Red Line 5W Racing Oil, 2019 Lincoln Navigator 3.5L Turbo, 1,059mi - Oil, 29,000mi - Truck.

The first column is the SAE Grade. 5W has to meet these criteria:

1675967920225.png
That's not the "5" you're talking about in the Redline "0W-5" oil you used. The basic understanding of the cold "Winter" cranking/pumpability vs hot operating viscosity grades in J300 doesn't seem to be fully understood. Look at the headings of the columns in the J300 table.
 
Last edited:
This is a continuation of an earlier thread. Please review for component history above.

All the testing Data is in now, comments from the labs are below the chart.
I added two virgin oil analysis on the 5W Red Line oil and particle counts from Polaris on the RL VOA and UOA.
HTHS values were performed on RL VOA and UOA by Savant Labs & Institute of Materials, Inc:

Nav2.jpg


Nobody had the virgin oil analysis in front of them when giving me the UOA comments below:

Blackstone comments:
ALI: We didn't find a lot of information on the Red Line website about this oil. We're seeing some extra
metal and silicon, and if you're racing, this might be normal...(I do run up the RPM even with the oil cold (80F) and there is high speed highway travel that could heat things up as one pushes this barn door down the road - but no towing)). Copper and aluminum could be bearing wear with silicon showing abrasive dirt, or if work has been done, maybe all this is from new parts wearing in. Check the air filter/intake if you suspect dirt. The TBN is still good at 3.3. Insolubles show little oxidation.
(I sent in a virgin oil sample (VOA)) to them, I guess they missed the connection to this used oil sample - should have written it on the UOA sample)).

Synthetic Advantage written comments:
1) Copper and silicon elevations are suspect as they are key bearing and cylinder alloys in the design. If aluminum increases, watch out. Redline may be using very high anti-foamant as Si. There is not much iron to wear in this design. Monitor.
2) Very high anti wear level focused formulation but as we can see acid is rising rapidly in the duration. There is no lead in this engine design so that may be an additive.
3) Interesting that it's more viscous than the Redline spec sheet with nearly 2% fuels which may indicate some oxidation action since it has high anti-wear but no corrosion nor antioxidants levels for long drains.
4) Combustion dynamic is exceptional. EGR/CCV flows may be cleaned/scavenged and could contribute to Si rise.
5) I would not run this oil much further than 1500 miles duration in your application because of possible acidic corrosion taking place. But it will clean carbon away!
Audio tape remarks in addition to the above:
Fairly good results with viscosity having little to do with what is seen on the UOA. There is little iron from the high wear areas, mostly from the valve train and crank. Si is high most likely from anti-foaming additives and maybe seals but if the aluminum was higher it could also be from bearing wear. Watch the Al trend. There is lead but not from bearings, maybe an additive or gasket related. No turbo issues unless there is copper in there. There is no anti-corrosive activity so acid corrosion is an issue. This oil is not designed to be used on a continuous basis. Oxidative thickening is occurring. Water level is high as one could see in Florida and engine running at lower temperatures. (Meaning motor oil temperatures are low from lack of load and from the thin oil, nothing to do with low ambient temperature. We are in tropical Florida after all).

Polaris comments:
Flagged data (Cu, Si, Mn) does not indicate an immediate need for maintenance action. Continue to observe the trend and monitor equipment and fluid conditions. Flagged data may be 'wear-in' or contamination from overhauled or new unit; Silicon/Dirt may be present due to new unit contamination; Oxidation is flagged, however we cannot determine the severity of this oxidation value. If using a synthetic lubricant starting oxidation values are typically higher. Continue to monitor other fluid properties for trends of oil degradation. Please submit a new (unused) sample of this fluid for BASELINE REFERENCE. Copper is at a MODERATE LEVEL; COPPER is most likely LEACHING into the oil via the OIL COOLER core tubing. This typically DOES NOT REQUIRE MAINTENANCE ACTION unless there is evidence of COOLANT in the oil. COPPER may also be from fuel lines or similar tubing; Manganese sources in unleaded gasoline engines include manganese/bronze valve guides and/or an additive added to the fuel; Please provide COMPONENT MANUFACTURER and MODEL to compare data to the correct standards for this component. Lubricant and filter change acknowledged.

Note: The price of Polaris and Blackstone labs is comparable but the Synthetic Advantage lab costs 3-4 times more.

What is a possible mechanism for wear that is lower than expected for this thinnest of oils? The oil film thickness is what it is and basically viscosity related. One reason is probably the film strength. Esters have a higher film strength than regular dino components. Can a thin high ester oil act/protect as a higher viscosity grade in vivo?

For wear control many think that high Zn is a big contributer but values as low as 0.03 have been shown to be all that is needed. More does not mean higher levels of protection. The reason more is used is because it may be consumed and diluted so you have to start with enough for the application. A study I presented recently showed that the same oil, with all the Zn removed from the formulation, only doubled the wear rate. So Zn is not the cure-all for wear. I think the reason it is popular is because it is multi functional and inexpensive for formulators.

It seems the copper and maybe a componant of other metals as the iron could be from acid errosion. This oil is for race day, not to be used in a motor for months at a time.

For me the most interesting comment was from Synthetic Advantage:
“Fairly good results with viscosity having little to do with what is seen on the used oil analysis.”

Ali
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RDY4WAR’s remarks on the First Thread of these results (post #20) was well thought out, informative and somewhat similar to what I feel the UOA analysts have given me for an evaluation. You get an accolade.

“The copper is quite high, however, the aluminum, tin, lead, and silicon content is low to non-existent (silicon is always high in virgin RL (Red Line) oil which indicates to me that the copper is likely a result of chelation rather than wear. Therefore, that becomes just a "monitor" item to see how it does over subsequent UOAs.

The phosphorus is higher than the zinc which is uncommon to see. Seeing the extra Mo, about double what RL puts in their HP line, I'm going to take a WAG and say it could be from a top treatment of MoDTP. (See: Molyvan L from Vanderbilt Chemical).

The variance in elements between the labs is showing 18% margin of error.

The detergent content is low which makes sense being a dedicated racing oil. Studies have shown that high amounts of overbased detergents can hinder ZDDP's reactivity and effectiveness. It makes sense that a racing oil would prioritize the AW and FM additives, getting everything else out of the way.

The oil consumption could be from the high amount of ester combined with the low viscosity / high volatility. The ester does a really good job of retaining an oil film on cylinder walls so it could be that more oil is introduced to the chambers as a result. That's not an uncommon phenomenon with RL.

Water is inevitable within an engine. Burning 1 gallon of gasoline produces 1.033 gallons of water as a by-product of the chemical reactions during combustion.

C8H18 + O2 = CO2 + H2O

This comparison between labs shows the limitations of Blackstone's method for measuring water and fuel dilution. Synthetic Advantage and Polaris found more accurate measurements using GC. Blackstone stated 0.0% for water while Synthetic Advantage found 851 ppm (0.0851%) in line with Polaris's
All in all, it's a good looking sample. Thanks for sharing.”

____________________________

Also, OVERKILL gets honorable mention for his comments.

ali
 
Any comments on the particle counts and the HTHS test results?
Since we don't have any reference PC data for this engine, it's hard to make any sort of informed comment on these values.

This article notes:
ISO concluded that the concentration of smaller particles was of greater concern than the larger ones. The organization determined that 4-, 6- and 14-micron particles provided the best representation of the particles closest to a lubricant’s film thickness. These particle sizes cause the most damage to moving surfaces and thus should be closely monitored.

But how high is 267,000 particles per ml compared to what this engine normally produces per 1000 miles? We don't have that data.

I do find it interesting that HTHS was higher than advertised.

Also, the comments on Polaris vs Blackstone ring true, you get more useful data from Polaris IMHO.
 
'A reason to test multiple sources before making a final diagnosis. Or ask for a repeat test if the results do not make sense. You may have noticed that the Polaris lab did not give me a result for the fuel dilution. Several days later they came back with a value of 9 (GC) and flagged it decidedly. I wrote back and informed them that two other labs gave values around 1 - 2 and asked they repeat the test. They just came back now with a new value of 2.3.
 
'A reason to test multiple sources before making a final diagnosis. Or ask for a repeat test if the results do not make sense. You may have noticed that the Polaris lab did not give me a result for the fuel dilution. Several days later they came back with a value of 9 (GC) and flagged it decidedly. I wrote back and informed them that two other labs gave values around 1 - 2 and asked they repeat the test. They just came back now with a new value of 2.3.
Yes, also a good reason to have trends in data. If you get an anomaly, you know what's typical for your equipment so you can ask them to re-test. If it's still out of line, then you've got grounds to investigate.
 
Regarding particle counts:

Synthetic Advantage written comments:
5) I would not run this oil much further than 1500 miles duration in your application because of possible acidic corrosion taking place. But it will clean carbon away!

I wonder if 4 microns is a worisome size. And could it be a carbon cleanout as alluded to above?

ali
 
Regarding particle counts:

Synthetic Advantage written comments:
5) I would not run this oil much further than 1500 miles duration in your application because of possible acidic corrosion taking place. But it will clean carbon away!

I wonder if 4 microns is a worisome size. And could it be a carbon cleanout as alluded to above?

ali
You'd know if you saw it in your filter. Carbonaceous grit is quite obvious in the filter, I've posted pictures of it before, as has @wwillson and @Astro14.
 
My thoughts at this time:

The running of a 5W grade oil is usable in this engine for my vehicle application. UOA does not indicate excessive bearing wear. However, the “racing” oil formulation is too caustic for long term use, a more conventional additive selection would be needed.

The high ester content is probably key to acceptable wear because of its film strength. The HTHS of 1.6 to 1.8 while not ideal and probably having no headroom, will not blow up the 450 HP twin turbo engine.

As I will never, without prior thought and planning, be towing 10,000lbs up a grade in the middle of an Arizona summer I do not need the specified 30 grade oil. I do not need the “headroom” “in case” this scenario may occur out of the blue...

Using a quality 20 grade oil is more than enough and will likely result in little to no wear. I am running a 20 grade oil now and will report back when I get some results. I feel todays fully formulated “thin” oils are superior to higher grade oils of the past.

After this run of 20 grade oil I will be using a 16 grade oil with confidence (though to be sure, I will get quality UOA tests). In the meantime I will benefit from a little more BHP and fuel economy.

Look out for my test of a 30 grade vegetable oil run in the 812 Superfast specifying a 40 grade conventional oil...

ali
 
Any comments on the particle counts and the HTHS test results?
What oil filter is being used - OEM? Any efficiency info on the oil filter being used? Since the particles in your UOA that are below 10u are pretty high, the oil filter probably isn't much better than 99% @ 40u would be my theory - see Filter X in the data I show below.

Here's some UOA PCs done on various engines, but these have way more than 1000 miles on them. It's better to compare PC data from the same engine with similar OCIs, just like it is to compare UOAs on the same engine with similar OCIs to have a better comparison. If you ran that oil longer, the PC counts below 20u would most likely be even higher. Your PC above 10u aren't bad, but again this was only with 1000 miles on the oil.

Your PC data above to compare.
1677123356950.png


1677123624372.png
 
Last edited:
The OEM Motorcraft filter, I believe, is rated at 50% at 20u.
Ford/Morotcaft claims their oil filters are 80% @ 20u. And Motocraft filters are suppose to meet USCAR-36 that says 95% @30u which would roughly translate to 80% @ 20u.
 
I thought it might be interesting to get a pH reading of the virgin oil. And before anybody asks, as any good chemist, I calibrated the meter at both pH 7.00 and 4.00 before taking this reading:

IMG_2490.webp
 
You cannot measure the pH of a non-aqueous liquid like that. It has no meaning, pH stands for “potential of hydrogen” ion and it requires water to be dissociated to get a meaningful reading. I spent a good chunk of my early career dealing with what pH means in non-water materials and using special pH probes. What you’re seeing on that meter is useless. That oil is not acidic since hydrocarbons do not dissociate.
 
The OEM Motorcraft filter, I believe, is rated at 50% at 20u.

I couldn't locate the Amsoil filter test when i looked recently, but as i recall they put the Motorcraft they tested at about 85% @ 20Microns. I would be surprised if it is as bad as 50% @ 20 Microns.
 
In regards to your question, there is a standardized test for titrating the oil to determine the remaining buffering capacity. You need some water in the oil (which is often already present) but here with a virgin sample I can guarantee that it isn’t acidic. The term has no meaning since there is little to no opportunity for proton donation.
 
OK, update with a run of PZ 0W-20 Platinum. The Red Line oil is out:

 5W->20W Comparison2 copy.webp


Some left over oil in this sample. The question is whether I should continue or just dump it and go straight to the next oil?

ali
 
Back
Top