TAN - M1EP versus M1 AFE (0W-20)

[CarbonSteel]

I updated the UOA thread, but it became awash in the sea of other posts, so I thought that I would start a new one specifically about the topic at hand.

I recently ran M1EP for 17,475 miles and posted the UOA, but at the time Blackstone forgot to run the TAN on the oil. They did that and sent me the results and I have to admit, I am not overly excited about the TAN numbers or EP (at this point). AFE (in my engine) seems to work as well as if not better than EP. AFE had a TAN of 5.3 at 15,109 miles whereas EP had a TAN of 8.9 at 17,475 miles. Although the EP was ran for 2 months longer and 2,366 miles further, I do not believe there should be such a variance in the TAN numbers. The wear metal numbers are similar so the higher TAN did not affect wear--yet. I plan to cut this run of EP at 15K to see how it directly compares to AFE, but unless something changes, I may go back to AFE.

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[btanchors]

2010_FX4 - This is quite interesting. I have done VOAs with TAN on 0W-20(AFE) and 5W-30(EP), which are not the exact same oils above, but should be close...Virgin TANs are around 3.

I would not ditch the EP for the AFE just because of this - there may have been some kind of operational condition when the EP was run. What was the 100C viscosity for the EP? Was it thicker?

Based on the TAN, it looks like the EP was at the end of its operational life.

I don't have anything useful to offer, though.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: btanchors
I would not ditch the EP for the AFE just because of this - there may have been some kind of operational condition when the EP was run. What was the 100C viscosity for the EP? Was it thicker?
Click here --> 2010 FX4 UOAs and you can see all of them. EP was a little thicker than AFE (8.5x versus 7.7x average). Operational wise (except for 3 runs of Chevron Techron) they were virtually identical. I am scratching my head on this one--just seems strange their flagship oil did not fare any better than AFE.

 

[bigt61]

Looks like the EP had the longest run - time wise - and had full summer heat, dead winter cold, and then back to full summer heat again before drain. That's tough sledding. Even 1/2 qt more make up oil would likely result in a more favorable TAN. Thanks for the great info and posts.

 

[gonefishing]

Wow that does seem high. Would the higher PAO basestock content affect it that much? I also had a UOA done on M1 EP 0W-20 but I didn't get TBN or TAN tested. I did get TAN results a couple UOA's back but that was on the AFE version. It showed a TAN of 6.3 with only 7300 miles. I plan to run that length again on the EP version so maybe I'll plan on getting TBN/TAN tested also just to see how it compares to AFE's TAN/TBN. Will be at least a month before I do this. I'll let you know.

 

[Tucson Five-O]

2010_FX4,

I'm with you. It is curious as to why the TAN with EP is so high, with the mileage only about 15% greater than the AFE OCI.

And I agree that an 8.9 TAN is higher than I would feel comfortable with.

As you are planning to do, I would drop down to a 15K OCI, and retest. If it's still high, I might try another 15K run, but with AFE, to see if it's the oil or whether something is changing in the engine.

But with your careful, analytical approach we will all see if the EP fares out better than the AFE. And that's why we test, to see if the actual results match the marketing hype.

Take care,
Gary

 

[jdavis]

Giving this one a bump, very interesting indeed. I wouldn't want to draw any real conclusion from this small (probable) anomaly though. I'll be much more interested in seeing how the 15k EP OCI looks however even that leaves plenty of unknowns.

 

[Greasymechtech]

TAN VOA x 3 = oil change out time
TBN
If your wear hasn't increased, then either are not to be worried about since the oil's PH hasn't become detrimental.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/100/ph-test-tan-tbn

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: Greasymechtech
TAN VOA x 3 = oil change out time
TBN
If your wear hasn't increased, then either are not to be worried about since the oil's PH hasn't become detrimental.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/100/ph-test-tan-tbn








This is why I don't do UOAs. Tan or tbn doesn't seam to have much to do about actual engine wear. Money should be spent on oil and filters and changing at 10K.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Money should be spent on oil and filters and changing at 10K.
You of all people should know that you can go past 10K with M1. My UOA stream is part of a long term project for the life of my FX4.

 

[jdavis]

Funny, my Tundra 5.7L M1 EP 0W-20 gets dumped every 5k.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Greasymechtech
TAN VOA x 3 = oil change out time
TBN
If your wear hasn't increased, then either are not to be worried about since the oil's PH hasn't become detrimental.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/100/ph-test-tan-tbn
I am not concerned about wear; the wear metals were fine. My concern is that Mobil's flagship oil may not be any better than its other synthetic offerings.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: jdavis
Funny, my Tundra 5.7L M1 EP 0W-20 gets dumped every 5k.
Why? Regular M1 can do that with half its TBN.

 

[53' Stude]

A fool and his money are SOON parted! LOL

 

[jdavis]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Why? Regular M1 can do that with half its TBN.


Warranty purposes

 

[53' Stude]

No offense but wouldn't MS5K do good then until you're out of warranty? Just thinking out loud so if I offended you I apologize

 

[jdavis]

I don't think that comes in 0w-20 :_

 

[53' Stude]

And......

 

[53' Stude]

Sorry, I bet your tundra if it's a 2013+up calls for 0w20. Sorry sir, I see now

 

[53' Stude]

Or how about Mobil Super Syn 0w20 with the rebate goin on now?