2016 Taurus SHO w/ 3.5L Ecoboost QS FS 5w-30 4,565 miles

[ZiTS]

This is the longest OCI I've ever done on any of my cars (it is what it is), and it certainly hasn't left me with that warm, fuzzy feeling I've heard so much about. I know what Blackstone said about not worrying about the elevated metal numbers, but...I am.

I'm all to familiar with the issues surrounding Ecoboost engines and long oil changes, but this was only 4,500 miles! The OLM was still at 55% for pete's sake. Between the iron, viscosity, and fuel dilution numbers, I'm backing down to 4,000 miles on this current fill. I do plan to continue using QS Full Synthetic in order to eliminate variables.

Please, those that are more knowledgeable, give me your thoughts and suggestions.

 

[FlyNavyP3]

What elevated wear? Your iron and aluminum numbers are roughly half the universal average with 2/3 the miles of the average sample. So your engine is wearing more favorably than the average 3.5 EB. I see no evidence that suggests a need to reduce the interval. If anything I see evidence that 6,000-7,500 is easily achievable before your next sample based on your wear numbers compared to universal averages.

 

[ZiTS]

Sorry, guys. I had trouble posting the correct report, so I think it will make a little more sense now. The original was the very first one done with only the 3K OCI. Mea culpa

 

[901Memphis]

Looks pretty good especially considering the engine is newer. I see no issue with going further. I would step up to the Pennzoil platinum though which is a similar but more robust additive package.

 

[SatinSilver]

I'd give Castrol Magnatec 5w30 a whirl. I like QSUD but your application may not be the best vehicle for it. Magnatec for whatever reason seems to return excellent uoa reports in ecoboost engines.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Best move here is to go with one of the latest LSPI-resistant, euro-spec thicker oils to counter the fuel dilution.
https://shell-livedocs.com/data/published/en/89db797b-d00c-4b95-8e28-cb5ffd24705f.pdf
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...w-40-reformulated-now-sn-no-more-ferrari
It's new "SN+" rating means it has been tested not to cause LSPI in Ford Ecoboost engines.
Extra viscosity here will fuel-dilute down to a 30 weight, resulting in a viscosity range Ford engineers would like this engine to be.
The Porsche A40 rating and Mercedes specs is a bonus.
Also, the new Corvette spec oil, Mobil1 ESP 0w40, is low enough in Ca to work well in this application too, another option.

As it is, you'd do OK, yet I would try for better by raising the performance of the oil here. Easy to do, an expensive vehicle deserves no less.

 

[Leo99]

"Nice engine and report."

You still want to worry. If you want to stop worrying then buy a Toyota and sleep better at night.

 

[littlehulkster]

Try Magnatec, Ecoboost engines seem to love the stuff and it's just as cheap as QSUD.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

You should try an oil with approx 33% less Calcium and approx 115% more Magnesium. That being Castrol Edge (black bottle).

 

[Imp4]

Originally Posted by Leo99
"Nice engine and report."

You still want to worry. If you want to stop worrying then buy a Toyota and sleep better at night.

Seriously...

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Triple, are you a space traveler? Because the only place I can see you came up with those numbers is from Uranus.

OP's report is perfectly fine; there would be no cause for concern if everyone would just remember: UOAs do NOT provide a reliable means of measuring engine wear! UOA is for two things: first, foremost, and almost exclusively- did the oil survive the usage and mileage while still having remaining TBN and did it stay in the correct viscosity grade; and second, provide a data point for trending IF the same oil was used previously.

If you keep playing Russian Roulette by changing oil brands on every OCI, you may as well just save the money spent on a UOA because there is literally almost nothing of value when one pulls these shenanigans. You wouldn't use an oxy-acetylene torch to solder 22 gauge wires, why are you trying to use a UOA to try to derive a conclusion from data it cannot provide? If you want to track actual wear, you'd need something like analytical ferrography and/or a filter debris analysis to give you much more insight into the wear that's going on. Problem is, these tests are way too expensive when compared to the cost of just replacing the oil on time, which is exactly what a UOA "should" be used for. NOT to chase a couple PPM here and there by changing oil brands!

 

[Old Mustang Guy]

I would not lengthen the oci. I don't like that flashpoint I agree with one of the castrols or M1 esp 0w40.

 

[ZiTS]

Thanks for the feedback so far, everyone. I should have mentioned this oil was the latest QS full synthetic formulation that is SN+ and has the revised FoMoCo spec for LSPI. The first run in the report which is the 3K OCI was their pre-LSPI oil.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

If it weren't for most likely extended periods of idling (Ohio in winter), the flashpoint and dilution would not show any concern. Once flashpoint is above 380 and/or you stop letting the car warm up for a half hour before driving, there is nothing in the report that would stop you from going longer.

IMHO, either alter your warmup technique in the winter, or keep the OCI to around 4.5k; once spring/summer rolls around try taking the OCI out to the OLM limit and re-run the UOA so you can see what a warm-weather test of the oil shows. You're driving roughly 15k per year; getting fuel dilution down can mean the difference of cutting out an extra oil change per year with no increase in risk to the vehicle.

 

[ZiTS]

Subie,

Very much appreciate your insight. Agree 100% with your comments about sticking with the same oil in order to be able to really learn anything from the reports. That's why I want to resist jumping on the Castrol Magnatec bandwagon right now. And you are right about the Ohio winter warm-ups likely having played a role. However, though I do use the remote-start feature like clockwork in the winter, it's never for longer then 1 or 2 minutes, at most. I think the bigger issue is (and always has been for me) that I live < 4 miles from work. The winter and remote start certainly just compound the fuel issues.

What concerned me the most from the report is that even though there were only an additional 1,500 miles on this OCI from the previous one, the iron more than doubled. To me, being a fanatic with my cars, that just doesn't sit well.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

ZiTS... I can see you're trying, so I'll try to explain a little better. I don't think you answered if this fill (QSUD) was the same on the 3k run; one big reason WHY using the same oil is important if you want to gather any useful data from a UOA is this: there are many different ways the additive packages are manufactured for oils. Don't take my word for it; search SonOfJoe and MolaKule's posts on additives to learn additional information.

So the way these work chemically (again, only my take on their much greater understanding) is that different oils will have different "signatures" in any given engine, and is at least partly to blame for the people who incorrectly interpret UOAs as valid indicators of wear believing oils like M1 "cause higher wear" because more iron shows up on a UOA when the previous run of Super-slippery 5W30 only showed half as much. It's almost all to do with chemistry stuff, and I am certainly not qualified to explain the hows or whys.

But I am intelligent enough to understand these things: use the same oil back to back to ensure your sample is not tainted from the last, different oil- as much as 15-20% of the old oil can remain in the engine during an oil change. Two, the same oil will eliminate any "chelation" that can result from slightly different add packs pulling different trace materials out of any old deposits. Third, since a UOA can by physical limitation only look at particles
dnewton3 has very good insights on the value and proper use of UOAs; you could learn alot researching his posts that will help ease your mind. Good luck on your journey towards knowledge!

 

[dnewton3]

You have to look at wear on a ppm/1k mile basis. Don't look at just the magnitude values. You want to understand a wear rate; not a wear value. You must standardize the data to understand the wear rates.

Do minimize your input variation; the OCI, the oil, the filter, the driving style, etc. Hold as much as you can pragmatically as a steady input, so that the outputs have a chance to stabilize.
Do not panic; this engine isn't on the verge of implosion.
Do run a few OCI/UOA cycles at 4k miles; see what you get in terms of a steady reading.
Do understand that cold weather idling and warm-ups alter wear rates due to fuel washdown of the cylinders.
Do recognize that the other wear metals are holding reasonably steady.
Do realize that all engines will occasionally throw a particle streak or surface gouge that will send a metal upwards, but then trend back down.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

This is from TestOil, and backs up dnewton's post:

Originally Posted by TestOil
The goal of oil analysis is to minimize equipment downtime, prevent unnecessary maintenance activities, and maintain equipment warranties.

Routine oil analysis provides:

Lubricant Condition: A lubricant's condition can reveal whether the fluid is healthy and fit for further service or ready for a change.
Identification of Contaminants: The increase of contaminants, such as dirt, water and machine wear, is the leading causes of machine degradation and failure. Increased contamination indicates it is time to take action in order to save the oil and avoid unnecessary machine wear.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Triple, are you a space traveler? Because the only place I can see you came up with those numbers is from Uranus.


I'm not on dope or space traveling. Don't you read the VOAs and UOAs here? Clean your eyes regularly Subie. It's a requirement for time-traveling....lol

I'll help you-out this time. Look at the Calcium and Magnesium numbers there.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...a-castrol-edge-5w-30-d1-gen2#Post4761510

 

[4WD]

The irony of advertising while reading the end of Taurus write up