Ford Powerstroke 2015, Rotella T6 (CJ-4) @ 7565 mi

[Donald]

Here are a set of UOAs I had been meaning to post. Installed a true bypass oil filter at 56820 so its been in use this whole past oil change. Looks like it has brought the Fe and Al down a bit.

I have not changed the oil at this point in time since installing the bypass. I considering going another 7600. If so I will change the normal oil filter.

Code:


oil T6 T6 T6 Motorcraft

mileage 64385 56820 48937 41160

mileage on oil 7565 7883 7777 7480



Metals

Fe 11 14 17 15

Cr
Pb
Cu 2 2 3 2

Sn
Al 2 5 7 8

Ni
Ag
Ti
V


Contaminants

Si 9 6 7 8

Na 4 9 9 7

K
Water%
Coolant no no no no



Additives

Mg 1090 1166 944 21

Ca 889 915 996 2155

Ba
P 1102 1141 1034 892

Zn 1375 1305 1189 985

Mo 67 65 57 5

B 38 42 45 42



Physical tests

Vis (cSt 100C) 12.6 11.5 12.6 10.0

Fuel %
Soot % 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.3



Physical/Chemical

TBN 7.1 8.1 7.5 5.9

 

[roadrunner1]

Looks good, have you been going by the IOLM on previous changes? TBN has been strong in the four samples listed.

I see the T6 still has the propensity to shear out of grade, it doesn't hurt anything as your wear metals are in check. I run 10w-30 until the IOLM states "change oil now" and viscosity is at or above what you have reported with T6.

If you wanted to compare with your truck you could try a 10w-30 since you have a history of UOA's.

 

[Donald]

I have enough T6 CJ-4 to go one more oil change. Then some Delo 5W40 that is also CJ-4.

 

[dnewton3]

The Fe and Al did drop, but they are within a normal sense of variation; cannot attribute that to wear reduction of the BP element at this point. In fact, since UOAs only see particles below 5um, and most BP elements are effective down to 2-3um, then it's true that the element is also, to some degree, eliminating the evidence of wear from the UOA. It's darn near impossible to tell how much by percentage, but it's certainly doing it, more so than you might think. BP elements do a great job of removing all particles in their effective range; they are great products. But they also are removing evidence of wear, fooling one into believing that the wear is actually lower that it really is. No matter; your engine is doing just fine.

T6 shears. I think it would shear if the wind blew across the top of a jug left open overnight ... Not that it harms the ability to protect from wear; just an observation.

I would like to think you could double the OCI to 15k miles; wear is low, contamination low, TBN strong. Why change perfectly viable oil? Why else did you get the BP element anyway? The ONLY way it's going to pay for itself is to extend the OCIs.

 

[Donald]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
The Fe and Al did drop, but they are within a normal sense of variation; cannot attribute that to wear reduction of the BP element at this point. In fact, since UOAs only see particles below 5um, and most BP elements are effective down to 2-3um, then it's true that the element is also, to some degree, eliminating the evidence of wear from the UOA. It's darn near impossible to tell how much by percentage, but it's certainly doing it, more so than you might think. BP elements do a great job of removing all particles in their effective range; they are great products. But they also are removing evidence of wear, fooling one into believing that the wear is actually lower that it really is. No matter; your engine is doing just fine.

T6 shears. I think it would shear if the wind blew across the top of a jug left open overnight ... Not that it harms the ability to protect from wear; just an observation.

I would like to think you could double the OCI to 15k miles; wear is low, contamination low, TBN strong. Why change perfectly viable oil? Why else did you get the BP element anyway? The ONLY way it's going to pay for itself is to extend the OCIs.


So go another OLM with the oil? But change the Motorcraft oil filter now?

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: Donald
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
The Fe and Al did drop, but they are within a normal sense of variation; cannot attribute that to wear reduction of the BP element at this point. In fact, since UOAs only see particles below 5um, and most BP elements are effective down to 2-3um, then it's true that the element is also, to some degree, eliminating the evidence of wear from the UOA. It's darn near impossible to tell how much by percentage, but it's certainly doing it, more so than you might think. BP elements do a great job of removing all particles in their effective range; they are great products. But they also are removing evidence of wear, fooling one into believing that the wear is actually lower that it really is. No matter; your engine is doing just fine.

T6 shears. I think it would shear if the wind blew across the top of a jug left open overnight ... Not that it harms the ability to protect from wear; just an observation.

I would like to think you could double the OCI to 15k miles; wear is low, contamination low, TBN strong. Why change perfectly viable oil? Why else did you get the BP element anyway? The ONLY way it's going to pay for itself is to extend the OCIs.


So go another OLM with the oil? But change the Motorcraft oil filter now?


I don't know that changing the FF filter is a necessity, but if it makes you sleep better, then go ahead.
Personally I would run the filter out as well, but I realize some have a sense of timidity in this regard.
I run "normal" FF filters easily out to 10-15k miles. Doing it right now on my two MGMs (Frams) and also my Dmax (NG).


As for the BP element, I've often heard that you can use a sense of temp on the hand to judge them. If the filter is not fully loaded, you'll have good oil flow. Good oil flow will bring the filter element (either the housing or canister depending upon type) up to engine temps; hot to the touch. If the element seems only luke-warm or cool to the touch, it's just about blinded off and ready for a change. The scientific way to do it would be to install pressure gauges at upstream and down-stream locations, then install a "new" element. Once you understand the running element dP, you start taking PCs and UOAs every 5k miles and watch the change in particles affect the wear ratem then note the corresponding dP. This approach is more accurate, but honestly it drives the cost of O/FCI up even more, and you're already going to struggle to pay this out. I think the hot-hand approach is more than satisfactory for a garage experiment.

 

[Donald]

I will change the FF filter now but next time I will go with a Mobile 1 filter and run that for two OLMs which is about 15000.

Or maybe a Amsoil Ea filter.

 

[dnewton3]

Other than convention, there's nothing that says you must FCI when you OCI. The intervals can be different. Obviously warranty plays into this, but if you're willing to run BP and extend your OCIs, then by extension you should be willing to extend your FCIs. The BP element is not only going to extend the life of the lube, but also the FF element as well, because it will capture some of the loading that would otherwise be in the FF media. So the FF should last longer than a "normal" application.

Why not replace this MC filter with another. Take this one and dissect it. See what it looks like.
Run the next one out to 10k miles, replace it with another MC. Dissect it. ... Continue up to 15k miles.

I've run MC filters out to 15k miles and they were perfectly fine. But I'd not want you to be uncomfortable, so test along the way.

 

[Brons2]

I assume this is not a Blackstone analysis? Otherwise you'd see insoluables which is one guide on how long to keep your filter on, if the previous OCI without the bypass had been low in insoluables, I'd say keep it for 15k.

 

[Donald]

Originally Posted By: Brons2
I assume this is not a Blackstone analysis? Otherwise you'd see insoluables which is one guide on how long to keep your filter on, if the previous OCI without the bypass had been low in insoluables, I'd say keep it for 15k.


Who wants to pay for a Blackstone UOA?

I believe soot in a NAPA UOA is insoulables in a Blackstone UOA.

 

[dnewton3]

The methodology to discern them is different.

Blackstone looks as soot and oxidation byproducts as a combined effect; "insolubles". It's a visual reference you can read about in the article I wrote.

Other labs measure soot and oxidation separately, by chemical/physical means.


I don't think there is any way to relate the two by a linear means. They are really only relative to themselves.

 

[bullwinkle]

Judging by your Motorcraft filter photos, and the fact it's a full synthetic media filter, I have no doubt it could go 15K easily, esp. with a bypass assisting with smaller particles (i.e. agglomerated soot/carbon). Be sure to cut and post your filter, looking like the MC is a great deal/sleeper filter for the 6.7, at least as good as any other filter out there for the application.