Mobil 1 5W-30, 5717mi - 2006 GM 5.3 ~115,500 total
- Thread starter DuckRyder
- Start date
- Status
Curious what your olm reading was?
Originally Posted By: 2James1
Curious what your olm reading was?
It does not have an actual read out, it does have an OLM, but it never goes off unless the shop forgets to reset it. I think you can get a percentage with a scan tool, but have never asked, maybe I will remember to ask one of these days...
Curious what your olm reading was?
It does not have an actual read out, it does have an OLM, but it never goes off unless the shop forgets to reset it. I think you can get a percentage with a scan tool, but have never asked, maybe I will remember to ask one of these days...
Ok. Strange all GM vehicles didn't read OLM percentage by 2006
Good UOA next time use castrol edge with syntec
dnewton3
Staff member
Nice low wear; engine and oil in fine shape.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Nice low wear; engine and oil in fine shape.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
That was predictable. Tell you what, how about you just ignore me since there is not one single person on the internet who's opinion I value less.
Nice low wear; engine and oil in fine shape.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
That was predictable. Tell you what, how about you just ignore me since there is not one single person on the internet who's opinion I value less.
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
If you find my response predictable, then you're apparently familiar with my position about waste. But then you must also be aware of the vast amount of data I have (over 10,ooo UOAs), and the fact that I do statistical process quality control for a living. I don't speak from opinion here; it is a fact that the UOA you posted could easily be duplicated with far less cost, and when you don't alter your maintenance plan after viewing representative data, it indicates you are paying for information that goes unused. Paying too much for lube, and ignoring information you paid for, is the epitome of waste. Your objection to that statement makes it none the less true. If you believe me to be in error, then what proof do you offer to refute my statement? What data do you have that shows your results were anything but statistically typical, and the expense you bore was rewarded with a ROI?
Your distaste for me is duly noted. You may not find any redeeming value in my posts, but some do. We are all free to glean what we want, and ignore the rest. But since you post in an open public forum, and invite folks to "draw your own conclusions", then this the risk you take. I no more post solely for your edification than you post for mine. I presume you share your UOA with all BITOGers, so that they can use it for research, learning, comparison/contrast and such. Well, the same goes for me; I see UOAs such as this and call out waste when it is apparent, so that others can see the folly of such practice. As long as we all follow the rules, we are free to post in both agreement and dissent. We have a long list of site rules here, but not one of them states we must be in agreement to post.
I realize that to some folks here this may come as a shock, but BITOG really wasn't started to become a bragging board where one can espouse mythology, and run free from any challenge. Rather, it is supposed to be a site where data is shared, and facts reviewed, discussion experienced, and conclusions drawn. Opinions are welcome, as long as they don't violate the rules. The mere act of posting on this public forum is an implied invitation for any member to comment.
Now before this goes off the deep end, let me assure you I don't mention this to taunt or otherwise inflame you. I apologize if you find this offensive; that is not my intent.
Your distaste for me is duly noted. You may not find any redeeming value in my posts, but some do. We are all free to glean what we want, and ignore the rest. But since you post in an open public forum, and invite folks to "draw your own conclusions", then this the risk you take. I no more post solely for your edification than you post for mine. I presume you share your UOA with all BITOGers, so that they can use it for research, learning, comparison/contrast and such. Well, the same goes for me; I see UOAs such as this and call out waste when it is apparent, so that others can see the folly of such practice. As long as we all follow the rules, we are free to post in both agreement and dissent. We have a long list of site rules here, but not one of them states we must be in agreement to post.
I realize that to some folks here this may come as a shock, but BITOG really wasn't started to become a bragging board where one can espouse mythology, and run free from any challenge. Rather, it is supposed to be a site where data is shared, and facts reviewed, discussion experienced, and conclusions drawn. Opinions are welcome, as long as they don't violate the rules. The mere act of posting on this public forum is an implied invitation for any member to comment.
Now before this goes off the deep end, let me assure you I don't mention this to taunt or otherwise inflame you. I apologize if you find this offensive; that is not my intent.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Nice low wear; engine and oil in fine shape.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
That was predictable. Tell you what, how about you just ignore me since there is not one single person on the internet who's opinion I value less.
Sad.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Nice low wear; engine and oil in fine shape.
The logical conclusion to draw? Complete and total waste of fluid and UOA.
That was predictable. Tell you what, how about you just ignore me since there is not one single person on the internet who's opinion I value less.
Sad.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
...But then you must also be aware of the vast amount of data I have (over 10,ooo UOAs), and the fact that I do statistical process quality control for a living. ...
You mean the vast amount of data from which the best you could do as far as "evidence" that a guy was doing it all wrong with 10,000 mile OCIs and 300,000 miles on a Toyota was an article from about a 3 year old blackstone newsletter on a truck with 100,000 miles?
BTW what industry standard confidence calculator are you using, what is your confidence level and what sample size does it give based on what target population?
Quote:
Now before this goes off the deep end, let me assure you I don't mention this to taunt or otherwise inflame you. I apologize if you find this offensive; that is not my intent.
I am not offended, (although I am not sure I believe, that is not your intent.) I just think it is a little silly that you do not realize that it does not matter how right you are (and I don't stipulate that you are) when your approach is so horrible that many do not care.
Some of your other accusations are not true but I'm not going to argue with you about them.
BTW, it is back to bulk oil...so suggestions of other oils are probably not very useful either
So does anyone care to comment about this UOA in comparison to the QSAD one or why the TBN in both cases is quite low for the mileage?
...But then you must also be aware of the vast amount of data I have (over 10,ooo UOAs), and the fact that I do statistical process quality control for a living. ...
You mean the vast amount of data from which the best you could do as far as "evidence" that a guy was doing it all wrong with 10,000 mile OCIs and 300,000 miles on a Toyota was an article from about a 3 year old blackstone newsletter on a truck with 100,000 miles?
BTW what industry standard confidence calculator are you using, what is your confidence level and what sample size does it give based on what target population?
Quote:
Now before this goes off the deep end, let me assure you I don't mention this to taunt or otherwise inflame you. I apologize if you find this offensive; that is not my intent.
I am not offended, (although I am not sure I believe, that is not your intent.) I just think it is a little silly that you do not realize that it does not matter how right you are (and I don't stipulate that you are) when your approach is so horrible that many do not care.
Some of your other accusations are not true but I'm not going to argue with you about them.
BTW, it is back to bulk oil...so suggestions of other oils are probably not very useful either
So does anyone care to comment about this UOA in comparison to the QSAD one or why the TBN in both cases is quite low for the mileage?
Neither TBN was "low." TBN depletion isn't linear. Blackstone suggested moving up. XOM will guarantee the oil for 10,000 miles. So, now comes the uncomfortable question. Do you pay Blackstone for advice you ignore? Are you paying XOM for a product that you won't use to its fullest, or, alternatively, are you paying XOM for a product in whose claims you lack confidence?
It would be interesting to see when the oil change light would actually go off on your vehicle.
It would be interesting to see when the oil change light would actually go off on your vehicle.
This is the first time this vehicle has had M1 (or any synthetic for that matter) and I'm not sure they would guarantee a mix, but they will guarantee EP for 1 year or 15,000 miles.
Had you bothered to research "me" before you made assumptions about what I will or won't do you'd probably have known that I've said the OCI target on this truck is mandated at 5,000 miles and you would also know that I do use the information from blackstone on my vehicles and do have confidence in XOM products.
I agree it would be it would be interesting to see when the change oil light would go off, but since that isn't possible we will have to get past it. Actually you all will have to get past it since I'm long ago over it.
Now here is the uncomfortable question for you, why can this group not simply talk about the oil? Why do you feel the need to ask "uncomfortable questions"?
I realize TBN is not linear, but a higher TBN at higher mileage seemed to warrent a minor freak out HERE so why the pass here?
Had you bothered to research "me" before you made assumptions about what I will or won't do you'd probably have known that I've said the OCI target on this truck is mandated at 5,000 miles and you would also know that I do use the information from blackstone on my vehicles and do have confidence in XOM products.
I agree it would be it would be interesting to see when the change oil light would go off, but since that isn't possible we will have to get past it. Actually you all will have to get past it since I'm long ago over it.
Now here is the uncomfortable question for you, why can this group not simply talk about the oil? Why do you feel the need to ask "uncomfortable questions"?
I realize TBN is not linear, but a higher TBN at higher mileage seemed to warrent a minor freak out HERE so why the pass here?
If you have to stick with a 5000 mile OCI, it looks like any API SN 5W-30 would be more than adequate as proved by your previous run with QSGB. If your engine had accumulated any sludge, this short run of M1 EP should have cleaned it up some. How long did it take you (months) to do the 5700 miles on this run?
About 2 months. IIRC the QSAD was about the same.
I agree any API oil is probably adequate... seems to have done pretty well so far.
I agree any API oil is probably adequate... seems to have done pretty well so far.
With respect to your link, I don't know what the freak out was about there. It certainly didn't make a lot of sense to me.
Nonetheless, I made no assumptions about what you would or would not do; I really had no idea. Nonetheless, if you wish to stay at a 5000 mile interval, I see nothing wrong with the QSAD.
With respect to the oil change light, there might be a way to test it. You could simply not reset it on your next oil change and see when it turns on.
Nonetheless, I made no assumptions about what you would or would not do; I really had no idea. Nonetheless, if you wish to stay at a 5000 mile interval, I see nothing wrong with the QSAD.
With respect to the oil change light, there might be a way to test it. You could simply not reset it on your next oil change and see when it turns on.
Gee, anybody notice?
It would be only a "complete and total waste" if virgin oil was put in and dumped out right away, without being run.
He made an incorrect statement.
This was not the case, there's 5,717 miles on the oil.
-------
It's getting to the point here that you cannot post an UOA anything short of a maxed out oil or feel hs wrath!!
It would be only a "complete and total waste" if virgin oil was put in and dumped out right away, without being run.
He made an incorrect statement.
This was not the case, there's 5,717 miles on the oil.
-------
It's getting to the point here that you cannot post an UOA anything short of a maxed out oil or feel hs wrath!!
Held viscosity, low insols, strong flash, typical ending TBN on newer oils. Everything looks in order.
I see nothing wrong with using high quality / expensive oil and filters for a 5k OCI. That's a personal choice and it's not my money. That being said, the oil/filter combo chosen are both for extended OCIs, by their design and their marketing
I see nothing wrong with using high quality / expensive oil and filters for a 5k OCI. That's a personal choice and it's not my money. That being said, the oil/filter combo chosen are both for extended OCIs, by their design and their marketing
The QS went in on 05/19 and came out on 07/26.
The M1 went in on 07/26 and came out on 09/30.
With respect to the OLM, thats how I know they sometimes forget to reset it, when that happens it goes off before half way on the next interval. I would estimate that if it was allowed to chart the changes it would generally run about 7000 or so intervals. Not sure how that tracks with others experience?
The M1 went in on 07/26 and came out on 09/30.
With respect to the OLM, thats how I know they sometimes forget to reset it, when that happens it goes off before half way on the next interval. I would estimate that if it was allowed to chart the changes it would generally run about 7000 or so intervals. Not sure how that tracks with others experience?
Originally Posted By: webfors
...That being said, the oil/filter combo chosen are both for extended OCIs, by their design and they're marketing
Very true, and not my habit (to use expensive oil/filter) on this vehicle, Just wanted to see how they it did and get a look inside the two filters (and for everyone else to get a look)...
So let me ask this too:
The insolubles were slightly (they were actually double, but double .1% is still not much) higher on the M1 run even with the "better" filter, what if any conclusion might one draw from that? Did the M1 "clean" more?
(and yes I realize 2 UOAs don't actually "prove" anything at all)
...That being said, the oil/filter combo chosen are both for extended OCIs, by their design and they're marketing
Very true, and not my habit (to use expensive oil/filter) on this vehicle, Just wanted to see how they it did and get a look inside the two filters (and for everyone else to get a look)...
So let me ask this too:
The insolubles were slightly (they were actually double, but double .1% is still not much) higher on the M1 run even with the "better" filter, what if any conclusion might one draw from that? Did the M1 "clean" more?
(and yes I realize 2 UOAs don't actually "prove" anything at all)
- Status
