2001 GMC Sierra 5.3L 147k, QSUD 5w-30 17,271miles

[volk06]

I'm posing this UOA for WOG.
Code:


OIL QSUD 5W30 SM

MILES IN USE 17,271 MILES

TIME IN USE MARCH 2011-JULY 19, 2012

MILES 147,116 MILES

SAMPLE TAKEN

MAKE UP OIL 2.0 QTS



univ avg based upon 5600 miles





ALUMINUM 5 3

CHROMIUM 1 1

IRON 42 19

COPPER 33 29

LEAD 5 8

TIN 0 1

MOLYBDENUM 66 73

NICKEL 2 1

MANGANESE 1 3

SILVER 0 0

TITANIUM 0 0

POTASSIUM 1 3

BORON 30 49

SILICON 20 12

SODIUM 23 41

CALCIUM 2662 2196

MAGNESIUM 15 130

PHOSPHORUS 711 692

ZINC 953 832

BARIUM 0 0



INSOLUBLES 0.3

FLASHPOINT ºF 410

SUS VIS 210ºF 64.7

cSt @ 212ºF 11.53

TBN NOT TESTED

 

[oggb]

Lack of a TBN makes me nervous, and also makes me thinks Blackstone might be somewhat blindly recommending OCIs far beyond what QSUD is suitable for.

I might go 10k on QSUD in that vehicle.

 

[volk06]

Yea it seems the oil started to thicken up and with out a TBN I wouldn't go any further. I think I'd pull it back due to the oil thickening up a bit but with out a TBN, no one knows how much life was left.

 

[addyguy]

Not bad results at all for 17k on that engine with a 'non long drain' oil. however, oil is starting to thicken up somewhat from oxidization, so I'd imagine it's pretty close to spent.

 

[dave1251]

Looks very good. I recommend 15K OCI's I may recommend to WOG remain at 17K but without a TBN I do know for sure, all I know is that oxidation is starting to rise, but insols where low? Did WOG change oil filters?

 

[wog]

yes oil and filter changed,another fill qsud 5w/30.

 

[addyguy]

..planning on sticking with same OCI, or cutting back just a bit (which would be prudent)...?

 

[LeakySeals]

How about a picture down the oil filler?

 

[Brons2]

You really need TBN to better evaluate this regimen. The oil has definitely thickened some, a sign of oxidation. I think you ran it too far, but that's just my opinion. I'd cut back to 12,500 and retest with TBN to see where you are.

 

[tinmanSC]

Originally Posted By: Brons2
You really need TBN to better evaluate this regimen. The oil has definitely thickened some, a sign of oxidation. I think you ran it too far, but that's just my opinion. I'd cut back to 12,500 and retest with TBN to see where you are.

+1

 

[dnewton3]

I'd really like to know a couple of things:

1) what predicated the OCI? was it the OLM, or a gut feeling, or what?

2) what are the universal averages, and what mileage are they based upon? It really makes it hard to know how well this compared on a "per mile" basis to other similar engines.


Overall, the Vortec engines seem to shed a bit of Fe and Cu moreso that other engines, but that does not make it wrong; only different.

At least the extended OCI is working towards a ROI that is reasonable. Kudos in that regard.

 

[The motor guy]

that one looks pretty good but i bet if he regularly did this the uoa's wouldn't look as good over time.

 

[wog]

cut it back to 12k -14k range,this truck throws iron and copper the averages are in the 40range for fe,and 33 fos copper. this goes back 6years.sus visc has ranged from61.9 to 63.9 in that time. normally do one year intervals,this year it got out due to work.this is first time without tbn,the range is been1.3 to 2.7 . miles are 11k to 15.5k,this last run was longest. use syn oil since truck hit 24k miles in 2003.

 

[wog]

i will try to post universal averages,but my computer skills are not good. may get kids to give me a hand.volk was kind enough to post uoa for me.

 

[Norm Olt]

Originally Posted By: tinmanSC
Originally Posted By: Brons2
You really need TBN to better evaluate this regimen. The oil has definitely thickened some, a sign of oxidation. I think you ran it too far, but that's just my opinion. I'd cut back to 12,500 and retest with TBN to see where you are.

+1


Good advice!

 

[lexus114]

No offense, but man you guy`s sure like to push your luck. C`mon, 17,000 miles on an oil change? I know I`ll get bashed from you long (over due) oci guy`s. But this is insane to me. (jmo)

 

[dnewton3]

Just what seems "insane" about this UOA?

If this were a 5k mile OCI, and we saw only 1/3 of the wear metals (Fe around 15ppm; cu around 11ppm), would that seem untenable?

What's "insane" about trying to maximize and investment, seeking the greatest ROI?

Like most people, it seems you are of the impression that OCIs should be limted by the exposure (duration of miles) rather than using data and logic to drive the decision to change lube.

Would you feel the same if the OCI was 17k miles, with only 6ppm of Fe and 9 of Cu? Would it still be "insane"? If not, then where would you put the condemation limits?

There are two fundemental things to understand about wear:
1) wear rates (progression of degredation)
2) wear totals (magnitude of accumulation)

I would want to know the universal averages and TBN to have a more clear understanding, and I'd like to see the data stream developed. But that does not make this OCI exposure "insane" in my book.

Further, this UOA is singular and not successive (unless he didn't post info that he's hoarding). We really don't know if the wear is reasonably flat across the mileage, or has it escalted recently in the last few thousand miles? I would say the following of this singular data offering; the average wear rates are not alarming and the wear totals are nowhere near a reasonable condemnation limit. What is "insane" about that?

Until a person can define and understand these concepts, the persistence of X,xxx mile OCI's is going to be forever ingrained in our mentality.

What seems "insane" to one person is simply methodical experimentation using data driven decisions to another ...

 

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Just what seems "insane" about this UOA?

If this were a 5k mile OCI, and we saw only 1/3 of the wear metals (Fe around 15ppm; cu around 11ppm), would that seem untenable?

What's "insane" about trying to maximize and investment, seeking the greatest ROI?

Like most people, it seems you are of the impression that OCIs should be limted by the exposure (duration of miles) rather than using data and logic to drive the decision to change lube.

Would you feel the same if the OCI was 17k miles, with only 6ppm of Fe and 9 of Cu? Would it still be "insane"? If not, then where would you put the condemation limits?

There are two fundemental things to understand about wear:
1) wear rates (progression of degredation)
2) wear totals (magnitude of accumulation)

I would want to know the universal averages and TBN to have a more clear understanding, and I'd like to see the data stream developed. But that does not make this OCI exposure "insane" in my book.

Further, this UOA is singular and not successive (unless he didn't post info that he's hoarding). We really don't know if the wear is reasonably flat across the mileage, or has it escalted recently in the last few thousand miles? I would say the following of this singular data offering; the average wear rates are not alarming and the wear totals are nowhere near a reasonable condemnation limit. What is "insane" about that?

Until a person can define and understand these concepts, the persistence of X,xxx mile OCI's is going to be forever ingrained in our mentality.

What seems "insane" to one person is simply methodical experimentation using data driven decisions to another ...



Like I stated in my post, it is my opinion. If oil was $100.00 a jug at Wal Mart, then I could see an oci of 10,000-15,000 miles. But that is certainly not the case. But then you guy`s would try to push it for 30,000 miles. There is always going to be a difference of opinion re; oci length`s. I am not trying to sell you on my belief`s here. However for me, this is too long. So we disagree, no harm done. Sorry if I came off a little strong, I didnt mean to.

 

[dnewton3]

No apology needed; you were not offensive by any means.

I agree we can disagree.

Yes - I try to maxmize my investments. Some do not.

I suppose if oil were $1/case you'd be changing it every 500 miles????

JK!

 

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
No apology needed; you were not offensive by any means.

I agree we can disagree.

Yes - I try to maxmize my investments. Some do not.

I suppose if oil were $1/case you'd be changing it every 500 miles????

JK!

Hahaha!!

A little story; Our 2006 MB C280 was serviced at the dealership every 13,000 miles I think it was. With the MB 1 0W-40, since it is out of warranty we have an excellent private MB mechanic in Allentown service it for her now. Here is where I DO AGREE that 10,00 miles on oci`s are acceptable. Because this car has a large sump capacity, as well as a fleece oil filter, so they are basically set up from the factory for longer oci`s. Here is my point, our private mechanic (who went on his own after working for MB dealer`s for years.) said we need to cut the oci down to 5,000 miles? I asked him why? he said the factory recommendation was too long? Now here, I do disagree. so we change around 7,000 now for her car. But for my RX with a 5qt sump, and basically a lawn mower oil filter, No more than 5,000 miles. I think the new RX`s have a larger sump, recommend 5W20 Synthetic oil with a 10,000 oci. So I`m not that far out of touch with you.