Originally Posted By: jsharp
Grrrr... Ran out of edit time again.
Do the same ppm/vs mileage calclation with lead. Yours is running about 3X what I'm seeing.
But again, I think we're splititng hairs. None of thses UOA's are *bad* by any stretch of the imagination.
And I don't think it's a great idea to try to compare one engine to another with UOA's. Simple differences in driving conditions could well swamp any of these UOA differences...
I do agree with you some. We are looking at Parts Per Million here, it's like a needle in a hay stack. One poster on here had 30k on one OCI using Amsoil and his numbers were going higher and higher. When you look at the mileage on the oil compared to the PPM conversions, they look good. The way I look at it is, the higher the PPM numbers are, no matter what the mileage is on the oil, the more wear going on inside your engine. People, not you, brag all the time on there about how many miles they squeezed out of their OCI using an oil when their UOAs look horrible when you just look at the numbers (ppm) only. I look at it like this, an engine can cost from $1,000 - over 8K depending on the type and size. I may be off on the price, because I'm more "old school" because I have worked on and built more of the older engines (Chevy 350, 454, etc) than the newer ones. If the UAs for an engine for lets say, copper, is 14ppm for an OCI of 4K and an engine has 15K on an OCI but has 35ppm, that tells me there is more wear in the engine using an OCI of 15K than using a 4K UOA. IMO, I’d rather do the shorter OCIs and save wear on my expensive engine than being able to run around on this forum bragging that I squeezed 15K out of my oil when in reality you are ruining your engine. Now that is fore people that plan on keeping their car until the wheels fall off. If you lease the car or trade it in every 3 years, then who cares, do 30K OCIs using ST dino. Its like I tell people, for the love of [censored], just change your oil already.
