What would a "bad" UOA look like though?I've never seen a bad UOA from Royal Purple when used appropriately. Good results OP.
One where a consensus agreed wear metals are high, severe viscosity loss, oxidative thickening, etc.What would a "bad" UOA look like though?
That typically shows a problem with the equipment though, not the lubricant. A lubricant that's appropriate for the application should in indiscernible from any other similarly approved oil.One where a consensus agreed wear metals are high, severe viscosity loss, oxidative thickening, etc.
That typically shows a problem with the equipment though, not the lubricant. A lubricant that's appropriate for the application should in indiscernible from any other similarly approved oil.
And of course a UOA doesn't tell us the full story. I suspect the UOA's from this engine looked "fine":
View attachment 117376
but the purple appears to have become a bit of a burgundy. Makes for some interesting looking varnish though!
That typically shows a problem with the equipment though, not the lubricant. A lubricant that's appropriate for the application should in indiscernible from any other similarly approved oil.
And of course a UOA doesn't tell us the full story. I suspect the UOA's from this engine looked "fine":
View attachment 117376
but the purple appears to have become a bit of a burgundy. Makes for some interesting looking varnish though!
That typically shows a problem with the equipment though, not the lubricant. A lubricant that's appropriate for the application should in indiscernible from any other similarly approved oil.
And of course a UOA doesn't tell us the full story. I suspect the UOA's from this engine looked "fine":
View attachment 117376
but the purple appears to have become a bit of a burgundy. Makes for some interesting looking varnish though!
Could be, depending on what we are seeing, but that may have absolutely nothing to do with the lubricant. High viscosity loss is typically from fuel for example. Oxidative thickening we don't see a lot of, since guys typically don't run long enough intervals. Metals can be high from break-in, or something being wrong, signalling a need to dig further (one of the uses of UOA's).But if you are using the lubricant in a appropriate way and those markers are still present in a negative way, it would be recognized as a "bad uoa".
As required/recommended by the vehicle manufacturer by way of viscosity, specs and interval length.What would be considered appropriate or inappropriate?