Redline 5W-30, 4724 mi, 2009 Nissan 370Z, VQ37HR

[Dwight_Frye]

Here is my first Blackstone Analysis report which hopefully is of interest to those with the Nissan VQ37 engines which are known to run hot and be demanding on oil. History on the vehicle:
Purchased new. Drained factory fill at around 1250 miles, refilled with the 5W-30 wt. Nissan Ester Oil. Ran that until about 5,000 miles and switched to the Redline 5W-30. Filter was a Mobil 1 #110 which is slightly larger than the standard # 108. Miles on this sample are 4724, time in engine about 6 months. It's pretty much a daily driver, no track time. I live in SouCal so I was concerned with an oil that would not only hold up to the high temps seen with the VQ37 engines, but high ambient temperatures during summer and stop & go freeway traffic. This engine has consumed a bit of oil during the time I have owned it, about 1.5 qts. per 4000 miles but seems to be settling down now as I have a little over 10K miles on it. My plan is 5K OCI's, could probably run longer as there was no viscosity breakdown but I like to baby my cars. Note the high moly count, that must be a major additive in the Redline. I'll run another sample at the next change to see how it's trending.

 

[hate2work]

That's a pretty good report, all things considered. Hopefully the cu and si will settle down soon and this engine will go a long time. RL is very good oil and with 5k OCIs you'll be treating it well

 

[Gary Allan]

I'd stay with the Redline. I think your copper will settle down, just like B-S said. These engines do tend to trash an oil in what we now consider a reasonable OCI over favorable conditions.

What hasn't really been shown is that beating up the oil results in any long term loss of utility or excessive wear. At least I'm not aware of it. It could be just like valve deposits on the DI Audi S(whatever). Nobody has established that using the approved oil over the OEM OCI has resulted in loss of utility/performance. They've show valve deposits on someone who may not have followed the OEM oci ..exceeding it ..and throwing more volatiles into the engine to form deposits.

That is, the beat down may be "factored in".

 

[pcfxer]

Originally Posted By: Dwight_Frye
Here is my first Blackstone Analysis report which hopefully is of interest to those with the Nissan VQ37 engines which are known to run hot and be demanding on oil. History on the vehicle:
Purchased new. Drained factory fill at around 1250 miles, refilled with the 5W-30 wt. Nissan Ester Oil. Ran that until about 5,000 miles and switched to the Redline 5W-30. Filter was a Mobil 1 #110 which is slightly larger than the standard # 108. Miles on this sample are 4724, time in engine about 6 months. It's pretty much a daily driver, no track time. I live in SouCal so I was concerned with an oil that would not only hold up to the high temps seen with the VQ37 engines, but high ambient temperatures during summer and stop & go freeway traffic. This engine has consumed a bit of oil during the time I have owned it, about 1.5 qts. per 4000 miles but seems to be settling down now as I have a little over 10K miles on it. My plan is 5K OCI's, could probably run longer as there was no viscosity breakdown but I like to baby my cars. Note the high moly count, that must be a major additive in the Redline. I'll run another sample at the next change to see how it's trending.

Perfect, keep up the 5k OCIs until Si drops to a reasonable value (about half of what you've got now). Si is already on its way down based on my Nissan Engine experience. Don't forget to get the TBN measured before extending your OCI when you're ready to.

 

[Artem]

Explain why you're using the M110 filter instead of the #108?

 

[deven]

Originally Posted By: Artem
Explain why you're using the M110 filter instead of the #108?

Maybe he wanted an oversized filter?

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: Artem
Explain why you're using the M110 filter instead of the #108?

Actually nissan used to use the longer filter. But when some vehicles became filter space limited they decided to standardize on the shorter version.

I always use the longer filter on my 01 Sentra SE. All Nissans (as far as I know) can take the longer version.

 

[saaber1]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
...It could be just like valve deposits on the DI Audi S(whatever). Nobody has established that using the approved oil over the OEM OCI has resulted in loss of utility/performance. They've show valve deposits on someone who may not have followed the OEM oci ..exceeding it ..and throwing more volatiles into the engine to form deposits...

Not sure if you are referring to the DI FSI here or not. But we have countless examples of significant problems from the valve deposits. These deposits impede proper tumble flow which is crucial for proper combustion in these engines. VAG's own patent for the engine says:

"Gasoline engines with direct injection of the fuel into the combustion chamber, i.e., not into the intake port, suffer especially from the problem of the formation of carbon deposits on components.

...the successful ignition of the stratified charge depends to a great extent on the correct development of the internal cylinder flow, which ensures reliable transport of the injected fuel to the spark plug to guarantee reliable ignition at the spark plug. However, a coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may interfere so strongly with the tumble flow that ignition failures may occur there as a result.

...Furthermore, the coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve causes flow resistance, which can lead to significant performance losses due to insufficient cylinder filling, especially in the upper load and speed range of the internal combustion engine. In addition, the carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may prevent correct valve closing, which leads to compression losses and thus sporadic ignition failures.

...These deposits on the valve stem can result in flow deficits due to undesired swirling and turbulent flow around the globular carbon deposits. This may persistently interfere with the formation of stable tumble flow from cycle to cycle."

And most of these guys are running oem oils at oem intervals such as this car which ran M1 0w40 at 10k OCIs, both as recommended in the manual:

They are having significant running problems and numerous secondary effects frm the improper combustion such as misfiring, hard starts, bad coils, poor idle, ring deposits to name a few.

 

[Bruce T]

Great results. Yes, I agree you should stick with RL 5W-30 and 5,000 mile intervals. For such a new engine, iron is low and aluminum is very low. The lack of viscosity shear is impressive, although the flash point has dropped. High copper and silicon are to be expected in a new engine, but it wouldn't hurt to change the air filter to help reduce the overall silicon levels. Yes, RL is known for containing lots of moly.

 

[Dwight_Frye]

For Bruce T: The factory recommended maintenance interval on the air filters (it requires two)is to replace at 24 months/30K miles. I like to err on the side of caution with air filters as they are not high dollar items, and was planning at changing them at the next oil change which would be 15K miles.
Would changing the filters now really have an effect on the silica level ? I through from reading the report and from other reading that silica is a byproduct of the engine block casting process and will diminish as the engine continues to break in.
Thanks to all for your comments.




Originally Posted By: Bruce T
Great results. Yes, I agree you should stick with RL 5W-30 and 5,000 mile intervals. For such a new engine, iron is low and aluminum is very low. The lack of viscosity shear is impressive, although the flash point has dropped. High copper and silicon are to be expected in a new engine, but it wouldn't hurt to change the air filter to help reduce the overall silicon levels. Yes, RL is known for containing lots of moly.

 

[Bruce T]

Yes, I think it would help, but I'm in the minority here. Conventional wisdom on BITOG is that air filters can go over 30,000 miles before they start affecting the air flow. Think about it and make your own choice. There are two primary issues:

1. "Air filters are more important than oil filters." This statement is widely accepted on BITOG, since unfiltered air will put some heavy abrasives inside your engine: bits of silicon (glass), rock, metal, road surface, tires, brake dust, gasoline, oil, ATF, antifreeze, and countless organic substances. Also, add the contamination from vehicle exhaust fumes.

2. "You can judge a dirty air filter by visual inspection." It is widely accepted on BITOG that you can't judge the true condition of your motor oil by its appearance, but it's OK for an air filter. I disagree. Most of the particles are lodged inside the filter, not on the outside. Many of the particles are small or lightly colored, so they're not visible when held up to the light. Under normal conditions, an engine runs with an air to fuel ratio of 14.7:1. That means it's pulling in over 14 parts of air for every 1 part of fuel, so a tremendous volume of air is being filtered. Yes, most of it is only air, but enough of it isn't to concern me. Conventional wisdom here is that a dirty filter becomes more efficient. I say it starts to pull in dirt.

 

[Bruce T]

Sorry, I didn't entirely answer your question. Yes, the silicon is from the manufacturing process, new metal, and new seals. Some of it could be an anti-foamant additive in the oil. It probably is not coming from an air intake leak. Nothing can be done about this normal break-in process on a new vehicle. I'm only talking about reducing the smaller contribution of the air filter.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
And most of these guys are running oem oils at oem intervals such as this car which ran M1 0w40 at 10k OCIs, both as recommended in the manual:


This sounds like an assumption. I'd like to see 5 documented incidents to many more that probably were not. X out the one's that track ..they're not changing oil at OEM intervals ..just like RSAudi guy. They're doing it way more often.

I'd love to put this matter to rest for myself. Every citing of this event tends to be littered with lack of validation ..exceptions ..etc. There's NO DENYING that it occurs ..just why it occurs and what people do as countermeasures are what I have in question.

I think the last thing you would do is change the oil out early. I can only imagine that it would make it MUCH WORSE.

 

[saaber1]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
This sounds like an assumption.

It is not an assumption. It is based on independent and dealer mechanic feedback. F.e. just this last week I got before-and-after pictures of an audi FSI that ran oem oils at oem intervals. the car had running problems, the intake was removed and the valves were cleaned via walnut shell blasting:

Many of the problems we see are from dealer mechanics where the car has been maintained by the dealer.

I am not aware of any data that shows that running the oils on shorter intervals makes the problem worse. It's quite the opposite. We have UOAs that show oils are heavily sheared and flashpoints dramatically lowered as they are run longer (closer to OEM recommendations of 10k). We also have Dyson's expert advice not to run oem oils too long in these DI turbo applications. We also have loads of evidence from dealers and independent mechanics.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, the fuel input (uptake, infusion ..choose your nomenclature of choice) would be a constant. The oil ..however, could only yield so much ..and

So, I can only see the situation as being exacerbated with more frequent oil changes where more volatiles are added to the equation.

That is, while the OEM may be off on design or oil spec ..or whatever ..changing the oil more often should not be the answer.

 

[BobFout]

Are DI sparkers having this intake gunking issue in Europe?

 

[unDummy]

Its a pity because more automakers are going DI.
And, I haven't seen a DI engine that did not have the issue.
The automakers need to add an extra injector upstream so that normal fuel cleaners can keep the intake ports/valves/manifold clean.
The only other option is for the owner to add water injection to keep the intake washed.

DI seems to be a great way to degrade the performance of a vehicle forcing the owner to buy another one.

 

[saaber1]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
..changing the oil more often should not be the answer.
I agree it's not a solution to the valve deposits but neither is continuing to run on oil that has sheared heavily and has dramatically lowered flashpoint. For the FSI (not TFSI) we are seeing high wear levels on the HPFP cam followers. So shorter intervals for protection make a lot of sense in that engine which quickly shears oils. Of course with the turbo the issue of heat comes up also and we do see oils with low flashpoints of say 300-360 (via BStone's open cup method though, so take with a grain of salt) at around 5k miles.

For the valve deposit issue I think the quantity and quality of viscosity modifiers may play a big role in terms of that portion of the deposits derived from oil.

 

[FZ1]

Right. Fluid performance begins to deteriorate beginning with the first use. If you want to maximize fluid performance,then change it more often.

 

[Gary Allan]

FZ1 ..change the chip. Even Casper the Friendly Ghost doll ..circa 196X, with the pull ring string, had more variety.


This is my last hijack of this thread. Apologies to the OP.

Quote:
but neither is continuing to run on oil that has sheared heavily and has dramatically lowered flashpoint.


..and you're assuming that this didn't occur in OEM validation of the engine and that, while VAG (sorry I'm not a VAG-got/ist/whatever - never did like the way it sounded, though -btw is it Vee-Aea-Gee ..or vA-g(ah)??) puked out rhetoric about the condition ..that the designer was absolutely clueless? ..not at all likely.


From my reading, about half of the fuel in oil flashes off quickly ..the remaining that can requires higher temps and longer times. I would think (an opinion) that this setup would have an ever increasing "2nd half" fuel component building up.

RSAudiguy's UOA showed higher Fe ..but I say "So? How do you know that's not what it's supposed to be as prescribed by the OEM?"


Quote:
For the FSI (not TFSI) we are seeing high wear levels on the HPFP cam followers.


Hmmm, I seem to recall this being a high fatigue item regardless of maintenance interval. Not positive, but I was under the impression that this was simply a weak link ..DI or otherwise.

Quote:
So shorter intervals for protection make a lot of sense in that engine which quickly shears oils.


Have you applied that same rhetorical policy in comment to a number of Asian engines that always shear the vii out of oil ..yet see no apparent harm because of it? Even with fuel?

Quote:
Of course with the turbo the issue of heat comes up also and we do see oils with low flashpoints of say 300-360 (via BStone's open cup method though, so take with a grain of salt) at around 5k miles.


..and are turbo failures occurring "en mass" reported by factory authorized technicians ..from the owners who blindly follow OEM intervals w/dealer provided oil? Naturally this is in the ignorance of a "no UOA" maintenance plan..



Your assertions may be 100% spot on, they're just too generic as in "it's what's commonly accepted" without more much more than opinion to support ..cause, effect, and remedy. I just don't see the cross checking.

Does every DI engine of a given group ALWAYS develop this condition to the point of requiring remediation? Based on mileage? Years? Gallons of fuel consumed? What's the variance and why does it exist in like mile chassis ...etc..etc?

Again, your take on it may be correct, I'm just not convinced that anyone really knows enough to state cause:effect with any authority other than to say that deposits form for lack of a fuel wash in the intake stream.