 or Mark III castor oil. I also added 8 oz of ZMAX twice to the fuel at 10k interval.

All UOAs and VOA were done by Polaris lab. They ran the UOA twice due to the high lead and fuel numbers.

.....................UOA.....VOA
Iron................31.........1
Chromium.........0..........0
Nickle..............0..........0
Aluminum.........6..........1
Copper.............4.........1
Lead...............103.......89
Tin.................0..........0
Silicon.............4..........6
Sodium............2..........7
Potasium...........2........0
Molybdenum......59........1
Antimony..........0.........1
Manganese........0.........0
Boron..............33........73
Magnesium.......238.......232
Calcium...........2583......2224
Phosphorus.......1222......1008
Zinc............ ..1225......1027

Fuel.............. 5.5%...........0.0%
Soot............. 0.1%...........0.0%
Water (IR)...... < 0.1..........< 0.1%
VIS @ 100C ..... 8.2 cSt......7.4
TBN.............. 5.43...........8.03
IR Oxidation.... 39.............29
IR Nitration...... 9.............10

The high fuel contamination is probably due to the 4k miles this summer when both of my radiator fans went out and the engine overheated on several occasions. I have seen this before when the AIS malfunctioned and the ECU was trying to compensate by dumping extra fuel to keep the engine running.

There is no Moly in the VOA so the 59 of moly is from the previous run of Red Line 5w20 (http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2490587#Post2490587). Apparently, there is a 10.4% of residual oil from the Red Line OCI (58/557 = 0.104129). If you subtract 10.4% of the previous UOA from the current UOA then it would more realistically approximate the performance of the NEO 0w5. Therefore, the numbers below are what should be if I was to run the NEO from the beginning and they do track well with the VOA.

...................-10.4% .....VOA
Iron................27.........1
Aluminum.........5..........1
Copper............4..........1
Lead...............101.......89
Silicon.............4..........6
Sodium............2..........7
Potasium..........2.........0
Boron..............30........73
Magnesium.......235.......232
Calcium...........2309......2224
Phosphorus.......1099......1008
Zinc............ ..1092......1027

The Lead number is about the same as the last OCI so I don’t think it was the ZMAX additives in the oil. My experiment with this vehicle is now completed. Barring any mechanical problem I will continue to run the NEO 0w5 until the car is either wreck or stolen. My mileage went from annual average of 44mpg (48 max) when new to 57mpg (62 max) now with all the mods and the low viscosity oil. One thing I might do when I change the timing belt is to switch the tranny fluid from Red Line MTL to ELF HTX740.
 
I find it interesting that there is no additional silicon after 25K desert miles on an intake taped up and missing a hose clamp....
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
BTW, the TBN is still 5.43 after 25K miles. Surprised the heck out of me.


Because you put so darn much new oil in there! Some of the wear metals were gone too. You replaced what? 8 quarts on a 6 quart sump? So you put like ~15% fresh oil in 8 times?

Multiply that out and see what the numbers may actually be.

I think youre putting a lot of wear on the engine, but its had a long life as it is.

Great experiment though, thanks for doing this, its really great stuff!
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Because you put so darn much new oil in there! Some of the wear metals were gone too. You replaced what? 8 quarts on a 6 quart sump? So you put like ~15% fresh oil in 8 times?



Maybe you just can't read. I SAID TOTAL OIL USED FOR THIS OCI IS 8 quarts. That is only 8 quarts for 25K miles. Another word, 6 quarts at the beginning plus 2 quarts of makeup oils. Let me know if you want me to do a pie chart.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
I thought that when you said "used" you meant the make up oil as well.


And when I said "total" that means everything is included does it not?
 
So the turbo diesel that calls for heavy 30 oil or 40 oils, runs great on 0w5 non diesel rated oil?
Hmm, I guess I could dump 5w20 VVB in my MB?
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
Been waiting for this a while. I don't think I'm brave enough to try 0w-5 on any of my vehicles, much less an extended drain, but your results are very impressive when broken down to PPM/1000mi.

Thank you for sharing you experiment with us!
 
Last edited:
Interesting experiment. Thank you for posting the results.

Curious that the viscosity went that high with so much fuel in it.

Just curious where you got the oil as I didn't see anything lighter than a 5w-20 on their website.
 
Originally Posted By: OB4x4


Curious that the viscosity went that high with so much fuel in it.



The viscosity went up because of the 10.4% of the residual oil higher viscosity.

I got most of my NEO oils from Baker Precision. NEO might not make them anymore but you still can get them from internet dealers. I got about 60 quarts left and they are dedicated to this vehicle.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Because you put so darn much new oil in there! Some of the wear metals were gone too. You replaced what? 8 quarts on a 6 quart sump? So you put like ~15% fresh oil in 8 times?



Maybe you just can't read. I SAID TOTAL OIL USED FOR THIS OCI IS 8 quarts. That is only 8 quarts for 25K miles. Another word, 6 quarts at the beginning plus 2 quarts of makeup oils. Let me know if you want me to do a pie chart.


Jeez, dude, calm down. So many angry people on the interwebs.

It's obviously an honest mistake if more than one of us read it the same way. Also, since you're being a bit of a jerk, I'll return the favor. The phrase is, "in other words." What could, "another word" possibly mean?
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
What could, "another word" possibly mean?



If you have to ask then you couldn't possibly understand it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
And when I said "total" that means everything is included does it not?


No - not really. Not to us BITOG folks. Because your full statement was not "total oil installed" but "total oil used". So this becomes a matter of what convention we BITOGers apply to the word "used".

I understand what you're saying in regard to the total oil installed, but I think what you're missing is that most BITOGers understand the term "used" to mean "consumed in addition after initial fill" or as "top off".

Perhaps it's not the way you speak of it, and understand it, but just about all the rest of us use the term "used" in a convention of "added after fill" and not as "part of the total load of initial fill plus sustaining top off".

In the future you could state it this way:
Initial quantity of lube installed at OCI fill: X.x qrts
Additional supplemental lube installed after initial fill to sustain adequate sump lube level: Y.y qrts
Total lube put into the engine for entire OCI: Z.z qrts


Of course, the rest of us will continue to employ the word "used" to mean top-off.


Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
JHZR2, I got on your soap box because I expected more from you as a mod. Nothing personal, sorry bro.


His status as a moderator has nothing to do with his comments; he was trying to decipher the lube added based upon your implication of "used", and then calculate the percentages. I, too, thought you had "added" (used) 8 qts after initial fill.

Just saying ... from another mod, "bro".
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top