2017 Ford 6.7PS ~9.5K miles Valvoline Premium Blue

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,390
Location
TN
VPBE 5w40. 7000 miles of this run was towing, hot environments, high altitude at times and speed limit (85mph at places)



17-8250-E-I-087826-Sev1.jpg
 
Last edited:
She is new and you put her to work. I'll bet the next uoa will look perfect.
 
Nothing wrong with that UOA, for what it can tell us.

More power to you, running the second fill to nearly 10kmi!
 
Is that 95 ppm for Fe?????? Your Fe averaged 10.8ppm/1k miles in your first OCI. Now you're averaging 10ppm/1k miles. That's a high wear rate. However, being a new engine on the second OCI, I'd say it's OK to disregard that, but I'd be cautious if that wear rate continues.

Not sure what you're doing with this. Is this a work truck? Are you traveling around the States? Can't understand how you get 85mph speed limits and high elevation while in FL, so I can only assume you're moving about the country. That would indicate to me you're driving for a living, perhaps?

I'm not saying it's time to panic; not at all. Because this engine is young, there will be some break in. However, all your other metals are already very low, indicating much of the break in is already completed. Normally the Fe would probably primarily from the cylinders under heavy loads, but that is often accompanied by some Al due to the interaction with the pistons; you don't have any Al wear to speak of, so I am left curious where the Fe is from? Just odd that your Fe is so high while others are appreciably low. It's not silica ingestion; that count came down to less than half it's previous level, but the Fe wear rate stayed the same.

Stay the course; do a few more UOAs and see where it finally settles at. Then reassess.
 
Last edited:
Thanks everyone

I travel for pleasure,but I do drive a lot. I am about half way through my next run on this truck. Maybe I will sample a little early, like 7500 this go around.
 
Originally Posted by dnewton3
Is that 95 ppm for Fe?????? Your Fe averaged 10.8ppm/1k miles in your first OCI. Now you're averaging 10ppm/1k miles. That's a high wear rate. However, being a new engine on the second OCI, I'd say it's OK to disregard that, but I'd be cautious if that wear rate continues.

Not sure what you're doing with this. Is this a work truck? Are you traveling around the States? Can't understand how you get 85mph speed limits and high elevation while in FL, so I can only assume you're moving about the country. That would indicate to me you're driving for a living, perhaps?

I'm not saying it's time to panic; not at all. Because this engine is young, there will be some break in. However, all your other metals are already very low, indicating much of the break in is already completed. Normally the Fe would probably primarily from the cylinders under heavy loads, but that is often accompanied by some Al due to the interaction with the pistons; you don't have any Al wear to speak of, so I am left curious where the Fe is from? Just odd that your Fe is so high while others are appreciably low. It's not silica ingestion; that count came down to less than half it's previous level, but the Fe wear rate stayed the same.

Stay the course; do a few more UOAs and see where it finally settles at. Then reassess.




Need more data points. An increase over one interval is meaningless, IMO. Acknowledge and agree with your suggestion for monitoring.

Originally Posted by BeerCan
Thanks everyone

I travel for pleasure,but I do drive a lot. I am about half way through my next run on this truck. Maybe I will sample a little early, like 7500 this go around.



Look forward to it. I wouldn't drain earlier than intended.
 
Anyone know why Polaris doesn't use GC to measure fuel dilution all the time? All my UOAs (maybe 20 total) from the Indianapolis lab have a GC measurement for fuel dilution (usually 3-4% for my 6.7), but I notice sometimes they just provide a fuel dilution "estimate" like in this case. Anyone know why?
 
Originally Posted by claluja
Anyone know why Polaris doesn't use GC to measure fuel dilution all the time? All my UOAs (maybe 20 total) from the Indianapolis lab have a GC measurement for fuel dilution (usually 3-4% for my 6.7), but I notice sometimes they just provide a fuel dilution "estimate" like in this case. Anyone know why?


I'm pretty sure it depends on the viscosity results. If the vis is well within the specified range of the particular grade, then they just leave it as an estimated
Edit- I overlooked where you said you usually have 3-4% fuel. So your viscosity results have been a bit low, thus triggering the GC test.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by dustyroads
Originally Posted by claluja
Anyone know why Polaris doesn't use GC to measure fuel dilution all the time? All my UOAs (maybe 20 total) from the Indianapolis lab have a GC measurement for fuel dilution (usually 3-4% for my 6.7), but I notice sometimes they just provide a fuel dilution "estimate" like in this case. Anyone know why?


I'm pretty sure it depends on the viscosity results. If the vis is well within the specified range of the particular grade, then they just leave it as an estimated
Edit- I overlooked where you said you usually have 3-4% fuel. So your viscosity results have been a bit low, thus triggering the GC test.


Makes sense, thanks. Went back and looked at mine, and a couple of mine had "estimates" but those were for cars with normal viscosity samples. The bulk had GC analysis, but most of those were for samples with lower viscosity (I have 3 sometimes 4 engines with fuel dilution issues).
 
I wonder if my use of enerburn is affecting the uoa results. I'm not sure but I think enerburn has iron in it. I am almost out and have no plans to buy more, so the uoa after next will be enerburn free.

Also probably not relevant but it turns out that my dpf filter is cracked and needs to be replaced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top