I got a Blackstone oil analysis after break in

[jackalopetx]

I got my oil changed at 1356 miles and got a sample. About 900 miles were on the gas engine according to the car computer. 

 

Copper and silicon were high, which is typical for break in. 87ppm vs 23ppm and 48 vs 21ppm average for all vehicles with 7200 mile interval. To me that proves that modern engines DO have a break in period, contrary to popular belief. In just 900 miles on the ICE, the oil accumulated several times the typical engine in 7k miles. It also shows that the filter doesn't capture every bit of metal. Fuel % is also 3% which they say gets better after break in. 

 

What surprised me though was the oil viscosity. The viscosity numbers are at the low end of what they should be for 0W-20 oil, and the flashpoint is 325F when it should be over 385F. It may not matter for these cars like it would for a turbo though.

 

Edited June 9, 2016 by jackalopetx

[ptjones]

With 118K mi. on MADMAX here are the BlackStone # with 11,400 "ICE miles". Used Mobil 1 0W-20. :)

 

Paul

[MaxHeadroom]

jackalopetx, Your centiStokes (cSt) kinematic viscosity "KV100" result of 6.1 (due to high-ish fuel dilution) puts the oil squarely in the new SAE "0w-16" category, a new, thinner oil coming out now for some cars, to be more popular in the future for higher fuel economy.  (HyperMilers will want to buy 0w-16 and use it currently, since it does save some gas.)

 

Should be enough viscosity margin still left in the oil, but it's cutting it close.  I know of one field study by Infineum, the company that designs the oil additive chemicals for Mobil1 & Pennzoil, that used some thin HTHS=2.0 (thin like your KV100=6.1 case)  in a hybrid (see "UNDERSTANDING LUBRICANT REQUIREMENTS OF HYBRID-ELECTRIC VEHICLES" for more info).

 

You're right about wear metals (iron, copper)  being high in new engines.  I changed my oil+filter at 800 miles, then oil-only again at 1,500 miles to flush it out.  Also, switching to a Fram Ultra XG3614 means you remove more smaller grit (over 99% under 20 microns, multipass ISO 4548-12) using full synthetic fiber media mats. ..... 

Then, let your drain plug mop up even tinier Fe particles an oil filter can't get by switching to a goldplug.com or drainplugmagnets.com .

 

I wonder if Ford isn't great at rinsing machining debris when making new engines.  I know Hyundai recalled some cars last year when metal debris may not have been fully removed from the crankshaft area during manufacturing at Hyundai's Alabama engine plant.  

This may happen to lesser degrees off and on at other engine plants.

 

Silicon can be caused by 3 things:

1.  Gaskets and seals leach into the oil when new.

2.  Sand gets in your air intake past the air filter, or you simply have a bad seal around the air filter.

3.  Silicates from coolant leaking into the oil, but your potassium K would be high too, so it's not from that.

 

Notice your moly was only a low 15 ppm.  Mazda motor oil from dealerships or Amazon, contains around 600 ppm moly for friction reduction, nice to have.  You might see more moly like Mazda has right now, used for boundary lubrication in the future in the thin 0w-16 grades (GF-6B in 3 years).

[C-MaxSea]

So Paul, just so I understand your glowing report correctly, that would be:  118k on your C-Max, 56,862 ICE miles, and 11,400 miles on the oil that was analyzed.

 

The analyst seemed quite impressed and recommended that you go even further (13,000 miles) on your next oil run.  Thanks for sharing,  

 

As you know, we are in the opposite mode only putting 5-10 K on our 2013 C-Max per year, and may need to put time in the equation for oil changes.  For now we are getting free changes once a year for 5 years.  After that we will be guessing at an appropriate interval in our 'miles vs time' oil change equation.

 

Nick

Edited June 11, 2016 by C-MaxSea

[plus 3 golfer]

Interesting Infineum report (they do provide a lot of good diesel fuel survey data for anyone with a diesel).  

 

Slides 16 and 17 are interesting as the FE from the dash computers shows no FE improvement using "thinner" oil (slide 16).  But the FE as measured by a "data logger" (wonder what they mean, what are they measuring) shows a "remarkable" (unbelievable?) improvement in FE from say 25 mpg to 34 mpg using "thinner" oil.   I'm not sure I'd report this until I understood what is going on.   Am I missing something?

 

One other point and that is the study is on Camry Hybrids used in taxis service - probably the most severe operating conditions a vehicle would experience.  So, I don't think we have to "worry" about OCI, Blackstone lab results, and life / durability of our C-Max ICE. ;)  I'll also bet that most of use will never see 200 k miles on our C-Max (or even 150 k miles).

[MaxHeadroom]

I should say, if a C-Max owner simply changes their oil and filter according to the Oil Change dashboard warning light, using ANY brand of 0w-20 they find that says "SN" &  has the API symbol on it, they'll be fine, under warranty or not.  Ford doesn't require the WSS spec, only SN at a minimum.  It's only the perfectionists amongst us that look for better oil and filters out there.

After that we will be guessing at an appropriate interval in our 'miles vs time' oil change equation.

Nick

No guessing is needed.  Ford's IOLM, the dashboard "oil change" light alert, tells you with precision.  The "I" in IOLM is for Intelligent, and it reads sensor data, feeds it to an oil life algorithm as you drive, and accurately will alert you when to change the oil.   All based on real sensor history & conditions like time cold, high speeds, etc., all of which stress oil, hence accuracy is good.   It must be reset at every oil change to work right.

(The only exception making you go by time/mileage would be if you are driving in a dusty environment a lot, and I'd change at 6 months/6,000 miles if dusty.)

 

Interesting Infineum report (they do provide a lot of good diesel fuel survey data for anyone with a diesel).  

 

Slides 16 and 17 are interesting as the FE from the dash computers shows no FE improvement using "thinner" oil (slide 16).  But the FE as measured by a "data logger" (wonder what they mean, what are they measuring) shows a "remarkable" (unbelievable?) improvement in FE from say 25 mpg to 34 mpg using "thinner" oil.   I'm not sure I'd report this until I understood what is going on.   Am I missing something?

 

One other point and that is the study is on Camry Hybrids used in taxis service - probably the most severe operating conditions a vehicle would experience.  So, I don't think we have to "worry" about OCI, Blackstone lab results, and life / durability of our C-Max ICE. ;)  I'll also bet that most of use will never see 200 k miles on our C-Max (or even 150 k miles).

That Infineum report was a bit confusing.  I guess it wasn't a big thorough fleet report with lots of vehicles and controlled variables, large sample size, etc., which is why we see the weird data at times.  

 

They used HTHS=2.0 (low viscosity oil) in the test Camry taxi hybrid, which means they were pushing it thinner than Toyota recommended for the engine already.  Any thinner and too much internal metal scraping happens in the engine, causing higher wear rates.

HTHS is about proportional to oil film thickness.

Some engines can take thinner oil better than others too.  Ford says we need HTHS = 2.6 or 2.7 for new oil, but knows fuel dilution in service could thin it down to 2.1 or so.  My '07 BMW supposedly needs thick HTHS=3.5 oil, as German cars typically do.

Edited June 11, 2016 by MaxHeadroom

[ptjones]

I'm sure I will be over 150K mi. before the end of the year with 134K now.  The thing I find interesting is with 117K mi.  and 11,400k mi on the ICE oil change that I barely used any oil.  When you add in that I use Grill Covers all year long and only take off the lower one when it's hot and using A/C sometimes. Also I have hit the over heating chime twice going long uphill grade(246*F) with no ill effects. :)   Just checked my oil with around 8k miles on the ICE, still in the middle of hash marks and light tan. It would appear FORD did a very good job in designing and making the ICE.  I'm sure I will get atleast 200k, maybe 300k mi. out of it. :)

 

Paul

Edited June 11, 2016 by ptjones

[C-MaxSea]

........................... It would appear FORD did a very good job in designing and making the ICE.  I'm sure I will get atleast 200k, maybe 300k mi. out of it. :)

 

Paul

Seems so.  Great that you are posting us so well on your higher miles. To be clear Paul, are you saying 200k, 300k on the vehicle, which would be 100k, 150k on the ICE?  That should be easy, eh.  (((maybe double that ?)))

 

Nick

Edited June 11, 2016 by C-MaxSea

[ptjones]

Seems so.  Great that you are posting us so well on your higher miles. To be clear Paul, are you saying 200k, 300k on the vehicle, which would be 100k, 150k on the ICE?  That should be easy, eh.  (((maybe double that ?)))

 

Nick

I think you are right, the other Hybrid components will be the problem, Trans, inverter, HVB ext. ;)  

 

Paul

[MaxHeadroom]

We should have a durable engine in our C-Maxes.  Ford has been doing this a long time now (12 years in service, much of it in the biggest proving ground of all, thousands as NYC taxicabs, and they have a good reputation for usually lasting.)  .. The old Ford Escape Hybrids are the ancestor of our version engine, almost the same thing, and engine still based on the Mazda L5 engine used in Mazdas and Fords during the 2000's.

Edited June 13, 2016 by MaxHeadroom

[jackalopetx]

Can the little bit of fuel in the oil really make it as thin as 0w16? 

 

I wonder what the weight of the oil is with no fuel and after 10k miles. Should we be using synthetic? I wonder why Ford's 0w20 is even a blend when every other manufacturer's is full synth

[ptjones]

Can the little bit of fuel in the oil really make it as thin as 0w16? 

 

I wonder what the weight of the oil is with no fuel and after 10k miles. Should we be using synthetic? I wonder why Ford's 0w20 is even a blend when every other manufacturer's is full synth

I talked to BlackStone and they didn't think synthetic was much better than non as far as wear goes. I'm still going to use mobil 1 0W-20. :) 

 

Paul 

[jackalopetx]

I talked to BlackStone and they didn't think synthetic was much better than non as far as wear goes. I'm still going to use mobil 1 0W-20. :)

 

Paul 

 

I guess the good thing is the C-Max tends to run pretty cold. Mine will warm up after driving a while, then cool to the low end of the graph if it runs in electric mode for a while. So maybe very thin oil is good

[fbov]

First off, you're the first, to my knowledge, to do an analysis on "factory oil" for want of a better term. What you get might not be typical. 

 

I've just done my fifth oil change, and the fourth that Blackstone will analyze. This time I sent a sample of unused oil, for a baseline. Mobil 1 AFE 0W20. I also tried to get the car good and hot before changing, to drive down the fuel level and see if flash point comes back. I'll post a summary when I get the data. 

 

 

 

...if a C-Max owner simply changes their oil and filter according to the Oil Change dashboard warning light, using ANY brand of 0w-20 they find that says "SN" &  has the API symbol on it, they'll be fine, under warranty or not.  Ford doesn't require the WSS spec, only SN at a minimum.  It's only the perfectionists amongst us that look for better oil and filters out there.

Absolutely true... 

 

Have fun,

Frank

[MaxHeadroom]

Can the little bit of fuel in the oil really make it as thin as 0w16? 

 

I wonder what the weight of the oil is with no fuel and after 10k miles. Should we be using synthetic? I wonder why Ford's 0w20 is even a blend when every other manufacturer's is full synth

Yes, it does thin it out to be a 0w-16, as seen by the viscosity at 100 degrees C (aka, "KV100") of 6.1, thin enough to be a 0w-16.  (A 0w-20 typically is about 8.0.)  

What's more, the HTHS of the fuel diluted used oil probably got reduced down to 2.3 too (when it should be 2.7).

 

With no fuel dilution, used oil almost always looks OK after a full usage.  See ptjones post above (2nd post) on his Blackstone report, showing about an 8 viscosity, still similar to new oil.  However, this is a little complicated since that viscosity is nudged upward slightly by oxidation, and nudged downward by some polymers affecting the viscosity index breaking up chemically over time, so the net effect is you often have the KV100 of used oil to be about the same as new oil, which is good really.

 

Should we use synthetic?  Why does Ford Motorcraft use a blend instead of a full-synthetic?  you ask...

Synthetics are better.   Less engine deposits left over in there over time and they do lower wear slightly compared to other oils usually.

Ford makes a cheaper product, using some Group II basestocks to cheapen the stew, and hopes nobody notices, since most folks buy Ford Motorcraft oil because "Its for my Ford.".  So marketing and consumer ignorance is what they exploit.  That said, Ford Motorcaft 0w-20 is adequate, no real problems.

 

If you want better 0w-20 oils, buy dexos1 spec 0w-20 oils out there, that's a more stringent spec to meet, and I doubt Ford Motorcraft 0w-20 could pass all dexos1 specs (performance tests, some might fail).  Almost all the full-synthetic 0w-20 oils are dexos1 qualified.