Mobil 1 EP 5W-30: 7,110 miles, 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
- Thread starter MCompact
- Start date
- Status
wemay
Site Donor 2023
No no noooo that can't be M1 5w30! It must be 0w60? Right?
Another ho-hum great report...yawn.
Is 24ppm of iron normal ? I ask because my uoa showed 25ppm ..at 9800miles.
however my lead numbers were much worse at 23..
however my lead numbers were much worse at 23..
Originally Posted By: alcyon
Is 24ppm of iron normal ? I ask because my uoa showed 25ppm ..at 9800miles.
however my lead numbers were much worse at 23..
At approximately the same mileage-and with a 5,000 mile OCI-the UOA from my motor showed Iron at 40 ppm, Copper at 83 ppm, and lead at 2 ppm. Keep in mind that Blackstone's universal averages for the Mazda 2.3 motor are based on a 4,000 mile OCI, so a considerably longer OCI could be expected to show higher numbers for one or more wear metals.
Is 24ppm of iron normal ? I ask because my uoa showed 25ppm ..at 9800miles.
however my lead numbers were much worse at 23..
At approximately the same mileage-and with a 5,000 mile OCI-the UOA from my motor showed Iron at 40 ppm, Copper at 83 ppm, and lead at 2 ppm. Keep in mind that Blackstone's universal averages for the Mazda 2.3 motor are based on a 4,000 mile OCI, so a considerably longer OCI could be expected to show higher numbers for one or more wear metals.
A good 40 weight like RT6 or one of the poe base oils would probably help bring your iron wear down. Looks good anyway.
The iron here is inconsequential. Twenty-some ppm on 7500 mile OCIs is absolutely fine. Everything is trending just fine, and nothing needs to be changed, aside from the chance the the OCI could be extended significantly.
Originally Posted By: Garak
The iron here is inconsequential. Twenty-some ppm on 7500 mile OCIs is absolutely fine. Everything is trending just fine, and nothing needs to be changed, aside from the chance that the OCI could be extended significantly.
I agree 100%. Mobil 1 5W-30 has performed well for 154,000 miles, so I see absolutely no reason to switch to another brand or viscosity.
The iron here is inconsequential. Twenty-some ppm on 7500 mile OCIs is absolutely fine. Everything is trending just fine, and nothing needs to be changed, aside from the chance that the OCI could be extended significantly.
I agree 100%. Mobil 1 5W-30 has performed well for 154,000 miles, so I see absolutely no reason to switch to another brand or viscosity.
Ya its doing its job and everything looks fine but if you can do better than 24 ppm iron why wouldn't you.and you most likely can. Try valvoline 40 weight if you don't like the idea of t6 or the expensive ester oils.or keep on with what your doing and it will still probably outlast the rest of the car, unless your goal is a half a million miles which isn't inconceivable.
IMO.....You should be able to do at least 10K......and save some time and $$$. Combine with a Fram Ultra filter if you don't already use one.
.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
IMO.....You should be able to do at least 10K......and save some time and $$$. Combine with a Fram Ultra filter if you don't already use one.
My dealer gives free oil changes for as long as I own the car, and the Mazda maintenance schedule uses 7,500 mile service intervals- so an OCI of @7,500 miles is perfect for my purposes.
IMO.....You should be able to do at least 10K......and save some time and $$$. Combine with a Fram Ultra filter if you don't already use one.
My dealer gives free oil changes for as long as I own the car, and the Mazda maintenance schedule uses 7,500 mile service intervals- so an OCI of @7,500 miles is perfect for my purposes.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
Ya its doing its job and everything looks fine but if you can do better than 24 ppm iron why wouldn't you.and you most likely can.
The point of UOAs isn't to chase "better" numbers by hopping brand to brand. He's got a good, trended analysis here with no numbers amiss, and nothing wrong. He's doing exactly what he should be doing with the UOA results - sticking with what works and staying with the same product for trending. If anything, he can ramp up the mileage.
UOA iron numbers do not correspond to wear, except in a very, very indirect way.
Ya its doing its job and everything looks fine but if you can do better than 24 ppm iron why wouldn't you.and you most likely can.
The point of UOAs isn't to chase "better" numbers by hopping brand to brand. He's got a good, trended analysis here with no numbers amiss, and nothing wrong. He's doing exactly what he should be doing with the UOA results - sticking with what works and staying with the same product for trending. If anything, he can ramp up the mileage.
UOA iron numbers do not correspond to wear, except in a very, very indirect way.
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
IMO.....You should be able to do at least 10K......and save some time and $$$. Combine with a Fram Ultra filter if you don't already use one.
My dealer gives free oil changes for as long as I own the car, and the Mazda maintenance schedule uses 7,500 mile service intervals- so an OCI of @7,500 miles is perfect for my purposes.
Wow-FREE M1 EP oil changes for as long as you own it?? That's a great dealer!
Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
IMO.....You should be able to do at least 10K......and save some time and $$$. Combine with a Fram Ultra filter if you don't already use one.
My dealer gives free oil changes for as long as I own the car, and the Mazda maintenance schedule uses 7,500 mile service intervals- so an OCI of @7,500 miles is perfect for my purposes.
Wow-FREE M1 EP oil changes for as long as you own it?? That's a great dealer!
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
Ya its doing its job and everything looks fine but if you can do better than 24 ppm iron why wouldn't you.and you most likely can.
The point of UOAs isn't to chase "better" numbers by hopping brand to brand. He's got a good, trended analysis here with no numbers amiss, and nothing wrong. He's doing exactly what he should be doing with the UOA results - sticking with what works and staying with the same product for trending. If anything, he can ramp up the mileage.
UOA iron numbers do not correspond to wear, except in a very, very indirect way.
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
Ya its doing its job and everything looks fine but if you can do better than 24 ppm iron why wouldn't you.and you most likely can.
The point of UOAs isn't to chase "better" numbers by hopping brand to brand. He's got a good, trended analysis here with no numbers amiss, and nothing wrong. He's doing exactly what he should be doing with the UOA results - sticking with what works and staying with the same product for trending. If anything, he can ramp up the mileage.
UOA iron numbers do not correspond to wear, except in a very, very indirect way.
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You'll find those organizations trend UOA's so that if an anomaly happens, they can head-off a problem before it becomes a big one. Things like coolant leaks, intake tract leaks, insanely high levels of a particular metal indicating a fragging bearing or camshaft...etc.
And no, an oil that shows lower numbers doesn't mean it is necessarily wearing less. The range of particles sampled by a UOA is very narrow and in the very small size range (well under 10 microns, higher resolution at smaller sizes). Larger particles, which would be more significant, aren't picked up. Also, different oils will have different metals signatures. And the UOA makes no differentiation between chemical chelation and actual abrasive wear so an oil with additives that aggressively bond to the surface (and subsequently releasing some particles into suspension) will show elevated iron, despite the fact that there is no abrasive wear taking place.
But your question is really the salient point. What is the purpose? Well, the point of the tool is to allow the extension of oil change intervals to maximize ROI and to monitor the health of machinery to track for anomalies through extensive trending. This means adhering to a single lubricant (usually) so that the trend is consistent.
The tool is not used as intended by most on this board.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
When the term "trend wear" is used with respect to large and expensive machines it does not mean switching between oil brands willy nilly chasing a few ppm of iron or copper. It is to establish a baseline for a machine and to monitor that baseline so that in the future if something shows as being "off" it will stand out from the trend.
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You'll find those organizations trend UOA's so that if an anomaly happens, they can head-off a problem before it becomes a big one. Things like coolant leaks, intake tract leaks, insanely high levels of a particular metal indicating a fragging bearing or camshaft...etc.
And no, an oil that shows lower numbers doesn't mean it is necessarily wearing less. The range of particles sampled by a UOA is very narrow and in the very small size range (well under 10 microns, higher resolution at smaller sizes). Larger particles, which would be more significant, aren't picked up. Also, different oils will have different metals signatures. And the UOA makes no differentiation between chemical chelation and actual abrasive wear so an oil with additives that aggressively bond to the surface (and subsequently releasing some particles into suspension) will show elevated iron, despite the fact that there is no abrasive wear taking place.
But your question is really the salient point. What is the purpose? Well, the point of the tool is to allow the extension of oil change intervals to maximize ROI and to monitor the health of machinery to track for anomalies through extensive trending. This means adhering to a single lubricant (usually) so that the trend is consistent.
The tool is not used as intended by most on this board.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
When the term "trend wear" is used with respect to large and expensive machines it does not mean switching between oil brands willy nilly chasing a few ppm of iron or copper. It is to establish a baseline for a machine and to monitor that baseline so that in the future if something shows as being "off" it will stand out from the trend.
On iron and wear, the "Universal Average" at Blackstone corresponds to the average iron ppm they are seeing at about 4,500 mile OCIs. So since this car goes more miles on an oil change, the wear is about average here.
Its incredibly engine-dependent. Some engines just have different heat treating on surfaces, more roller bearings, etc., and some even have no iron cylinder liners at all (just aluminum cylinder surfaces).
Its incredibly engine-dependent. Some engines just have different heat treating on surfaces, more roller bearings, etc., and some even have no iron cylinder liners at all (just aluminum cylinder surfaces).
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You'll find those organizations trend UOA's so that if an anomaly happens, they can head-off a problem before it becomes a big one. Things like coolant leaks, intake tract leaks, insanely high levels of a particular metal indicating a fragging bearing or camshaft...etc.
And no, an oil that shows lower numbers doesn't mean it is necessarily wearing less. The range of particles sampled by a UOA is very narrow and in the very small size range (well under 10 microns, higher resolution at smaller sizes). Larger particles, which would be more significant, aren't picked up. Also, different oils will have different metals signatures. And the UOA makes no differentiation between chemical chelation and actual abrasive wear so an oil with additives that aggressively bond to the surface (and subsequently releasing some particles into suspension) will show elevated iron, despite the fact that there is no abrasive wear taking place.
But your question is really the salient point. What is the purpose? Well, the point of the tool is to allow the extension of oil change intervals to maximize ROI and to monitor the health of machinery to track for anomalies through extensive trending. This means adhering to a single lubricant (usually) so that the trend is consistent.
The tool is not used as intended by most on this board.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
When the term "trend wear" is used with respect to large and expensive machines it does not mean switching between oil brands willy nilly chasing a few ppm of iron or copper. It is to establish a baseline for a machine and to monitor that baseline so that in the future if something shows as being "off" it will stand out from the trend.
That was very helpful thanks. I have a little better understanding of the subject now.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
I've heard that alot on here but it doesn't make sense. If he did as many uoas with a heavier oil and it showed less iron, it would certainly be relavent. Many organizations trend wear with uoas. Otherwise whats the point here. He could just stop using uoas and just stay at the ocis he's at.
You'll find those organizations trend UOA's so that if an anomaly happens, they can head-off a problem before it becomes a big one. Things like coolant leaks, intake tract leaks, insanely high levels of a particular metal indicating a fragging bearing or camshaft...etc.
And no, an oil that shows lower numbers doesn't mean it is necessarily wearing less. The range of particles sampled by a UOA is very narrow and in the very small size range (well under 10 microns, higher resolution at smaller sizes). Larger particles, which would be more significant, aren't picked up. Also, different oils will have different metals signatures. And the UOA makes no differentiation between chemical chelation and actual abrasive wear so an oil with additives that aggressively bond to the surface (and subsequently releasing some particles into suspension) will show elevated iron, despite the fact that there is no abrasive wear taking place.
But your question is really the salient point. What is the purpose? Well, the point of the tool is to allow the extension of oil change intervals to maximize ROI and to monitor the health of machinery to track for anomalies through extensive trending. This means adhering to a single lubricant (usually) so that the trend is consistent.
The tool is not used as intended by most on this board.
Originally Posted By: Bigdaddyeasy
You can determine about what's a reasonable oci with a particular product, look for issues, or trend wear. In the case of extremely long ocis which I've done in the past with amsoil, you can use them to ensure the oil is still serviceable. It makes sense under that circumstance to uoa. It makes sense for large tractors that hold gallons of oil to uoa to check for serviceability since there's a large expense to dump and refill as well as to help trend wear.
When the term "trend wear" is used with respect to large and expensive machines it does not mean switching between oil brands willy nilly chasing a few ppm of iron or copper. It is to establish a baseline for a machine and to monitor that baseline so that in the future if something shows as being "off" it will stand out from the trend.
That was very helpful thanks. I have a little better understanding of the subject now.
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
ow-FREE M1 EP oil changes for as long as you own it?? That's a great dealer!
I wish; since Mazda does not spec a synthetic I have to provide the oil- but I still get a free filter and the dealer has to contend with the fiddly inverted cartridge filter housing. So to be accurate I should have said that I'm paying less than $35 for an oil change using 5W-30 EP.
ow-FREE M1 EP oil changes for as long as you own it?? That's a great dealer!
I wish; since Mazda does not spec a synthetic I have to provide the oil- but I still get a free filter and the dealer has to contend with the fiddly inverted cartridge filter housing. So to be accurate I should have said that I'm paying less than $35 for an oil change using 5W-30 EP.
- Status
Similar threads
