2006 GTI 2.0t FSI Castrol Syntec 05w40 5049 mi

[JosephH1]

UOA as received back from Terry Dyson. I am going to try RLI 05w40 Biosyn at next change.

Vehicle 2006 VW GTI 2.0T FSI Engine
Miles on engine 35,020
Oil type Castrol Syntec 05w40
Miles on oil 5,049
Time on oil 2 months
Oil capacity 5 qts
Oil added None
Oil filter Mann OEM
Air filter VW OEM (15,000 since change)
Driving Use 80%Highway, 20% city
Sampling taken at oil change

Iron 24
Copper 2
Aluminum 3
Chromium 1
Tin 0
Lead 2
Nickel 1
Silver 0
Titanium 0

Molybdenum 3
Magnesium 733
Calcium 1004
Phosphoru 945
Zinc 881
Barium 0
Potassium 0
Boron 7
Silicon 4
Sodium 8

V40C 56.4
V100C 10.3
TAN 5.6
Flash 305
OXID 14
NIT 14
KF 1015
TBN 4.5
FUEL 1.42
SOOT 0
GLYCOL 0
vndx 174
sulfate by product 20

 

[drewjp]

What is the universal average for Iron for this engine? It seems high, but I don't have enough experience with turbo UOAs.

The TBN is still good, this oil still has life in it...

 

[buster]

Quote:
V100C 10.3


This is the only thing not good about the report IMO.

 

[JHZR2]

fuel 1.42...

 

[Audi Junkie]

Flashpoint & Fuel

 

[Pablo]

And we know the cure to that: RLI!

Was the oil drained hot?

TAN is interesting.

 

[glennc]

What causes TAN to be highish when TBN is still good? Is it the particular varieties of acids and bases, such that the bases present can not neutralize the acids present? If so do you blame the oil for having a less than ideal base mix or is some other factor responsible - or is there some other explanation entirely? It looks like there are bases but they are not effective.

Other than that, fuel a bit high, consequently viscosity and flashpoint lowish, possibly raising the wear somewhat. Still not bad, and some of the wear could still be from break-in.

 

[JAG]

glennc, here is a discussion on that topic. I'll see if I can dig up something more official than knowledgable people on a forum.
http://forums.noria.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/136604995/m/122105033

Here's something but it's not earth-shattering in insight.
http://www.lubetrak.com/newsletter/Mar28HTML.html

 

[JAG]

I found a good article. http://www.practicingoilanalysis.com/art...cid+Number+Test

My comments on this UOA are that the viscosity is ridiculously low for a 5W-40 oil and the TAN is surprisingly high. There is some fuel dilution but less than I've seen in some other UOAs so the viscosity loss from the oil itself is very high. This engine is a bruiser for sure but this oil seems to have shown its weak knees in this situation. This engine needs an uber-lube.

 

[glennc]

Thanks JAG I appreciate the reply. I suppose this quote from the second link you provided is the biggest hint as to the answer:

"Because the chemistries used to make up TBN can differ in quality and ability to maintain effectiveness over extended drain intervals, the TAN test and results is the most accurate measure of the oils on going ability to resist degradation from greater level of acidity. This definitely makes the TAN test the preferred test method for used oil analysis when determining extended drain capabilities of a wide variety of oils."

If you accept that acids and bases can coexist in solution, which is obviously true, then the only question is why, in this case, is the acid number so high when the base number is also still fairly high. Usually in UOAs if TAN is higher than TBN, TBN is lower and the explanation is that the additive is mostly used up. In this case, not so. The quote implies that the quality of the chemistry that comprises the oil's TBN is likely to blame. In that case it is a point against Syntec, and it implies that adequate TBN results for Syntec in UOA may not necessarily imply good remaining engine protection. A useful piece of data, to be sure.

 

[JAG]

I agree with your last paragraph completely. I read a research paper where the author stated that field test results in diesel engines indicated that some oils had decently high remaining TBN values, but they were already past being suitable for continued use due to high TAN values and soft-metal corrosion. This agrees with the link above.

In this UOA, I don't see high soft-metal (copper, lead) levels which can happen when TAN is too high. I have no definite explanation for that. It's also odd that oxidation and nitration aren't much higher given the high TAN. I still think the oil is suffering and I wouldn't trust it to keep the engine clean in that condition, but that is just a hunch based on experience with my VW 1.8T.

 

[Al]

Obviously Terry thinks that this oil is not holding up. It will be interesting to see what gives with the RedLine. But the question is whether the fuel dilution is always there. Iron says so, but yet Cr. is low and so is silicon. Meh..beyond me. Don't expect miracles on the first UOA with RedLine..it will be cleaning things up and results may be worse.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Al
It will be interesting to see what gives with the RedLine.

FYI, RLI stands for Renewable Lubricants, Inc., not RedLine.

 

[Al]

Hmmmm...same exact Flash (305) and same fuel (1.42) in this report:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1076128#Post1076128
by Dyson....strange

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Al
It will be interesting to see what gives with the RedLine.

FYI, RLI stands for Renewable Lubricants, Inc., not RedLine.

Yikes.............

 

[JosephH1]

Thanks for the great input everyone. Yes, Terry is concerned about the high TAN. Fortunately, it looks like the 5k OCI I have been running got the Castrol out before significant damage was done to the soft metals. At this point I am REALLY happy that I did not follow VW's recommended 10k OCI from the start. The RLI 05w40 is on order as of today.

 

[Max_Wander]

direct injection has whipped the butt of another oil.... at least the RLI lineup has proven to be a worthy DI defender.