Lab results after running with no air filter

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Donald
Its silicon, not silicone. Copper is very high and should be < 5.


Copper reading well over 20 ppm is typical of Hemis (and GM LS series, also). Its not a wear metal, it leaches from coolers and fittings in the oiling system.

 

[jayg]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
21 PPM iron really doesn't seem high for an iron-block engine still at relatively low mileage if you ask me. Neither of my Jeep 4-leakers ever returned lower than 18 PPM iron, and the best my SRT has done so far is 23 PPM (granted, its under 20k miles but the jeeps are both over 100k).

I wouldn't worry- sounds like the whole thing was a non-event.



x2

 

[BigD7]

thanks guys. I looked through a bunch of Hemi UOAs and they all indeed returned high copper numbers, so I'm not concerned. 21PPM of iron at only 1000 miles is a bit worrisome but I'll attribute that to prolonged break-in for now and the fact that its a hemi. in addition, the fact that I take so many short trips probably contributes as well. A couple of more 6-month UOAs should definitely shed some light on this.

 

[Errtt]

As stated its unknown how long (or short) the vehicle ran without an air filter. Also with only 25k on it, I'd think after the air filter now attached, more vehicle miles, a few more OCs, numbers should improve.

 

[Bamaro]

One thing to keep in mind is that you ran it without filtration for an "unknown amount of time". It could have 1 mile or a thousand.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: BigD7
So i'm having a bit of trouble understanding this. Since the Silicone is so low, how come the wear is so high?


Because PP 5W-20 is not working for you.

It could be because of the brand, or it could be the viscosity.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was because of the viscosity.

 

[Brent_G]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: BigD7
So i'm having a bit of trouble understanding this. Since the Silicone is so low, how come the wear is so high?


Because PP 5W-20 is not working for you.

It could be because of the brand, or it could be the viscosity.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was because of the viscosity.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: BigD7
So i'm having a bit of trouble understanding this. Since the Silicone is so low, how come the wear is so high?


Because PP 5W-20 is not working for you.

It could be because of the brand, or it could be the viscosity.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was because of the viscosity.

Or, don't try to determine wear from a UOA. I don't see a lesson about wear or oil viscosity here.

 

[Ducman]

Originally Posted By: Brybo86
iron potentially still from break in wear...? do you have another UOA to compare it to?


There's no wear trend established in this instance, so it's all just speculation at this stage.

The engine should be sufficiently broken in by now.
Only regular UOA's will help determine if anything is not right.

Ultimately, I would be inclined to say that any excess wear(if any) is largely due to very short trips.

Note the low TBN.
The TBN is the only thing that stands out to me on the UOA.

 

[Ducman]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
21 PPM iron really doesn't seem high for an iron-block engine still at relatively low mileage if you ask me. Neither of my Jeep 4-leakers ever returned lower than 18 PPM iron, and the best my SRT has done so far is 23 PPM (granted, its under 20k miles but the jeeps are both over 100k).

I wouldn't worry- sounds like the whole thing was a non-event.



I agree completely.
Except the TBN seems low for such short mileage.
Again, I attribute that to very short trips.
It clearly puts the vehicle into the severe service category.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Or, don't try to determine wear from a UOA. I don't see a lesson about wear or oil viscosity here.


That's partly the whole reason for getting a UOA is to check for abnormal wear as well as contaminates.

And being that this UOA is reporting abnormal wear with 5W-20......it's a slam dunk.

 

[Ducman]

To the OP.

Chalk it up to experience, and start establishing wear trends through UOA's
Although UOA's are not a great tool to determine problems, it's not by any means a useless tool.
Only regular UOA's will be able to establish trends or spikes that are out of the ordinary.

The TBN is low to me. I think a TAN would be of interest here.
I think it's the very short trips your doing.
What is the severe service schedule for your vehicle?

I would be inclined to just carry on in accordance with the recommended service schedule.
Whilst establishing trends through OUA's at the time of service.
And don't get too caught up in the results of your first UOA. It means nothing at this stage. Wait until there's 4 or more UOA's under your belt.

 

[Ducman]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Garak
Or, don't try to determine wear from a UOA. I don't see a lesson about wear or oil viscosity here.


That's partly the whole reason for getting a UOA is to check for abnormal wear as well as contaminates.

And being that this UOA is reporting abnormal wear with 5W-20......it's a slam dunk.

With reference to the oil university.
I personally would be inclined to keep using the thinner grade of oil.
I honestly don't see anything abnormal about his wear numbers.
Maybe I'm missing something here.

Are these numbers unusually high for these engines when used in severe service applications?

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Ducman
I honestly don't see anything abnormal about his wear numbers.


I'm thinking the wear numbers are too high for a 1000 miles on the oil.

 

[Ducman]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Ducman
I honestly don't see anything abnormal about his wear numbers.


I'm thinking the wear numbers are too high for a 1000 miles on the oil.



IMO, It's impossible to determine anything from a single UOA.
Especially on the first one when the engine may still conceivably be running in.
And it's a total unknown how long the air was being unfiltered.
With regard to the air filtration issue. The amount of Silicon in the oil is quite low.
That's why I believe there's nothing to see in this instance.

It is a requirement that a baseline and trend is established, for anything to be drawn on this potential "non issue".

For all we know, this could be normal for this type of engine in a severe service application, due to the very short trips. The engine rarely if ever gets to normal operating temp.
That's the only big issue which is patently obvious at this point in time.
It's all speculation other than that.

If it was me.
I would continue with the current oil or change to an Amsoil equivalent in the current grade, then go forward with regular UOA's at "appropriate service intsrvals" to get a picture of what's normal.
Then determine if I would like to/can improve on the wear metal situation by experimenting with different grades when it becomes clear what's normal.

 

[Rendezvous]

I live on Long Island also and the roads are covered in sand and dirt right now from all the recent snow storms. Your truck wouldn't have picked a worse time for the air filter to fall off lol

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
That's partly the whole reason for getting a UOA is to check for abnormal wear as well as contaminates.

Merk, please untangle that sentence for me.

How many PPM of contaminants equates to how many nanometres of wear, and for which viscosity, which brand, and which engine variety? UOAs can check for abnormal wear when other variables are held constant. Switching brands and viscosities (along with having no baseline trending in the first place) throws that whole idea out the window.

 

[ram_man]

No air filter or some high flow air filters will cause elevated engine wear. I have seen piston rings become sharpened over time do to after market filters.