Pure ONE PL 24651 (cut open)

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
The paper says that dispersant additives often clash with antiwear additives like Mo and ZDDP and reduce their ability to form protective films.


Absolutely. I'm sure it's no coincidence that many pure racing oils have virtually no detergent/dispersant package but a very high anti-wear package. That's not to say they're appropriate for normal passenger vehicle use, but racers can make sacrifices where they see the benefit.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
What the industry is starting to embrace (before most BITOGers are willing to do so) is that even "normal" OCIs can be 10k miles or so, give or take a bit. The IOLMs are doing a pretty good job of prediciting a (still conservative) extended OCI. Even the "dumb" OLMs are pushing out to 7.5k miles with fairly regular appearance now. Why? Resouces. Money and raw oil.


I can see the future now. As more and more cars are on the road, and less resources are available, there could be laws put in place to not change the oil/filter until the OLM says so (or some other more sophisticated "UOA on-board monitoring system"). Kind of like "1984" in maybe "2024".

Not changing oil until it's really needed could save a lot of oil resources, as I'm sure there are mutli-thousands of gallons of used oil thrown away needlessly each year (each month?). Of course, there is used oil recycling which helps out the situation.

 

[dnewton3]

Zee - you make a good point as ususal.

Look - I cannot change the world; I'm not that vain. But I can affect the corner that I live in. And perhaps I can affect just a little of the BITOG world?

Now, most certainly, one must BALANCE the cost of the OCI against certain things like convenience, UOA costs & results (if used), rebates, etc. They ALL play into the decisions to OCI.


I abhor waste, in any form. There are times when some waste is simply convenient. Hey - I've been known to walk away from a 1/2 bottle of beer, because it was "time to go" to a movie, or I'd had my fill, etc. But generally, waste is waste, and it's undesirable in any form. The question becomes one of waste vs ROI. And it drives down to the concept of "waste at the end of what?"


Think of oil and beer (two BITOG favorites).

If someone changes oil too often, at every OCI, that is waste. If they say "I have TBN of 4.0 and I'm going to change oil, even though wear, contamination and TAN are all low. I'll feel better being pro-active and changing it early." that is a waste of an OCI. And some folks say "Who cares"? Well - I would think your wallet cares.

Would it be no different than drinking 1/2 a bottle of beer, dumping it down the drain, and grabbing the next bottle in the six-pack? And then only drinking that bottle down to 1/2, and repeating the cycle. At the end of the six-pack, you have technically wasted three bottles! Now multiply that for every six-pack per week, and every week of your adult life. Adds up, doesn't it?

OCIs are no different. Sometimes BITOGers get caught up in the very narrow view of a singular OCI, and forget that there are a great many OCIs in the lifecycle of the vehicle. If you waste 30% of every single OCI, you have essentially thrown away GALLONS upon GALLONS of lubes and cases of filters all to "sleep better" at night.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't sleep better throwing money away.

And herein lies the really annoying issue; there is no real benefit to frequent OCIs. Now, if the nature of frequent OCIs resulted in reduced wear, I could understand that. BUT THEY DO NOT! Wear actaully escalates after an OCI. There is ZERO TANGIBLE BENEFIT TO FREQUENT OCIS, AND IT IS IN FACT, SLIGHTLY DETRIMENTAL! Where is the benefit to frequent OCIs that cost more, and have zero wear rate reduction? Someone PUH-LEEZE tell me ....


So how does this affect the OCI? Two places:
1) your home
2) OEM recommendations

As for #1, I've covered that. Dump your beer and oil as you see fit.

As for #2, OEMs are being pushed by Agency and coporate responsibility to maximize resources. All of them. And that includes oil stocks. And when the DATA and FACTS show that longer OCIs are actually beneficial, why would they continue to offer 3k mile OCIs? When both lab studies and real world UOAs show that 10-15k mile OCI have low wear, it is simply good corporate citizenship to lengthen the OCI. I beleive that corporations (major car and lube OEMs) have known this for some time now. It's not them that need to be convinced. It's the public that need to change their paradigm!


Food for thought.

 

[BISCUT]

This is a great thread. Very informative for me, a novice. Thanks for sharing.

 

[circuitsmith]

I embedded a link in my last post, maybe some missed it:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=151348&Number=2209122

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: circuitsmith
I embedded a link in my last post, maybe some missed it:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=151348&Number=2209122




You need to read my "normalcy" article, and also read the SAE study I reference therein. This phenomenon is not a myth; wear is escalated towards the front end of an OCI, and it lasts (depending upon vehicle and lube) up to 3k miles or so. As the oil ages, it normalizes with the engine and wear becomes nearly non-extistent as the OCI lengthens, for some period of time much longer than the typical BITOGer will be able to believe. The SAE study, along with my thousands of UOAs, show wear rates dropping even towards 15k miles of use.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3

You need to read my "normalcy" article, and also read the SAE study I reference therein. This phenomenon is not a myth; wear is escalated towards the front end of an OCI, and it lasts (depending upon vehicle and lube) up to 3k miles or so.


Was just thinking that the advertised "3 months or 3000 miles" oil change recommendation these days isn't helping make engines last as long as one may think.

Of course, a 3 mo/3K OCI might be needed if a vehicle was is some super server use environment.

 

[ltslimjim]

^I agree completely.

 

[dnewton3]

Let me be clear:

The 3 mo/3k mile OCI is not going to throw any vehicle into an early grave; it's not that serious. Way back in the day (many decades ago), the 3mo/3k mil OCI was probably more prudent because lubes were not as good, and engines were not as well desgined and built. But today is different.

Early OCIs do indeed exhibit more wear. And, as the oil ages, the wear rates come down. In fact, the SAE Ford/Conoco study proved that wear comes down on an order of magnitude (a factor of 10) as the OCI greatly increases! The wear becomes nearly non-existent for some duration of time, much further out than most folks think. In the study, the wear was still dropping at 15k miles!

As I said in my article; short OCIs do not reduce wear and longer OCIs do not increase wear. The opposite is factually true.

And "super severe" really isn't as common as folks think. Today's modern engines are much more capable of tolerating harsh conditions with little adverse effect.

What contributes to wear more than anything else is contamination; fuel, coolant, dirt, etc. Control those and you control wear.

 

[KCJeep]

dnewton3,

You've got me convinced average wear per 1k is less with an extended OCI. But what about cleaning? Do relatively short OCI's truly enhance the cleaning of a dirty or neglected engine, albeit at the expense of slightly higher wear?

 

[PZR2874]

So then why is it when I change my oil at 3K (DI) I feel the power of the car return? If more wear was closer to the front of the OCI, I shouldn't feel any difference. And it's not placebo.

 

[surfstar]

Originally Posted By: PZR2874
So then why is it when I change my oil at 3K (DI) I feel the power of the car return? If more wear was closer to the front of the OCI, I shouldn't feel any difference. And it's not placebo.


It is placebo unless you have multiple dyno runs to prove it.

How would wear metals affect "power" anyways?

I admit that if I had a Ms3, I'd do 3k OCIs for fuel dilution issues.

 

[LeakySeals]

Originally Posted By: PZR2874
So then why is it when I change my oil at 3K (DI) I feel the power of the car return? If more wear was closer to the front of the OCI, I shouldn't feel any difference. And it's not placebo.

I feel that too. The ruff idle slowly increases as I get to 8k, then its gone on the OC. Lot of other reasons why that is, but the oil is clearly one of them. I haven't noticed it as much on extended OCI's since I changed filter brands. Maybe 3-5% efficiency gain does matter.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: KCJeep
dnewton3,

You've got me convinced average wear per 1k is less with an extended OCI. But what about cleaning? Do relatively short OCI's truly enhance the cleaning of a dirty or neglected engine, albeit at the expense of slightly higher wear?



For engines that run really dirty (older carb'd engines, old IDI diesels) I'd say the contamination production can be, at times, pretty intense. And then perhaps a few shorter OCIs with heavy detergent lubes can be beneficial.

But today's engines (well controlled with eletronic fuel injection; both gas and diesel) run MUCH cleaner, generally.

Detergents can only clean up two things:
1) dirt already present
2) dirt produced at some typical rate

If you start with a reasonably clean engine, there isn't much left to clean up.

If you have an engine that does not produce a lot of soot/insolubles, there isn't a lot to clean up.

Analogy time (yes, it's that time again ...)
Two elderly folks live in a small home.
They hire one maid to clean once a week; that's all that is needed to keep a reasonably clean home.
If they hired three maids to come at the end of teh week, would the house be any cleaner? Not really. The maids can only clean what dishes might be collected, or dust that settles, or clothes that need washed. As long as some level of "acceptable" dirt is removed, extra maids are undeeded. You can add maids, but that does not make the house "cleaner". They will clean to the acceptable level, and no further. They cannot clean what is not yet unclean. Now - if the grandkids came over and trashed the place, the situation would change.

Same with you engine. Generally, clean running vehicles produce contaminanats at a fairly consistent rate, and that rate is easily handled by the add-pack of the oil. You can really bolster the oil add-pack with more "cleaners" but they cannot clean up what does not yet exist; they go unused or only ligtly used. And so the rest is wasted potential thrown away with each OCI.

And - (some folks don't know this) you cannot discount the fact that heavy detergent packages actually inhibit the desirable chemical barrier formed, and can hinder the wear reduction! Noted in the SAE study as well, BTW.

So, while some amount of detergents and dispersents are certainly desirable, a heavily loaded add-pack can be wasted, and also be detrimental to wear, despite what "common sense" would tell you.

Where is the balance point? Depends upon each vehicle and lube selected. "Normal" OEM OCIs are very conservative, but they are growing longer as the engines and lubes become more capable. UOAs and PCs can help decide just how long of an OCI is acceptable. But generally, the safe OCI duration is much further out than folks think.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3

Analogy time (yes, it's that time again ...)
Two elderly folks live in a small home.
They hire one maid to clean once a week; that's all that is needed to keep a reasonably clean home.
If they hired three maids to come at the end of teh week, would the house be any cleaner? Not really. The maids can only clean what dishes might be collected, or dust that settles, or clothes that need washed. As long as some level of "acceptable" dirt is removed, extra maids are undeeded. You can add maids, but that does not make the house "cleaner". They will clean to the acceptable level, and no further. They cannot clean what is not yet unclean. Now - if the grandkids came over and trashed the place, the situation would change.


Only problem with that analogy is that some guys might want excess maids running around (and trying to clean) the house.

 

[aquariuscsm]

What`s the string around the filter media for?

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
What`s the string around the filter media for?


I am not in the filter making business, but I believe it holds the media around the inner tube and in place while the end caps are secured in position with the adhesive.

If I'm wrong, I would presume someone will chime in.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
What`s the string around the filter media for?

As mentioned above by dn3 it's assembly string generally used on the larger diameter older Purolator filters. It holds the media in place during filter assembly. That said, the OP's P1 is the older shiny blue P1. Based on recent dissections, assembly string seems to be disappearing from newer Purolator filters.

 

[dnewton3]

Additionally, it's harmless to the filter once in place, and the labor to remove it prior to installing into the "can" would be wasted labor, therefore it's simply left in place.

 

[Oldwolf]

I don't think this has been mentioned, sorry if it has, but after observing this chart for awhile, I wonder if optimum results for any engine might be achieved thus:

1) Partial OC's such that operation is always within the "Normal Operation" boundaries.

2) This would require UOA for what characteristics? TBN, acidity, remaining additives,...??

3) Might be able to eventually have a rule-of-thumb such as "at every [manufacturer recommended oci * 0.75] drain half the oil out and replace with new" (just as an example).

4) Furthermore, to reduce waste, might even be able to replace the oil filter at every third or fourth cycle because the motor oil never really gets very dirty, and because filter loading perhaps is now greatly reduced.

This is really a neat thread and has profound implications on oc habits, overall resource consumption reduction (motor oil, filters, engines last much longer, etc.).

I've wondered about this concept for a long time, ie, is it better to have motor oil forever operating within the narrow boundaries of, say, 30% to 60% "used up", rather than the more typical 0% to 90%, as an example?