Should I do a UOA on the first batch of oil in a new motor?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You see a lot of "factory fill" UOAs on this site. Personally, I think it is a waste of money. You know you are going to see high wear materials in the new engine, and you aren't going to be using the same unknown oil in the future... so you are not really getting much beneficial information out of it.
 
How about a UOA on the second fill? Or, should you wait until the car gets to a certain mileage like 10 or 15,000 miles?
 
If you have a few extra bucks, yes!
You will be interested in seeing what is there, and what the progression is in the future. You can't secong guess yourself, later.
We would like to know as well, just for fun.
I wouldn't be alarmed at any anomalies that you may find, just yet!
 
No "need" to do one. From a "business" persepctive, it wouldn't really tell you much, if anything. You might do it strictly for your own amusement, that is, just for fun. If you do, please let us know what happens.
cheers.gif
 
I'm sure you'll see elevated wear metals, but it might be nice to see if / by how much they decline over the next few OCIs...I'd want an initial test in case wear metals are still high after 3000, so I won't have to wonder if they've increased or decreased since new.
 
I did a UOA on a new engine because I was curious about what was in there, and I felt it would set a "worst case" baseline on my vehicle. I figure that the numbers would go down from there, but if they went up on the next UOA it would make me pay a little more attention.

In my case, it actually drove me to have Terry Dyson look at it and I ended up dumping the oil early. So for me it helped me make a decision that I was on the fence with. In the grand scheme of things, I learned a bunch of stuff that I would not have if I went "sans UOA". So that was worth my $$. I also thought I would have regretted not doing it, so the $20 was worth it to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom