UOA - PU 5w30 / 5,601 miles / 2011 G37x
- Thread starter jddssc121
- Start date
- Status
Wonder what is up with the lead and tin?? I am sure it is a little skewed. PU used to have such a nice dose of Boron...no more. Oil held up well though.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Your VQ needs a 40 weight oil.
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Your VQ needs a 40 weight oil.
my warranty begs to differ
Then pour the 30 weight on your warranty and try 40 weight in your engine.
The words on paper and what engines tell you are not always the same.
Ed
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Your VQ needs a 40 weight oil.
my warranty begs to differ
Then pour the 30 weight on your warranty and try 40 weight in your engine.
The words on paper and what engines tell you are not always the same.
Ed
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
my warranty begs to differ
As does mine. Yes, there may be some countries out there where Nissan/Infiniti allows a 0w-40. That's fine, but I'm not putting my G in a shipping crate and sending it overseas if I need warranty work.
my warranty begs to differ
As does mine. Yes, there may be some countries out there where Nissan/Infiniti allows a 0w-40. That's fine, but I'm not putting my G in a shipping crate and sending it overseas if I need warranty work.
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
That will nail him on the SM/GF-4 or better side of things.
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
That will nail him on the SM/GF-4 or better side of things.
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
What makes you say that? I have added a few VQ reports on here which included GC and T6. Both oils held up fine after 8k miles OCIs...
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
What makes you say that? I have added a few VQ reports on here which included GC and T6. Both oils held up fine after 8k miles OCIs...
Originally Posted By: FCobra94
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
What makes you say that? I have added a few VQ reports on here which included GC and T6. Both oils held up fine after 8k miles OCIs...
uhh..... scroll up
(Warranty reasons)
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
Originally Posted By: webfors
Nice report. Still trending down. Not sure if thicker is needed, if so go with a thicker 30 weight like GC, or one of the M1 HM 30 weights.
I love GC (I used it in the WRX) but as Garak mentioned, it's a no-go for the VQ
What makes you say that? I have added a few VQ reports on here which included GC and T6. Both oils held up fine after 8k miles OCIs...
uhh..... scroll up
(Warranty reasons)
Nissan recommends an ester based oil for their VQ engines. Have you tried : http://www.redlineoil.com/product.aspx?pid=2&pcid=21
Originally Posted By: bourne
Nissan recommends an ester based oil for their VQ engines. Have you tried : http://www.redlineoil.com/product.aspx?pid=2&pcid=21
correction - Nissan recommends a NISSAN ester based oil for their engines
I'm not a big redline fan *ducks for cover*
Nissan recommends an ester based oil for their VQ engines. Have you tried : http://www.redlineoil.com/product.aspx?pid=2&pcid=21
correction - Nissan recommends a NISSAN ester based oil for their engines
I'm not a big redline fan *ducks for cover*
Fair enough. In that situation I recommend VWB for 3k oci unless synthetic is required for warranty purposes. If so, then Synpower for 5k.
dnewton3
Staff member
This is not break in issues by now; the Al and Cr are settled.
The Cu, Pb and Tn all indiate a wear issue. I've not got a lot of data on this particular engine yet, so I cannot give direct sigma numbers to help, but generally we should expect these number are probably at least "normal" in total deviation. I suspect there is some abnormalities to be excluded from the data, but with numbers like some of these, he might actually be providing data that is actualy doing the skewing of data ... Please understand that we really don't have enough macro data yet on this to find real statistical numbers. So some of this is presumptive at this point.
But what is concerning is that the Cu has stabilized, but at a number much higher than average. The Pb is up, and the Tn has come out of no where.
Something is afoot. I would stick with the current course and let the data develop.
I would also point out that, for such an expensive oil, would we not expect "better" performance? Yes - I'm poking at the PU topic here. But fair is fair; how many times do we hear about how superior PU is? Well - where's the proof in this UOA? How great is this lube doing? I will fully admit we don't have enough data to really make a determination here, but so very often we see folks jump on one UOA and praise a synthetic. The shoe is not on the other foot; this one PU UOA really isn't impressive now, is it? (I am being purposely provacative here to get people to see the folly of praising or punishing a singular UOA). I really don't believe the PU to be at fault, but I'm enjoying the ability to poke at the PU here. Too many people look at one UOA and just fall in love with a synthetic. How lovely is this looking now? If you can love a fluid from one UOA, then in fairness you'd have to swallow this spoonful of disappointment, too.
I'll offer this realistic question as an observation:
is there a reason to believe that the PU is failing here, or it there a mechanical problem that no oil will be able to overcome?
Time will tell.
The Cu, Pb and Tn all indiate a wear issue. I've not got a lot of data on this particular engine yet, so I cannot give direct sigma numbers to help, but generally we should expect these number are probably at least "normal" in total deviation. I suspect there is some abnormalities to be excluded from the data, but with numbers like some of these, he might actually be providing data that is actualy doing the skewing of data ... Please understand that we really don't have enough macro data yet on this to find real statistical numbers. So some of this is presumptive at this point.
But what is concerning is that the Cu has stabilized, but at a number much higher than average. The Pb is up, and the Tn has come out of no where.
Something is afoot. I would stick with the current course and let the data develop.
I would also point out that, for such an expensive oil, would we not expect "better" performance? Yes - I'm poking at the PU topic here. But fair is fair; how many times do we hear about how superior PU is? Well - where's the proof in this UOA? How great is this lube doing? I will fully admit we don't have enough data to really make a determination here, but so very often we see folks jump on one UOA and praise a synthetic. The shoe is not on the other foot; this one PU UOA really isn't impressive now, is it? (I am being purposely provacative here to get people to see the folly of praising or punishing a singular UOA). I really don't believe the PU to be at fault, but I'm enjoying the ability to poke at the PU here. Too many people look at one UOA and just fall in love with a synthetic. How lovely is this looking now? If you can love a fluid from one UOA, then in fairness you'd have to swallow this spoonful of disappointment, too.
I'll offer this realistic question as an observation:
is there a reason to believe that the PU is failing here, or it there a mechanical problem that no oil will be able to overcome?
Time will tell.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: jddssc121
I'm not a big redline fan *ducks for cover*
Shhh, don't disrespect the Red Line. Just remind the viewers that it isn't SM/GF-4 or newer, and is therefore another no go.
I'm not a big redline fan *ducks for cover*
Shhh, don't disrespect the Red Line. Just remind the viewers that it isn't SM/GF-4 or newer, and is therefore another no go.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
I've not got a lot of data on this particular engine yet, so I cannot give direct sigma numbers to help, but generally we should expect these number are probably at least "normal" in total deviation.
When I get off my behind and send in a sample from my last PYB OCI at the severe service interval, maybe you'll get another data point.
And Dave, these engines are a bit of an enigma. I've seen some UOAs on some of the car specific sites, and I've seen high end synthetics and boutiques shear down like mad, I've seen them go reasonably well, and I've seen conventionals run reasonably well. And the Nissan Genuine Ester oil doesn't show anything to justify its price.
I've not got a lot of data on this particular engine yet, so I cannot give direct sigma numbers to help, but generally we should expect these number are probably at least "normal" in total deviation.
When I get off my behind and send in a sample from my last PYB OCI at the severe service interval, maybe you'll get another data point.
And Dave, these engines are a bit of an enigma. I've seen some UOAs on some of the car specific sites, and I've seen high end synthetics and boutiques shear down like mad, I've seen them go reasonably well, and I've seen conventionals run reasonably well. And the Nissan Genuine Ester oil doesn't show anything to justify its price.
I had a FX45 (non-direct injected V8 derivative of this engine) that I had to take up to M1 TDT to get the bottom end numbers tamed, M1 0w40 wouldn't do it. TDT would run 15k without problems, and when I traded it at 155k it was using a qt every 10k. However, I traded it for an FX50s (direct injected V8 derivative) which still has a lot of warranty left. For the warranty period, at least, I will be going with 5w30 of some API SN flavor, although I may just drop to 3500 mile changes with Mobil Super. I do believe these engines need a thicker oil to get the bottom wear in check, but haven't heard much on bottom end problems...
I also have a Titan, which also uses a derivative. Haven't got enough miles on it yet to get a UOA, but without DI, doubt M1 5w30 at 7.5 will have any issues.
I also have a Titan, which also uses a derivative. Haven't got enough miles on it yet to get a UOA, but without DI, doubt M1 5w30 at 7.5 will have any issues.
- Status
Similar threads
