PP 5w-30 09 WRX

Messages
199
Location
Michigan
Got my second UOA on my 2009 WRX. First UOA was the factory fill and had it sampled early out of fear of premature bearing wear after hearing about so many cases of spun bearings on this model. The second UOA has given me confidence all is well. Oil Filter is a Purolator PureOne. Make up oil was added approx 3,000 miles into the interval. Mostly city driving but did take a 1,200 mile road trip just before sampling. UOA
 
Last edited:

Patman

Staff member
Messages
21,985
Location
Oakville, Ontario
I can't view the UOA on that page (it's asking me to load a plug in) This is one of the reasons we ask that people type out their UOA results instead of providing a link, that way everyone can see the results no matter what happens (if you link to somewhere else, what if that server goes down, for example)
 

HondaRD

Thread starter
Messages
199
Location
Michigan
Ok, lets try this: Blackstone Comments: Aluminum, iron, copper, and silicon all improved nicely in the second sample form the 2.5L in your Subaru. At this point, silicon is the only left-over from when the engine was new, though we fully expect it will decrease again next time and when it gets below 13 ppm, we'll consider it normal. All wear levels were normal and in the correct balance, and this is a good sign that the engine is past break-in and free of any problems. No fuel or anti-freeze was present and the viscosity was normal 5W/30. At 9,010 total miles, we think this engine is doing well. SAMPLE#2: PP5w-30 Sample Date: 6/27/09 Oil Mileage: 4,315mi Engine Mileage: 9,010mi Make-up Oil: 0.5 qts Sample#1: Factory 5w-30 Sample Date: 12/17/08 Oil Mileage: 932mi Engine Mileage: 932mi Make-up Oil: 0 qts ELEMENTS IN PARTS PER MILLION Sample #2, Sample #1, Universal Avg. Aluminum: 5 9 4 Chromium: 1 0 1 Iron: 10 18 9 Copper: 5 16 9 Lead: 0 0 4 Tin: 1 1 0 Molybdenum: 74 1030 57 Nickel: 0 0 0 Manganese: 0 2 1 Silver: 0 0 0 Titanium: 0 0 0 Potassium: 3 3 2 Boron: 33 190 45 Silicon: 20 74 13 Sodium: 7 8 15 Calcium: 2906 1808 2286 Magnesium: 12 12 161 Phosphorus: 686 837 728 Zinc: 850 1040 882 Barium: 0 3 0 PROPERTIES: SUS Viscosity @210*F: 59.6 53.5 [ 56-63 ] cSt Viscosity @ 100*C: 9.33 8.32 [ 9.1-11.3 ] Flashpoint *F: 390 385 [ >365 ] Fuel %: <0.5 <0.5 [ <2.0 ] Antifreeze %: 0.0 0.0 [ 0 ] Water %: 0.0 0.0 [ <0.1 ] Insolubles %: 0.3 0.2 [ <0.6 ]
 
Last edited:
Messages
11,145
Location
Florida, Cape Coral
Does the PureOne have the same specs as the OEM? I was under the impression that the OEM had a much higher pressure relief setting. I would recommend using the OEM filters at least until you are out of warranty. Just because a filter screws on does not make it a good choice.
 
Last edited:

HondaRD

Thread starter
Messages
199
Location
Michigan
Yeah, I'm pretty happy with the wear numbers I'm seeing. I gotta say I was pretty scared to see the large number of people who were having their engines replaced within months after their purchase. I was looking for signs of Silver in the UOA which appears to be the telltale sign of inevitable bearing failure based on UOAs I've seen before the issue was apparently fixed. Eddie, you're right, the PureOne is a few psi below factory spec bypass rating of 23psi. The PureOnes seems to come closest to meeting factory spec compared to other aftermarket offerings. I will probably switch to the OEM Honeywell filter when I try Rotella 5w-40.
 
Messages
686
Location
PA
PureOne seems to do great despite the different bypass setting spec.... That's a great UOA. What is your warranty requirement for OCI interval? I thought it was 3750 miles.
 
Messages
1,714
Location
CA.
Honeywell=Fram? If so I'd either stock with the Pure One filter, or a Mobil 1 filter, check specs. It looks like your current filter is working well. JMO AD
 
Messages
15,055
Location
Canada
Even though you got good results, I'd still be inclined to move up to a 40-weight in this engine. Subaru is pretty liberal about what they allow in the engine, so I'd use Rotella T 5W-40, which is inexpensive and shows good results in these engines....
 

HondaRD

Thread starter
Messages
199
Location
Michigan
It's 3,750 miles. I like to live dangerously Actually, I can't get myself to change the oil every 3,750 miles. I'm not implying I know more than Subaru engineers but I just feel it's a waste of resources, energy, and time to change it out so early if using a high quality synthetic oil at the proper viscosity. I have my theories as to why Subaru reduced their OCIs beginning in 08'MY, but I've decided to extend my OCI based on what "data" I've seen and will use periodic UOAs to guide my decisions. Hopefully I won't eat my words if my engine blows up down the road.
 

HondaRD

Thread starter
Messages
199
Location
Michigan
huh, yea I pondered this for a long time. I've decided that while Fram is indeed produced by Honeywell, that doesn't mean I am using an off the shelf Fram by using the OEM filter. Until I see a documented failure of a Honeywell Subaru filter I'm not going to worry about it. The PureOne filters are not perfect. The gritty coating is poorly applied to the canister edges that run parallel to the gasket which actually have left scratch marks on the mating flange to the oil filter housing. Also the gasket on the PureOnes don't seem very robust. I haven't experienced any leaks but the gasket height and width doesn't appear to give the filter much safety margin compared to the OEM or Wix filters. I would also prefer the higher bypass spec when I go to a 5w-40 weight as well. It's a compromise I guess.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15,368
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
 Originally Posted By: ADFD1
Honeywell=Fram? If so I'd either stock with the Pure One filter, or a Mobil 1 filter, check specs. It looks like your current filter is working well. JMO AD
Honeywell/fram is so bad thats why both Honda/Acura and Subaru use them as OEM service replacement in the USA. They are MUCH better spec'd and built than our 3 buck orange can at greatWalofChinaMart. I have a rod knock on our Forester,so I'm waiting out the clacking time bomd and using the OEM; I want no arguments with service after engine failure. Cant beat the Purolator pureone or M1 filtration for over the counter.
 
Messages
15,368
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
 Originally Posted By: FZ1
You're gonna be sorry if you try to get warranty work on that motor.
He can just whip out the UOA and say - I got proof the oil holds up, what do YOU got? The best way to deal with this is be UPFRONT with the service manager and tell him what your (planning on) doing. If all is agreed, then 5-7K OCIs!
 
Messages
15,368
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
I think the #51356 Wix filter (H=3.4") for the older honda works here on the NA, dont know about turbo clearance. Its the biggest can you can get on there WO going to some crazy baldwin B1431 (H=4.0")cross spec.
 

HondaRD

Thread starter
Messages
199
Location
Michigan
Oh no, I'm sorry to hear about your rod knock issue. Sounds like you are experiencing what I was fearing with my car just after purchasing it. I think you could take it is now regardless of what filter is on it considering the amount of documented cases of rod knock that have been seen on the 09 WRX and Forrester. I wonder if your car falls within the VIN range of the original stop sale. http://www.subaruforester.org/vbulletin/f88/2009-forester-xt-rod-knock-replacing-engine-55684/
 
Last edited:

FZ1

Messages
4,727
Location
Texas
No,man. The best way to deal with an engine with known problems is to get all the service done by the dealer,at the prescribed intervals,so that it's documented that you complied with the warranty requirements.
 
Messages
2,038
Location
Sequim, WA
ARCOgraphite and HondaRD: From this thread: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1408284&fpart=1 I introduced a new Subaru Honeywell built filter and a FRAM PH9715 to the band saw here at work. Sorry, there are no pictures. I don't do digital, and there are plenty out there already. Sigh... It's as we feared. The Subaru filter is a "Blue Can of Death". The filter element is exactly the same. Same size, number of pleats, color, texture, and the same red stripe on the cardboard end caps. The ADBV is identical, as is the base plate. The bypass spring is stronger in the Subaru filter to meet Subaru's spec of 23.3 psi. Pressing on the valve with a pen required ~4 lbs to begin movement on the FRAM, ~6 lbs for the Subaru filter. This puts a hole in the theory of the by-pass being set to protect the filter, as the element is the same, Subaru specifying nearly twice the bypass pressure of the FRAM. The only other physical difference is that the gasket has a round sealing surface on the Subaru filter. It's not an O-ring as the Tokyo Roki, but a molded gasket that is the same as the FRAM on the bottom, but is thinner and round on the outside, top circumference. Subaru and Honda don't use Honeywell sourced filters because they are good. They use them because they can buy them cheaper than a Tokyo Roki. Ed
 
Top