Oil filter duration of use

[KCJeep]

Quite a bit of varnish, harmless IMO. I don't see the crud I feared I would though.

So essentially what you're saying here is the dizzy dame who gets her oil changed at Wally's every 12-18 months if and when she remembers is actually an OCI genius. The dummies are here on BITOG.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep

So essentially what you're sare is the dizzy dame who gets her oil changed at Wally's every 12-18 months if and when she remembers is actually an OCI genius. The dummies are here on BITOG.

ROFL @ KC!

 

[dnewton3]

Yeah - I got a bit of a chuckle out of that, too!


Seriously, though, I don't know I'd call her a genius. But, it's clear that if she does blow off the occasional OCI (by accident or perhaps because money is tight), the engine isn't going to self-destruct.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: steve20
Well Dave--you've done your homework--provided data, pictures of the filter, and under the valve cover--and answered a lot of questions. I'd say you nailed it.
A tip of the hat to you, Sir.
Steve

disclaimer: I run 5-8K ocis, and won't be extending them any time soon


Agreed, Dave sure put his money where his mouth is

Lots of varnish, but no sludge in that picture. I've seen much worse. Not bad at all for the mileage or OCI history I'd say, not bad at all!

 

[ZeeOSix]

Quote:
Lots of varnish, but no sludge in that picture.


Is the varnish layer a result of using non-synthetic oil, or extended OCIs or ... ?

 

[dnewton3]

I would presume the varish amber color is from a lifetime of dino use. It was that color when I took the top end off for the rebuild at 130k miles. And it's been that color for the last 115k miles. There was no distinct color shift whatsoever after the two consequtive long OCIs.

While I did experiment with syns early in the vehicle lifecycle, we cannot attribute this to syns as they represent a very minor part of the overall maintenance plan early on. The engine has seen the vast bulk of it's lubes be dino; typically whatever I could find on sale/rebate. That would be everything from QSGB, VWB, MC5K, etc. About the last 85k miles has been house brands; AAP, AZ, and a lot of WM/ST; again, best price won the sale.

I view the varnish as a "patina" of sorts. It's not a heavy, thick varnish at all. It does not wash or rub off; I've tried to remove it by hand with a rag and brake cleaner, etc. It seems "baked" into the top metal surface.

The varnish is light, IMO. Obviously this is somewhat of a subjective call when it comes to color. But what is clearly evident is that there is no sludge buildup at all. Not after 230k miles of dino use. Not after two greatly extended OCIs.

 

[millerbl00]

Varnish would be a big problem in a VVT engine and some engine timing chain tensioners.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: millerbl00
Varnish would be a big problem in a VVT engine and some engine timing chain tensioners.


Could be but it's a matter of degree. That pic does not indicate a problem for any engine, VVT notwithstanding. And if a guy knows enough to debate this, he will have some idea of things to watch for with his particular engine.

 

[Arctic388]

I agree a filter could last 15K. I have run some 18K and 23K and cut them open and they were like new inside. I have also ran some for 3K and they look like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zf27FQsh3Nc

it all comes down the specific oil used and what filter is used and most importantly the history of the engine. on my Malibu i use a PL25288 and have to add a quart around 5-6K miles. i use PU in it so don't really see a need to change the filter for a long time based on the previous ones i have cut open.

on my Tahoe i am changing the filter this time at 1500 miles and check again at 3000 until i see the sludge clear up again like previous filters and then plan to do my experiment again with the additive and see what results i get.

I have been cutting filters open for a while now for 4 vehicles and on 2 of the filters i have seen holes in the media but even seeing that on the cars i know can do it i run filters as long as i want and on the Tahoe i am having fun with the results i am getting out of it.

 

[dnewton3]

To continue this topic, here is my Dmax UOA at the other end of the spectrum:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3173384#Post3173384


The previous Villager UOAs and pictures show that high mileage accumulation in short time-span are doable. This linked Dmax UOA series is intended to prove that longer durations are doable as well.

The Dmax valve covers do not come off nearly as easy as the Villager, and so there are no pictures. But then again, with only .3 insols, it's just silly to thing there's any muck in there. The Dmax is one clean running engine, and the oil stays well-cooled because of a superior lube system design. There is no coolant intrusion nor moisture build up. In short, sludge is a non-issue.

I intend to run this OCI out as far as safely practical. This completes a 2nd year. I am starting into a 3rd year. I will update at that point, and if all looks well, go into a forth. Upon completion of the OCI (as yet undeterimined) I will dissect the filter for all to see. But that seems to be at least a year or two off.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted by KCJeep
Quite a bit of varnish, harmless IMO. I don't see the crud I feared I would though.

So essentially what you're saying here is the dizzy dame who gets her oil changed at Wally's every 12-18 months if and when she remembers is actually an OCI genius. The dummies are here on BITOG.

Well, they spend their money (saved) on other things.... but we like to obsess

 

[webfors]

Holy old thread batman. WTH!

 

[Ablebody]

I appreciate this thread even though it's old. It speaks volumes.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Couple of things I've realized since this thread was started:

Oil filters don't always "get more efficient as they load up", until they are nearly 100% loaded and go into bypass (which you don't really want to happen). Depending on the media, filters can dislodge captured particles as the filter loads up and the delta-p across the media increases.

Comparing UOA "insolubles" to ISO particle count data shows there is no good correlation, and the insolubles data is basically too insensitive and worthless in determining the filtering performance. An ISO particle count is the better test.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Couple of things I've realized since this thread was started:

Oil filters don't always "get more efficient as they load up", until they are nearly 100% loaded and go into bypass (which you don't really want to happen). Depending on the media, filters can dislodge captured particles as the filter loads up and the delta-p across the media increases.

Comparing UOA "insolubles" to ISO particle count data shows there is no good correlation, and the insolubles data is basically too insensitive and worthless in determining the filtering performance. An ISO particle count is the better test.

So what about wear? Would uoas accurately show wear?
Anyway, I dunno, it seems pretty simple to me. If there are particles in the oil then the filters didn't catch them. Unless your suggesting that they just sorta guess on a uoa?

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Ablebody
So what about wear? Would uoas accurately show wear?
Anyway, I dunno, it seems pretty simple to me. If there are particles in the oil then the filters didn't catch them. Unless your suggesting that they just sorta guess on a uoa?

It depends. Sure, they show "wear" since if there is no metal in the virgin oil and there is later, then it had to come from the engine. But that's about as far as it goes. There is an upper bound to the particle size detectable by emission spectrography and for the most part it is unable to detect those particles which cause wear. So a standard UOA only shows "normal" wear, not abnormal. ICP and AA can detect down to the individual atom level so anything on the small end is detectable.

That isn't a definitive statement though. When I used to run UOA for the automotive and fluid power departments in college, if you got a sample with an iron count of (lets say) 3600 ppm then obviously there is a problem with something. But even within a normal range that doesn't mean that all is well in the engine or hydraulic system. In addition to the analysis on the as-received sample we also performed an acid digestion. This gave a quick and dirty indication of the amount of larger, damage inducing particles in the sample. Without that a sample could analyze just fine yet be full of particles that are imminently harmful to the equipment.

I've posted this graphic before from a Machinery Lubrication article. Note the particle size that is detectable by emission spectrography (ICP, AA, etc.) and where it falls on their threat graph. It's not absolute but you get the idea.

 

[bbhero]

Great post kschachn. Learned some interesting information here.

 

[Ablebody]

Originally Posted by bbhero
Great post kschachn. Learned some interesting information here.

Yes that really was informative

 

[ZeeOSix]

On the same line of logic, a filter that keeps the oil cleaner (ie, gives a better ISO particle count) should result in less wear. Also, there has been mention that some "wear metals" in UAOs can be from metal errosion, not from physical rubbing wear.

A UOA "insolubles" measurement and an ISO particle count are not the same thing. The PC count is more telling.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...lubles-vs-iso-particle-count#Post4859910