Schaeffer 9000 5w30 5,205 Miles; 2003 Corolla

[panthermike]

Just did this for fun, analyized by Schaeffer. Kit was free from the local Schaeffer rep. Not interested in ROI, etc. but here it is! This run consisted of a 4day/week 150 mile trip that was all highway with roughly 6 miles of 5-7% grades. Weekends were mixed driving. Redline SI-1 used at the end of OCI. No additives in the oil.

Looks good IMO, Phos/Zinc levels on the lower side of most oils, as was the case with a 7000 5w20 UOA I did a couple of years ago.

N/A values weren't tested by Schaeffer. They're comments were "Contamination and additive depletion levels normal. Wear metal levels are within normal limits. Increase oil drain interval to 7,000 miles.

Code:
OIL SCHAEFFER 9000 5W30

MILES IN USE 5,205

MILES ON VEHICLE 111,940

SAMPLE TAKEN 12/02/12



ALUMINUM 3

CHROMIUM 0

IRON 5

COPPER 0

LEAD 0

TIN N/A

MOLYBDENUM 221

NICKEL N/A

MANGANESE N/A

SILVER 0

TITANIUM N/A

POTASSIUM 2

BORON N/A

SILICON 10

SODIUM 211

CALCIUM 1557

MAGNESIUM 27

PHOSPHORUS 576

ZINC 661

BARIUM N/A



INSOLUBLES N/A

WATER 0

FUEL 0

ANTIFREEZE 0

FLASHPOINT ºF N/A

cSt @ 212ºF 9.34

SULFUR 7

OXIDATION 5

NITRATION 16

 

[Donald]

TBN? It looks good, but you used high quality oil and should expect a good UOA, which you got.

 

[panthermike]

Schaeffer doesn't test for TBN, at least not on this kit. I surely wasn't expecting a bad UOA but no reason to pass up a freebie!

 

[Gabe]

Is this the SN formula??

 

[panthermike]

Originally Posted By: Gabe
Is this the SN formula??


You know, I'm willing to say yes based on the sodium levels. At least, I sure hope so! Unfortunately I threw away the last container, I vaguely remember looking at it and it being SN.

Edit: For anyone interested, the air filter is a Fram.

 

[DragRace]

Always liked Schaeffers oils,thanks for posting this up,not many on this forum use it.

 

[FZ1]

Nice motor.

 

[skyship]

The wear figures are good, but this oil seems short on additives as the Zinc and Calcium figures are low. I don't know the recommended OCI, but the oil is still in good condition.

 

[dnewton3]

No contamination intrusion.
No significant wear variance.
No extended miles.

Yup - that' about as normal as one could expect.

 

[panthermike]

Originally Posted By: DragRace
Always liked Schaeffers oils,thanks for posting this up,not many on this forum use it.


Yeah, I’ve always liked them as well. For a few years now there’s a local guy that’s been selling it to me at basically cost. I use the Schaeffer oil off and on, but not exclusively.

Originally Posted By: FZ1
Nice motor.


Thanks! I have no other UOA’s on this car to compare but all seems to be well.

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
No contamination intrusion.
No significant wear variance.
No extended miles.

Yup - that' about as normal as one could expect.


Normal is good that’s what I was hoping for

I have one more of these Schaeffer kits to use, not sure which car I’ll use it for though.
I’ve always kept my OCI’s around 5-6K but I might start extending them further as I know it certainly won’t hurt the car.


I may use Blackstone next time for this car since I can get a TBN, as well as insolubles. Although the TBN will only be worth it if I'm going to stick with a particular oil.

 

[dnewton3]

Yes - normal wear is a very good thing.

I realize you stated your not interested in ROI. But then I'd have to ask, what are you interested in? Wear control, I presume? The 9000 series product did a nice job. But so can a lot of other brands and grades. Some of them cost less, too. (There's that darn ROI topic sneaking in; it's unavoidable ....)

Also, if you switch labs (and there's nothing wrong with that) then you're not really going to be able to directly compare/contrast your results to this UOA.


TBN really isn't "worth it" unless you are doing two other things:
1) getting a TAN along with the TBN
2) greatly extending the OCI

 

[panthermike]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Yes - normal wear is a very good thing.

I realize you stated your not interested in ROI. But then I'd have to ask, what are you interested in? Wear control, I presume? The 9000 series product did a nice job. But so can a lot of other brands and grades. Some of them cost less, too. (There's that darn ROI topic sneaking in; it's unavoidable ....)

Also, if you switch labs (and there's nothing wrong with that) then you're not really going to be able to directly compare/contrast your results to this UOA.


TBN really isn't "worth it" unless you are doing two other things:
1) getting a TAN along with the TBN
2) greatly extending the OCI


Good points, I'm definately a novice with the UOA topic. I agree with what you said about the Schaeffer, other oils will protect just as well and cheaper at that. I usually only buy the Schaeffer because I like the guy that sells it to me and he's always treated me well. But I've slowly scaled back my usage of their products. I currently have enough Amsoil OE oil for 3 OCI's in both the Civic and Corolla. I switch brands often.

So I'll only get UOA's in the future if I want to trend the results. Probably Blackstone since they test for more than Schaeffer. I don't think I'll extend my OCI's enough to warrant the extra cost of TBN/TAN.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: panthermike
... I usually only buy the Schaeffer because I like the guy that sells it to me and he's always treated me well. ....... I switch brands often.



There is nothing wrong at all with being a patron of a product you like. I encourage people to use our vendors here if they are after a product that is represented; support those who support us. Using who you like because they have "treated you well" is every bit an acceptable reason to use Schaeffers. It's an emotional decision, and there's nothing wrong with that. Switching brands often is also fine. It, too, might be an emotional thing; just wanting to try new and different things. But brand swapping does limit other things (consistent data, for example).

I often come off as rude and disparaging; that's not my intent. I just try to point out that there are many, many reasons to do things in our lives. Emotional decisions are just as viable as logical ones. But what I stress (and most people miss) is that they should not confuse the two. So very often, members here will try to justify their use of synthetics, and short OCIs, when data clearly shows no advantage whatsoever. But they clign to their actions, not recognizing (or perhaps not admitting) that the attachment is emotional and not logical.

If you use Schaeffers because you like the guy who sells it, that's as good a reason as any other. You are just a step ahead of most folks, in that you both recognize and embrace the emotional attachment, rather than trying to support a weak statement with mythology and rhetoric.

The Schaeffer product did a fine job; it would likely do so for a much greater OCI. You're only hurting your wallet by not maximixing your investment; that's all. If you're OK with that, then there's nothing to worry about.

Kudos to you for your honesty!

 

[panthermike]

Definately an emotional decision, I've known for years that I haven't been maximizing my OCI's for best ROI. But as you said, it's an emotional decision, more of a "feel good" thing. 5 or so years ago, I was stuck on 3K OCI's, now I'm at roughly 5K. Maybe by next year I'll be at 6K

I don't find you to come off rude, just bluntly honest. I find that being honest, bluntly or not, is far better than being a liar or in denial.