M1 0W-20; 5k miles; 2011 5.7L Tundra; UOA #4

[btanchors]

Here is the latest UOA on my 2011 Tundra with 5.7L engine. Looks pretty stable. TBN a little better this time, probably because the usage period covered warm weather (I am speculating that warm weather usage = less condensation, fewer acids to neutralize).

This is the last UOA using Mobil 1 0W-20. I have installed Amsoil signature series 0W-20. I will have a UOA performed at 5,000 miles to compare to the previous four UOAs using Mobil 1.

Also, I just had a VOA performed by Blackstone on the Amsoil Signature series 0W-20, since I am using it now and wanted a baseline VOA from the same lab for comparison. This is being posted in the VOA section.

 

[pbm]

I think your UOA is fine but I'm sure your results would be just as good running any name brand dino 5w20 at 5K OCI's. If I'm running synthetic I'd want to go at least 7K to make it worthwhile costwise....

 

[btanchors]

pbm,

I do intend to do just that - in fact, it was the reason for me to switch to the Amsoil as I think it will stand up to an extended interval better than the Mobil 1.

I will dump the current fill of Amsoil at 5K miles, after drawing a sample for a UOA. Then, I will install a new batch of Amsoil, and from that point on, I plan to run it at an interval of 10K miles, or one year, whichever comes first.

 

[buster]

Comparing both oils at 5k intervals won't tell you much. Mobil's Tbn will hang above 2.0 for awhile.

See this UOA as an example.

I would have gone at least 10-15k on the M1 then compare. Otherwise it's not a real comparison.

Quote:
"Thanks for your message, Mike. We appreciate the feedback. A slight reduction in ash is desirable for advanced engine technology such as gasoline direct injection (GDI) engine and passenger car diesel engines. With GDI engines, higher levels of ash appear to result in a higher occurrence of Low Speed Pre-Ignition. The industry is currently developing tests and specifications to address Low Speed Pre-Ignition. In the future, passenger car engine oil specifications such as ILSAC GF-6 and dexos1 (next generation) are likely to have requirements such as lower ash to address Low Speed Pre-Ignition.

As for TBN retention, it is only a single parameter that provides an indication of the used oil condition. A reduction in TBN is an indication that the overbased detergent is doing its job by neutralizing acids that form as a result of combustion. TBN should be used in combination with other used oil parameters such as oxidation, nitration, TAN (Total Acid Number), ICP metals, D4684 MRV viscosity, and D445 kinematic viscosity to determine the overall condition of the used oil.

Finally, in our experience in severe-service Las Vegas field testing, Mobil 1 engine oil TBN levels typically do not drop below 2 for vehicles with 15,000 mile oil drain intervals. Furthermore, it is our experience that those oils tend not to drop any lower when we continue to 20,000 mile oil drains.

 

[INDYMAC]

I think the 5K OCI works well for this oil and engine application. Very nice!

What is the starting TAN?

 

[tig1]

M1 0-20 is clearly good for 10K or more in your engine with no problems.

 

[btanchors]

INDYMAC,

Initial VOA is shown here. It indicates a starting TAN of 2.8.

 

[BearZDefect]

Originally Posted By: tig1
M1 0-20 is clearly good for 10K or more in your engine with no problems.

How did you reach that conclusion?

 

[INDYMAC]

Originally Posted By: btanchors
INDYMAC,

Initial VOA is shown here. It indicates a starting TAN of 2.8.


Then it's time to change the oil. Very nice combination! How do you like your truck? Everytime I look at possible replacements for my 2000 Tundra, I think this could be the one.

 

[dnewton3]

Very consistent data. Everything is under control. Wear metals expectedly low for such short duration. TBN surely drops like a rock, does it not, in only 5k miles? Not that it's at condemation, but zowie what a stone ...

Total waste of oil. Any dino oil could have done that, and further. But, if you are setting this up as a comparison, then I can understand the methodology.

P.S. - your thread title is misleading; the oil duration is only 5k miles, and not 25k miles; I'll change it to match our convention of posting.

 

[btanchors]

INDYMAC,

If you like your 2000 Tundra, you will love the new Tundra, unless you think your 2000 Tundra is too big. I have the 2006 Tundra as well as the subject of this UOA, the 2011 Tundra. Great vehicles.

What is your rule of thumb for changing oil judging from the TAN? TAN increased by 2 points over the VOA, and you're indicating it's time to change the oil. The factory's recommendation for oil change interval is 5K miles, which is why I have been changing it at this interval.

dnewton3-
The drop in TBN is what concerns me about lengthening the oil change interval on this vehicle. As you point out, none of the UOAs have reached the condemnation point, but there isn't much margin left to double the interval, which is what I want to do. This is why I am trying the Amsoil to compare.

I now have four vehicles in my family's "fleet". Two of them are four wheel drive. Between all four vehicles, there is a LOT of lubrication related maintenance that must be done, especially on the two 4WD pickups. This is why I am seeking to lengthen the oil change intervals, to reduce the amount of time I have to spend performing maintenance.

Also, agreed regarding the misleading title - I would change it but I do not see a way to change the title. I don't know why I put total miles this time instead of UOA miles, sorry about that.

 

[buster]

Quote:
but there isn't much margin left to double the interval, which is what I want to do. This is why I am trying the Amsoil to compare.



You keep saying that, but it's been explained that retention is more important and that Tbn can remain 2.0> for thousands of miles. Keep that in mind. Just sayin....

At 10k miles, the Tbn could have stayed the same. This is why 5k is a complete waste of oil.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: BearZDefect
Originally Posted By: tig1
M1 0-20 is clearly good for 10K or more in your engine with no problems.

How did you reach that conclusion?


For one thing M1 has a 10K warranty on this oil. Also with my own experience with 10K OCIs. Also "FISSKER",a member here, has done 15-20K OCIs with M1 0-20 and put 300+K on engines doing this.

 

[INDYMAC]

Originally Posted By: btanchors
INDYMAC,

If you like your 2000 Tundra, you will love the new Tundra, unless you think your 2000 Tundra is too big. I have the 2006 Tundra as well as the subject of this UOA, the 2011 Tundra. Great vehicles.

What is your rule of thumb for changing oil judging from the TAN? TAN increased by 2 points over the VOA, and you're indicating it's time to change the oil. The factory's recommendation for oil change interval is 5K miles, which is why I have been changing it at this interval.

dnewton3-
The drop in TBN is what concerns me about lengthening the oil change interval on this vehicle. As you point out, none of the UOAs have reached the condemnation point, but there isn't much margin left to double the interval, which is what I want to do. This is why I am trying the Amsoil to compare.

I now have four vehicles in my family's "fleet". Two of them are four wheel drive. Between all four vehicles, there is a LOT of lubrication related maintenance that must be done, especially on the two 4WD pickups. This is why I am seeking to lengthen the oil change intervals, to reduce the amount of time I have to spend performing maintenance.

Also, agreed regarding the misleading title - I would change it but I do not see a way to change the title. I don't know why I put total miles this time instead of UOA miles, sorry about that.


I actually still love my Tundra, and think it's the perfect size for my uses (TRD, AC, 4X4, SR5). I would get something similar in a new one when the time comes.

I don't have any hard fast rules for TAN. But when I see it double I figure that reserve alkalinity is no longer effective, no matter what the TBN number is. Why wait for it to reach dangerous levels?

I have no problem with 5K mile OCI's, if I like how the lubricant protects. But I probably have more time on my hands than you do.

Thanks for posting all of your UOA's. I learn a lot from them.

 

[btanchors]

buster,

I hear what you are saying, but assuming the TBN is sufficient, how can we explain the TAN going up? If the TBN is sufficient to neutralize acids, why would the TAN rise significantly?

In UOA number 3 (The prior one), TAN is still close to VOA levels, but in UOA 1, 2, and 4, TAN has risen significantly.

Perhaps I do not understand the relationship between TAN and TBN...

 

[buster]

I hear you, I really don't know. I tend to trust XOM's expertise so I have always listened to what they say being they spend more on R&D than all the others combined. But that doesn't mean they are necessarily right about this.

I wish I could get to the bottom of it because I'm going to be converting my mom's CRV over to 1/year oil changes and plan on going with Mobil 1 EP 5w20.

 

[btanchors]

buster,

I highly trust XOM as well - I've been a heavy user of Mobil 1 since 1977, when it came in a metal can and the only viscosity available was 5W-20! So my trying a new oil did not come casually. On the other hand, if I do not see any difference, or if the Amsoil doesn't perform as well as the Mobil 1, I have no qualms about changing back to Mobil 1.

I continue to find this whole process of testing, evaluating, and discussing pretty fascinating.

Obviously, I will continue to post the next sets of results for more discussion...

 

[buster]

Amsoil has a bit more flexibility because they dont' have to adhere to API standards. My question is mainly about the Tbn in the new SN formulations vs the older higher Tbn formulas. According to XOM, they test all their oils out to 25k, so I tend to believe them. I know some of the TBN's we are seeing with the new SN stuff haven't been all that great, but at the same time we are not seeing enough cases where the oil was pushed out to 15k miles. We know Tbn is not linear so it's definitely possible that a 2.5 Tbn at 5k could very well be 2.5 @ 10-12k miles. That's kind of where I'm at with this.

 

[btanchors]

The other aspect of this is that Amsoil (I believe, someone correct me if I am wrong) purchases some base stocks from XOM. In that way, Amsoil's products also benefit from XOM's experience. I agree that as a blender whose products don't have to be API certified (at least for the Signature series) they have more flexibility. Not clear how that might/might not affect this aspect of the oil's performance.

Again, fascinating discussion, thanks buster (and others) for all your comments.

 

[Tucson Five-O]

btanchors,

I understand your reasoning for switching from AFE to SSO, although as buster & dnewton3 advised, you haven't ascertained much changing AFE @ 5000 mile intervals. Undoubtedly SN dino, particularly a SOPUS oil like PYB would have these results @ 7500 miles.

And TAN is a strange animal to interpret, particularly in gas engines. I mean, look at your previous OCIs. 4.9 TBN/4.4 TAN, 3.9 TBN/4.7 TAN, 2.1 TBN/2.7 TAN, and your most recent OCI, 3.0 TBN/4.8 TAN. No rhyme or reason on what the TAN will do. The way I would use the TAN, and it's not cheap, is to extend the OCI out to at least 7500 miles, do a UOA to include TBN & TAN, do it again at 10,000, and again at 12500miles. Stay the course, have faith in XOM R&D & the AFE, and keep the oil in. Otherwise, unless you're enamored with synthetics, then use a good dino, keep OCIs at 5-7.5k and be happy.

I would be looking at the TAN's pattern and if the rate of increase changes, there you go, time to dump it. I would have stayed with the AFE. The SSO will probably look the same at 10k as the AFE did @ 5k.

You have the analytical skills and the desire to do it right, so do it!!

Just my thoughts.

Take care,
Gary