Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
See I'd disagree. We have seen all brands of engines with both "high" and "low" numbers.
What I will say is we are too "concerned" with the difference between having a UOA that shows 7ppm of Iron, 20ppm of copper vs 14ppm of iron and 40ppm of copper and the later is being a "poor" oil or motor. Lower is better but in the end it is NOT going to matter.
Until those numbers are both high (like in the hundreds) AND you have TRENDING then I'd show some concern.
UOAs ARE USEFUL and should not be discouraged if they don't make your favorite brand look good.
They are what they are,
data that is better than fantasy.
Bill
You said"if they don't make your favorite brand look good". This UOA is with PP 5-30. I don'r use PP. I believe PP is an outstanding product and would use it if M1 went out of business. As for discourageing the use of UOAs, For the the most part I think they are a waste of $ for most people. I also believe I am not breaking any BITOG rules by saying that. Am I? However we still are a free people and can decide for ourselves matters of this nature. We can, can't we?
Notice that I'm not making blanket statements like you are. I'm just explaining to others that may be reading this thread (
which are MANY MANY more than members here who may read it) discussing what/how UOAs
are useful. Been doing that for many more years than you've been around here.
It's not all about you but it is when you make statements that are not factual.
See how you make it about brands. Where above did I say anything about either PP or Mobil 1?
In fact let's review...
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: tpitcher
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Try M1 EP. Seems more durable in my Honda V6.
Careful!! M1 EP was shot in another UOA forum here........
I noticed that. I guess both of these reports show that M1 and PP are junk oils. Must be true, the reports say so.
I'd trust the "reports" more than brand loyalty and even more
marketing.
But what one oil does in one engine and UOA does not mean anything for the same oil in another engine. And what one oil does in the same engine may not do the same if the operating conditions are not close to the same or the engine is in the same condition.
Its REALLY important to do your own UOAs on YOUR engine.
Bill
Notice that you have
nothing to do with the thread until someone says something about Mobil then here you are with bells on. Once they have been spoken about then its time to defend no matter what needs to be said.
I reply with FACTUAL (and truthful) stating the above. UOAs do have a purpose and I've stated why they are more important than what the marketing department or member bias here. Also notice what I said above.
You are not breaking any rules but expect to be called out when making statements that UOAs are useless for determining wear when your only purpose to be in the thread is to defend a brand. (They
are useful and have saved many life's and engines in aviation. If they were "for the most part" (whatever that means) then why does aviation spend millions a year doing them? Nothing to do with contamination BTW.)
Back to the subject in hand. To the OP... DO a few short OCIs with PYB or GTX (whatever you'd like) and then another UOA and let's see what comes of that. Keep off the remote start so we can see if the oil choice makes a difference. But truthfully your numbers are low enough that I'd run whatever 5w-30 you want and get on with it. It does not look like you have a coolant leak and your engine will last a long time with any oil.
With my 2000 4.8l Chevy motor (which is doing great with around 125k on it now with the new owner) Chevron 5w-30 did the best as far as MPG, UOA numbers and such. This is over PYB, GTX and Mobil 1.
Bill
