New member from Texas with a question about oil

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: hollnagelc
I was thinking of just monitoring the "health of the engine" with the uoa. I figured maybe every 10-15k miles to check on it. Or would this be a waste of time / money?

Oh and what do y'all think about the bypass filters? I've never had one and not sure they'd be worth having with 5000-7500 mile oci.



As far as UOAs, they are a great tool, but like any tool, they can become a toy with no purpose, if you don't understand how to use them. Many BITOGers are guilty of this sin, so to speak. They hop from brand/grade to brand/grade with no idea what they are looking for, or how to interpret what they see. They very often have no idea what the expected deviation is; they don't know what's "normal". Although a shameless plug that I'm not above, I suggest you read my "normalcy" article about UOAs (see it on the home page).

As for bypass filters, they are also a great tool, but only if used with their benefits and limitations in mind. If your planned OCI is 7.5k miles, there is no way in Hades that you'll ever get it to pay for itself. It will cost more than it saves in your situation. Bypass filters are tools that can greatly extend the OCI; they are fiscal savings tools. But this is predicated on extending the OCI.


Here's the bottom line ...
If you are going to stick to "normal" OCI durations, as defined by the OEM, then just forego the UOAs and bypass; they will be a big drain on your wallet with no tangible return. Bazillions of vehicles and pieces of equipment run just fine with "normal" fluids and filters in typical daily applications. By some measure, OEM OCIs are wasteful, as they are very conservative and often dump fluid before it's time is due, because they are erring on the ultra-safe side. However, the only way to make this worse, it to use premium products, pay for data, and then promptly ignore the information and capacity they offer.

Or, use a good syn, add a bypass filter, pay for UOAs, establish your ranges and track your trends. THAT is the correct use of the tools. But it will make you have to greatly extend your OCI, to pay the investment back. Syns often cost 2-3x more money than a dino oil. Bypass filters have a large initial investment, plus added FCI costs. UOAs add even more costs. To get the ROI, you really have to s-t-r-e-t-c-h out the OCI. And that can be really hard to make the ROI balance in a small sump system when all true costs are included.

There are other alternatives as well. There are some folks who can successfully stretch out the OCI, with dino fluids, using UOAs. There is a member here running a Cummins in his Dodge that successfully and successively ran longer and longer OCIs using VPB. I have not heard from him in a while, but he was heading towards 20k miles per OCI on dino oil with no bypass! And he was getting great wear rates while doing so! Talk about savings! Check his UOAs out; his name was BigGreyMegaCab (or something like that ...).

Given your expected annual mileage, you have some choices to make. The decision is yours. Are you going to play with, or succuessfully use, the tools?

 

[Clevy]

I think by-pass filtration is a great idea. It helps extend the life of the lubricant exponentially,and in some cases oil changes are no longer required,only filter changes and top up with what went out in the filters.
I've bought 2 franz bypass systems for my mustangs and when the new engines are installed these will be also.
By-pass also extends the life of the equipment because it removes all but the most minute particles,which translates to less wear.
Dnewton is the man. His advice is always sound and sensible.

 

[miniac007]

I agree 100% with dnewton3 except that an UOA is not just a tool to choose the "best" oil and filters and OCI. It is also a tool for preventive maintenance that help you to detect some engine problems.

So, like the price of the oil pressure gauge on your dashboard, the ROI of the UOA cannot be evaluated simply with the extension of the OCI.

The ROI of UOAs can be negative during 500k miles, and become positive at once if it can allow you to detect a problem in your engin which can become very expensive if not detected at the beginning

 

[dnewton3]

Agreed.

UOAs are a DIRECT view of lubricant health.
UOAs are an INDIRECT view of equipment health.

But it all goes back to my statement about knowing how to use the tools.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: miniac007
It is also a tool for preventive maintenance that help you to detect some engine problems.


Well, it CAN be. It certainly isn't a given.

Say you change the oil and your UOA sample regimen is every 7K miles. Something in your engine starts to go south 2K into the OCI and 5K before the UOA interval. A rapidly wearing part may or may not last another 5K miles before there are other indications of failure, so in that case the UOA didn't help. And in my experience, this is the normal scenario because parts usually fail in a fairly short period of time.

In order for a UOA to be able to tell you of a maintenance problem, say an oil that is inadequate in some way and causing increased wear, you have to have had a lot of trending done ahead of that so you understand what "normal" is for your engine, used the way YOU normally use it. You can't always (or often) rely on other people's individual UOAs for comparison. Universal averages are better in that regard , especially if the averages come from a LOT of samples, but your situation could still be considerably different. Establishing trending can be an expensive, time consuming proposition that may or more often does not ROI for us non-commercial shlubs.

Anyway, UOA trending can be a lot like over-insuring. It can pay off BIG in certain isolated incidents for a small percentage of the owners that do so, but for the majority, it's just a lot of money going out with no payback. It's of more value to commercial interests because downtime is more of a financial hit.

I use UOA to determine my OCI with a particualr oil. Once that is done, I won't do it again without some reason, such as changing the lube spec significantly or some other major change in the equation.

 

[roadrunner1]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: miniac007
It is also a tool for preventive maintenance that help you to detect some engine problems.


Well, it CAN be. It certainly isn't a given.

Say you change the oil and your UOA sample regimen is every 7K miles. Something in your engine starts to go south 2K into the OCI and 5K before the UOA interval. A rapidly wearing part may or may not last another 5K miles before there are other indications of failure, so in that case the UOA didn't help. And in my experience, this is the normal scenario because parts usually fail in a fairly short period of time.

In order for a UOA to be able to tell you of a maintenance problem, say an oil that is inadequate in some way and causing increased wear, you have to have had a lot of trending done ahead of that so you understand what "normal" is for your engine, used the way YOU normally use it. You can't always (or often) rely on other people's individual UOAs for comparison. Universal averages are better in that regard , especially if the averages come from a LOT of samples, but your situation could still be considerably different. Establishing trending can be an expensive, time consuming proposition that may or more often does not ROI for us non-commercial shlubs.

Anyway, UOA trending can be a lot like over-insuring. It can pay off BIG in certain isolated incidents for a small percentage of the owners that do so, but for the majority, it's just a lot of money going out with no payback. It's of more value to commercial interests because downtime is more of a financial hit.

I use UOA to determine my OCI with a particualr oil. Once that is done, I won't do it again without some reason, such as changing the lube spec significantly or some other major change in the equation.


I agree with both you and Dave on this subject as I UOA several engines at every OCI. I did find, through UOA, a leak in my fuel system that I was able to track back, through its UOA history, and see that the fuel % had in fact increased.

So in the instance I provided it was beneficial to this particular engine to catch the problem before a catostrophic failure occurred.

 

[miniac007]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: miniac007
It is also a tool for preventive maintenance that help you to detect some engine problems.


Well, it CAN be. It certainly isn't a given.


It IS. But like the other tools in your toolbox, you don't use them all everytime you do mechanics

I am sure there is in your toolbox one special you use just once every 5 years, but your are very happy to have it those times

I think UOA are usefull to detect defects in intake, like silicon input or fuel dilution du to injectors problems for example. Problems that are hard to see in normal usage.

But you are right, paying just for it is expensive.

But if you considere all the advantages, little + little = positive ROI.

For me, mileage OCI optimization + multiannual OCI optimization + preventive maintenance + standardization of oil range between vehicles = Positive ROI.

But I have not only one car...

 

[hollnagelc]

Here it is.

 

[pocketchange]

Greetings All (NFG here),

FWIW, T6 @ 7.5K has me past 375K, hot shot (48 States) @ 36K (Gooseneck).

pc

 

[1989outlaw]

Hi all , I have been in the oil patch for the last 10 years , first 6 with Schlumberger and now with Halliburton . Perforating off of wireline . The main concern we have is hours and hours of idling with the heater on or A/c here in Oklahoma . We try and always raise the hood and kick our Fords up to 12 or 1500 rpm. We know its not good on our trucks but you gotta have some where to cool off or warm up. We use Rotella 15w40 and do monthly changes, our hours are close to 400 to 500 per month . I know we should change more often but we don't . We have very little trouble out of our pickups . Rotella or Delo is very common around the oil field that would be the two I would choose from just because of availability . Both are know as fine oils on this site . Being a directional driller your truck may not idle near as much as ours do in completions.

 

[hollnagelc]

Thanks for the input outlaw. I don't do near as much idling as y'all do. But probably more than most people. The delo and rotella are definitely easier to find than the premium blue. Do y'all ever come down to the eagleford shale?

 

[1989outlaw]

No I have never been down there , but a lot of the guys on my crew have. we mainly work out around Wheeler TX or up around Stillwater OK for either Devon or Continental . When I was working for Schlumberger we used to also use a oil called Rimula made by Shell , good oil as far as we could tell. There is always plenty of either Delo or rotella on location. That is all we use anymore even in our personal vehicles because they are so easy to find. Good stuff for lawn mowers too.