Bentley GTC OEM at 3,000mi
- Thread starter AEHaas
- Start date
- Status
I think all new cars should come with a recommended "shortened" first OCI. Like around 2,000 miles. Followed by another shorter OCI, say 5,000 miles. Then continue with the manufacturers recommended OCI of 7,500 or 10,000 miles.
Instead of recommending what is best for customer convenience, recommend what is best for the engine.
Instead of recommending what is best for customer convenience, recommend what is best for the engine.
Buster, I do not know what your deal is. I have not posted anything about boutique or other oils in this engine. All I have done is to comment factually on the UOA and your postings.
I've posted about the range of validity for UOA measurements in concrete factual terms.
I've posted that this is normal break-in wear and that we'll see the normal asymptotic decline over mileage and OCIs.
I've said that the data indicates that the rings are not sealed and that there is a considerable amount of fuel dilution.
When people, including yourself, seem to indicate that UOA ppm metal wear elements mean nothing, and are not useful or valid, I've described the difference between UOA measurements made with ICP and Rotrode spectroscopy in extreme detail, including the ability of both to "see" wear, and Rotrode to more accurately see severe wear, because of it's larger particle size detection capability.
I posted about detergents, dispersant and AW additive packages and said that for most engines, and most drivers, who are not driving high HP, high RPM, non-DI engines, that it really doesn't matter what approved oil that you use. They're all pretty much just as good over the normal life of the car.
I've posted on why I think 10K OCIs are allowed for Bentleys.
And, I've responded to your continued insertion of Mobil 1 marketing quotations into the discussion, out of context.
I have repeatedly said that for anyone who plans to keep their car for only the warranty period, or extended warranty period, and then turn it, it just doesn't matter what oil is used, as long as it is approved. If the engine breaks, it's the manufacturers problem. If the engineers, project managers, and accountants at (name your favorite automobile company) have done their job right, then they will have designed and cost-reduced their engine to the extent that there are minimal failures that the manufacturer is liable for when approved lubricants are used. These approved lubricants are not the best that can be used, but they are "good enough". When they don't do their job correctly, you get your Toyota/Audi/VW sludge monsters.
IMO, it's only if you are driving a high HP, high RPM, or direct injected engine, and are driving it hard, or are interested in keeping a car well past the warranty period and into the 150-200K mile range, that alternative oils even make sense.
I've posted about the range of validity for UOA measurements in concrete factual terms.
I've posted that this is normal break-in wear and that we'll see the normal asymptotic decline over mileage and OCIs.
I've said that the data indicates that the rings are not sealed and that there is a considerable amount of fuel dilution.
When people, including yourself, seem to indicate that UOA ppm metal wear elements mean nothing, and are not useful or valid, I've described the difference between UOA measurements made with ICP and Rotrode spectroscopy in extreme detail, including the ability of both to "see" wear, and Rotrode to more accurately see severe wear, because of it's larger particle size detection capability.
I posted about detergents, dispersant and AW additive packages and said that for most engines, and most drivers, who are not driving high HP, high RPM, non-DI engines, that it really doesn't matter what approved oil that you use. They're all pretty much just as good over the normal life of the car.
I've posted on why I think 10K OCIs are allowed for Bentleys.
And, I've responded to your continued insertion of Mobil 1 marketing quotations into the discussion, out of context.
I have repeatedly said that for anyone who plans to keep their car for only the warranty period, or extended warranty period, and then turn it, it just doesn't matter what oil is used, as long as it is approved. If the engine breaks, it's the manufacturers problem. If the engineers, project managers, and accountants at (name your favorite automobile company) have done their job right, then they will have designed and cost-reduced their engine to the extent that there are minimal failures that the manufacturer is liable for when approved lubricants are used. These approved lubricants are not the best that can be used, but they are "good enough". When they don't do their job correctly, you get your Toyota/Audi/VW sludge monsters.
IMO, it's only if you are driving a high HP, high RPM, or direct injected engine, and are driving it hard, or are interested in keeping a car well past the warranty period and into the 150-200K mile range, that alternative oils even make sense.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: AEHaas
Terry also said to use Shell V-Power whenever possible. Fuel is part of the oil demise issue. Once again, oil is blamed but is not the cause of the issue.
I am going to follow this recommendation.
So fuel choice can be a factor with dilution? That's something that I've never changed.
Does it have to do with the specific detergents/additives used and how they affect performance of the fuel injectors?
-Dennis
Terry also said to use Shell V-Power whenever possible. Fuel is part of the oil demise issue. Once again, oil is blamed but is not the cause of the issue.
I am going to follow this recommendation.
So fuel choice can be a factor with dilution? That's something that I've never changed.
Does it have to do with the specific detergents/additives used and how they affect performance of the fuel injectors?
-Dennis
Originally Posted By: buster
RI, you make a lot of valid points. All I am saying is that oil analysis is a good tool, but limited.
You're saying nothing that I haven't said. All tools are limited, and you get what you pay for. However, you go further than this, and have pretty much said that the metal wear numbers are meaningless, except for trend analysis. This is just not factually correct.
UOA metal analysis is routinely used in the development of engines and oils, because it is fast and accurate in what it does. Ferrography is great stuff, but it cannot be done in reasonable time to keep an engine on a dyno stand from blowing. An ICP or Rotrode analysis can be done quickly and at multiple times each day during bench testing.
My basic point, which I learned about 6 months ago on my own, and was confirmed by Terry, is that the type of equipment used for UOA analysis makes a huge difference. Not all labs are equally as effective in measuring metal wear. Terry's lab is, because he specially selected a contract lab that does Rotrode analysis. You'll find that as you look close at the analysis he does that there were specific reasons for everything that is included in his Premium analysis service. These were derived from his experience in the development and screening of commercial and racing lubricant formulations.
RI, you make a lot of valid points. All I am saying is that oil analysis is a good tool, but limited.
You're saying nothing that I haven't said. All tools are limited, and you get what you pay for. However, you go further than this, and have pretty much said that the metal wear numbers are meaningless, except for trend analysis. This is just not factually correct.
UOA metal analysis is routinely used in the development of engines and oils, because it is fast and accurate in what it does. Ferrography is great stuff, but it cannot be done in reasonable time to keep an engine on a dyno stand from blowing. An ICP or Rotrode analysis can be done quickly and at multiple times each day during bench testing.
My basic point, which I learned about 6 months ago on my own, and was confirmed by Terry, is that the type of equipment used for UOA analysis makes a huge difference. Not all labs are equally as effective in measuring metal wear. Terry's lab is, because he specially selected a contract lab that does Rotrode analysis. You'll find that as you look close at the analysis he does that there were specific reasons for everything that is included in his Premium analysis service. These were derived from his experience in the development and screening of commercial and racing lubricant formulations.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Originally Posted By: AEHaas
Terry also said to use Shell V-Power whenever possible. Fuel is part of the oil demise issue. Once again, oil is blamed but is not the cause of the issue.
I am going to follow this recommendation.
So fuel choice can be a factor with dilution? That's something that I've never changed.
Does it have to do with the specific detergents/additives used and how they affect performance of the fuel injectors?
-Dennis
Detergents and additives help to keep the valves clean and mitigate oil deposit formation on the valves. But there are also other additives in some fuel formulations that specifically address fuel lubricity issues. If fuel is going to wash down the cylinder walls, it would be nice to have a fuel that has had some lubricity enhancement. V-Power would be one.
Originally Posted By: AEHaas
Terry also said to use Shell V-Power whenever possible. Fuel is part of the oil demise issue. Once again, oil is blamed but is not the cause of the issue.
I am going to follow this recommendation.
So fuel choice can be a factor with dilution? That's something that I've never changed.
Does it have to do with the specific detergents/additives used and how they affect performance of the fuel injectors?
-Dennis
Detergents and additives help to keep the valves clean and mitigate oil deposit formation on the valves. But there are also other additives in some fuel formulations that specifically address fuel lubricity issues. If fuel is going to wash down the cylinder walls, it would be nice to have a fuel that has had some lubricity enhancement. V-Power would be one.
You really do not want to wear out a Bently.
Originally Posted By: Steve S
You really do not want to wear out a Bentley.
I'd agree. A 550 HP twin turbo W12 engine is a total monster. I would want to pamper a car like that with the best oil for the job. And I'm sure that AEHass will do just that.
You really do not want to wear out a Bentley.
I'd agree. A 550 HP twin turbo W12 engine is a total monster. I would want to pamper a car like that with the best oil for the job. And I'm sure that AEHass will do just that.
Originally Posted By: RI_RS4
Detergents and additives help to keep the valves clean and mitigate oil deposit formation on the valves. But there are also other additives in some fuel formulations that specifically address fuel lubricity issues. If fuel is going to wash down the cylinder walls, it would be nice to have a fuel that has had some lubricity enhancement. V-Power would be one.
What about BP/Amoco 93 and Sunoco 93?
-Dennis
Detergents and additives help to keep the valves clean and mitigate oil deposit formation on the valves. But there are also other additives in some fuel formulations that specifically address fuel lubricity issues. If fuel is going to wash down the cylinder walls, it would be nice to have a fuel that has had some lubricity enhancement. V-Power would be one.
What about BP/Amoco 93 and Sunoco 93?
-Dennis
RI RS4 I'm curious whether you noticed the post I put up above in response to some of yours about the degree to which UOA data correlates with engine wear. It crossed with your post pointing to article abstracts discussing analysis, so I wonder whether you missed it. Number 1135799. I mentioned three factors that I think call into question the relevance of wear metals numbers to meaningful conclusions, things that have changed my opinion on this subject over the time I've been posting here. I'm curious how you think these factors might be successfully corrected for or whether that is even necessary.
Most of the abstracts you linked to really don't seem entirely relevant to engines where different oils are used, in non-laboratory conditions, especially when the oil is filtered by different and un-controlled-for filters that absorb an unknown proportion of the wear.
Most of the abstracts you linked to really don't seem entirely relevant to engines where different oils are used, in non-laboratory conditions, especially when the oil is filtered by different and un-controlled-for filters that absorb an unknown proportion of the wear.
Glenn
Sorry I didn't get to this earlier. Here are my thoughts:
1) The concentration of wear particles of a particular size in the oil at any time is a function of the actual wear rate, the volume of oil, and the rate of particle removal by filtering. Although the filter is a fairly complex creature, changing it's filtering function as it loads up, I think (don't know for sure, but suspect) that the largest filter rate changes occur initially after it is freshly replaced. I suspect that eventually it reaches a homeostasis, where the filtering rate is fairly constant for a relatively long period of time.
The cartridge type filter used in my engines seems to be very consistent over time and mileage, since my UOA wear numbers across samples at multiple oil mileage points have always been reasonable, repeatable with 1-2 ppm and made sense. That may not be the case for other filter types.
2) You are correct, some of the wear may be due to corrosion of non-wear surfaces. However, if non-wear surfaces are experiencing oxidation and corrosion, you can bet that the wear surfaces are seeing worse chemical effects, since more fresh metal is exposed, and local temperatures are higher, increasing the amount of chemical activity. These should stabilize once the new chemistry has been incorporated into the engine.
But, your point is well taken. If "things" increase on the introduction of a new oil into an old engine, this is not necessarily indicative of higher wear. It just may be that the new chemistry is doing it's thing. But, if a new equilibrium has not been achieved after the 2nd or 3rd change, and metal numbers remain higher, I've gotta argue that it's the oil. And conversely, if you introduce a new oil and the numbers go down substantially on the 1st change, something important is going on. That's why in my engines, RLI Biosyn is so amazing. There is zero doubt that wear is being reduced. The effect of the oil is near-instantaneous and easily measurable, and in all cases in recent Audi engines that I've seen shows a minimum of 2:1 (Usually 3:1) reduction in Fe measurements.
3) Yes, I think cleaning is a real phenomenon. I'd advocate that you cannot condemn an oil based on particle wear, unless it's been through 2 OCIs in the engine. On the second OCI the new chemistry has settled in. It may very well be that Redline scavenges iron oxides. I'm not sure you can say that it will smooth the surface in doing so, since bearings contain some pretty darn hard oxides. But I'm no chemist, either.
As far as the correlation to actual wear for tracking purposes, that is pretty much unassailable. There's too much published evidence. The problem with BITOG is that the analysis data is uncontrolled. There are too many labs being used, and too many different ways of contaminating the samples. I've been extremely careful with my sampling methods, and have used the same lab throughout my oil analysis projects, and I've gotten consistent, repeatable results. (I've actually taken multiple samples within short time windows, just to see whether Terry's lab is repeatable.) I'm also pretty well convinced that most labs are using the wrong equipment. ICP spectroscopy is extremely accurate, but unfortunately it has a fairly low particle size cutoff of 0.5 to 2 microns.
Sorry I didn't get to this earlier. Here are my thoughts:
1) The concentration of wear particles of a particular size in the oil at any time is a function of the actual wear rate, the volume of oil, and the rate of particle removal by filtering. Although the filter is a fairly complex creature, changing it's filtering function as it loads up, I think (don't know for sure, but suspect) that the largest filter rate changes occur initially after it is freshly replaced. I suspect that eventually it reaches a homeostasis, where the filtering rate is fairly constant for a relatively long period of time.
The cartridge type filter used in my engines seems to be very consistent over time and mileage, since my UOA wear numbers across samples at multiple oil mileage points have always been reasonable, repeatable with 1-2 ppm and made sense. That may not be the case for other filter types.
2) You are correct, some of the wear may be due to corrosion of non-wear surfaces. However, if non-wear surfaces are experiencing oxidation and corrosion, you can bet that the wear surfaces are seeing worse chemical effects, since more fresh metal is exposed, and local temperatures are higher, increasing the amount of chemical activity. These should stabilize once the new chemistry has been incorporated into the engine.
But, your point is well taken. If "things" increase on the introduction of a new oil into an old engine, this is not necessarily indicative of higher wear. It just may be that the new chemistry is doing it's thing. But, if a new equilibrium has not been achieved after the 2nd or 3rd change, and metal numbers remain higher, I've gotta argue that it's the oil. And conversely, if you introduce a new oil and the numbers go down substantially on the 1st change, something important is going on. That's why in my engines, RLI Biosyn is so amazing. There is zero doubt that wear is being reduced. The effect of the oil is near-instantaneous and easily measurable, and in all cases in recent Audi engines that I've seen shows a minimum of 2:1 (Usually 3:1) reduction in Fe measurements.
3) Yes, I think cleaning is a real phenomenon. I'd advocate that you cannot condemn an oil based on particle wear, unless it's been through 2 OCIs in the engine. On the second OCI the new chemistry has settled in. It may very well be that Redline scavenges iron oxides. I'm not sure you can say that it will smooth the surface in doing so, since bearings contain some pretty darn hard oxides. But I'm no chemist, either.
As far as the correlation to actual wear for tracking purposes, that is pretty much unassailable. There's too much published evidence. The problem with BITOG is that the analysis data is uncontrolled. There are too many labs being used, and too many different ways of contaminating the samples. I've been extremely careful with my sampling methods, and have used the same lab throughout my oil analysis projects, and I've gotten consistent, repeatable results. (I've actually taken multiple samples within short time windows, just to see whether Terry's lab is repeatable.) I'm also pretty well convinced that most labs are using the wrong equipment. ICP spectroscopy is extremely accurate, but unfortunately it has a fairly low particle size cutoff of 0.5 to 2 microns.
Originally Posted By: buster
I don't own a high performance car, but I know people that do and none ever have oil related issues. Most with Mobil 1 retail oil.
Interesting! I've heard of abnormal lifter and cam chain noise, cam tensioner failures, and cams that have been wiped, due to lubrication problems. I've heard of intake valve deposit issues in the new DI engines causing misfires, because the oil can't handle the fuel dilution.
Most people wouldn't know an oil related issue even if it hit them in the face. Sometimes the solution for the manufacturer is to just replace the failed part in warranty. Sometimes it's to strengthen the part to make up for boundary lubrication issues. VW did this on the cam for the 2.0 TFSI engine by doing special hardening on the camshaft lobe that drives the high pressure fuel pump.
I don't own a high performance car, but I know people that do and none ever have oil related issues. Most with Mobil 1 retail oil.
Interesting! I've heard of abnormal lifter and cam chain noise, cam tensioner failures, and cams that have been wiped, due to lubrication problems. I've heard of intake valve deposit issues in the new DI engines causing misfires, because the oil can't handle the fuel dilution.
Most people wouldn't know an oil related issue even if it hit them in the face. Sometimes the solution for the manufacturer is to just replace the failed part in warranty. Sometimes it's to strengthen the part to make up for boundary lubrication issues. VW did this on the cam for the 2.0 TFSI engine by doing special hardening on the camshaft lobe that drives the high pressure fuel pump.
11 and 24 mpg is really good gas mileage considering the performance and when compared to any full sized car or suv.
RI, oil analysis is very useful. My thread about it being useless was a joke. Where I differ with you is whether the differences we see are really anything of significance even further beyond the warranty period. I think it's always some type of compromise in formulating. Some oils give up wear protection for better sluge/deposit control. IMO.
Hi,
RI - You said:
"Interesting! I've heard of abnormal lifter and cam chain noise, cam tensioner failures, and cams that have been wiped, due to lubrication problems. I've heard of intake valve deposit issues in the new DI engines causing misfires, because the oil can't handle the fuel dilution."
Can you please elaborate................
See, if all engines in a engine family are "noisy" at start up the this is normal not abnormal. Many new owners of such an engine may deem the noise to be abnormal - this is the problem
In any case such noises have never been shown to be a precursor to excessive wear. They are often an acoustics factor of the lubricant
In MHE using random UOAs to determine the wear performance of one lubricant against another is at best "interesting"
RI - You said:
"Interesting! I've heard of abnormal lifter and cam chain noise, cam tensioner failures, and cams that have been wiped, due to lubrication problems. I've heard of intake valve deposit issues in the new DI engines causing misfires, because the oil can't handle the fuel dilution."
Can you please elaborate................
See, if all engines in a engine family are "noisy" at start up the this is normal not abnormal. Many new owners of such an engine may deem the noise to be abnormal - this is the problem
In any case such noises have never been shown to be a precursor to excessive wear. They are often an acoustics factor of the lubricant
In MHE using random UOAs to determine the wear performance of one lubricant against another is at best "interesting"
Last edited:
Doug
you're right, random UOA's are not useful in comparing lubricants. there has to be a systematic and consistent way. I consider the BITOG way to be quite random, since multiple labs are used, and sampling is not controlled. When people attempt to compare their results based on 2 samples, without any other knowledge of the oils and engines, they are "smoking something" at best.
Elaboration:
Currently the 2ZZ-GE engine in the Lotus Elise is having a number of lubrication failures on the high-speed cam lobes in some engines. The high speed lobe uses a slipper follower, that has extremely high pressures. This is the same engine that is in the Toyota Celica where it has not seen similar issues.
The Audi/VW 2.0TFSI has had a rash of failures on the cam drive for the fuel pump. Since VW has it's own oil spec, and the oil couldn't be guaranteed to stand up to the extreme pressure, they had to go back and perform special hardening for that lobe.
Quite a few Audi V8 engines experience chain tensioner failures during the life of the engine, on engines with less than 100K miles. This chain drive system is designed to be a "lifetime" system.
Quite a few Audi V6 DI engines are experiencing excessive intake valve deposits, causing misfires. This is not corrected by fuel additives, since fuel additives do not pass across the intake valves.
you're right, random UOA's are not useful in comparing lubricants. there has to be a systematic and consistent way. I consider the BITOG way to be quite random, since multiple labs are used, and sampling is not controlled. When people attempt to compare their results based on 2 samples, without any other knowledge of the oils and engines, they are "smoking something" at best.
Elaboration:
Currently the 2ZZ-GE engine in the Lotus Elise is having a number of lubrication failures on the high-speed cam lobes in some engines. The high speed lobe uses a slipper follower, that has extremely high pressures. This is the same engine that is in the Toyota Celica where it has not seen similar issues.
The Audi/VW 2.0TFSI has had a rash of failures on the cam drive for the fuel pump. Since VW has it's own oil spec, and the oil couldn't be guaranteed to stand up to the extreme pressure, they had to go back and perform special hardening for that lobe.
Quite a few Audi V8 engines experience chain tensioner failures during the life of the engine, on engines with less than 100K miles. This chain drive system is designed to be a "lifetime" system.
Quite a few Audi V6 DI engines are experiencing excessive intake valve deposits, causing misfires. This is not corrected by fuel additives, since fuel additives do not pass across the intake valves.
- Status