dnewton3
Staff member
This is from my wife’s 1995 Mercury Villager with 230k miles on it; it is a clone of the Nissan Quest. These vans utilize the drive-train from the Maxima (engine, tranny, front suspension).
My maintenance plan has always been a 5k mile “normal use” OCI pattern even though many would say it qualifies as “severe” from a usage standpoint. It is the quintessential soccer-mom type vehicle running kids and errands all over town, with lots of short runs, frequent engine start/stop cycles and “city” driving.
This UOA represents a break from my normal pattern; I ran a 10k mile OCI to see if the wear rates would be positively or negatively affected. This particular UOA represents about 6k miles of the “normal” soccer-mom driving, and 4k miles of a round-trip run out to Phoenix and back for Thanksgiving. In the mountains of NM and AZ, I ran with OD locked out (to keep the transmission from hunting back and forth in 3rd-4th gear shifts and to keep the t/c from locking and unlocking). Subsequently, the engine spent a lot of time at 3-4k rpm in the mountains.
I added perhaps 1 quart of top-off fluid over the 10k miles, a little bit at a time as needed.
I have a very good idea of the current condition of the upper end; the front valve cover comes off with reasonable ease. I monitor for “sludge” should a concern arise. At this point, sludge is not an issue; the 10k mile OCI didn’t seem to cause a problem.
I am approaching 450 UOAs for this engine family (VG30E), with over 400 UOAs coming from Blackstone. My engine is very “normal” in that it is right in line with the wear rates of the macro data. Under my 5k mile OCI plan, I usually don’t UOA; it’s just not cost effective. I did do it once to check on the engine after an overheating event (failed water pump); everything was fine. The macro data has everything I need. This UOA (at 10k miles) was to confirm/deny the extension being safe. As can be seen, the wear rates are very controlled.
- The column on the left is the current 230k mile UOA (sample 2) with dino oil. This sample was an experiment to see how well a dino would hold up in “extended” use.
- For comparison/contrast, the UOA on the right is with syn (sample 1) at 160k miles. This UOA was to see how much “better” a syn would be in normal use.
- As you can see, there was no statistical benefit to running syn for the “normal” 5k mile duration, and there was no detriment to running dino for 2x that duration. Both fluids performed well within “normal” expectation for the exposure; they were all within one sigma deviation.
Blackstone comments:
… This sample went nearly twice the universal average. The longer oil run didn’t hurt a thing, in fact, some wear metals got better …. TBN read moderate at 1.9, showing some active additive remaining. TAN read 3.6 showing low acidity (8-10 is bad). Insolubles were low at .4 ….. Try going 11-12k miles next time.
Code:
UOA sample # 2 1
Brand Wm/ST QS?
type dino syn
grade 5w30 5w30
filter Puro clsc Wix
Oil miles 10k 5k
Veh miles 230k 160k
make up oil 1.0 .5
Blackstone Data Blackstone Data
w/ macro analysis w/ macro analysis
10k 10k 5k 5k
My Univ std My Univ std
Sample Avg dev Sample Avg dev
Al 2 7 2 3 4 2
Cr 0 2 2 0 1 1
Fe 7 18 8 8 10 5
Cu 3 7 4 2 4 3
Pb 2 10 8 0 5 5
Tn 0 2 2 0 1 1
Moly 40 55 61
Ni 0 0 0
Mang 0 0 1
Silver 0 0 0
Ti 3 0 0
Potas 0 2 1
Boron 3 21 39
Si 9 6 12
Sodium 39 2 31
Calcium 2253 2760 2073
Magn 13 15 205
Phos 683 694 735
Zinc 937 809 876
Barium 0 0 0
oil properties
Sus V @ 210 57.8 57.6 54-63
cSt V @ 100 C 9.58 9.54 8.5 - 11.3
FP 395 360 > 365
Fuel tr tr
Insol .4 .3 < .6
TBN 1.9 n/a > 1.0
TAN 3.6 n/a
This is a singular example of how capable dino oils really are. Twice the UA OCI, and metals are right in line with normal wear rates, even dropping slightly.
Note that the vis did not get stupid thick, nor thin. So much for those pundits of oxidation risks. The insolubles are well in control even with a normal filter at 10k miles. Hmmmmm ..... guess I don't need a M1, PureOne or Eao, do I?
Of note, I’d like to call your attention to the TBN/TAN relationship. I have always said that TBN depletion is not linear, and that you must also really know TAN to judge if you’re really at risk. Clearly – I’m not. There are some folks that would look at only the TBN, and get the OCI jitters. Well, this is proof that lowly house brand dino oils can go WAY longer than most of you give them credit for. Yes, Virginia, this is (gulp) dino Supertech from Wal-Mart, with a Purolator classic filter.
Given this performance, I am trying to decide if I want to run one more 10k mile OCI for confirmation or just go all the way to 15k miles. I really don’t see much risk in running all the way out. The wear rates are well controlled, the engine is tight with no contaminant intrusion, and condemnation limits are nowhere in sight. Why not?
Your thoughts are welcome. But fair warning – you better be really well prepared to defend your “must use synthetic” or “ran too long” comments if that’s the position you’re going to take.
My maintenance plan has always been a 5k mile “normal use” OCI pattern even though many would say it qualifies as “severe” from a usage standpoint. It is the quintessential soccer-mom type vehicle running kids and errands all over town, with lots of short runs, frequent engine start/stop cycles and “city” driving.
This UOA represents a break from my normal pattern; I ran a 10k mile OCI to see if the wear rates would be positively or negatively affected. This particular UOA represents about 6k miles of the “normal” soccer-mom driving, and 4k miles of a round-trip run out to Phoenix and back for Thanksgiving. In the mountains of NM and AZ, I ran with OD locked out (to keep the transmission from hunting back and forth in 3rd-4th gear shifts and to keep the t/c from locking and unlocking). Subsequently, the engine spent a lot of time at 3-4k rpm in the mountains.
I added perhaps 1 quart of top-off fluid over the 10k miles, a little bit at a time as needed.
I have a very good idea of the current condition of the upper end; the front valve cover comes off with reasonable ease. I monitor for “sludge” should a concern arise. At this point, sludge is not an issue; the 10k mile OCI didn’t seem to cause a problem.
I am approaching 450 UOAs for this engine family (VG30E), with over 400 UOAs coming from Blackstone. My engine is very “normal” in that it is right in line with the wear rates of the macro data. Under my 5k mile OCI plan, I usually don’t UOA; it’s just not cost effective. I did do it once to check on the engine after an overheating event (failed water pump); everything was fine. The macro data has everything I need. This UOA (at 10k miles) was to confirm/deny the extension being safe. As can be seen, the wear rates are very controlled.
- The column on the left is the current 230k mile UOA (sample 2) with dino oil. This sample was an experiment to see how well a dino would hold up in “extended” use.
- For comparison/contrast, the UOA on the right is with syn (sample 1) at 160k miles. This UOA was to see how much “better” a syn would be in normal use.
- As you can see, there was no statistical benefit to running syn for the “normal” 5k mile duration, and there was no detriment to running dino for 2x that duration. Both fluids performed well within “normal” expectation for the exposure; they were all within one sigma deviation.
Blackstone comments:
… This sample went nearly twice the universal average. The longer oil run didn’t hurt a thing, in fact, some wear metals got better …. TBN read moderate at 1.9, showing some active additive remaining. TAN read 3.6 showing low acidity (8-10 is bad). Insolubles were low at .4 ….. Try going 11-12k miles next time.
Code:
UOA sample # 2 1
Brand Wm/ST QS?
type dino syn
grade 5w30 5w30
filter Puro clsc Wix
Oil miles 10k 5k
Veh miles 230k 160k
make up oil 1.0 .5
Blackstone Data Blackstone Data
w/ macro analysis w/ macro analysis
10k 10k 5k 5k
My Univ std My Univ std
Sample Avg dev Sample Avg dev
Al 2 7 2 3 4 2
Cr 0 2 2 0 1 1
Fe 7 18 8 8 10 5
Cu 3 7 4 2 4 3
Pb 2 10 8 0 5 5
Tn 0 2 2 0 1 1
Moly 40 55 61
Ni 0 0 0
Mang 0 0 1
Silver 0 0 0
Ti 3 0 0
Potas 0 2 1
Boron 3 21 39
Si 9 6 12
Sodium 39 2 31
Calcium 2253 2760 2073
Magn 13 15 205
Phos 683 694 735
Zinc 937 809 876
Barium 0 0 0
oil properties
Sus V @ 210 57.8 57.6 54-63
cSt V @ 100 C 9.58 9.54 8.5 - 11.3
FP 395 360 > 365
Fuel tr tr
Insol .4 .3 < .6
TBN 1.9 n/a > 1.0
TAN 3.6 n/a
This is a singular example of how capable dino oils really are. Twice the UA OCI, and metals are right in line with normal wear rates, even dropping slightly.
Note that the vis did not get stupid thick, nor thin. So much for those pundits of oxidation risks. The insolubles are well in control even with a normal filter at 10k miles. Hmmmmm ..... guess I don't need a M1, PureOne or Eao, do I?
Of note, I’d like to call your attention to the TBN/TAN relationship. I have always said that TBN depletion is not linear, and that you must also really know TAN to judge if you’re really at risk. Clearly – I’m not. There are some folks that would look at only the TBN, and get the OCI jitters. Well, this is proof that lowly house brand dino oils can go WAY longer than most of you give them credit for. Yes, Virginia, this is (gulp) dino Supertech from Wal-Mart, with a Purolator classic filter.
Given this performance, I am trying to decide if I want to run one more 10k mile OCI for confirmation or just go all the way to 15k miles. I really don’t see much risk in running all the way out. The wear rates are well controlled, the engine is tight with no contaminant intrusion, and condemnation limits are nowhere in sight. Why not?
Your thoughts are welcome. But fair warning – you better be really well prepared to defend your “must use synthetic” or “ran too long” comments if that’s the position you’re going to take.
Last edited: