Mobil-1 5W-30 SS, 2003 Ford 4.0L SOHC, 4871 miles

[chucky2]

Previous oil changes were:

575 factory fill changed out with Castrol GTX 5W-30 and Mobil-1 M1-209 oil filter.

3010 Castrol GTX 5W-30 changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Mobil-1 M1-209 oil filter.

6025 Mobil-1 5W-30 SS changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Mobil-1 M1-209 oil filter.

9025 Mobil-1 5W-30 SS changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Mobil-1 M1-209 oil filter.

12029 Mobil-1 5W-30 SS changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Mobil-1 M1-209 oil filter.

15057 Mobil-1 5W-30 SS changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Wix oil filter - I'll edit later to put in exact one.

19928 Mobil-1 5W-30 SS changed out with Mobil-1 5W-30 SS and Wix oil filter - I'll edit later to put in exact one.

Results:

code:

---

Element 19928 15057 9025



Aluminum 3 4 4

Chromium 1 1 1

Iron 14 19 16

Copper 5 3 3

Lead 1 2 0

Tin 3 2 3

Molybdenum 59 69 77

Nickel 0 0 0

Manganese 1 1 1

Silver 0 0 0

Titanium 0 0 0

Potassium 0 3 1

Boron 138 157 155

Silicon 11 10 9

Sodium 6 4 7

Calcium 2938 3120 2887

Magnesium 13 14 20

Phosphorus 756 730 799

Zinc 909 825 910

Barium 0 0 0



SuS@210F 60.9 59.3 61.3 should be 54-61

FlashpointF 410 385 385 should be >365

Fuel %
Antifreeze % 0.0 0.0 0.0 should be 0

Water % 0.0 0.0 0.0 should be 0.0

Insolubles % 0.3 0.3 0.1 should be
TBN 5.8 5.4 8.5

---

Blackstone Comments: This oil was run 4,871 miles in the engine and the TBN still read at 5.8, so you haven't hurt this oil any during your last use cycle. Using the extra 1,800 miles for the last fill of oil, wear in most of the metals actually improved. The used oil was in perfect condition and readings for silicon and insolubles are steady. We may be missing something but we think you are far better off with the longer oil use intervals. Heck, try 5,000 miles for the next sample. This Ranger engine seems to enjoy the longer oil use intervals. No harmful contaminants found in this sample.

My comments: Only thing that this is my first run on the Wix oil filter, instead of the Mobil-1...interesting that wear metals are down...maybe having more flow - if it is true that Mobil-1 filters might not flow enough all the time, and Wix do - is better than higher filtration...complete speculation there though. Also, I started using Amoco 89 octane instead of Amoco 93 octane... Other than that, good amount of highway driving at high speeds...in fact I made a 5 hour trip at high speed and then took this sample when I changed the oil right afterwards...and
General BITOG UOU Observation: We've got to get a better method of entering the data in the website...if I have the free time...yeah, like that'll ever happen...I'm going to try and find a web-based database tool that we might be able to use...that way when everyone inputs their numbers, not only would they just have to type in numbers...elements field would already be there...but it would be stored for searching. So much to do, so little time...

[ July 11, 2004, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: chucky2 ]

 

[Matt89]

quote:

---

Heck, try 5,000 miles for the next sample.

---

Another startlingly bold recommendation from Blackstone. This oil looks great and they want you to try an interval a total of 129 miles longer. GO FOR IT! I think you'll be safe...

I think they just like their regular samples (and payments)...

Edit: It occurs to me that 5,000 miles is probably your "normal service" interval, right?

 

[SSDude]

Once more we see high iron with M1. No reason to be alarmed though.

 

[buster]

quote:

---

Once more we see high iron with M1. No reason to be alarmed though.

---

Agree, I mean their are reasons for RL's high #'s so their must be a reason for Mobil's high iron right?

 

[chucky2]

SSDude- Actually, looking at numbers Whimsey has posted using Motorcraft 5W-30 and a Motorcraft FL-820S filter for 5,000 miles (25,000 miles on vehicle) and numbers Bill J. has posted using Amsoil TSO 0W-30 with Amsoil filter for 4,641 miles (17822 miles on vehicle), these numbers are either the same ppm/1000 or better than either of those postings...Whimsey didn't best me in any category that mattered, and Bill J. had .1 ppm/1000 less Iron than me, and .2 ppm/1000 less Tin, while having 1.6 ppm/1000 more than me for Aluminium, .2 ppm/1000 mor Chromium, 1.6 ppm/1000 more Copper, .4 ppm/1000 more Lead...Whimsey had .5 ppm/1000 more Silicon than I, while Bill J. had 1.6 ppm/1000 more than I. Hard to tell if the Silicon was dirt or leaching from seals, etc....?

buster- Mobil-1 does have high Iron in a good number of reports though, so I can't really argue with SSDude's comment...for as expensive and highly touted Mobil-1 is, there should be a good reason their Iron numbers are as high as they are.

Matt89- Yep, normal service interval. Once I got a trend on a couple (and I would have had a 3rd had I not been carelessly forgetfull) 3,000 mile runs, I bumped it out to 5,000 miles. I don't want to run any farther than 5,000 mile runs until the warranty is up...after that I'll probably start pushing it out even more. I short changed it because I was going to be significantly over if I'd waited until after my drive back home, so I changed it with a little less than 5,000 miles - I doubt the numbers would have changed much either way.

Thanks for the comments everyone!

Chuck

 

[Whimsey]

These Ford 4.0L SOHC motors seem to produce more iron and silicon in their UOA's than you'd thing is "normal". But I thing it's just the "nature of the beast". Oh, and chucky2 I did best you in one catagory. Motorcraft 5W-30 costs $1.42/qt versus Mobil 1 5W-30 at around $4/qt+/- and produced similar wear numbers for similiar miles

.

Whimsey

 

[chucky2]

Whimsey- Can't argue with that at all!

Once the warranty is up, in 5 yrs/100,000 miles, I'm going to have a tough choice:

Extend out the Mobil-1 interval, or change 1/2 to 1/3 as often with a dino and 1/4 to 1/5 of the price...hard decision...

I do wonder however if in the long run, as in 10 years long run, if the real full synthetics start paying off? The drivetrain and/or body will probably be dead before the engine craps out though, so it probably doesn't matter...

Take it easy!

Chuck

 

[jthorner]

Wear metals wise for OCIs of 5,000 miles or less we have seen little or any evidence of Mobil-1 resulting in lower wear metals than for any of the highly rated conventional oils.

For normal driving, moderate climates and sub 7,500 mile OCIs it makes one question spending $4-$5/quart for motor oil instead of $1-$1.50.

John

 

[chucky2]

jthorner- I'd agree that for the price, normal 3k-5k intervals, and regular conditions and driving, buying Motorcraft, Castrol GTX, Pennzoil, or Chevron/Havoline - or one of the SL rated CI-4 diesel oils - is a pretty tough price/performance to beat.

I do wonder however in a few years down the road, if running a synthetic will have helped out any...and I also wonder if it's saving me any money in gas?

We'll probably never know....

Chuck

 

[drm7]

chucky2: I have an 03 Mazda B4000 (rebadged Ranger) and I'm starting my 5000 OCI w/M1 5w30 as well. I switched at 5000 miles to M1 and did a couple 4000 mile changes. I currently have 17k on the clock. I wouldn't worry about 10 years from now. My brother is still driving a 92 that looks like it was made last year. Body and frame are mint. Motor has 150,000. I think if you want to get 200k (as I plan to do) it will be no problem and I'm betting the syn oil will keep the motor clean and allow it to reach this mileage w/o coking up rings, oil galleys, and it will keep the seals clean. This is where I think the benefits of syn come in. We'll see. These engines have 2 timing chains, one on front and back of engine. These may be hard on oil and that my be why Ford still specs 5w30.

 

[Whimsey]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jthorner:
Wear metals wise for OCIs of 5,000 miles or less we have seen little or any evidence of Mobil-1 resulting in lower wear metals than for any of the highly rated conventional oils.

For normal driving, moderate climates and sub 7,500 mile OCIs it makes one question spending $4-$5/quart for motor oil instead of $1-$1.50.

John

---

I've got to agree with there. In my own case the first change with Schaeffers Supreme 5W-30 for even less miles than the Motorcraft 5W-30 previously used did not improve the wear #'s. Of course that was in the winter months vs the spring/summer months with the Motorcraft 5W-30. I'm still running the Schaeffers Supreme 5W-30 and will extend it to 7,500 miles. In the interests of science. And hopefully the wife doesn't read this post, otherwise I'm toast

.

Whimsey

 

[chucky2]

drm7- That's what I heard about those older Rangers, they're beasts. I have heard more than a few complaints though on the newer ones like ours (well, not 03's since they're pretty new, but the 99-01's especially), so I think the jury is still out on the newer style Rangers - I hope ours are as durable as the older ones, lets hope so.

Whimsey-

Smart man!

 

[drm7]

chucky2: what kind of complaints? I've heard pretty good stuff about the motors and in my digging in other forums I haven't read any complaints on the 5 spd auto trans. The trans is my biggest fear. I'd like to get 200k+ before it goes. Then I'll dump the whole truck. To get 200k I plan to flush the trans, brakes, and radiator every 30k. That will be about every 2 years for me. I'll probably stick with 5k OCI on M1.

 

[chucky2]

From just cruising around the Ranger websites, it seems that 99-01 owners (and some '02) had more problems than did the owners of older Rangers.

There were even threads at a couple of the websites that asked about problem this and problem that on the newer Rangers...the people with the older Rangers seemed to have a noticable lack of problems, while newer Ranger owners had more.

So far, the only beef I have with mine is a less than smooth engine idling - the thing has some type of rattle or something like that - and the dash surface is peeling off.

Other than that, so far, I haven't had any problems.

Good luck with yours!

Chuck

 

[Whimsey]

quote:

---

Originally posted by chucky2:
From just cruising around the Ranger websites, it seems that 99-01 owners (and some '02) had more problems than did the owners of older Rangers.

There were even threads at a couple of the websites that asked about problem this and problem that on the newer Rangers...the people with the older Rangers seemed to have a noticable lack of problems, while newer Ranger owners had more.

So far, the only beef I have with mine is a less than smooth engine idling - the thing has some type of rattle or something like that - and the dash surface is peeling off.

Other than that, so far, I haven't had any problems.

Good luck with yours!

Chuck

---

The earlier 4.0L was the old pushrod design. Somewhere around 2000 they introduced the SOHC design and there were some early problems with the wierd OHC design that engine uses. Hopefully my wife's 2002 built in November 2001 has the new corrected design

.

Whimsey

 

[Geoff]

Are you willing to try Mobil 1 10w-30? This is great trending and I would like to see the difference since in one of our cars I have used the 5w- and 10w- 30 M1 since new and would like to see if the weight matters much.

 

[FordSVTGuy]

I just changed the oil on my 2002 Explorer with the 4.0L V-6 and put in Mobil-1 5w-30. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I will be leaving this in for 7,500 miles and then doing a UOA.

Previous UOA on my engine showed low wear using Havoline 5W-30 synthetic, but also poor TBN retention. I am hoping that the Mobil-1 will provide similar wear numbers, but with better TBN retention. I am curious to see how the iron numbers change. I am certain that they will increase with Mobil-1, but I hope not by that much.