Originally Posted By: dnewton3
UOAs are one of two things to a BITOGer:
1) a toy
2) a tool
Most BITOGers use them as toys. They have no idea how to properly interpret the data, and they hop-scotch between brands and grades so quickly that no sensible data can be discerned. They make false statements based upon a remedial understanding of the data, with little or no effort to understand the data stream in relation to macro and micro analysis.
But here, we see the UOA used as a tool. The results are not representative of the lube; they are an indication of a problem. And, that problem was apparently diagnosed and rectified.
Now, what remains, is to stick with that lube for another OCI or two, and do some UOAs and confirm the repair. One variable has been identified; the air leak was found. It was fixed; a variable hopefully was eliminated. So, to confirm the repair, another UOA needs to be done. It is possible that the wear metals will relieve. They may or may not go down to unviversal average, because a singular OCI may not completely flush out all the Si. It might actually take two or three before the results stabilize. But regardless, if he wants a good ROI from the data he paid for, then he needs to control the variables one at a time, and seek out what the results would tell him.
Or, conversely, he could just let mythology and rhetoric pervade ....
You make the call.
Nicely said. I'd definitely do more OCIs / UOAs with M1 0w40 to get more data after fixing the intake leak. I'd love nothing more then for the next few UOAs to show excellent wear because lets face it, M1 0w40 has been proven time and time again that it's an awesome juice that gets the job done well.
UOAs are one of two things to a BITOGer:
1) a toy
2) a tool
Most BITOGers use them as toys. They have no idea how to properly interpret the data, and they hop-scotch between brands and grades so quickly that no sensible data can be discerned. They make false statements based upon a remedial understanding of the data, with little or no effort to understand the data stream in relation to macro and micro analysis.
But here, we see the UOA used as a tool. The results are not representative of the lube; they are an indication of a problem. And, that problem was apparently diagnosed and rectified.
Now, what remains, is to stick with that lube for another OCI or two, and do some UOAs and confirm the repair. One variable has been identified; the air leak was found. It was fixed; a variable hopefully was eliminated. So, to confirm the repair, another UOA needs to be done. It is possible that the wear metals will relieve. They may or may not go down to unviversal average, because a singular OCI may not completely flush out all the Si. It might actually take two or three before the results stabilize. But regardless, if he wants a good ROI from the data he paid for, then he needs to control the variables one at a time, and seek out what the results would tell him.
Or, conversely, he could just let mythology and rhetoric pervade ....
You make the call.
Nicely said. I'd definitely do more OCIs / UOAs with M1 0w40 to get more data after fixing the intake leak. I'd love nothing more then for the next few UOAs to show excellent wear because lets face it, M1 0w40 has been proven time and time again that it's an awesome juice that gets the job done well.
