Philosophy of UOA's?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
20
Location
West Side
Hi
Just so we are all clear, what is the purpose of UOA's?
Some have said that they only use them to see if coolant or fuel (or something else) gets into the oil so that they can address any malfunctions. I think I saw an interview of two men from Shell/Pennzoil who said this much at some kind of race event for their car. The guy interviewing appeared to be an average Joe with a YouTube channel. I tried to find the link but could not. He was asking about seeing this and that metal % in the oil, and the two guys were like, "No, we don't really use it that way, we look for coolant or fuel to be in there so we can go fix any leaks."

If you think I'm lying about this, I guess you can use twitter or phone to contact Pennzoil.

So can someone explain why people turn to them for anything other than what those two guys described? And how exactly would you justify doing so?

It seems to me that UOA's would not really be accurate for metal present anyways because the heavier parts fall to the bottom of the oil, so you may get a higher or lower reading for something depending on if the oil sat for a while or not before collecting a sample. Like using the ladle at Souplantation to dig deep in the soup container.
 
People here use UOAs as tea leaves, and imagine you can them to divine the differences between oils and filters.

Really they're just a way to track trends. Establish a baseline and you'll know what is normal; when something is outside of normal it should prompt you to investigate, whether it be fuel, coolant trace, silicon, or wear metals.
 
1. To see how knackered high mileage, tired FF or old fluids are (fun)
2. You've been getting UOAs since your car was new. You're at 100k miles, all of the sudden silicon/lead/copper/iron/whatever element signals coolant consumption shoots up. You can take action and possibly save something
3. You want to extend OCIs on a specific oil and get a series of UOAs to determine how far you can run x oil.
4. You buy a car and the seller claims it was serviced and you want to find out.
 
People fill their cars with oil that costs $1.78 a gallon after rebate, and then spend $28 for a lab test so they can change that oil less frequently.
 
Originally Posted By: wdn
People fill their cars with oil that costs $1.78 a gallon after rebate, and then spend $28 for a lab test so they can change that oil less frequently.


Bingo.
 
Originally Posted By: rooflessVW
People here use UOAs as tea leaves, and imagine you can them to divine the differences between oils and filters.

Really they're just a way to track trends. Establish a baseline and you'll know what is normal; when something is outside of normal it should prompt you to investigate, whether it be fuel, coolant trace, silicon, or wear metals.


^^^^^^^
Great post here. Summarised perfectly.
 
Originally Posted By: Burt
Originally Posted By: wdn
People fill their cars with oil that costs $1.78 a gallon after rebate, and then spend $28 for a lab test so they can change that oil less frequently.


Bingo.


Those are not the types who get UOAs. It usually tends to be people who are using specific oils for some reason: people who want long OCIs or people who track their cars enough to worry about blowing them up. The rebate hunters just want to find some cheap filters so they can do an OCI for $10 or less.
 
I use them commercially. Tells me what's going on inside the engine (wear contaminants etc) and how well the oil is holding up (TBN,TAN,nitration and oxidation, plus viscosity retention). Money well spent ($17 each plus $5 for TAN testing every other sample).

For the average Joe who is following the OEM recommended service interval with a decent oil, I'd say they are a waste.
 
Most big rig fleets use them to tell when they need an oil change. Much cheaper than changing oil that still has life left. Larger shops do it on site.
 
For me, honestly, they’re for fun. I classify my level of Geek on this forum as a hobby so the wife doesn’t ask why I’m getting another UOA for a vehicle I’ll never keep long enough to really leverage the historical data.

Having said that, there is a lot of great data here that’s “boring” because plenty of people have paid for and posted UOAs that don’t show anything exciting. A few UOAs or cut-open used oil filters for the same brand/oil gives a clue what’s possible, while a larger sample size is a true trend and more valuable.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: wdn
People fill their cars with oil that costs $1.78 a gallon after rebate, and then spend $28 for a lab test so they can change that oil less frequently.


Awesome! LoL …
 
Imagine, we are paying these labs to track our data and sell it. The best studies are done by the customers that pay in the real world. UOA establishes a baseline and are fun!

Racing teams do not use them. They do physical measurements.

According to Dave at Redline, they are not accurate. I would ask Molekule?

I believe that you need hundreds of them for accuracy for statistical analysis.
 
spankme2.gif

Originally Posted By: wdn
People fill their cars with oil that costs $1.78 a gallon after rebate, and then spend $28 for a lab test so they can change that oil less frequently.


crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Onetor
Imagine, we are paying these labs to track our data and sell it. The best studies are done by the customers that pay in the real world. UOA establishes a baseline and are fun!

Racing teams do not use them. They do physical measurements.

According to Dave at Redline, they are not accurate. I would ask Molekule?

I believe that you need hundreds of them for accuracy for statistical analysis.


Wouldn't they have everyone ever who did it,in data base
 
Much more of a benefit for the large vehicles/equipment. Look at the sump size for the large 4wd tractors or other farm equipment. Much easier to sample oil, test it, know its serviceability then to drain out gallons upon gallons of oil without knowing a thing.

I think it is a great idea and even down to the smallest scale I am working on. Numbers, data and facts are king. Its great to put it to the bench racing crowd that cheer on the Amsoil every 3000 miles, I need 5w40 for those Florida cold starts on my diesel, because it makes me sleep better and cheap insurance.
 
Originally Posted By: ThugStyle
Hi
Just so we are all clear, what is the purpose of UOA's?
Some have said that they only use them to see if coolant or fuel (or something else) gets into the oil so that they can address any malfunctions. I think I saw an interview of two men from Shell/Pennzoil who said this much at some kind of race event for their car. The guy interviewing appeared to be an average Joe with a YouTube channel. I tried to find the link but could not. He was asking about seeing this and that metal % in the oil, and the two guys were like, "No, we don't really use it that way, we look for coolant or fuel to be in there so we can go fix any leaks."

If you think I'm lying about this, I guess you can use twitter or phone to contact Pennzoil.

So can someone explain why people turn to them for anything other than what those two guys described? And how exactly would you justify doing so?

It seems to me that UOA's would not really be accurate for metal present anyways because the heavier parts fall to the bottom of the oil, so you may get a higher or lower reading for something depending on if the oil sat for a while or not before collecting a sample. Like using the ladle at Souplantation to dig deep in the soup container.


There was actually a pretty decent exchange about this topic a while back that can be found here:

Link to thread
 
Originally Posted By: ThugStyle
If you think I'm lying about this, I guess you can use twitter or phone to contact Pennzoil.

Shell themselves uses UOAs for Scuderia Ferrari to try to check for abnormal wear, since you are simply not allowed to open up engines, much less rebuild them. That's available on Shell's on YouTube channel. Of course, that on its own doesn't transfer to ordinary usage, but there is value in trended analysis, beyond simply checking for coolant and fuel.
 
Originally Posted by rooflessVW
People here use UOAs as tea leaves, and imagine you can them to divine the differences between oils and filters.

Really they're just a way to track trends. Establish a baseline and you'll know what is normal; when something is outside of normal it should prompt you to investigate, whether it be fuel, coolant trace, silicon, or wear metals.

This. A thousand times over; this.

Read the "normalcy" article, and combine it with the comment quoted above.


I used my UOAs to prove that 5k mile OCIs are a waste of money. I've proved that syns are often (not always) a waste of money.

In my former life as an oil biggot, I used to run syns at 3k miles because marketing hype told me they were "best". Now, I run 10k-15k miles on dino lubes, with no worries, because data tells me otherwise. I am to the point where, in proven situations confirmed with previous testing, I don't even do UOAs any longer. IOW ... I used the tools to experiment and learn, and then used the results to modify my maintenance programs to get the best ROI.
THAT is why one should do UOAs.
 
I use them to determine trends, determine if a lubricant is up to the task, determine a safe OCI based on my engine, driving pattern, fuel, oil used. I also use them periodically to make sure coolant leaking into the oil and that fuel dilution remains a non-issue from worn components as time goes on.

They are a tool, not the be all end all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top