2009 Silverado, 2956mi, PYB 5w30 SN, OLM 62%

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
29
Location
Texas
2009 Silverado GM 5.3L PYB 5w30 SN

What about the HIGH LEAD?? This was my 4th run with PYB (2nd run with PYB/SN). OLM still showed 62% remaining and I had wanted to extend oil change out to at least 5-6K. Current fill is PP 5w30 SM. All suggestions/comments welcome.

BLACKSTONE COMMENTS:
Wear for the most part looks good in the second sample from your Silverado. Copper dropped to average and with the exception of lead, all metals read around universal averages (based on 5,800 miles). Lead tends to show bearing wear and at 24ppm, it's a lot higher than we like to see. Nothing obvious turned up to explain the increase. The viscosity read a little low for 5W30, but no fuel or other harmful contaminaiton was present. We suggest sticking with 3,000 for now; we'll look for lead to improve next time.

Code:


OIL PYB5w30 CasGTX5w30

MI on OIL 2956 3135

MI on UNIT 19999 4843

Sample Date 2/20/2011 5/7/2010



ALUMINUM 3 4

CHROMIUM 1 1

IRON 9 19

COPPER 40 190

LEAD 24 10

TIN 3 3

MOLYBDENUM 246 5

NICKEL 1 1

MANGANESE 1 6

SILVER 0 0

TITANIUM 0 0

POTASSIUM 0 3

BORON 69 4

SILICON 12 23

SODIUM 5 269

CALCIUM 2267 2139

MAGNESIUM 7 7

PHOSPHOURS 717 675

ZINC 779 863

BARIUM 0 0



SUS VIS 210F 54.3 55.8

cSt @ 100C 8.58 9.00

FLASHPOINT F 375 400

Fuel 0.0 0.0

Antifreeze 0.0 0.0

Water 0.0 0.0

Insolubles 0.2 0.3

TBN 4.3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boy now that is a add pack to be proud of. PYB will even be more popular now. Nice to see improvements like this. GIVES us more choice with other SN oils getting better it seems. Like Valvoline with a NOACK of 7% in the 5-30 SYN,
grin.gif
time will tell how they perform I guess but so far not too shaby.
 
Based on the flash number and very low viscosity numbers, my guess is the oil is being hammered by fuel dilution and allowing increased bearing wear. I believe the fuel reading of 0 is probably in error. It’s rare to see 0 fuel dilution, especially in the AFM 5.3. Have you run any fuel system cleaners through the engine?
 
That UOA looks pretty darn good to me. I'm not familiar with
that engine, but if it has lead/babbit cam bearings, increasing
the viscosity slightly will lower lead PPM. (Use half 5w-30
half 10w-30 ?) As someone else said any fuel injector cleaner
will increase the readings also. The new add pack looks nice.
 
No fuel additive used. I almost always use Shell 87 octane. Could lead be from extremely cold weather we had the last couple months and idling engine some to warm it up?
 
Originally Posted By: dave2009
No fuel additive used. I almost always use Shell 87 octane. Could lead be from extremely cold weather we had the last couple months and idling engine some to warm it up?


Yup - the idling would cause fuel dilution, which would increase bearing wear.

The bearing wear would worry me on an engine this new - I'd try an API SM-cert. HM 5W-30, to see if the lead wear drops.
 
Are you using a remote start? How do you drive? What use does this truck see?

I'd be concerned but keep doing what you are. Hopefully its temporary.

Bill
 
I used the remote start several times (maybe 20-25 over 2 months) during this run, 3-4 minutes max idling time. About 60% highway/40% city. No towing or heavy loads.

Could the use of Shell nitrogen enriched fuel cause this?

What about the lower viscosity with PYB compared to say GTX?
 
I would guess it’s something other than just the colder weather and additional idling. From what I have read and heard, the 5.3 can use all the help it can get to fight fuel dilution.

I’ve seen good results with my 5.3 by using a good fuel system cleaner like Techron or Regane three or four times a year, and keeping a clean air filter in place. Those things will help the engine run as efficiently as possible and minimize fuel dilution. If you do use a fuel system cleaner and are going to do a UOA, try to run the cleaner near the end of the oil change interval and after the oil sample is taken so the cleaner’s use does not affect the UOA. Continued use of top tier fuels like the Shell you have been using should also help to maintain good engine efficiency.

It appears the lead wear was significantly less in the earlier run. This could be due to the better state of tune on the then new engine, or the Castrol chemistry may reduce lead wear in this application. Until you get a better understanding of what is going on, you might also consider going back to Castrol, or switching to Quaker State if you prefer Shell products.
 
I would not worry to much about it. I've been on this site since 2002 and every GM V-8 shows higher led numbers than any other engine on the planet. I chalk it up to nature of the beast.

Do your 5K oil changes using PYB 5W-30 and let me know when you reach 500K.
 
Blackstone is stating universal averages to be 9ppm at 5,800 miles and mine was 24ppm at only 3,000. What is especially concerning to me is the increase. Hopefully its an abnormality.

What about running PP 5/30 now?
Or what does everyone think about 10/30 for the next run?
 
I personally would stick with the 5W-30 no matter which oil you decide to use. I don't know that the PP would bring the numbers down, but you could try. I've seen V-8 GM's show high lead readings up to 60K before they start coming down.
 
Originally Posted By: dave2009
Blackstone is stating universal averages to be 9ppm at 5,800 miles and mine was 24ppm at only 3,000. What is especially concerning to me is the increase. Hopefully its an abnormality.

What about running PP 5/30 now?
Or what does everyone think about 10/30 for the next run?


I'm certainly no expert on UOA reports, but I've seen my fair share of errors. If you are really concerned have them run the report again, or send a sample off to another lab before you drive yourself nuts! JMO
 
We have seen the remote start do things like this to UOAs. Personally I'd do two things;

1. Knock off with the remote start.

2. Do a couple more OCI and THEN do a UOA with the SAME oil. (and 5w-30 is fine)

Then *if* you have the same issue, let's look at it then. Don't go by one or two reports and think its the end (except for coolant leaks)

I've had single digit lead on both of the Chevy Silverado's that I've run UOA tests. Both have the same engine as yours. One is a 2000 and the other is a 2002. 4.8l V8 in a 4x4. (same engine except stroke)

Take care, bill
 
"1. Knock off with the remote start."

This.

OP:
Why are you using remote start? Is it to have heat before you drive?
 
Warm it up some...but other than that, no good reason.

Usually I just start once I'm in, put on seatbelt, wait a few seconds (5-10) for idle to come down, put it in gear and go. I don't drive it hard normally (never if it's a cold engine) and even if the H2O temp is up to normal I would not put the hammer down unless it's been running for awhile as I would assume the oil temp would be up to normal temp by then.
 
Your driving habit sounds good. I'd just skip the warm up part. PYB 5w30 is a great oil. I'd continue to use it and see if skipping the remote start improves the wear.
 
Use a synthetic and double the interval. Engine is begging for a 6k run with Platinum or Ultra.

Cu/Pb wear is normal GM shedding the pennies they hammered into a bearing held together with lead solder.

SBC should last forever. Top off oil if ever needed during the run. Keep an eye on coolant level.

Remote starters are a fad. I'm a little surprised the the enviro-eco-greenie-hippies haven't picketed against them. Sad, but in certain areas, its a must for the garageless if you want to see where you're going. Start vehicle, idle for minutes while scraping snow/ice/frost off all windows..... remote start while eating morning cereal makes it that much easier...

With a synthetic, you can start, buckle seat belt, and immediately drive away gently without feeling too guilty.
 
I have PP in it now with PureOne filter the last several runs. Never have to add oil or coolant. Runs perfectly, just worried about the lead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top