This is a new one to me.New oil/filter when installed increases wear?How is this so?Thanks Joe
New oil=Increased wear?
- Thread starter Dually
- Start date
- Status
I don't think new oil and a new oil filter of the right type will ever cause engine wear (unless somebody does something silly like leaving the drain plug out). There are some people who say there is evidence that after engine oil has been in a engine longer then 3000 miles wear metals decease. Well, maybe so. But that does not mean that you can leave dirty oil in an engine for 20,000 miles either.
It has been demonstrated that the ppm of wear metals is higher in the first 1000 or so miles than in subsequent 1K intervals. I do not understand the mechanism of this. It seems the wear is initially slightly higher then a lower plateau is reached until additives are compromised and wear can then increase again. The numbers are small and the slight increase will likely not ever be noticed in the operational life for most users if more frequent OC's are done. Like Mystic said, this is no indication that it would be ok to run a 20K OCI. That's my pennies worth of opinion.
also NEW oil will clean and disperse some of the pre exsisting sludge or debris and will show in a used oil analysis.
bruce
bruce
This to me would be the only explanation. If oil had to be "breoken in" i would think it would be done prior to bottling.
ZDDP has to be activated first to be effective. It was generally considered to activated at high temp (150+ C). Now it is believed to be also activated by high pressure. I guess it is feasible to consider that it may take some time to activate ZDDP in fresh oil.
Think you are correct BUT remember that the OLD ZDDP is still on the wear surface as a film that resists wipeing somewhat so perhaps it the old ZDDP film could start to wear off before a "new" active ZDDP film forms thus higher wear rates "till broke in". Small stuff would not worry about it old oil with high acid will wear off more bearing metal than "new" oil will so change when needed.
bruce
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
You may have a disproportionate number of particles early on in a filter's life. Given the variance in pore size, more flow will go through the larger pores causing them to become saturated earlier in the FCI. After they're plugged, or restricted, the flow will naturally balance itself with increased flow through the smaller pores.
This really hasn't shown itself in PC to my knowledge. That is, I don't think anyone has done PC in 1000 mile increments to see if a filter improves in efficiency as it ages ...but it's accepted and makes sense in a reasoned kinda way. I think I've even seen filter manufacturers assert this ..but have never seen any statistical evidence to support it ..at least I don't recall any
School is still out on the upramp in wear metals early on in the OCI thingie. Lots of theories ..but little in terms of conclusive evidence. I was hoping to maybe do a 1k-1k-2k and see if the increase occurs at the same mileage every time (between 2-3k) even if you've started the process a couple of times over. You can then make certain assumptions ..but they'll just be assumptions that are supported with data that suggests that they may be correct.
This really hasn't shown itself in PC to my knowledge. That is, I don't think anyone has done PC in 1000 mile increments to see if a filter improves in efficiency as it ages ...but it's accepted and makes sense in a reasoned kinda way. I think I've even seen filter manufacturers assert this ..but have never seen any statistical evidence to support it ..at least I don't recall any
School is still out on the upramp in wear metals early on in the OCI thingie. Lots of theories ..but little in terms of conclusive evidence. I was hoping to maybe do a 1k-1k-2k and see if the increase occurs at the same mileage every time (between 2-3k) even if you've started the process a couple of times over. You can then make certain assumptions ..but they'll just be assumptions that are supported with data that suggests that they may be correct.
Testing with partially stressed oil, which contained some wear debris, produced less wear than testing with clean oil. This finding was unexpected and initially confusing (further inquiry suggested that the result was not so surprising, as many oil chemistries require time and temperature to enhance their effectiveness).
http://www.swri.org/3pubs/IRD1999/03912699.htm
http://www.swri.org/3pubs/IRD1999/03912699.htm
To me this is a pretty conclusive evidence and points to my ZDDP theory. It also shows minimal impact of fuel filtration in the first 20 hrs.
The protection provided from ZDDP is likely sacrificial, the tribofilm layer is sheared under stress to be replaced by new byproducts of activated ZDDP. Yet in new oil, there is no much activated ZDDP leaving metals unprotected.
To me, the best engine oil is the used synthetic oil drained and disposed by the 3000 mile oil changers.
Don't forget that new oil tends to be higher viscosity than slightly used oil. The thinner oil may actually produce less wear than the thicker oil.
Older threads:
Thick vs thin:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post660092
Old vs new:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...part=1&vc=1
Older threads:
Thick vs thin:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post660092
Old vs new:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...part=1&vc=1
Patman
Staff member
If someone has a lot of money, or is simply very curious, a good test (not a perfect test, but good enough) would be to run a bunch of 1000 mile OCIs, getting a used oil analysis done after each one. Do this about 3 or 4 times, then repeat the test again, this time doing a bunch of 2000 mile intervals. Then do the same for a few higher intervals. And then compare all of the data. It would have to be done in a moderate climate, so that extremely cold weather doesn't happen during the testing.
Also mentioned in Oil Life Study
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Brief mention of additive activation by Castrol re short trips
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet..._on_running.pdf
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Brief mention of additive activation by Castrol re short trips
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet..._on_running.pdf
Someone once told me(or I read it) that oils needed to be 'broke in', much like and engine.
That some 'botique' brands broke in their oil before bottling; that being part of the reason that their oil was 'better' than the run of the mill stuff.
Thought at the time: 'I want some of what ever he's smoking!'.
Maybe he wasn't so far off base after all.???
That some 'botique' brands broke in their oil before bottling; that being part of the reason that their oil was 'better' than the run of the mill stuff.
Thought at the time: 'I want some of what ever he's smoking!'.
Maybe he wasn't so far off base after all.???
used oil analysis can detect particle sizes up to about 5 to 10 microns. Typical oil filters cannot efficiently filter out particles in that size range and below it. Therefore, oil filter presence should not effect UOA wear metal readings.
this is pretty anecdotal and outdated but.....
back in the 70s I worked with a fellow who had been at Sohio (now BP)
they ran race cars at Daytona (with stock engines) as an extended oil/engine life durability test
He said they invariably blew up right after an oil change and could never attribute that to anything that was done incorrectly with the oil change procedure.
back in the 70s I worked with a fellow who had been at Sohio (now BP)
they ran race cars at Daytona (with stock engines) as an extended oil/engine life durability test
He said they invariably blew up right after an oil change and could never attribute that to anything that was done incorrectly with the oil change procedure.
Unless the particles floating around in a non-filtered engine are larger than 5 - 10 microns.
The UOA won't detect anything larger than that even if the particles are in the oil sample that's sent to the lab. They are simply too large to be "zapped, broken down, and measured" by the ICP method. If you don't trust my word, seach for "ICP particle size UOA" or something similar on Google.
Thanks for the links. Lots of reading and no conclusive facts.
The more I think, there should be minimal practical implications of this fenomenon that I have no doubt it exists.
The infamous CR study in taxicabs compared 3000 miles to 6000 miles oil changes and showed no significant difference in wear. The study was less than scientific but if 3000 miles changes were so bad, it would show up.
As for the viscosity changes, the papers dealt with 15W40 oils that don't shear, so we don't have to worry about it.
- Status
