Redline 10w30, low mileage LS1 :(

[Shane]

I know high copper is common in low mile LS1s, but I'm really starting to worry about several readings in my oil analyis.
Background: 02 WS6 TA M6, Mobil1 at 500/1500 miles, Redline 10w30 at 3000/6125 miles. All Mobil1 long filters. Long tube headers, airbox lid, Fram air filter. Daily driver, monthly autocrosser.
This test is from the 6125-10198 mileage oil. I'm really starting to wonder if Redline is worth the extra cost.
Please, give some input to these results:
Miles on oil: 4073
Miles on unit: 10198
material/current result / previous result(3125 on oil/6125 on unit)
aluminum/13/10
Chromium/2/1
Iron/28/23
Copper/298/263
Lead/24/13
Tin/2/3
Moly/617/351
Nickel/1/1
Manganese/3/2
Silver/0/0
Titanium/0/0
Potassium/20/3
Boron/19/30
Silicon/29/31
Sodium/16/11
Calcium/3102/2680
magnesium/17/35
Phosphorus/1319/1099
Zinc/1487/1205
Barium/0/0

Visc@210F: 65.5
Flashpoint:395
Fuel Antifreeze: 0
Water: 0
Insolubles: .3
TBN: 1.6

Sure, this oil has 1K more miles on it, but the copper, lead, and TBN values have me pretty worried...

This time, I put in Redline 5w30 and used the K&N filter, so we'll see what the next results look like - though I'm afraid to go beyond 4k miles after this analysis.

Thanks in advance,
Shane
http://home.austin.rr.com/ezgo

[edit]: Should also mention that I always run 6qts of oil...and that Blackstone Labs did the analysis

[ August 07, 2003, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: Shane ]

 

[Patman]

Before condemning the oil, I'd try switching oil filters first. The Mobil 1 oil filter is pretty restrictive, so if you're driving your car hard, you could be starving it for oil quite often. I'd go with a K&N oil filter if I were you.

Also, the silicon is quite high, so check for leaks. Some of the silicon is antifoaming, but some of it could be dirt getting past the air filter. The Fram air filter is usually very good at stopping dirt, although it's always possible to get a bad one that might have a tear in it or something.

[ August 07, 2003, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Patman ]

 

[Shane]

Thanks for the quick reply Patman.

On this last oil change, I did go with the K&N filter, so hopefully that will help!

thanks again,
Shane

 

[Pablo]

The only thing I'll say is to give it a chance to settle in/break in. Compare to 3 crazya*** poncho's test.

Patman, others - I wonder if this engine type is best just do 3K dino until 20,000-30K miles?? Then do an AutoRx clean and go with the synthetic. Am I whacked?

 

[Chris B.]

I'm starting to wondering about Redline too! Even other LS1's that have low miles and M1 filters using other oils are showing much better numbers. I'll wait to see if your next run with the K&N oil filter shows better numbers(and it will have to be much better then this) befor I wright off Redline. After 3 runs with this oil it should be giving you great numbers for the price they ask for their oil!!!!!

 

[Shane]

Thanks guys. I have checked out Poncho's testing before - awesome experiment there!
I had justified the higher cost of the Redline by thinking I would be able to extend the intervals by 1K until I hit a maximum acceptable level. Here, I've only hit a 4K mile interval, and I wouldn't push it any more than that. I will definitely keep this next interval at 4K until I see if the K&N oil filter helps.
I'm also checking to see if my airbox lid is allowing air in behind the filter and looking into replacements if need be...
thanks again,
Shane

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo:


Patman, others - I wonder if this engine type is best just do 3K dino until 20,000-30K miles?? Then do an AutoRx clean and go with the synthetic. Am I whacked?

---

Pablo, I don't really think that's necessary to wait for synthetic though. Just look at Vettenut's UOA on his 2002 Corvette (which uses the LS1 engine). He ran the factory fill Mobil 1 until 1k, then ran Amsoil for 5 or 6k immediately after that, and the report looked excellent!

 

[quadrun1]

Didn't we see a Redline UOA with a TBN of ZERO the other day? What was the explanation for that again?

Even though we generally like to see wear metals coming down as the engine breaks in, these levels don't look too bad considering it's a new engine, and the fact that you sometimes autocross... I wouldn't worry about it too much!

 

[Whimsey]

Maybe these high wear numbers are a result of "enthusiastic" driving, which goes with that car

. Perhaps what Bob said in another thread was correct. That such driving is tougher on engine wear than start-ups

. Just a thought.

Whimsey

 

[shortyb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by quadrun1:
Didn't we see a Redline UOA with a TBN of ZERO the other day? What was the explanation for that again?

---

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000657

That was mine. It wasn't the oil's fault per se, more operater error. In brief, I used an aggressive fuel cleaner that transferred some of the mess into the oil. I then ran the oil in service for another 1K before a drain. That used most of the additive package.

To be fair, Blackstone was in the middle of calibrating their TBN testing method and a subsequent Dexsil test showed a TBN of 2.0. I'm thinking that if not for the robust basestock of the RL, I may have had a bigger mess on my hands. I have another UOA coming up where nothing was added, either fuel side or oil side, and will wait and see how this comes out before I consider a switch.

 

[JohnBrowning]

I actualy wounder more about the LS1 then the oil. They seem to throw off wear metal like crazy. We have seen consistently high Iron and Copper in these engines. It seems that they are either built tight from the factory and generate low numbers or they wear like crazy. They also seem to take forever to settle down. I am inclined to think it is the design and material selection more then anything. We have seen good and bad numbers for these engines with just about every brand of oil. I would give it more time to settle down. I would also not evaluate any oil for it's abilitys if thair is any autocrossing involved. Each autocross event is just different enough in terms of counditions to make any comparsion kind of mute.

[ August 07, 2003, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: JohnBrowning ]

 

[Terry]

JohnBrowning is right on ! That is a great motor oil in a really unbalanced but high HP for the $ motor.

 

[Chris B.]

Yes that is a good point!!!!
Maybe it is the LS1. This is supposed to be GM's flagship engine. I really wish they got the bugs out a little better buy now and being a chevy "350" it has been around forever. If GM could just get it balanced and take car of the piston slap and oil burning issues the LS1 could be one of the best engines out there...they sure are powerfull and a hoot to drive!

 

[sprintman]

Really unbalanced?? pls explain...s

 

[3 Mad Ponchos]

Chris,
Actually the LS1 is not related to the classic SBC. It is a clean-sheet design (and 346 c.i.).

Shane,
IMO your wear metals are pretty high even allowing for the LS1 propensity to shed metal like crazy. Also your TBN seems very low even allowing for Blackstone's new system (even at 12k with no filter change, M1 showed right around 3). You've only got 4k on this oil. I dunno, I'd be pretty tempted to try a different oil to determine whether it's the oil or the car.

Cheers, 3MP

 

[Chris A]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman:
Before condemning the oil, I'd try switching oil filters first. The Mobil 1 oil filter is pretty restrictive, so if you're driving your car hard, you could be starving it for oil quite often. I'd go with a K&N oil filter if I were you.

---

How can a restrictive filter starve an engine for oil? Even if the bypass valve is all or nothing, at worse, the oil pressure will be 8psi less. 8psi less oil pressure will NOT cause an engine to starve unless that engine already has oil pressure problems.

 

[Shane]

Thanks again all!

As mentioned previously, this change I put in Redline 5w30 and a K&N long filter. If it doesn't improve *a lot*, I'll be going back to the Mobil 1 I used in my old (99) TA...

Shane

 

[Patman]

My cousin is the engine test engineer at the assembly plant that puts the LS1/LS6 engines together, and he assures me that they've worked out the bugs on the newer engines coming out of there now. He's only had this position for just a couple of years, before that I believe the quality was a lot worse, but GM has smartened up, or so we hope.

Unfortunately, like many large companies, GM gets a lot of it's parts from the lowest bidder, so the quality suffers sometimes there. An engine is only as good as it's weakest part. The LS1 design is brilliant, this engine makes 350hp and still gets over 30MPG, it has the best flowing cylinder heads of any production V8, period.

BTW, wait until you see the future versions of this engine. GM will be bringing out large displacement versions for use in the top Corvette model, and 500hp will be a reality. Cylinder shutdown technology is also part of this bright future, enabling that 500hp engine to still acheive 30MPG highway, but running on just 4 cylinders when needed. Unlike the 4-6-8 fiasco of many years ago (the Cadillac motor) this one WORKS.

[ August 11, 2003, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: Patman ]

 

[Chris B.]

Unfortunally my LS1 is going to get a rebuild because is sounds just like a diesel, is slaps that hard....sometimes.

 

[sprintman]

Thanks Terry.