2010 Ford Fusion 2.5L - 2,864 mi - After Valve Job

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
3,236
Location
Phoenix, Arizona - USA
Many of you are familiar with the issue I had with my Fusion earlier this year, which required top-end work. For those of you not familiar - Cylinder 1 developed a problem with one of the exhaust valves which required removal of the head and a valve job. Details can be found starting about half way down Page 1 of this thread.

As part of the work, they put new Motorcraft 5w-20 oil in, and a new MC FL910s filter on.

I had planned on doing an oil change after about 1,500 miles of driving following the work, but that ended up going out to 2,864 miles. I put over 500 miles per week on the car, and I was extremely busy with work, etc.. so this was the first chance I got to set aside enough time to do the oil change, etc.

Here's the results of the UOA on this oil. More or less what I expected, following head/valve work.



Had I not told them about the work performed prior to this change, I suspect their comments would have been substantially different.
laugh.gif


Wear metals don't actually look TOO bad, surprisingly.. granted, they are higher, but not massively so.

Silicon is about 15 times higher than my average for this engine over the last 30,000 miles, but that's to be expected. After all, the head was actually off the engine for over 3 weeks, and they DID use some silicon-based sealers in some spots during reassembly.

As to the sodium - The oil fill that was in the car when I brought it in was Valvoline Next-Gen, which has sodium in its add-pack, so I suspect there was some of that left in the sump after they changed everything out.

Thoughts?
 
For an engine that has just been apart, (at least the head) that looks excellent. It's good to hear the work went well and it's running well. I have confidence the UOA results will improve over time.

How's the oil consumption?
 
I must say that for an engine that's had a top end job, those wear metals are very reasonable for break in.

I suspect all will settle down nicely after a few more OCIs.

Congrats! Looks like another 250k miles is ahead of you!
 
Thanks - I agree that the results look pretty darn good, all things considered. I also am expecting the numbers to come down over the next UOAs. My plan for the current fill is to go the full 7,500 mile OCI, but we'll see how I feel when the 5,000 mile mark rolls around.

Originally Posted By: Cujet
How's the oil consumption?

So far, over the ~3,500 miles I've put on it since I got it back, I have not noticed any consumption. Then again, it didn't consume any detectable amount before the top-end work, so I'm not surprised. I check it weekly, though, just to be sure.


Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Congrats! Looks like another 250k miles is ahead of you!

Thanks! I'm hoping so. Another ~7,500 miles and the car will have made it to the moon, so another 250,000 from now and she'll have made the round trip.
 
Great UOA considering - & you already noted the elevated dirt. What did you replace the MC with for your 7500 mile run?
 
Originally Posted By: SirTanon
Thanks - I agree that the results look pretty darn good, all things considered. I also am expecting the numbers to come down over the next UOAs. My plan for the current fill is to go the full 7,500 mile OCI, but we'll see how I feel when the 5,000 mile mark rolls around.

Originally Posted By: Cujet
How's the oil consumption?

So far, over the ~3,500 miles I've put on it since I got it back, I have not noticed any consumption. Then again, it didn't consume any detectable amount before the top-end work, so I'm not surprised. I check it weekly, though, just to be sure.


Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Congrats! Looks like another 250k miles is ahead of you!

Thanks! I'm hoping so. Another ~7,500 miles and the car will have made it to the moon, so another 250,000 from now and she'll have made the round trip.


Glad to see the work you had done is performing very well. I also would like to see many more miles from my Fusion. At present it has right at 207K and runs and performs as well as when I first bought it nearly 10 years ago. For DDs, 20 wt oils perform very well.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bigt61
Great UOA considering - & you already noted the elevated dirt.


Hard to say for sure if it's 'dirt' - Could be dust/dirt... could also be from the silicone sealants/lubes used during reassembly.

Originally Posted By: bigt61
What did you replace the MC with for your 7500 mile run?


For oil, the engine got 5 quarts of Valvoline MaxLife 5w30 and about 1/2 quart of Valvoline Next-Gen 5w20.

The filter was a Bosch Distance+ D3422 that I found at WalMart for $1.
 
Originally Posted By: SirTanon
Originally Posted By: bigt61
Great UOA considering - & you already noted the elevated dirt.


Hard to say for sure if it's 'dirt' - Could be dust/dirt... could also be from the silicone sealants/lubes used during reassembly.

Originally Posted By: bigt61
What did you replace the MC with for your 7500 mile run?


For oil, the engine got 5 quarts of Valvoline MaxLife 5w30 and about 1/2 quart of Valvoline Next-Gen 5w20.

The filter was a Bosch Distance+ D3422 that I found at WalMart for $1.


Your 2.5 holds 5 1/2 qts of oil?
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: SirTanon
Originally Posted By: bigt61
Great UOA considering - & you already noted the elevated dirt.


Hard to say for sure if it's 'dirt' - Could be dust/dirt... could also be from the silicone sealants/lubes used during reassembly.

Originally Posted By: bigt61
What did you replace the MC with for your 7500 mile run?


For oil, the engine got 5 quarts of Valvoline MaxLife 5w30 and about 1/2 quart of Valvoline Next-Gen 5w20.

The filter was a Bosch Distance+ D3422 that I found at WalMart for $1.


Your 2.5 holds 5 1/2 qts of oil?


That's what it takes to get it to the top of the hash marks on the dipstick, yeah.
(edit - realistically, it's a little under that.. more like 5.3 qt.)
 
Last edited:
I've read on other forums that the 2.3 engine has a smaller sump than the 2.5. My guess is that since the 2.5 was basically an 'upgrade' of the 2.3, and based off of it, Mazda decided as part of the development process that a slightly larger sump would be beneficial.

Don't forget, also, that I tend to use an oversize filter, and that means a bit more oil capacity. Not much, mind you, but some.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top