Redline in a 2000 SS

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

I found this on another board and thought was interesting.
______________________________________________

I just got the second analysis on my 2000 SS in today from Blackstone. Looks like my copper levels are relatively high so its something that I need to keep my eye on. I know that LS1's seem to be prone to having high Cu levels initially, but mine actually increased from last time (was 196ppm at 7600 miles). Note also that I did cam and oil pump swap about 4500 miles ago. Don't know if this could contribute to the Cu levels at all, but I'm hoping its not excessive bearing wear. If so I'll have to speed up plans for a forged 346

Anyway, here are my results with ~4000 miles on Redline 10W30 (12,000 miles on the engine):

Aluminum 12ppm
Chromium 2
Iron 17
Copper 232
Lead 9
Tin 2
Moly 443
Nickel 0
Manganese 1
Silver 0
Titanium 0
Potassium 4
Boron 7
Silicon 18
Sodium 15
Calcium 2748
Magnesium 47
Phosphorus 1197
Zinc 1361
Barium 1

SUS viscosity @ 210F = 65.4
Flashpoint = 460F
Fuel Antifreeze = 0.0%
Water = 0.0%
Insolubles = 0.3%

I didn't see any oxidation or tbn levels posted.

 

[Patman]

One thing I wonder, what does that SUS viscosity translate to when put into the kinematic viscosity at 100C in cst? Why do a lot of labs report the viscosity this way when all the oil manufacturers give their viscosity in cst at 100C?

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

Patman,

goto this page and you can convert sus to cst

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/visc.html

 

[Patman]

Maybe my brain hurts from working too hard today (yes, I've actually been working!)

..but I can't seem to figure out how to convert that 65.4 at 210F number to a cst at 100C number. The conversion on the bottom gives it for how to convert to cst at 40C, but not at 100c. And the larger graph is harder to read exactly where the numbers in SUS relate to the numbers in cst at 100C.

Help!

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

Pull the chart up... take a sheet of paper,
lay it across on the 64.5 sus # on the right side, and follow it to the left, which crosses almost right in the middle of a 30wt and over on the left will show just a little over 12cst's @ 100deg C.

 

[Patman]

That chart doesn't seem to line up right though. The range for a 30wt is 9.3cst to 12.5 cst at 100c, but yet according to that chart the 30wt would be just under 11cst to just under 14cst?

 

[Patman]

I just did a Google search and I think I came up with the right formula to convert SUS to cst.

It's something like this:

cst= 0.226xSUS-(195/SUS)

With this formula it spit out 65.4 SUS is equal to 11.8 cst.

 

[Fulton 1]

Hey, that's my post from LS1Tech (Hi Patman)

That was the complete report from Blackstone, no oxidation levels listed on my data sheet.

Very interesting site BTW

[ June 21, 2002, 07:51 PM: Message edited by: Fulton 1 ]

 

[Patman]

Welcome aboard my friend! I hope you too will be doing a lot of oil analysis! Next time, instead of Blackstone, use Terry Dyson, he gives a lot more useful info with his analysis results (such as oxidation and nitration and tbn)

You can find out how to contact Dyson Analysis right here:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/terry.html

 

[Fulton 1]

Thanks for the link Patman. I am planning on contacting Terry next time around. Looks like his analyses are more informative than Blackstone's.

 

[Bror Jace]

Fulton, those are some seriously good numbers ... except for the copper. That is awfully odd. Copper is usually an ingredient (along with lead) that is found in bearing material ... but your lead is awfully low. Another source of copper would be bronze ... as in valve guides ... but this is unlikely to produce those sorts of numbers. Isn't there a lot of tin in bronze as well as copper?

Someone in another thread mentioned that GM now uses a copper based anti-seize compound. Might a big ole' glob of this stuff have found its way into your motor upon assembly and is now slowly dissolving and showing up in lab test results?

I used to be a big Chevy man but my confidence in GMs ability to produce quality products was seriously shaken in the 80s. We all know that a small block Chevy V8 will usually outlast every other component on a vehicle so why put a lot of effort and precision (read: cost!) into their assembly? I think GM's quality control in this department is wanting and an excess of something like anti-seize makes a lot of sense when looking at your results.

I knew another guy who went by the name WTD at the Edmunds board and he got some seriously crappy numbers in his Chevy pick-up V8 with Mobil 1 and only 5,000 miles, most noticeably a lot of lead. My first thought was that the oil was doing its job fine but the truck's engine wasn't put together terribly well and it was showing a great deal of wear.

Now, I'm not so sure what the culprit is/was.

 

[Fulton 1]

Bror Jace,
Thanks for the input on the copper. It's beginning to worry me a little. I too have been thinking of the valve guides, but it does seem awfully premature with only 12,000 miles on it. As you've mentioned, the other bearing-type metals look fine, which is also confusing. You're the second person that has mentioned anti-seize with copper. Of all the LS1 analyses I've looked at they all seem high in copper for the first 10-15k miles, then they tend to drop off. This seems to me to be associated with either breakin or some form of assembly lube. My numbers are, however, about twice the amount that I've seen from other LS1's with similar mileage. Blackstone first indicated that copper might be an oil additive, but when I contacted Redline they told me that they used no copper in their oils

I suppose only time will tell

 

[Bror Jace]

The copper number seems to be something of a "flier." It's so far out of whack, there has to be a special reason for that ... and I suspect someone on the line was having a bad day and/or they got a little "irrationally exuberant" with the anti-seize. Either that or the esters are leaching it out of the places where it was used.

Of course, that's just a semi-educated guess. I just can't believe it's a straight wear number. Your others are too good for that to be the case. Even if your valve guides were wearing catastrophically, where are the elevated levels of tin?

Oh, and Red Line's info is correct. My samples of their oil have showed mostly single-digit PPMs of copper and that's all. Yours are twenty times greater than that so it can't be coming from the oil.

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

I don't think this is showing a true picture as I have seen way too many Redline oil reports that look good but with high levels of oxidation.

The oxidation/ nitration levels on this oil would be one thing I'd like to see so you can see how well the base oil is holding up other than just viscosity. Tbn would also be nice but with the other (oxidation levels) you can get a pretty good picture of that as well.

I'd thought that oxidation levels would be reported in a standard oil analysis.

 

[Patman]

That's Blackstone Labs for ya, they don't include the more important info, yet they charge more
than Terry! (if you want TBN they do)