05 Passat PD TDI, Amsoil 5w-40 @ 13,000 mi.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
31,869
Location
CA
 -


This car is indeed a 2005 VW Passat PD TDI, that specs the VW 505.01 oils.

I'll have another sample coming in within the next few weeks, so it'll be interesting to see how it turns out.

The lab used was Wix Filters, which contracts out to Stanley Services.

I noticed in both analysis reports that the Aluminum level is quite high and is significantly more than the 0.5-0.8ppm/1000 miles that the TDIs normally produce, at least from the analysis results that I’ve seen posted here on BITOG. The Al continues to drop, but not by much. In addition, in the 2nd sample, the soot is more than 10x the amount that it was in the first sample, which is the only reason that I can come up with at this point which may have prevented the Al level from dropping further. The sudden and significant increase in soot may have also caused the rise in viscosity. Nor do I see any sign of dirt ingestion, as the Si level is quite reasonable and there is no Ni present. Lastly, I’m happy to note that the Fe level is much lower in this report compared to the same engine running a 505.01 oil, which I mainly believe is due to the Amsoil staying in grade and protecting better against valvetrain wear.

I think this report is a good candidate for Terry's services in an attempt to find the cause of the high Al level.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Michael
 
Where is the paranoid doomsayer pro-505.01 crowd?
Did you post these results at tdiclub yet?

Stick with a 10k or less OCI. Maybe your just pushing the oil a little too much. Otherwise, numbers look good.
What fuel additives are you using?
 
Not my car. No fuel adds...dunno if its been posted on TDI club. I personally can't figure out why solids are so high, its probably related to soot. What surprises me is the sudden increase in soot between the last interval and this one.

The high Al also concerns me as it should be 1/2 the current amount, I think the Al is soot related as well, though Al was high in the first interval when soot was low.

Mike
 
no but its my car though..lol..hey michael thought i chime in...the car is running fine and doing great...and as for the results being poseted on tdiclub..they should be soon i have sent them to the guy who has the spreadsheets for the oil analysis so whenever he gets it up there...

i think i might also of been an issue with the extended drain interval up above 10k on the oil that time or it could not be.i dunno...

next change coming up in about a few weeks..and that will be at 10k..so we will find out then
 
What air filter are you using? When was it last changed? How does the intake plumbing look? Make sure the air filter box is completely sealed - leaks here bleed air into the 'post-filter' airspace...

The Si plus sodium suggests an intake leak.

I just had help finding a leak in my TDI, so this is fresh on my mind... (thanks TooSlick!)

Andy

PS...AFL is in the middle of bring reformulated and will be recommended for 505.01 apps in January.
 
they air filter was the stock one and it was due for change..the prefilter screen(pre filter) had a crap load of dirt and debris in it as well.. that was all removed and switched to kn filter
 
Are you sure oil analyis of this sort will tell whether the cams are wearing within acceptable rates? I've read elsewhere that the particle size produced by wear due to oil film breakdown is outside (larger than) the scope of consumer UOA. See also http://www.sacskyranch.com/camshaft.htm
 
nortones2, that's an interesting find and may really strike fear into the minds of people who think UOAs give an entirely accurate picture of wear rates. As that link says, if "chunks" break off cam lobes, the filter will catch them and won't even make it into the oil sample sent to the lab. Is there any easy way to inspect the cam lobes on these engines? Another option shown in that link is to look inside the oil filter for large metal debris. BTW, I don't have this engine (I have a 1.8T), I'm just a curious observer.
 
you mean chunks of metal found in my oil filter canaster is not normal?

Isnt that what the filters for is to remove this stuff-
smile.gif
 
Jag: I used to run a Passat diesel (pre-PD) so currently I'm in a similar position. No expertise in this, but my understanding is that serious (non-consumer) oil analyis does indeed read all the signs! That means tracking down all size range particles. Failure to do so can give a false picture. There are other ways of tracking wear particles also: the oil manufacturers use radionuclide techniques, which are much more sensitive, and again all evidence is checked including the filter content. What seems to be the position is that case hardened components like cams may flake a a result of fatigue. At that time, there may be little in the size range appropriate to oil analysis to flag up a warning, but as the cams wears quickly once the hardening is compromised by pitting etc, the damage is done.
 
That's my understanding too, nortones2.
cheers.gif


quote:

you mean chunks of metal found in my oil filter canaster is not normal?

Isnt that what the filters for is to remove this stuff-

Respectfully, you are missing the point. VW insists people use a 505.01 spec oil in this engine. Some people are using oils not meeting this spec and using oil analysis to supposedly prove that their oil is doing the job. But these simple UOAs do not tell the whole picture of wear. So the method of proof is faulty. Their oil may be doing the job, but these simple UOAs will not prove that 100%. Having the cam lobes flake-off particles is a bad thing, whether the filter catches the particles or not.
 
quote:

But these simple UOAs do not tell the whole picture of wear. So the method of proof is faulty. Their oil may be doing the job, but these simple UOAs will not prove that 100%.

Indeed, I agree, but please substantiate or at least explain the reasoning behind the follwing statement that you made in another thread:

quote:

I figure if you can use an oil that meets the right specs and gives slightly better UOAs, go for it.

You can't have it both ways. If a simple UOA is incapable of even detecting substantial wear like flaking, how can you, with a straight face, base your recommendation of one oil over another on arbitrary and effectively meaningless ppm numbers that differ only marginally between two UOAs?
 
Mori, here we speak of potential large iron chunks caught by the oil filter and is only brought up because of the unique characteristics of this engine and VW's strong insistence on 505.01 oil. Such chunks wouldn't even make it into the oil sample. Not saying this is happening but given the engine design and VW's position on what oils must be used, I wouldn't rule it out.

My comment above says: "...meets the right specs...". Above oil does not meet 505.01.

This engine is new and unique and what makes 505.01 oils special is not widely understood and comments on other engines UOAs don't apply to it. We see other engine's cams all the time and see no flaking.

You can think 16 vs 8 ppm is meaningless and arbitrary if you want. One is 1/2 the other...LoL. I won't take the time in the future to answer such questions from you because it's apparent you aren't asking for the sake of learning, so don't bother asking again.
 
JAG, I totally agree that the oil spec mandated by the carmaker should be used, especially in the PD engine. However, just because an oil meets a spec it does not guarantee that no unusual wear or serious damage is occurring.

quote:

We see other engine's cams all the time and see no flaking.

I don't know who "we" are, but I know BMW had a serious problem with flaking cams in some of their gasser engines.

quote:

You can think 16 vs 8 ppm is meaningless and arbitrary if you want. One is 1/2 the other.

See those numbers in the context of parts per million or in terms of percentage. I'd like to hear Terry's opinion on whether or not UOA numbers are wear numbers and whether a difference of 1 ppm here and there, or even a difference of 8 ppm in the case of FE, with an oil that consistently shows higher Fe numbers than other oils, let's one conclude with certainty that one oil performs better than the other.


quote:

I won't take the time in the future to answer such questions from you because it's apparent you aren't asking for the sake of learning, so don't bother asking again.

I didn't know you were here to teach.
tongue.gif
What I've learnt is that opinions become facts if repeated often enough. I don't care wether or not you reply to me, but I'm not going to stop questioning statements that appear flawed.
wink.gif
 
JAG, please DO expand on the specifics of why ICP spectro will miss camslobes or any other component "breaking away" not being detected?

Could you envison a analyst using proprietary metallurgy and bench testing data on the specific engine family and clean oil chemistry data to backup the primary spectro interpretation?
 
I use analystsinc for testing too, as I use many different labs and they have no special gifts of interpretation of Redline oils that I have observed.

On RL's Dave and his oil analysis opinions, well
I have been analyzing oil before he knew what POE esters were.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top