Kendall GT1 5w-30, F150 Ecoboost 4240mi
- Thread starter BeerCan
- Start date
- Status
How much do these reports run? I'm used to the Blackstone reports.
Fuel dilution is starting to leach some Cu I believe. At least it is someone else's issue now. Thanks for the UOA!
dnewton3
Staff member
Everything looked improved.
The fuel down a tiny bit (pehaps variation in the driving, or the testing ...)
As I recall (and my memory certainly fails at times, so correct me here if I'm wrong) you used synthetics for these OCIs?
Two things I'll mention; not an attempt to start an argument.
1) if these shorter OCIs are the plan for folks who own this engine, and fuel is clearly of concern for these engines, then synthetics really aren't going to help one whatsoever. Might as well get a decent dino and flush it out often. Synthetics will not stop fuel intrusion, and often don't respond much (if any) differently than would a dino in short-to-moderate OCIs regarding fuel.
2) it is a fact that the majority of vehicles rarely stay in the 1st possession past 150k miles (often less than 100k). That in mind, if one's logic is to use syn's for the long-term affects, why pay to pass the benefits to someone else? Vehicles are often traded or wrecked long before a motor would fail due to lube selection. Even if you didn't use all syns here, that same logic applies to others who do.
I'm not trying to pick on you, BeerCan. But this is a great example that, in this type service, using synthetics really didn't gain anything, and now that extra cost is into the wind as you don't have the vehicle any longer.
The fuel down a tiny bit (pehaps variation in the driving, or the testing ...)
As I recall (and my memory certainly fails at times, so correct me here if I'm wrong) you used synthetics for these OCIs?
Two things I'll mention; not an attempt to start an argument.
1) if these shorter OCIs are the plan for folks who own this engine, and fuel is clearly of concern for these engines, then synthetics really aren't going to help one whatsoever. Might as well get a decent dino and flush it out often. Synthetics will not stop fuel intrusion, and often don't respond much (if any) differently than would a dino in short-to-moderate OCIs regarding fuel.
2) it is a fact that the majority of vehicles rarely stay in the 1st possession past 150k miles (often less than 100k). That in mind, if one's logic is to use syn's for the long-term affects, why pay to pass the benefits to someone else? Vehicles are often traded or wrecked long before a motor would fail due to lube selection. Even if you didn't use all syns here, that same logic applies to others who do.
I'm not trying to pick on you, BeerCan. But this is a great example that, in this type service, using synthetics really didn't gain anything, and now that extra cost is into the wind as you don't have the vehicle any longer.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Everything looked improved.
The fuel down a tiny bit (pehaps variation in the driving, or the testing ...)
As I recall (and my memory certainly fails at times, so correct me here if I'm wrong) you used synthetics for these OCIs?
Two things I'll mention; not an attempt to start an argument.
1) if these shorter OCIs are the plan for folks who own this engine, and fuel is clearly of concern for these engines, then synthetics really aren't going to help one whatsoever. Might as well get a decent dino and flush it out often. Synthetics will not stop fuel intrusion, and often don't respond much (if any) differently than would a dino in short-to-moderate OCIs regarding fuel.
2) it is a fact that the majority of vehicles rarely stay in the 1st possession past 150k miles (often less than 100k). That in mind, if one's logic is to use syn's for the long-term affects, why pay to pass the benefits to someone else? Vehicles are often traded or wrecked long before a motor would fail due to lube selection. Even if you didn't use all syns here, that same logic applies to others who do.
I'm not trying to pick on you, BeerCan. But this is a great example that, in this type service, using synthetics really didn't gain anything, and now that extra cost is into the wind as you don't have the vehicle any longer.
I agree that short OCIs are going to be the normal for this engine. After I use up my stash of my full syn, I'll be using kendall synblend instead of full synthetic. (I can get it cheaper that most bottled oil at walmart). The question is have is, what if someone is actually working the engine hard. Would a conventional oil hold up as well as a synthetic under those hot temperatures and conditions, like turbos even with short OCIs? Is there a reason the HTO-06 spec is only on full synthetics?
Everything looked improved.
The fuel down a tiny bit (pehaps variation in the driving, or the testing ...)
As I recall (and my memory certainly fails at times, so correct me here if I'm wrong) you used synthetics for these OCIs?
Two things I'll mention; not an attempt to start an argument.
1) if these shorter OCIs are the plan for folks who own this engine, and fuel is clearly of concern for these engines, then synthetics really aren't going to help one whatsoever. Might as well get a decent dino and flush it out often. Synthetics will not stop fuel intrusion, and often don't respond much (if any) differently than would a dino in short-to-moderate OCIs regarding fuel.
2) it is a fact that the majority of vehicles rarely stay in the 1st possession past 150k miles (often less than 100k). That in mind, if one's logic is to use syn's for the long-term affects, why pay to pass the benefits to someone else? Vehicles are often traded or wrecked long before a motor would fail due to lube selection. Even if you didn't use all syns here, that same logic applies to others who do.
I'm not trying to pick on you, BeerCan. But this is a great example that, in this type service, using synthetics really didn't gain anything, and now that extra cost is into the wind as you don't have the vehicle any longer.
I agree that short OCIs are going to be the normal for this engine. After I use up my stash of my full syn, I'll be using kendall synblend instead of full synthetic. (I can get it cheaper that most bottled oil at walmart). The question is have is, what if someone is actually working the engine hard. Would a conventional oil hold up as well as a synthetic under those hot temperatures and conditions, like turbos even with short OCIs? Is there a reason the HTO-06 spec is only on full synthetics?
Originally Posted By: volk06
I agree that short OCIs are going to be the normal for this engine. After I use up my stash of my full syn, I'll be using kendall synblend instead of full synthetic. (I can get it cheaper that most bottled oil at walmart). The question is have is, what if someone is actually working the engine hard. Would a conventional oil hold up as well as a synthetic under those hot temperatures and conditions, like turbos even with short OCIs? Is there a reason the HTO-06 spec is only on full synthetics?
That was my first thought too. As always, dn3 makes a lot of sense but what about conventional and the turbo? Maybe under everyday conditions that the average truck sees (read:commuter vehicle) it would be just fine but what about for those that work the engine? I believe dn3 has a lot of experience with conventionals in his Duramx but what about the differences between the the turbos in the two applications?
Again, I have to imagine the differences for this are narrower now than they would have been on previous API standards.
I agree that short OCIs are going to be the normal for this engine. After I use up my stash of my full syn, I'll be using kendall synblend instead of full synthetic. (I can get it cheaper that most bottled oil at walmart). The question is have is, what if someone is actually working the engine hard. Would a conventional oil hold up as well as a synthetic under those hot temperatures and conditions, like turbos even with short OCIs? Is there a reason the HTO-06 spec is only on full synthetics?
That was my first thought too. As always, dn3 makes a lot of sense but what about conventional and the turbo? Maybe under everyday conditions that the average truck sees (read:commuter vehicle) it would be just fine but what about for those that work the engine? I believe dn3 has a lot of experience with conventionals in his Duramx but what about the differences between the the turbos in the two applications?
Again, I have to imagine the differences for this are narrower now than they would have been on previous API standards.
Wow that fuel level makes me nervous! Not to hijack thread but I own a 2013 Ecoboost F150 and I'm trying to figure out an OCI. Just dropped the factory fill at about 2700 miles and put in M1 5W30. I'm thinking I should do a 2500-3000 max OCI?? Truck is commuter duty only.
dnewton3
Staff member
You guys make a good point about the oil and the turbo. On face value, there might be some merit to the concern.
But I hear that same topic discussed about turbo-diesels. And (with regen engines) they also have fuel dilution issues. But the evidence there shows no "gain" to using syns in short-to-moderate OCIs either. I can personally attest to having great success with dino HDEO in my Dmax, where others run syn, and yet our wear results are the same. So at times, I'm not sure the topic of turbo's is everything people fear it to be in regard to dino fluids. Now, I'd admit that even dino HDEOs are made with turbos in mind. Is that true of PCMOS? There probably are some dino PCMOs that would meet Ford's spec for the EcoBoost;I have no idea what they may be because I don't know the Ford fluid spec.
Upon looking both at a 2012 & 2013 Ford Manual, the oil spec is WSS-M2C946-A. Here is a partial list of approved fluids:
MS5k (dino)
PYB (dino)
VWB (dino)
GTX (dino)
If it is so important to be concerned with the turbos in the Ecoboost, then I would have suspected Ford to call for something extraordinary. But good ol' dino oil works just fine by them, up to the OLM limit.
I understand your first reaction; it makes sense on the surface. But the underlying data simply shows it's likely a false fear.
I do understand it's a bit early to be saying things with total confidence. Where the Dmax has 10+ years of UOA history, the Eco-Boost has only about 1+ of history. But what I see is that fuel dilution is probably the main thing to worry about, and I don't know that synthetics are going to avert that looming issue by any means over what a dino would do.
The other thing I'd point out is that even with the TBN issue, and the fuel issue, the wear itself is calming and not really demonstrably fearful. Perhaps the fuel and TBN and turbos are not enough to affect wear?
I would remind all about the concepts of inputs and outputs. The TBN and fuel might affect wear. But the wear itself is showing they don't, at least at these OCI durations (4-6k miles).
But I hear that same topic discussed about turbo-diesels. And (with regen engines) they also have fuel dilution issues. But the evidence there shows no "gain" to using syns in short-to-moderate OCIs either. I can personally attest to having great success with dino HDEO in my Dmax, where others run syn, and yet our wear results are the same. So at times, I'm not sure the topic of turbo's is everything people fear it to be in regard to dino fluids. Now, I'd admit that even dino HDEOs are made with turbos in mind. Is that true of PCMOS? There probably are some dino PCMOs that would meet Ford's spec for the EcoBoost;
Upon looking both at a 2012 & 2013 Ford Manual, the oil spec is WSS-M2C946-A. Here is a partial list of approved fluids:
MS5k (dino)
PYB (dino)
VWB (dino)
GTX (dino)
If it is so important to be concerned with the turbos in the Ecoboost, then I would have suspected Ford to call for something extraordinary. But good ol' dino oil works just fine by them, up to the OLM limit.
I understand your first reaction; it makes sense on the surface. But the underlying data simply shows it's likely a false fear.
I do understand it's a bit early to be saying things with total confidence. Where the Dmax has 10+ years of UOA history, the Eco-Boost has only about 1+ of history. But what I see is that fuel dilution is probably the main thing to worry about, and I don't know that synthetics are going to avert that looming issue by any means over what a dino would do.
The other thing I'd point out is that even with the TBN issue, and the fuel issue, the wear itself is calming and not really demonstrably fearful. Perhaps the fuel and TBN and turbos are not enough to affect wear?
I would remind all about the concepts of inputs and outputs. The TBN and fuel might affect wear. But the wear itself is showing they don't, at least at these OCI durations (4-6k miles).
Last edited:
SAJEFFC,
I think, like BeerCan, your engine can handle a 5k OCI, but no more.
And this may be controversial, but good luck with Mobil 1 in this application. From what I've seen here, in engines with high fuel dilution, it's only average at best. It has great high temperature deposit protection, which will prevent ring coking & keep the turbo clean, but your UOAS will be nothing to write home about.
I think your SOPUS and Conoco-Phillips products give you a better compromise between deposit protection and wear control in a rich running engine.
But I would definitely stay with an HTO-06 rated oil, regardless of the drain interval. It's just too easy to heat up the oil with that turbo.
Take care,
Gary
I think, like BeerCan, your engine can handle a 5k OCI, but no more.
And this may be controversial, but good luck with Mobil 1 in this application. From what I've seen here, in engines with high fuel dilution, it's only average at best. It has great high temperature deposit protection, which will prevent ring coking & keep the turbo clean, but your UOAS will be nothing to write home about.
I think your SOPUS and Conoco-Phillips products give you a better compromise between deposit protection and wear control in a rich running engine.
But I would definitely stay with an HTO-06 rated oil, regardless of the drain interval. It's just too easy to heat up the oil with that turbo.
Take care,
Gary
dnewton3,
I think your comment regarding HDEOs being formulated with turbos in mind is spot on. Think about it, it's very common to see turbocharged diesel engines; not so much for gas engines, at least in the truck segment. And HDEOs are by definition stout oils with the CJ-4 rating.
I highly doubt any PCMO meets those specifications. And why would they need to? Until now, that is, running in a pig-rich ecoboost monster of an engine.
Warranty aside, an HDEO like T-5 10W-30 might not be a poor selection in this engine, particularly if the engine is being worked hard. Just my 2c.
Take care,
Gary
I think your comment regarding HDEOs being formulated with turbos in mind is spot on. Think about it, it's very common to see turbocharged diesel engines; not so much for gas engines, at least in the truck segment. And HDEOs are by definition stout oils with the CJ-4 rating.
I highly doubt any PCMO meets those specifications. And why would they need to? Until now, that is, running in a pig-rich ecoboost monster of an engine.
Warranty aside, an HDEO like T-5 10W-30 might not be a poor selection in this engine, particularly if the engine is being worked hard. Just my 2c.
Take care,
Gary
dn3, good point about the HDEOs and being designed with turbos in mind. I agree that it is likely an over reaction and also really too early to tell with this engine. My concern though wouldn't be as much to do with wear results as the health of the turbo in regards to coking and such, or would that type of problem be evident in the UOA?
Anyone know how the Duramax and EcoBoost turbos (not the engines, the actual turbo) would compare? Size, speed, heat profile that type of thing? Is there something different about the diesel units than the gas that would account for say the HTO-06 spec?
Anyone know how the Duramax and EcoBoost turbos (not the engines, the actual turbo) would compare? Size, speed, heat profile that type of thing? Is there something different about the diesel units than the gas that would account for say the HTO-06 spec?
Thanks Gary for the advice. I think if I'm going to do 3-5K intervals I may just go back to Motorcraft 5W30 blend. Apparently it's a pretty good oil (Ford used it in the hero engine tests) and that should keep the warranty happy. Anyone know if Mtrcraft meets HT-06?
The blend does not. Unknown if Motorcraft full synthetic does. I looked it up on the FordParts website and it didn't say.
I checked to see if any of the equivalent Conoco-Phillips products are HTO-06 rated. The full syn 5W-30 is GM 4718, which probably would be sufficient in your application, but it's not the same as HTO-06.
A readily available SOPUS oil like PP or QSUD 5W-30 is what I would use, again realizing that your OCI limitation will be fuel dilution and these oils may not be anymore resistant.
Or do what some GM V-6 DI owners do, use Amsoil 5w-30 ASL. It seems to resist thinning from fuel dilution very well. Of course, it's downside is it's not an approved API rated oil.
Gary
I checked to see if any of the equivalent Conoco-Phillips products are HTO-06 rated. The full syn 5W-30 is GM 4718, which probably would be sufficient in your application, but it's not the same as HTO-06.
A readily available SOPUS oil like PP or QSUD 5W-30 is what I would use, again realizing that your OCI limitation will be fuel dilution and these oils may not be anymore resistant.
Or do what some GM V-6 DI owners do, use Amsoil 5w-30 ASL. It seems to resist thinning from fuel dilution very well. Of course, it's downside is it's not an approved API rated oil.
Gary
Ok sir thank you very much for the advice. I do love this little powerhouse engine so I'll just change it more often and sleep well. It's not like we don't love to change oil here on BITOG!!
My apologies to the O.P for the hijack.
Last edited:
Great video. I would run Kendall in my car any day.
It is a commercial. ....
Originally Posted By: electrolover
It is a commercial. ....
You mean it's not a true story? LOL!
It is a commercial. ....
You mean it's not a true story? LOL!
Originally Posted By: sm00thpapa
Originally Posted By: electrolover
It is a commercial. ....
You mean it's not a true story? LOL!
But it's on the internet....
Originally Posted By: electrolover
It is a commercial. ....
You mean it's not a true story? LOL!
But it's on the internet....
- Status
Similar threads
