UOA for 2005 Duramax/Delvac 15w-40

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does oil analyzers charge extra for the TBN reading like blackstone? or is it included in the normal test? I can't find anything on their site.
 
Originally Posted By: Jdblya
Does oil analyzers charge extra for the TBN reading like blackstone? or is it included in the normal test? I can't find anything on their site.


Nope no extra dough. TBN included. I contend OAI is a better value and actually more accurate. Some people say I'm full of doo-doo because of the sponsor avatar by my name.
 
OAI (Polaris Labs) gives you TBN, Soot, Oxidation and Nitration as a standard practice. You don't get the pentane insolubles with the OAI package, but you definitely get a lot for your money. If you call the Polaris folks directly you can poke through their other menu style testing packages that are pretty cool too. FYI- Delvac will treat you well for the price point. If you aren't putting on tons of miles, or running in extreme conditions Delvac 1300, Delo and Kendall are all great oils for the price. The sleeper syn blend that I'm seeing in a CI-4+ is still Amsoil PCO though.
 
No Pablo you are right about what they "do do for little proceeds due". OAI samples in the US are processed in ISO17025 registered facilities that maintain accreditation with A2LA. As I've stated many, many times I send blind samples in duplicate and triplicate to these folks and I have yet to scratch my head or see some weird additive levels that don't make sense. They helped me catch a thieving oil supplier who substituted a cheaper product when they were supposed to be supplying my client with bulk Delo 400LE!! Now that was a FUN conversation to have.
 
My dad has the same truck, could you explain a little about your driving conditions?
 
Pablo, are you saying that because of the mileage on the Amsoil run? When I compare the reports, all of my wear numbers are lower with the Delvac run than the Amsoil. And again, Amsol was costing almost 4x the money than Delvac, yet I am not getting 4x the protection. I just don't see the benefit. Anwyways, very happy with Delvac at $10 a gallon and a WIX or Pure One filter for $10-12 is a gem in my opinion.
 
Originally Posted By: jstutz
My dad has the same truck, could you explain a little about your driving conditions?


Driving is a mix of city/highway as I live in Southern California. I pull a 12,000# RV 4-6 times a year. I do tend to let it idle more than most because I just don't like starting a diesel over and over throughout the day. I believe that is what kills them more than anything, but that may just be my oldschool thinking.
 
Originally Posted By: cowhorse01
Pablo, are you saying that because of the mileage on the Amsoil run? When I compare the reports, all of my wear numbers are lower with the Delvac run than the Amsoil.


18K vs 7.5K - you HAVE to account for the mileage. And when you do, Amsoil shows lower wear is all I'm saying. But it's a single run, etc.....
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: cowhorse01
Pablo, are you saying that because of the mileage on the Amsoil run? When I compare the reports, all of my wear numbers are lower with the Delvac run than the Amsoil.


18K vs 7.5K - you HAVE to account for the mileage. And when you do, Amsoil shows lower wear is all I'm saying. But it's a single run, etc.....


Exactly, the Amsoil was run way longer, 10.5K longer and wear looked good on the Amsoil run. TBN in the 7's, very impressive.

Run whatever makes you happy though, both are good oils in there own respects.
 
The key is to read these things in PPM/1,000 miles. 10 ppm of FE accumulated in 10,000 miles is the same as 5 ppm FE accumulated over 5,000 miles. The metal accumulation rate is 1ppm FE/1,000 miles of use. It's like hearing there were 50 murders in Flint, MI but only 45 in Cleveland (pure made up numbers) and coming to the conclusion that Flint doesn't have much violent crime. Then you find out the population of Flint is 1/4 of Cleveland's and gain a new perspective because you got a 1 in 6,000 chance of getting murdered there each year!
 
Only the Fe seems to have any significant shift in ppm directly attributed to duration of exposure. The other metals (Al, Cu, and Pb) are all so low that it's a moot point to discuss them, regardless of which sample you're looking at.

I agree that there is more Fe wear per mile with the Delvac, compared to the Amsoil. But Byron is looking at more than just the wear in regard to his total maintenance plan. Cost averages, ease of convenience, UOA costs, etc all play into his decision. Delvac has shown some stunning UOAs; this is not the only one.

Fe wear with Amsoil, based upon an averaged ppm reading was around 1ppm/1k miles (19ppm over 18k miles), and the Delvac ran about 1.5ppm/1k miles (11ppm over 7.5k miles). So, the Amsoil had 1/3 less wear, but it also cost 4x as much money to operate the Amsoil system as a whole! And let's not forget that the Amsoil run WAS USING BYAPSS! Don't forget to look at the soot/insolubles as well. The claim to fame for bypass filtration is lower contaminants, but when you look at the numbers, you can see very little if any advantage in that regard for the Amsoil fluid and bypass system. When you consider those facts, the Amsoil performance is not near as stellar as you would first think. Delvac 1300 and a "normal" full-flow filter did nearly as well as high-end-PAO with bypass, for 75% less cost!

Admittedly, single UOAs are not conclusive. The real knowledge comes from many successive, consistent UOAs. But most people here, (including myself), don't have the money, nor accumlate the miles, to do a true personalized statistical study. In lieu of that, we have to rely on the average information from others in similar situations. Dmax owners enjoy some of the best wear numbers out there for a light-duty diesel truck engine. And there is continuing evidence that shows (for short to moderate OCI duration = less than 10k miles) dino fluids beat synthetics hands down on a cost/wear average ratio. If you greatly extend the OCI, then you can't beat synthetics. But most people OCI way more often than necessary, regardless of base stock of the oil.

Further, where is the benefit to using high end products if you "extend" the vehicle life out past a practical point? Engine longevity is simply not an issue any longer, as they most all will last well past the intended or actual ownership of the vehicle. Wear is so low with today's products (regardless of base stock) that longevity is moot to 99.9% of us! In other words, the higher wear rate of Delvac is still so low that the perceived advantage to Amsoil is nil; neither product has a wear rate high enough to "wear out" the engine in a "practical" life-cycle. So the ONLY savings found in synthetics and/or bypass filtration are in fiscal return, for less oil purchased. And if you can't (or won't) extend out the OCI, then that savings is blown away.

The OP is looking for good wear-protection, cost averaged over a moderate duration of exposure. 10k mile OCIs on quality dino oil will result in excellent wear protection in a Dmax. In fact, it has become so common place that I really don't think that a UOA is even necessary for 10k miles or less. Meaning you can run 10k miles and (if you're a prudent shopper) OCI for about $25 on a Dmax engine. Dino's rule in moderate OCIs; their cost/wear-performance ratio simply beats synthetics.
 
Last edited:
You make valid points, and the trick is real extended runs. Very few people who post here take advantage of true extended OCI's.

A couple things - the OP said the M1 produced lower wear - I just wanted to clear the air on that, and you you mention "contaminants" and the BYPASS - honestly in this simple UOA there isn't much of a measurement done. True - both have very low soot and good TBN retention (again 7.5K vs 18K), but no particle size and quantification.
 
Agreed, Pablo.

Many times I come off as being against synthetics and bypass filtration, but nothing could be further from the truth. They can show great benefits when "used as directed".

Unfortunately most people can't leave their fingers off the wrenches long enough to enjoy the true benefit of such products.
 
Understood dnewton I was just trying to point out the fact that any UOA trending must be done with rates of wear based on a use condition versus comparing numbers. The OP's statement of less wear was incorrect, and that's what I was trying to get him to understand. If you don't run extended intervals, have a problem child modified engine or roll in extreme conditions the group II and group II+ diesel oils of today are well optimized.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top