The hardest thing for most to understand is that this type of OCI practice is so very uncommon, and we have VERY LITTLE for comparative purposes. You cannot look at info like this and try to analyze it in terms of a "normal" UOA, because there are several things which just don't lend themselves to conventional wisdom.
As most know, a UOA is going to see any particle as large as 5um or so, and anything smaller. But most all BP elements (commercially available ones like the Amsoil, MG, FS2500, etc) are all "absolute" around 2um or so, but not so much below that. Hence, any particle that is smaller than 2um has a reasonable chance of staying present in the lube sump for the entire duration of the OCI. Since there are 72k miles on this lube, that is a LOT of residual particulate staying in the sump. I don't care if it's Fe, Cu, soot or whatever, it's still in there if it's smaller than 2um. Which is why we see some substantial Cu in the count. I don't know the source; could be a cooler or could be a bearing. We have no idea. But that does not make it "wrong" to have such high Cu in this UOA. For an equivalent normal value, we'd had to add up the effect of perhaps 15 OCIs worth of Cu presumed to exist under 2um ...
Fe is the commonly accepted tracker of typical normal wear in most UOAs, because it tends to accumulate with exposure. But the Fe here is not nearly as affected as the Cu. That' does not make it wrong; just different. The only time stuff smaller than 2um is removed is when a filter element is changed, and the lube in the filter takes out a portion of the particles left in the OIL, not the media.
I will remind all that stuff this small (2um and smaller) is essentially harmless to the engine in most all cases.
Also, the top off effect with filter changes is difficult to understand. Sure, it bolsters the add-pack a bit, but that also alters the TCB to some degree. No SAE or other entity study data exists that I'm aware of to discuss how these long term effects alter the TCB. We know that the TCB improves with maturity, but there's likely a practical limit to it's growth; probably a parabolic curve that flatten out in terms of layer thickness vs time.
This is anecdotal only because there's very little to compare/contrast it to. We don't know if this is "normal" for this extreme duration or not.
It would be helpful to also have PCs along with these UOAs.
I'll not pass judgement as others have, other than to say it's interesting.
