Sulfated Ash & CC Deposits

Status
Not open for further replies.

JAG

Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
5,316
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
For the last 10k miles, I've been using a Heavy Duty (Diesel) Engine Oil called Amsoil ACD in my VW GTI 1.8T. It has high levels of metallic containing additives that form ash when burned. This is quantified in the sulfated ash test. In general, the ash builds up on spark plugs and some other parts of the combustion chamber.

My engine has 106K miles on it now and I've been monitoring the spark plug and piston top deposits every time I've changed the plugs. When I changed and looked at the plugs used while using Amsoil ACD, the spark plugs did not have any more deposits than they did while using passenger car motor oils. The piston top deposits were lower than it was the time I checked it before.

I should note that Amsoil ACD has cut back the oil consumption from minor to undetectable, so that probably is why the piston top deposits are improved now.

So just because one changes to an oil with higher sulfated ash does not mean that ash deposits in the combustion chamber will increase. In my case, they were overall decreased!
 
Everyone that uses ACD loves it. Works well in a lot of different applications. No VII's to shear makes it a tough oil. The low volatility probably makes the deposits/CAT coverter a non issue.
 
This is managed environmental policy speaking when we're talking about reductions in..well ..in just about everything in regards to oil component make up. A person can make intelligent observations and make sensible choices. Consumers cannot. You need to engineer out most of the mishaps/liabilities.
 
How high will be too high? How the car is driven will contribute to deposits. How much oil the car uses will add to the deposits.
 
How low is too low on catalytic converter efficiency? What future threshold is going to turn on the CEL/MIL ..and how much will the motoring public be impacted by it? Same deal, imo
21.gif


I suppose it's sorta like "make sure you wear clean underwear in case you're in an accident and have to go to the E.R." ...except for agencies as they configure policy.
 
In my estimation, the requirement for reduced additive levels to protect cats is the cart leading the horse.

Engines can, and have been built that don't use oil for the first 170-200k miles. By not using, I'm referring to the old Oz "standard" of 1 litre in 5,000km, and it's time for a refresh (rering, valve seals).

Car manufacturers ague that 1qt/1000miles is "normal"...as a result, the cats see more oil and more additive...then they ask for additive levels to drop to protect the cat that shouldn't be seeing oil anyway.

JAG's oil consumption is undetectable, so I reason his catalyst could care less on the sump contents.
 
This goes for piston/cc chamber deposits ..cat life..what have you. They're contouring the total package of automobile ownership so it's totally out of your hands. Not necessarily a bad thing if the notion is in the right hands ...but ...
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
How low is too low on catalytic converter efficiency? What future threshold is going to turn on the CEL/MIL ..and how much will the motoring public be impacted by it? Same deal, imo
21.gif


I suppose it's sorta like "make sure you wear clean underwear in case you're in an accident and have to go to the E.R." ...except for agencies as they configure policy.
It also keeps most guys from wearng girls underwear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top