2013 GTI Follow Up UOA

[rhhsiao]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: rhhsiao
Run the oil longer unless you're constrained by the manufacturer recommended OCI.

This is Low-SAPS. 2.0T are hard on oil, even some High-SAPS cannot retain TBN properly. My 5K OCi on M1, TBN was at 2.6.


I was replying to the OP. Sure the oil is Low-SAPS, but even if the engine is "hard on oil", where does that show up in the UOA on this run? Why is a TBN of 2.6, in your case, unacceptable? TBN for the OP is 4.3 and wear metals are all within average ranges. If his TBN was also 2.6 and wear metals didn't budge, would you automatically assume the oil is now unfit for use?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: rhhsiao
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: rhhsiao
Run the oil longer unless you're constrained by the manufacturer recommended OCI.

This is Low-SAPS. 2.0T are hard on oil, even some High-SAPS cannot retain TBN properly. My 5K OCi on M1, TBN was at 2.6.


I was replying to the OP. Sure the oil is Low-SAPS, but even if the engine is "hard on oil", where does that show up in the UOA on this run? Why is a TBN of 2.6, in your case, unacceptable? TBN for the OP is 4.3 and wear metals are all within average ranges. If his TBN was also 2.6 and wear metals didn't budge, would you automatically assume the oil is now unfit for use?

OP lives in CA that has much better gas then rest of states. Much lower sulphur content in CA makes difference.
Problem with TBN in my case is that M1 starts very high in TBN, but in 5K came down to 2.6.

 

[rhhsiao]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: rhhsiao
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: rhhsiao
Run the oil longer unless you're constrained by the manufacturer recommended OCI.

This is Low-SAPS. 2.0T are hard on oil, even some High-SAPS cannot retain TBN properly. My 5K OCi on M1, TBN was at 2.6.


I was replying to the OP. Sure the oil is Low-SAPS, but even if the engine is "hard on oil", where does that show up in the UOA on this run? Why is a TBN of 2.6, in your case, unacceptable? TBN for the OP is 4.3 and wear metals are all within average ranges. If his TBN was also 2.6 and wear metals didn't budge, would you automatically assume the oil is now unfit for use?

OP lives in CA that has much better gas then rest of states. Much lower sulphur content in CA makes difference.
Problem with TBN in my case is that M1 starts very high in TBN, but in 5K came down to 2.6.


What does this have to do with my response to the OP's UOA of saying he should go longer? If anything, the lower sulfur content of CA's gas only supports my statement. If his TBN depletion is low despite the use of a low-SAPS oil (which I don't believe Mobil 1 0W-40 is), then he could potentially use the oil for a longer interval because it will take longer for the acidified oil to make an impact on wear metals.

As for your engine, not sure of the history of the car, but why does it matter that TBN came down so quickly? Is poor TBN retention in your engine showing up as increased wear? Or are you just condemning the oil based solely on the fact that TBN came down more quickly than you are comfortable with even if it has made no impact on wear or other factors?

 

[Ayrton]

Jeff

I think you found a winner with the Mobil 1 0w-40. Your TBN stayed decent, it actually remained fairly thick, wear levels are great, etc. etc. You couldn't ask for a more normal report.

Mobil 1 0w-40 is so easy to get and affordable in USA. I would stick with it 100 percent if I was you. Enjoy your car and your Mobil 1 choice!

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: Ayrton
Jeff

I think you found a winner with the Mobil 1 0w-40. Your TBN stayed decent, it actually remained fairly thick, wear levels are great, etc. etc. You couldn't ask for a more normal report.

Mobil 1 0w-40 is so easy to get and affordable in USA. I would stick with it 100 percent if I was you. Enjoy your car and your Mobil 1 choice!

For his application (and mine) M! is just OK, but there are better oils available.