2010 Ford Fusion 2.5L - 8,991 mi - PUP 5w20

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
3,236
Location
Phoenix, Arizona - USA
Well I finally got the results on this. For those who don't recall, this oil was drawn out of my Fram Ultra 3614 filter because I forgot to sample from the draining oil.

Just under 9,000 miles on the oil, which was drawn when the car was a hair short of 224,000 miles. Previous oil change was done 05/21/2016, so this oil also had 8 months on it. For about 1/2 of this OCI, I was in between jobs, so lots of short-trips.

All in all, not bad, but I can't help but think it would have been better if it was all highway miles (and thus also only about 3.5 months, at my current rate).



A few interesting observations:

1 - The oil used in this sample was PUP 5w20, same as in the previous sample (5/21/16), but for some reason only had 33 Boron, as opposed to 50 boron for the last one. I must assume that due to the higher miles and longer time, more of the Boron was used up?

2 - Sodium. In the sample drawn on 12/4/15, the oil was mostly Valvoline, thus the higher sodium, but then after that, I was using PUP for both the 5/21/16 and 1/22/17 samples, and PUP has 0 Sodium in it. My car uses no appreciable coolant, and the antifreeze results were 0.0 across the board, so I must assume that the values of 77 and 25 can only be the result of either a) remaining Valvoline in the sump/engine, or b) the PUP dissolving some sodium-rich varnish... Thoughts, anyone?

3 - Chromium, while not "high" was actually there, whereas it was 0 in previous samples. I have to wonder if this might have come off the finishing nails I used to poke the ADBV to drain the oil from the filter, or possibly from the filter itself? That, or my short trips actually led to a tiny bit of wear to the rings.

... also, I have NO idea why they refer to my car as a Focus.. In the documentation I sent with the sample, I clearly stated it was a Fusion.


** I'd love to get some input from everyone.
 
Here's my brand new report on my latest sample. 2011 Fusion, nearly identical to yours but half the mileage. I've gone way past the 9k mark though for a while with no ill effects. The samples farthest to the right are PP 5w-20, the two most recent samples are PUP 5W-20.

Chris

 
I was going to go farther than 9,000 on this oil, but those months with lots of short tripping, and the overall time on the oil during the 9,000 miles just got me a little too.. itchy.. to see what was going on in there. That, and the oil was getting pretty dark.

Seeing the results, I actually wish I had gone all the way to 10,000 miles, at least. Based on the numbers, I probably could have even gone a little beyond 10k.
 
Looks like too frequent a short trip and winter does take its toll on your oil conditions.
But if oil life at end Jan is below say, 7K miles one could possibly pull it through to 12-14K OCI with a 'normal' wear rates, I suppose.
blush.gif
 
I dunno that I'd go so far as to say my results were bad enough to say they weren't 'normal'

Yeah, iron is a little higher per mile than previously, but 10ppm is still much better than most UOA results I see on here. Even chromium, which is 'Far more' than my previous two runs, is still only 2ppm.
 
You both can go much further on the lubes. You're averaging 1ppm/1k mi of Fe, give or take a few tenths. What is the fear here?
You'll always see a few ppm of Al, Cr, etc, but they typically just move up/down a ppm or two overall, regardless of the miles.

Honestly, and I realize you'll think this is absurd, but 20k miles would be easily doable here.

I had a 2010 2.5L Fusion. I used to run dino 5w-20 and got numbers this good too.

You're not anywhere near condemning the fluid based on wear; just your unrealized fears are pushing you to OCI.
 
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Honestly, and I realize you'll think this is absurd, but 20k miles would be easily doable here.

Agree with you 20K would be doable ...... especially for Subie.
Having said that for similar engine in Tanon's application, I would be hesitant to recommend pushing for 15K, as yet ..... as evidenced in it's oil thickening phenomenon.

Hi dnewton3, had been following your valuable and insightful past contributions in UOA ...... and it would be nice if you can be around here contributing .....
thumbsup2.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
You're averaging 1ppm/1k mi of Fe, give or take a few tenths. What is the fear here?


No fear, really.. just an observation of change, compared to the last two runs. I do realize that it's all due to the short tripping and longer overall time on the oil.

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
You'll always see a few ppm of Al, Cr, etc, but they typically just move up/down a ppm or two overall, regardless of the miles.


Agreed. Really, it's just me being paranoid more than anything else. I want this car to last me out to at least 483,600 miles, so lower UOA readings are vital.

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Honestly, and I realize you'll think this is absurd, but 20k miles would be easily doable here.


Not absurd at all. Considering my current daily commute is 110 miles round trip, it would only take about 8 months to hit 20,000 miles. On the right oil and filter, I definitely think it's doable... although not on what I have in there right now (Valvoline NextGen - 3qt conventional 5w20 / 2qt HM 5w30, and about 1/4qt PUP 5w20, on a Champ filter). Next time I fill with full synthetic, I'll put on a Fram Ultra 3600.. and see how I feel @ 15,000 miles.

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
I had a 2010 2.5L Fusion. I used to run dino 5w-20 and got numbers this good too.
You're not anywhere near condemning the fluid based on wear; just your unrealized fears are pushing you to OCI.


I've run full conventional Valvoline Next-Gen out to 7,500 miles in this car, and that didn't bother me, so I definitely believe you there.

.. and yes, I let my paranoia get to me. I think maybe I just wanted a little reinforcement in the form of a UOA.


Originally Posted By: zeng
Having said that for similar engine in Tanon's application, I would be hesitant to recommend pushing for 15K, as yet ..... as evidenced in it's oil thickening phenomenon.


I don't know that I'd go so far as to say it experienced an "oil thickening phenomenon" - It's still well within the viscosity range for a 5w20, and if you look at the previous UOAs, the viscosity is virtually identical to the last PUP run @ 7,400 miles, which was almost 100% highway driving. It's also extremely close to the next previous run, which was on a blend of Valvoline NextGen High Mileage and Castrol SynBlend.

Additionally, I've actually run straight 10w30 in this engine for a summer OCI.. with no noticeable change in engine behavior.
 
I have another fill of PUP 5w-20 in now and my highway driving has picked up significantly... I've driven nearly 3000 miles in the past three weeks vs about 300 miles per week previously. If this rate of driving keeps up, I will push 20k on this OCI since I should be able to hit 20k while the temperature is still warm. I also decided (I know this will stir up plenty of controversy) to use 1oz/5gal of TC-W3 2-stroke oil in my fill-ups as an upper cylinder lube. I have seen mileage pick up around 1.2mpg, but the overall is still significantly impacted by ambient temps. When outside temps were in the mid-60's-70's, I was getting around 0.9-1.1 mpg better than when the ambient in the 30s. This car is by far the most affected by ambient temps of any car I've ever owned. It's disappointing but since I've learned about it I account for it mentally.

I'm confident that in the summer when the temps are 70*F+, the PUP and TC-W3 will consistently deliver 37.0-38.0mpg over a full tank. One other side effect that I cannot otherwise account (other than a side effect of reduced upper cylinder friction through the TC-W3) is that 100%, without fail, before adding the TC-W3, my car would NEVER shift into 6th gear before 51mph, no matter what conditions. Now, it will shift into 6th gear as low as 46-47mph. I don't claim to know how/why the TCM controls shift speeds, but it has absolutely never done this before the last two tanks of gas, and my mileage shows the results of earlier shifting.
 
How are you getting 37-38mpg out of your Fusion? Is yours a hybrid? I drive about 95% highway, but the most I've ever been able to get out of my Fusion over a tank was a hair over 31mpg. Granted, I usually drive between 70 and 75mph, but that shouldn't be impacting my fuel economy THAT much.
 
No, it's not a hybrid. Like I said, in the colder weather, mileage does suffer some. But I just finished about a 1400-mile round trip that took me from Indiana to western Kentucky, all the way up to Chicago suburbs, back to middle Indiana, then up to Windsor, Ontario over a four day stretch and it returned 35.4mpg. The headwinds coming back south today took it from 36.0 down to 35.4 over about a 185-mile stretch.

How do I do it? I have Pennzoil Ultra Platinum 5W (or 0W sometimes)-20 oil, Amsoil ATL and Lubegard Platinum in the trans, Continental tires aired up to 44 psi, and I make an extreme effort to get the trans to shift between 2.5 and 3k RPM every time. I have memorized the upshift points and will always hit that speed and let off to force the shift; when slowing down, I would rather speed by a couple MPH rather than having the trans downshift from 6th at 44mph, or to 4th at 29mph. Once the limit goes back up, I accelerate gently to the speed where I know the trans will shift all the way to 6th, then slowly speed up after that. I always use cruise on the highway, and typically cruise no more than 5mph over the limit. Speed also causes a big hit; I've noticed that once I clear 75mph, the best I can manage is in the mid-33s. If it's over 80 for sustained times, it may drop into the low 32s.

That being said, when I do need to merge or pass, I go flatfooted to get around, then go back onto cruise. When the ambients are above 75-80* is when the mileage really starts to shine. 30-60 degrees the best I can do is usually mid-35s.
 
You will always get slightly less fuel efficiency in winter for two reasons
1) longer cycle time to full temp, meaning more enrichment of the fuel tract to keep it running and warm up
2) less energy in the fuel; when cold out, they use more butane, which can't be used as much in summer because it evaps more so (RVP in low 50s) than other compounds in gasoline.

Butane has less energy per pound, so it takes more volume of the fuel to drive any given distance when more butane is present. It is, however, also a tad cheaper to produce and sell, so we get a very marginal benefit from the fiscal side to offset the loss of economy. I have no idea if it pays for itself or not; never got that deep into it. The skeptic in me believes it's never a plus for we consumers, but the company instead. Not unlike E-85 fuels with Ethanol in effect of power density. Sure they cost less, but they also get lower economy. Ethanol has about 25% less energy per pound contrasted to good gasoline, but it also costs less (often about 25% less as well). It's a wash in terms of who uses it. But it cost ALL of us to subsidize it. If it had to stand on it's own merit, it would fail (quickly and miserably) because the fiscal model cannot support the indulgence. Ohhh my ... I must reprimand myself to inching too close to the naughty line ...
spankme2.gif
 
Last edited:
DNewton, I agree with your assessment and already understood what you were saying... I just wanted to give some explanation to the OP about the seasonal differences between our similar cars.

I agree, ethanol as a "general purpose" fuel is absurd. It does have very specific applications where it "can" be a better fuel, but there are always tradeoffs. For the general population, the benefits never outweigh the downsides. Some days I still wonder what happened to the synthetic fuels the Germans developed in the 30's since they had no natural resources of their own... but then we'd be killing a huge cash cow (Big Oil) that feeds directly into the pockets of the wealthy. Does this mean I get the stick as well?
smile.gif
 
I understand about seasonal mileage differences, etc.. and considering that nearly all of my driving is highway, and I live in Phoenix, which is both mostly flat (at least on the highways) and warm, most of what was stated above doesn't apply.

Once I hit the highway, I usually set the cruise control at between 70 and 75, and that puts it in the ~2100-2200 RPM range.. pretty much the butter zone.
I almost never 'flat foot' it.. perhaps once or twice a week when I need to get past a truck while entering the highway. Even passing on the highway, there are usually 4-5 lanes, and I can just shift lanes to get around someone. When I can't, I usually drop the cruise back until there's room, and then go down a gear to get around.. still rarely goes over 3200 RPM.

I've run Pennz Ultra Platinum 5w20 the prior two OCIs, including the 9k one I posted..

I'm also in Phoenix where even our winter temps almost never go under 35 overnight, and still hit highs in the 70's during the day, vs. your Midwest weather..

I think the only real major difference, besides different ATF fluid (which IMHO, can't possibly make more than 1MPG difference in this trans over Mercon LV or Valvoline ML) is that I run my tires at 35 or 36 PSI, and you air yours up to 44. THIS would make a potentially big difference in MPG over 36.. at the cost of much shorter tire life.


... I do think I have found a culprit, though. So back around 210,000 miles, I started noticing my car was idling a bit rough. I started thinking that perhaps the plugs were worn out, and not finding any records in the service records of a plug change, I decided to replace them @ 215,000 miles. Indeed, they were the factory original iridium plugs, but they still looked fairly decent.

Come 225,000 miles, the idle was still rough, and in fact a bit rougher.. I was also getting a CEL - P301 - Misfire on Cylinder 1.

I figured that the Autolite plugs I put in (yeah, I know, bad move) were just not good for this engine, so I replaced them again @ 225,000 miles with new NGK fine-wire plugs, as well as replacing the (also factory original) Coil-on-Plugs...

.. No improvement. The crazy thing, it ran pretty smooth on the highway, and Torque was reporting an overall misfire count of less than .005% while cruising @ 70MPH, even though I was getting around 10-15% misfires at idle. So I bought a compression tester.

Yup, bad compression on Cylinder 1. I have a nagging feeling I'm looking at a burnt exhaust valve. That would definitely screw up my MPG.
 
Okay, so I got feedback from the mechanic.. According to him, the valve on cylinder 1 had started to deform (for some reason) and as a result was sticking in the valve guide, thus not seating correctly, which caused it to overheat, which gradually compounded the problem. Apparently at this point, it's gotten pretty bad.

I can totally buy that, based on the behavior of the engine. It seemed pretty obvious that it was a valve issue.

But... I was then told that cylinders 1, 2, and 3 were "worn unevenly and thus damaged due to fuel wash-out" resulting in them recommending a new long block ..which sounds like complete [censored] to me. Based on the UOA results shown in my OP, I don't see how this could even be a possibility. I've got virtually no fuel dilution, flashpoint is plenty high (430), and the car does not burn, or otherwise use, any measurable amount of oil.

Am I wrong?
 
I assume the head is off? They measured the bores of 1,2,3?
I'd want to see it for myself.

It's possible the cylinders are damaged, but I don't see fuel as the cause, given your UOAs.

Perhaps take the injectors to a local shop and have them leak/load test them?

There's no evidence of fuel in the lube. If there's no evidence of a bad injector, I'd call hogwash.
 
Thanks for the feedback dnewton.

Yep, the head is off - had to be done in order for them to properly evaluate the valves/seats.. etc..

I will be going by the shop tomorrow morning and asking to have a look at the cylinders myself. I have been inside enough engines in my 45 years to know what normal wear looks like. I don't expect to see anything abnormal, honestly, especially considering how robustly Mazda-built L5-VE engine is built. It's a strong engine.

Quote:
To increase durability of the bore, Mazda uses a 4340 steel-molybdenum alloy material for the cylinder liners. This offers enhanced high-heat tolerance as well as reduced friction.


As far as the injectors go - I may or may not get them tested, since I'm going to have a look at the cylinders myself. I would think, though, that if they were leaking/wasting enough fuel to legitimately cause wash-out, my fuel economy would have suffered tremendously as a result. Prior to this valve issue popping up, I was getting 31MPG, and even with this valve problem, I was still managing to get 27-28MPG.

-------------

A few things I left out in my prior post. In the call I got 2 days ago, in which they told me about the valve, and the supposed abnormal/uneven wear in the cylinders, the service writer tried to sell me on a brand new long block to the tune of $7000.. I told her she was insane if she thought that was reasonable, and her response was "Well, your warranty should cover it"

... I asked her what warranty she thought I had on my 227,000 mile car, to which she responded "oh."

I told her to just give me a quote on correcting the valve issue, and I ended up getting a call back from her the next day, which blew my mind even further.

She said "I spoke with the mechanic and the service manager, and we can't replace the valve, but the good news is we found a used good long block for only $2500"

Needless to say, any faith I had in her was shot. I told her I was done and she needed to have the service manager call me immediately. 30 minutes later, I got a call from him.

His initial comments were "Well, it's not that we CAN'T replace it, it's that the engine has well over 200,000 miles on it, and our concern is that if we fix this valve problem, and then another one starts to fail in 6 months, what's to stop you from coming back in and blaming it on us? We just can't take that risk"

Wow.. just wow. Isn't that something that a customer could pull on any car? Heck, I've seen cars with less than 30,000 miles on them experience major failure. Are they going to refuse to service that too? Needless to say, this is when I started to play my cards.

- I've worked on plenty of cars myself, and I understood that anything in the engine can pretty much fail at any time. This was part of owning a car
- I bought the car used @ 178,000 miles, knowing that used cars can fail at any time. In fact, I've only ever bought used cars, with the exception of my current 2014 Altima. I bought them because I am mechanically inclined and know how to maintain them
-- I do UOAs on most of my oil changes, and that in fact, I had UOAs on my last 4 oil changes on this car, all of which reported absolutely stellar results.
-- With the exception of this one valve issue, the car has run exceptionally for the entire time I've owned it, and did not burn a drop of oil.
-- I reminded him that previously in the conversation, I had already asked the service writer 3 different times, 3 different ways, if any of the other valves in the head showed any problems, according to the tech working on the car, and the answer had always been 'no'

... It was, at this point, his tune changed. It's amazing how well the UOA proof, etc.. does that.

I then advised him that the issue with this engine was that only 1 valve was bad, in 1 cylinder, and that all they needed to do was correct the issue - pull the valve, guide, spring, etc.. machine the seat if necessary, and replace the parts.

His initial reaction was "You know that there's 4 valves per cylinder, right? Not just 2"

I just said "Yes, I know. 2 intake and 2 exhaust per cylinder. The tech says just the 1 valve is bad, but honestly, the machine shop should really inspect everything while they have it. I have no problem replacing both exhaust valves at the same time. In fact, I think that given the mileage of the engine, it might even be worthwhile to inspect and replace all the valves while they have it"

That pretty much ended it. He said "Well, I don't know that we need to replace them all, but we'll let the machine shop give us their opinion. We'll send it off today and ask for them to expedite it"

I even suggested that if the valve seat/head was too far gone, that we just replace the entire head assembly.. and his response was "well, those can get really expensive"

More expensive than a 2,500 used long block? [censored]??

... Needless to say, the confidence that I did have in this shop is pretty much shot. Shame, I used to trust them.
 
Wow, that was an interesting story. Did this happen at the Ford dealer? Too bad you can't deal directly with a mechanic that knows what he's talking about versus the service manager. Too many layers it sounds like. Best of luck to you and the car. Please keep us updated on how this turns out. I hope for the best.
 
Thanks, Satin.


Yeah, it happened at the Ford dealership. Same dealership that I've purchased multiple cars from. I always work with the same salesman, since he's an honest guy. They don't play games with me when I buy cars from them because they know I used to sell cars and I know how the business works. First car I ever bought from them, I basically "stole" from them.. lol. One thing I do well .. negotiate.

And yeah, it's too bad I can't just work directly with the mechanic. I have been able to speak directly with him in the past, and he always seemed to know what he was doing, but they've got some new service writers since they moved from their old location to their brand new facility. I was hoping things wouldn't change when that happened, but I'm thinking they have.

On a positive note - One of my coworkers heard me talking about what's going on and turned me on to her mechanic. Apparently he's an independent mechanic, certified, and specializes in Ford. She's been taking her cars to him for years. In fact, some other coworkers heard us talking about him and turns out many of them use his services too.

If things with the dealership go any more pear-shaped, I'm just going to tell them to put all the parts in boxes, and have the car towed to this independent mechanic's shop for him to finish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top