Pennzoil Ultra, 22k miles, 2002 Camaro Z28

[A_Harman]

This UOA has been almost 3 years in the making.
Once the Camaro reached the point where it would use a whole quart of oil in a 30-minute lapping session, I decided to retire it from track use, as of October 2016.
But it still runs fine on the street, so I put it on the "perpetual oil change" regimen, to use up the 3 gallons of SN Pennzoil Ultra I had stashed. I changed the filter at 260k.

Polaris Comments:
Flagged data does not indicate an immediate need for maintenance action. Continue to observe the trend and monitor
equipment and fluid conditions. BEARING/BUSHING METAL is at a MODERATE LEVEL: Base Number is MODERATELY LOW. As
Base Number depletes, the ability to neutralize acids is diminished. OXIDATION is at a MODERATE level, which may be due to
extended drain interval or high operating temperature. FLAGGED ADDITIVE levels indicate slight LUBE MIXING; Lubricant and
filter change acknowledged.

Overall, I think I ran it too long based on the high corrected Iron level, and low TBN. I now have VML 5w30 in it, and will do 10k-mile OCI's and see how it likes it.

 

[Linctex]

From Aug 2014 to Dec 2018 - This is one sump fill, that lasted 4+ years and 52,000 miles?

 

[69GTX]

So if I read this right, the filter went 42K miles and a fresh quart of oil (from blow by) was added every 3700 mi over the past 52K miles?

 

[A_Harman]

No. I stopped doing UOA's after Aug '14, but did not stop doing oil changes. The last oil change was March, 2016.

 

[berniedd]

In Feb2013 to July 2013, you ran only 2000 miles, you had to add 2 quarts of oil, and yet the the iron, aluminum, lead and tin skyrocketed while the TBN took a dive. Why is this?

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted by berniedd
In Feb2013 to July 2013, you ran only 2000 miles, you had to add 2 quarts of oil, and yet the the iron, aluminum, lead and tin skyrocketed while the TBN took a dive. Why is this?


The car was sitting outside my mechanic's shop for 3 months waiting for him to rebuild the transmission. He left the exhaust system open, and I assumed this allowed a couple of cylinder bores to rust. If you go back to my posted UOA at the time, there is discussion on it.

 

[Shannow]

I think that you are being a bit harsh on this analysis.

Remember, that the oil starts off with zero PPM iron, so the quart lost in the first interval contains nearly none...

I've thrown together a couple of curves to demonstrate...1,500 mile intervals got me closest to 14 quart makeup with simple math. Adjusted the "iron per interval" to get it close(ish) to your end.

First curve is oil consumption similar to yours...funny, how linear wear rate with oil consumption (and make-up) "appears" to wear more in the first interval, then get better...hmmm...
Second curve is straight linear, no consumption, indicating that your corrected value as a straight multiplier is overly pessimistic by around 15%...

 

[Shannow]

Part two of my thought bubble hinges on the two P.U. fills being from similarly sourced oil.

If the oil transport to the exhaust (loss) is all droplets, through the PCV, then the above curves hold...the transport oil will be carrying whatever the level of contaminants in the sump is at the same ration.

Papers seem to indicate that in the ring belt, the volatiles make it into the chamber, leaving more highly additised oil remaining in the drain back oil.

IF your two P.U. fills were from similar batches in time (stash), the concentration of the additive elements increasing over time would indicate that considerable of the transport mechanism is in the ring belt...thus the concentration factors both in my oil consumption curve, and your straight multiplier are also excessively negative.

In short, I think that your rig is good for perpetual oil changes, with 10k filter changes.

Please, at 10k, pull a sample, and not the oil, and decide to move on from there.

 

[CR94]

Originally Posted by Shannow
... Papers seem to indicate that in the ring belt, the volatiles make it into the chamber, leaving more highly additised oil remaining in the drain back oil. ...
Might that separation effect be less significant in an engine consuming oil so rapidly? (... assuming those papers were about less severely worn engines)

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted by Shannow
I think that you are being a bit harsh on this analysis.

Remember, that the oil starts off with zero PPM iron, so the quart lost in the first interval contains nearly none...

I've thrown together a couple of curves to demonstrate...1,500 mile intervals got me closest to 14 quart makeup with simple math. Adjusted the "iron per interval" to get it close(ish) to your end.

First curve is oil consumption similar to yours...funny, how linear wear rate with oil consumption (and make-up) "appears" to wear more in the first interval, then get better...hmmm...
Second curve is straight linear, no consumption, indicating that your corrected value as a straight multiplier is overly pessimistic by around 15%...



Good stuff!
An adjustment to the first graph would be the sump volume in the Camaro is 5.5 qts, so the cumulative Iron concentration would be:

Which puts the concentration at the end of interval even closer to 51.
Then goal-seeking the Iron concentration rate to get exactly 51 gives 9.75 ppm.
This makes the wear rate 6.5 ppm/kmile, which is pretty high.

 

[Gasbuggy]

That's awesome!

 

[bullwinkle]

I would love to see the inside of your Ultra, if you still have it, to see how the media did (blinded off or not?).

 

[dailydriver]

It's really cool that your 4th gen LS1 is still chugging along at that mileage!

My '00 Z28 finally dropped a lifter @ ~235K (HARD!) miles, and, as you know, once those needle bearings, and other lifter bits circulate in the sump, it is basically a FULL rebuild, since the heads have to come off anyway for even the lifters to be changed out.

Since I did not have access to either the tools, nor the facilities necessary to do this (and I was getting quotes of upwards of $10K to do the full job, even with a used stock LS1), I sold it as it was (and YES, I DID inform the buyer, and he could hear the clacking from a block away anyway

), and bought the little rally rocket in my sig instead.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted by dailydriver
It's really cool that your 4th gen LS1 is still chugging along at that mileage!

My '00 Z28 finally dropped a lifter @ ~235K (HARD!) miles, and, as you know, once those needle bearings, and other lifter bits circulate in the sump, it is basically a FULL rebuild, since the heads have to come off anyway for even the lifters to be changed out.

Since I did not have access to either the tools, nor the facilities necessary to do this (and I was getting quotes of upwards of $10K to do the full job, even with a used stock LS1), I sold it as it was (and YES, I DID inform the buyer, and he could hear the clacking from a block away anyway

), and bought the little rally rocket in my sig instead.

When the oil consumption went up a few years ago, I wanted to do an LS3 swap and keep tracking it. But underbody rust from 16 Michigan winters is making me think twice about that.
It can probably go for a few more years in daily driver service. I hope you haven't jinxed it by pointing out how yours failed!

 

[racin4ds]

I'm amazed to see that era LS1 still alive especially being beat on! lol I had many friends in my younger years with those fancy LS1 cars trying to outrun my mustangs, they were faster on the strip but never lasted much past 50k miles. They burnt tons of oil and smoked all the time, while my lowly little 302 and 4.6 motors took a beating every weekend at the track and still didn't use a drop of oil.

It was always a fun rivalry, I had one friend with a factory "freak" 02 Camaro M6 car that would run 12's in stock trim. He was a demon on the shifter but man that thing was fast. I think that motor made it to just shy of 30k miles before it blew up!

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted by racin4ds
I'm amazed to see that era LS1 still alive especially being beat on! lol I had many friends in my younger years with those fancy LS1 cars trying to outrun my mustangs, they were faster on the strip but never lasted much past 50k miles. They burnt tons of oil and smoked all the time, while my lowly little 302 and 4.6 motors took a beating every weekend at the track and still didn't use a drop of oil.

It was always a fun rivalry, I had one friend with a factory "freak" 02 Camaro M6 car that would run 12's in stock trim. He was a demon on the shifter but man that thing was fast. I think that motor made it to just shy of 30k miles before it blew up!



Mine ran 12.6 @114 MPH on just a lid, Eaton Posi limited slip, Pro 5.0 shifter, SLP cat back exhaust system, and drag radials, (but also with a launch/60' BUTCHERING; road race type suspension, and BIG Strano front sway bar, and optional size, 17x9 and 275/40-17 front wheels/tires) and yes, still managed to make it to 235K miles.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted by racin4ds
I'm amazed to see that era LS1 still alive especially being beat on! lol I had many friends in my younger years with those fancy LS1 cars trying to outrun my mustangs, they were faster on the strip but never lasted much past 50k miles. They burnt tons of oil and smoked all the time, while my lowly little 302 and 4.6 motors took a beating every weekend at the track and still didn't use a drop of oil.

It was always a fun rivalry, I had one friend with a factory "freak" 02 Camaro M6 car that would run 12's in stock trim. He was a demon on the shifter but man that thing was fast. I think that motor made it to just shy of 30k miles before it blew up!


That wasn't a factory freak, I had many friends with LS1 F-bodies back then that ran in the 12s in stock trim. Mine ran a 13.08 at 106mph in stock trim and with just a few free modifications, drag radials and 4.10 gears it ran 12.6s at 111 mph.

I didn't know anyone that blew up their LS1 at low mileage (and the higher mileage ones that blew up were always nitrous related)

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Yeah 12.90s in stock trim wasn't all that freakish, fairly common if you actually knew how to drive the thing and didn't John Force it in the waterbox. Many years ago, my brother had bought a 2001 Trans Am with a 6-speed and something like 50k miles and bone stock, first pass I cranked off a 12.99@107 with a 1.77 60' on whatever tire it came with (non-drag radial). My own 09 G8GT ran a 13.07@109 with only a Superchips handheld canned tune; it ran high 13.30s@106 fully stock (1.89 60's were fairly normal).

His current 00 Camaro SS has a 404-cube LS3 headed motor we built and runs 10.0s@134 on motor, and still has the full factory interior (with A/C!) and 8-point cage. It's got a Turbo 400 with a transbrake and a Moser 9" under it, but other than that the rest of the car is stock. Popping the hood you can't really see anything to tip you off other than the headers.