2013 Chevy Equinox, 2.4L, 7,611mi, Mobil-1 0w40

[Turk]

Originally Posted By: 1maniac
I filled it back up with m1 5w30 only because I have a stash of it. Im planning on running this out to 5k then either back to the m1 0w40 or EP 5w30. Im not sure using a Dexos oil really benefits me here. I do like the Amsoil HDD idea also for this machine..


Sounds good. Keep us informed.

 

[KCJeep]

It appears to me using a true Dexos oil in this engine will lead to an early demise without crazy short OCI's.

As already suggested, I can't help but wonder if something like T6, being an HDEO with its differing add pack than a PCMO would do better in this vehicle.

 

[edyvw]

Geeeeez this oil is beaten up.
I did not know these engines are so hard.
My UOA on VW 2.0T that sees redline every day looks impressive compare to this. After 5K went from 13.5 to 13.3cst.
Flash point also in this GM engine looks bad.
Try T6, maybe that will work.

 

[147_Grain]

Since you're going back to Mobil 1 5W-30, why not top-off with their 0W-40 and keep the OCI at 5,000?

 

[Tucson Five-O]

147_Grain,

OP said he didn't add any makeup oil this time, so there may not be any make up oil needed, so no benefit to be had.

And edyvw, without a doubt, most of the viscosity loss is due to fuel dilution, rather than through classic shearing. The GM 3.6L DI is the same. Both are fuel diluting pigs.

It seems that Ford has better designed injectors, placement or software tune than GM does, although in fairness their EcoBoost engines dilute the oil severely too.

But for a naturally aspirated engine where extra fuel isn't used to control detonation, these Ecotecs do a number on the oil.

Now the $64000 question is whether running the 5W-30 specced oils down to sub-8 csts is really affecting wear.

Gary

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Wow! Viscosity starts out at ~13.5, and ends up at 10.6. Lost 20% of its viscosity, and sheared out of grade. There is not enough fuel dilution to account for that. Maybe the balance shafts are beating up the oil? But anyway, the oil ended up as a nice 30-weight, which is what the engine calls for. It sheared the 30-weights down to 20, and that's not so good.


My thoughts exactly. Being this engine appears to knock the oil a grade down, going up a grade is probably not a bad idea. You could also a try a more shear stable 10w40 or 5w40. It could just be this particular engine wears this way.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: Tucson Five-O
147_Grain,

OP said he didn't add any makeup oil this time, so there may not be any make up oil needed, so no benefit to be had.

And edyvw, without a doubt, most of the viscosity loss is due to fuel dilution, rather than through classic shearing. The GM 3.6L DI is the same. Both are fuel diluting pigs.

It seems that Ford has better designed injectors, placement or software tune than GM does, although in fairness their EcoBoost engines dilute the oil severely too.

But for a naturally aspirated engine where extra fuel isn't used to control detonation, these Ecotecs do a number on the oil.

Now the $64000 question is whether running the 5W-30 specced oils down to sub-8 csts is really affecting wear.

Gary

It seems that Redline 5W40 would do good here.
But then, it is Equinox not M5.
I just cannot contemplate that this engine dilutes oil so much in mostly HWY regime.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Tucson Five-O
147_Grain,

And edyvw, without a doubt, most of the viscosity loss is due to fuel dilution, rather than through classic shearing. The GM 3.6L DI is the same. Both are fuel diluting pigs.

It seems that Ford has better designed injectors, placement or software tune than GM does, although in fairness their EcoBoost engines dilute the oil severely too.

Gary


I just cannot contemplate that this engine dilutes oil so much in mostly HWY regime.


The fuel dilution on the last OCI was only 0.5%, which is not enough to account for 20% viscosity loss. Must be a lot of shearing going on.

 

[JAG]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: Tucson Five-O
147_Grain,

And edyvw, without a doubt, most of the viscosity loss is due to fuel dilution, rather than through classic shearing. The GM 3.6L DI is the same. Both are fuel diluting pigs.

It seems that Ford has better designed injectors, placement or software tune than GM does, although in fairness their EcoBoost engines dilute the oil severely too.

Gary


I just cannot contemplate that this engine dilutes oil so much in mostly HWY regime.


The fuel dilution on the last OCI was only 0.5%, which is not enough to account for 20% viscosity loss. Must be a lot of shearing going on.


Blackstone simply estimates fuel % based on flashpoint and that method consistently underestimates it compared to the much more accurate GC method.

 

[Turk]

Ok, JAG, but even if Blackstone was doubly off, it still sheared way down.

 

[demarpaint]

You gotta love what a DI engine does to oil.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You gotta love what a DI engine does to oil.

I'm not even sure that DI is to blame for the shearing. But it sure seems to cause outrageous fuel dilution.

This is the same reason my car comes with a factory recommended interval of 3k miles on M1 0w-40. Fuel dilution.

 

[gregk24]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You gotta love what a DI engine does to oil.

I'm not even sure that DI is to blame for the shearing. But it sure seems to cause outrageous fuel dilution.

This is the same reason my car comes with a factory recommended interval of 3k miles on M1 0w-40. Fuel dilution.


What vehicle do you have that recommends 3K changes on M1 0w40?

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: JAG
Blackstone simply estimates fuel % based on flashpoint and that method consistently underestimates it compared to the much more accurate GC method.


Interesting! I'll keep that in mind.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You gotta love what a DI engine does to oil.

I'm not even sure that DI is to blame for the shearing. But it sure seems to cause outrageous fuel dilution.

This is the same reason my car comes with a factory recommended interval of 3k miles on M1 0w-40. Fuel dilution.


I think the excess fuel in the oil is breaking down the oil, which could be the cause of the shearing. Either way excess fuel in the oil is not good for the oil or the engine.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: gregk24
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
You gotta love what a DI engine does to oil.

I'm not even sure that DI is to blame for the shearing. But it sure seems to cause outrageous fuel dilution.

This is the same reason my car comes with a factory recommended interval of 3k miles on M1 0w-40. Fuel dilution.


What vehicle do you have that recommends 3K changes on M1 0w40?



I think it's a 2005 Chrysler 300 with the 6.1L SRT hemi.
The one with piston squirters.
That engine was built to run. It spec'd M1 0w-40 because the specialized SRT oil was available yet.
It's funny. So many oem's performance engines accept that oil right off the shelf. I'm going to use it in my charger on the interval after this one.
Gonna give the Castrol 0w-40 a shot since I got 5 jugs on sale a month or so ago.

 

[JAG]

Originally Posted By: Turk
Ok, JAG, but even if Blackstone was doubly off, it still sheared way down.


With the GC flashpoint method, it's common to see a percent or two of fuel in UOAs. The ones with high fuel content tend to be 4 to 6 percent fuel, if I recall correctly. That really drops the viscosity.

 

[edyvw]

I do not know guys, but in my CC M1 0W40 went fro 13.5 to 13.3 after 5K and flash point was at 425. TBN though was at 2.6.

 

[cptbarkey]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: cptbarkey
i guess this the definition of a disposable engine. what a shame.



What am I missing?
How so?
Please explain


Good luck getting an explanation from a troll.


its a bland crossover, a commodity 2.4L 4 banger that has consistently shown terrible UOA's. Call me a troll if you like, I just called this engine out too as a piece of garbage. enjoy my opinion.

 

[Garak]

I really must ask - are we know using UOAs as a measure of an engine family? I've heard of engines being denigrated because of their lack of power, their NVH, their fuel economy, their durability, but never over consistently showing terrible UOAs.