PD-TDI (2004+) Oil Info & Analyses (Post #1 = FAQ)

[SUNRG]

SUNRG - I have had great success in cleaning my Infiniti's gasoline 3.0 liter V-6 with Auto-Rx. Do you think dumping Auto-Rx in at 16K miles on this oil would achieve the same result as using the Motul E.C.? Thanks. - Sloppy Snood

No. I would not use Auto-Rx with 506.01.

Motul Engine Clean only spends 15 minutes in your engine and it's primary purpose - in your situation - is just to help you get the most complete oil change possible and help reduce inherited contaminants in the new oil to near zero. Your nearly new engine is not "dirty" .

cheers!

 

[AndyH]

VOA - AMSOIL's Reformulated AFL

Here's a recent VOA for AMSOIL's reformulated (released Jan 1, '06) 5W-40 Euro:

To compare/contrast the old AFL (with no 505.01 recommendation) to the new brew which was specifically built for Benz 229.51 and BMW LL-04 and also recommended for 505.01, we'll grab the numbers from TooSlick's post http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?p=706880:

Castrol 505.01, AMSOIL AFL (old), AMSOIL AFL (new)

Vis @ 100C... 13.7/15.0/13.58 cSt
HT/HS...?/4.2/3.7 cP
Noack...?/5.5%/8.9%
FP, +440/+449F/+446
PP, -60/-59F/-44
CCS -30C 3400/5200/5204 cP

TBN/ASTM D-4739 ...12.1/12.4/6.39

Silicon ...1 ppm/4 ppm/4 ppm - antifoam additive

Detergent/Dispersant additives:
Calcium...2361/3243/1440 ppm
Mag ......8/11/12 ppm

Antiwear additives:

Phosphorus..1045/906/701 ppm
Zinc .......1270/1000/804 ppm

Moly....none/none/none
Boron ..none/none/50 ppm

--------

Notice the drop in the multi-duty TBN/anti wear/detergent/dispersant calcium/phosphorus/zinc? And the addition of boron? That boron is adding all the anti-wear protection and then some. This is providing the wear protection as the volume of traditional chemistry is lowered to lower SAPS. This info from a company that makes boron-based additives:

Andy

 

[tditom]

Andy- please excuse if this is a novice question, but will TBN matter less with ULSD fuel?

 

[AndyH]

No. I would not use Auto-Rx with 506.01.

Motul Engine Clean only spends 15 minutes in your engine and it's primary purpose - in your situation - is just to help you get the most complete oil change possible and help reduce inherited contaminants in the new oil to near zero. Your nearly new engine is not "dirty" .

cheers!

You certainly don't need to use engine flushes routinely when the car's had a life of anyone's synthetic oil - there's going to be very, very little to clean!

One benefit of these flushes comes in when changing oil brands and expecting long oil drain intervals. When changing brands, I recommend using the engine flush made by the manufacturer of the new engine oil - the Motul flush when switching to Motul, an ELF product (is there one?) when switching to Elf, and AMSOIL's flush when switching to AMSOIL. The reason for this is each of the short-interval flushes (generally 15 minutes in the old oil) consists of a mix of solvents and the detergent additives used in the company's oil. Using the company's flush when switching to their oil minimizes the 'additive clash' of the remaining 5-10% of the old oil formula left in the engine after an oil change. For the same reason - I wouldn't recommend using the AMSOIL flush when switching to Elf or Motul, or vice-versa, as you introduce a fresh shot of the 'old' additive package, some of which remains, when switching to the new oil. In the 'real world' it probably won't make much noticeable difference over a 10,000 mile OCI, but will be more significant for those running extended drains.

Auto-RX is an ester-based product and per their directions is best used with petroleum oil for the best cleaning benefit. Since TDIers are already using synthetics, the engines are clean - even with the Group III based early 505.01 products (which have no ester base oil), there's not much reason to use the product. That recommendation may change if there's an old car involved with a history of petroleum oil use, however...

I ran a very painful round of Auto-RX 'testing' in my old Passat - doing the deep-cleaning recommendation with petroleum oil (Delo 400). Before and after compression testing, fuel mileage, and oil analysis showed no differences. (What I did notice, however - during both the 3000 mile 'wash' with Delo/Auto-RX and the 3000 mile 'rinse' with Delo - was using one quart of oil per 3000 miles, lots of blinks of the low oil pressure light on startup, and a significant drop in fuel mileage. I was never so happy to drain the oil and change the filter in my life as I was once that rinse cycle was done!)

Andy

 

[AndyH]

Andy- please excuse if this is a novice question, but will TBN matter less with ULSD fuel?

Tom,

We're examining oils that are already proven in the TDI/ULSD environment, so we can be pretty sure the levels in the oil are at least up to the minimum standards the OEMs require. In the same equipment with LowSD vs. ULSD, the ULSD will produce lower amounts of acid so will cause less wear on the oil.

High % of biodiesel will shorten drain intervals, even with ULSD, as there's more acid production in engines burning biodiesel in spite of the lack of sulfur. This info came from briefings from both Infineum and Lubrizol last month. It's enough of an issue that oil companies that make extended drain products are withdrawing any extended drain recommendations when biodiesel is used in any percentage.

Andy

 

[tditom]

thanks for the info. So if I use biodiesel, should I look for something with a higher TBN than the AFL product if I want to go at least 10K mi OCI?

 

[AndyH]

... The Sodium level jumped to 447 from zero ppm. Is this cause for concern?...

Sodium can be either an oil additive component or a contaminant from either antifreeze or road salt. Antifreeze leaks normally show potassium and can show boron. Road salt normally shows higher silica/silicon as well.

Rob's VOA doesn't show any sodium in the virgin oil, so you're probably not looking at an oil additive. The other antifreeze components aren't there, and SI is low, so you shouldn't have either a coolant or air intake leak.

You can have the spectro test re-run for free - either send the lab a 'journal note' from the OAI website (if you have internet access to your results) - or give them a call.

Don't sweat this until/if you see a trend with the next sample.

Andy

 

[AndyH]

thanks for the info. So if I use biodiesel, should I look for something with a higher TBN than the AFL product if I want to go at least 10K mi OCI?

Not unless/until you're consistantly running B50-B100, and used oil analysis shows a TBN problem. There should still be enough reserve for a 10K OCI.

Andy

 

[tditom]

That makes sense. Rob reported running B33 and his 506.01 oil was good at 15K mi, IIRC.

 

[SUNRG]

High % of biodiesel will shorten drain intervals, even with ULSD, as there's more acid production in engines burning biodiesel in spite of the lack of sulfur.

in my personal experience, this is not true. i ran B100 exclusively for 5k with Castrol 505.01 and TBN after 5k (9.24) was virtually unchanged from the VOA (9.12) value.

before i started using my local CAT lab i had number of UOAs performed on biodiesel fueled TDIs and TBN retention was always higher than what we were seeing with D2.

every bit of first hand lab data i've seen indicates that high quality ASTM biodiesel use reduces UOA indicated engine wear and improves TBN retention - thereby helping to safely extend drain intervals. i just dropped an oil sample off at the lab today with 16,004 miles on ELF Evolution CRV 0w-30 506.01 oil, fuel has been nearly exclusively B33 BioDiesel, 14k UOA looked great (all wear metals very low - 28ppm Fe).

It's enough of an issue that oil companies that make extended drain products are withdrawing any extended drain recommendations when biodiesel is used in any percentage.

B5 BioDiesel has been mandated in France for years - i.e. all diesel in France is B5 at a minimum. Elf and Motul, French companies producing extended drain oils (that are used in France with B5+ BioDiesel) are making no such withdrawals.

This info came from briefings from both Infineum and Lubrizol last month.

I'd like to see their data.

 

[AndyH]

in my personal experience, this is not true.

No surprise, Rob - the briefings I received were from Infineum and Lubrizol and were an overview of world fuel quality vs oil life. Their info base was far more broad than a handful of TDIs. An observation - not a slam.

B5 BioDiesel has been mandated in France for years - i.e. all diesel in France is B5 at a minimum. Elf and Motul, French companies producing extended drain oils (that are used in France with B5+ BioDiesel) are making no such withdrawals.

The oil abuse, as I stated, is coming from higher concentrations of biodiesel use. I agree that B5 is allowed for all of the normal drain intervals. Keep in mind that a TDI isn't extending OCI until moving beyond 10,000 miles or 1 year, whichever comes first.

I'd like to see their data.

I already invited you to come up to Superior - you could have gotten it first hand. I'll see what I can extract from the briefings and get to you.

Keep in mind that no automaker or any of the world's fuel injection equipment manufacturers will stand-behind their products with concentrations higher than B5. There are some significant long-term fuel system issues with high rates of biodiesel use that will cause problems. It's not enough to say that things look great after 10,000 miles of use. I'll get the info into the biodiesel forum.

Andy

 

[tditom]

i ran B100 exclusively for 5k with Castrol 505.01 and TBN after 5k (9.24) was virtually unchanged from the VOA (9.12) value.

How do you explain that, Andy? It seems like he should have seen some drop off if the acidity in the biodiesel was a big factor, right?
(I started down this line of questioning because I noticed how low the TBN was on the re-formulated Amsoil 5W40, BTW.)

 

[AndyH]

How do you explain that, Andy? It seems like he should have seen some drop off if the acidity in the biodiesel was a big factor, right?
(I started down this line of questioning because I noticed how low the TBN was on the re-formulated Amsoil 5W40, BTW.)

Rog, Tom -- I understand. I've got a few TDI miles on homebrew and ASTM fuel from B2 thru B100 as well. Keep in mind that 5K on B100 is not an extended OCI - that's 1/2 of the OEM interval.

On the TBN measurements: There are two main ASTM tests for TBN - the one used by oil manufacturers for certification and datasheets gives an approximately 2 point higher reading than the method used by the majority of the analysis labs. This is why the new AFL datasheet lists a TBN of 8.0 while the VOA shows 6.39. Another factor when comparing this oil to the other 505.01 products is that AFL is the only one formulated to include 505.01 plus BMW LL-04 and Benz 229.51. (Notice that Elf LLX 5W-30 507.00 has a lab-tested TBN of 5.32) The 10K TDI OCI is 1/3 of the interval the other two specs dictate. There's more than enough reserve in this oil. Last AFL point: Adding the new ACEA and OEM specs to AFL required a drop in SAPS - which also lowers TBN. This is why this formerly-CI-4+ oil lost that rating. Oil performance isn't dictated by any one spec - it's the way the package works together - it's about how well the oil performs it's intended job.

On biodiesel - Please remember that I'm reporting what I was told by two of the world's largest additive suppliers for the industry as a whole -- not tailored info specific to Rob's TDI. UOA is a trend device and is not a valid tool for comparing oil or fuel performance. Simply be aware of the potential issues, perform multiple UOA tests to set your OCI based on your oil, fuel, and vehicle use, and press on.

--------------
OEM OCI positions:

B5 is generally accepted

Cummins: "The oil change interval can be affected by the use of biodiesel fuels and some applications may require shortening intervals to half of the diesel equivalent."

Biodiesel and Lubricants - what's being seen in the field

- Fuel dilution
- Sludge and varnish formation
- Depletion of TBN
- TAN increases more rapidly
- Certain metals such as copper and lead leached from bearings caused by the biodiesel fuel in the lubricant
- Oil filters plugging from sludge

----------
From the Infineum 'Trends2006' Briefing:

Negative properties of FAME:

-Poor oxidative stability: Potential issue of filter plugging and deposits in the engine, corrosion and deposits within fuel injection system

-Variable quality: Might affect response to additives

- Hygroscopic: Potential poor water shedding property of the fuel

- High NOx emission from B100: Might impact ability to meet Euro V spec

- Low temperature viscosity: Impact on future common rail FIE
-----
From article "Asia Pacific Biodiesels: A market in its infancy", page 6, Infineum Insight, Issue 29, March 2006:

"...a key concern is that crops from different regions, grown from different seeds, subjected to different weather conditions have very different attributes and will produce fuels with vastly differrent characteristics..." "...there is concern amongst the OEMs that these fuels will have a detrimental impact on engine performance...there are many performance characteristics that need consideration including cold flow properties, detergency, oxidation, fungal growth, viscosity increase, corrosion and hygroscopcity..." "Preliminary findings from Japan suggest that current European and US biodiesel specifications are insufficient for protection of advanced Japanese hardware due to issues of oxidation stability, corrosion and acid value..."

Andy

 

[SUNRG]

many, if not all of the concerns listed above have been raised and discussed at length in the biodiesel forum.

one critically important note is that while ASTM BioD specification could (and eventually will) include additional testing standards - the negative study data i've seen has been the result of using low quality biodiesel - not fresh, clean, dry, high cetane, virtually glycerin free ASTM ULSBioD blended conservatively for the temperature in which the equipment is operated. i have yet to see any negative BioD data when these latter conditions are met.

the whole point (of concerned equipment manufacturers) is that the current BioFuel infrastructure does not adequately ensure that these conditions are met - and when they are not - the likelihood of problems occurring is vastly increased.

 

[AndyH]

many, if not all of the concerns listed above have been raised and discussed at length in the biodiesel forum.

one critically important note is that while ASTM BioD specification could (and eventually will) include additional testing standards - the negative study data i've seen has been the result of using low quality biodiesel - not fresh, clean, dry, high cetane, virtually glycerin free ASTM ULSBioD blended conservatively for the temperature in which the equipment is operated. i have yet to see any negative BioD data when these latter conditions are met.

the whole point (of concerned equipment manufacturers) is that the current BioFuel infrastructure does not adequately ensure that these conditions are met - and when they are not - the likelihood of problems occurring is vastly increased.

Rob,

I sincerely doubt either the fuel industry or the fuel injection industry spends much time in the TDI Club biodiesel forum. But if they did, they'd see that VW halted B100 testing due to fuel dilution and other issues: http://forums.tdiclub.com/showpost.php?p=1318792&postcount=19

Please note that the info I typed above was speaking to ASTM fuel - none of the concerns were directed toward home-brew or non-ASTM fuel - these are the things the industry is seeing in the field with certified fuel.

Based on my own biodiesel use (homebrew and ASTM), this board, Journey to forever, the infopop servers, Fryer to the fueltank, etc., I believed 100% as you have written above.

That view of 'reality' changed the week of the 22nd of May when I was able to attend three briefings - one by AMSOIL's chief chemist, one by Lubrizol, and one by Infineum. Two of the largest issues for fuel injection equipment are corrosion and deposits.

Per Infineum: Diesel nozzles are going from 4 holes to 7 or 8 or more, and hole sizes are going from >.25mm to less than .1mm. Acceptable deposit flow loss percentages going from over 10% to under 5%, and injections/minute at 3000rpm are going from about 1500 to more than 7500. Fuel temperatures at injector tip are going from under 250C to over 300C.

None of these individual moves is kind to biodiesel - all of them are a bit more brutal.

Once again - this is not my data - I'll not loose any sleep whether you like them or not. Our cars aren't very affected by what we believe - but by what they consume.

I bought B20 in SD on the way home from hearing these lectures and I hope to see a LOT more biodiesel used in this country - but I'm certainly going to continue tokeep my eye on the 'big picture', use detergent additives and keep my filters changed.

Andy

 

[SUNRG]

Based on my own biodiesel use (homebrew and ASTM), this board, Journey to forever, the infopop servers, Fryer to the fueltank, etc., I believed 100% as you have written above.

That view of 'reality' changed the week of the 22nd of May when I was able to attend three briefings - one by AMSOIL's chief chemist, one by Lubrizol, and one by Infineum. Two of the largest issues for fuel injection equipment are corrosion and deposits.

All I'm saying Andy is that all of the concerns you've re-raised have been discussed in the BioDiesel forum. Everything.

In spite of this? Thousands upon thousands of TDIs are running trouble free on everything from WVO to ASTM virginia soy BioD. There are also some TDIs that have had fuel system problems. Every instance I've personally seen has been correlated with poor quality fuel - be it BioD or Petro.

How can this be reconciled? One explanation is simple. Equipment manufacturers create worste case scenario situations and use data gleaned in these circumstances to make conservative BioD use recomendations... to protect themselves. IMHO - it's a good practice.

56,000+ BioDiesel fueled miles and counting... Cheers!

May 2003 - Bosch report on biodiesel and fuel injection [LINK]

June 2004 - Diesel Fuel Injection Equipment Manufacturers Common Position Statement [LINK]

January 2005 - BOSCH BD TESTING RESULTS......no good [LINK]

May 2005 - Diesel Purge Procedure - with pics of BioD caused injector deposits (not a TDI) and a TDI fuel injector after 40,000 miles of B100 use (clean) [LINK]

June 2005 - How-To: Using BioDiesel in PD-TDIs... [LINK]

January 2006 - Biodies-ill, VW's warranty, and the Diesel Injection Systems Official stance on it.[LINK]

 

[AndyH]

All I'm saying Andy is that all of the concerns you've re-raised have been discussed in the BioDiesel forum. Everything.

In spite of this? Thousands upon thousands of TDIs are running trouble free on everything from WVO to ASTM virginia soy BioD. There are also some TDIs that have had fuel system problems. Every instance I've personally seen has been correlated with poor quality fuel - be it BioD or Petro.

How can this be reconciled? One explanation is simple. Equipment manufacturers create worste case scenario situations and use data gleaned in these circumstances to make conservative BioD use recomendations... to protect themselves. IMHO - it's a good practice.

56,000+ BioDiesel fueled miles and counting... Cheers!

Rob,

IF, as you suggest, the industry is simply using a worst case scenario and pulling data to justify their position, how is that different when someone with a polar-opposite belief system does the same thing? The data is neutral.

First, an analogy. Man number one is standing on the ground in the middle of a continent-sized old-growth pine forest. The trees are 100' tall minimum. Man number two is flying over this forest at approximately 1000 feet above ground level - 900 feet or so above the tops of the trees. Man number three is orbiting over the same continent in a space station.

Man number one says a lot of the trees look brown and suspects an illness.
Man number two says there are some patches of off-color trees, but it looks like a small-scale issue.
Man number three says the forest looks absolutely lush, green, and perfect.

Each of these three gentlemen has their view of the world - each is correct - and none will change the other's minds.

1. These are NOT my points - this info is from the largest additive suppliers on the planet and are actively working to solve the problems increased use of biofuels creates for FIE and lube oil. These are the folks in the satellite. These are folks and this is the 'finished information' that is digested from a LOT of 'lower level' data and is used by the industry to plot their course forward.

2. The data and info presented is a look FORWARD to the changes in FIE and lube oil forced primarily by the tightest emissions restrictions on the planet - the 2007 NA emissions. The restrictions are much more severe than the Euro requirements.

3. When one is piloting a boat, they have two sources of info for choosing a course - they can look ahead and track toward a destination, or they can look to the wake and make course corrections based on where they were. One of these methods will get a person to the destination of their choosing, the other will not.

One can pull a LOT of data from 2003 or earlier and justify their belief system. What I think they would be missing is that the hardware used then is different than today's or tomorrow's. The fuel standards are different, and the emissions requirements are different. If one doesn't accept and incorporate those changes into their view of 'reality', then at some point there's going to be a 'big bang' when the personal view intercepts the 'big picture'.

Have a great week.
Andy

 

[SUNRG]

post has been updated here

 

[tditom]

rob-
any ideas why the Fe rate seems to fluctuate from analysis to analysis?

 

[SUNRG]

One can pull a LOT of data from 2003 or earlier and justify their belief system.

all of the links i posted support the concerns you've re-raised.

they are NOT new concerns or outlooks. that's all.

IF, as you suggest, the industry is simply using a worst case scenario and pulling data to justify their position...

not justifying their position, using that data to develop a conservative outlook / position that protects both the consumer and the fuel systems equipment manufacturer. and yes, that's exactly what they're doing.


want a great example, with the potential to bring this discussion back on topic? Here you go:

​

 

[SUNRG]

rob-
any ideas why the Fe rate seems to fluctuate from analysis to analysis?

this is probably due to varying driving conditions, lab variance, non-sterile sampling environment, human sampling inconsistencies (i'm good, but not perfect ).

once the Fe wear rate begins to steadily climb, we will know that from the perspective of preventing UOA indicated Fe wear, the oil is no longer functioning optimally.

 

[tditom]

OK, so basically these readings are "in the noise".
At what point is Fe level considered at the upper acceptable limit?

 

[SUNRG]

OK, so basically these readings are "in the noise".
At what point is Fe level considered at the upper acceptable limit?

IMHO - the Fe wear rate is what we want to keep up on.

in my example, since i've tracked my Fe wear rate from 228 to 16,004 miles and it's oscillating in 1-3ppm range, when it climbs above 3ppm i'll probably change it.

however, Fe wear rates of 2-4ppm are considered very good for a broken in 90-100hp TDI, and we see many analyses in my ODO range (~55k) with 3-7ppm wear rates... so there's a lot of variance.

 

[AndyH]

all of the links i posted support the concerns you've re-raised.

they are NOT new concerns or outlooks. that's all.

Sigh. I read your links. I'm sorry you don't recognize what's different. Most telling is is that you have 'drawn your sword' to defend your position BEFORE READING THE DATA! I would have thought you'd find some value in external validation from trained professionals.

I guess we'll talk again in a few years and see which of us owes the other an apology. Until then, be well.

Andy

 

[AndyH]

OK, so basically these readings are "in the noise".
At what point is Fe level considered at the upper acceptable limit?

Tom,

Test results can vary +/- 10% when the same sample is tested in the same lab by two different techs - and can vary up to +/- 20% when tested in two different labs. This means that for an average iron production of 2ppm, the same sample will read between 1.8 and 2.2 ppm for a 10% variation, and 1.6 and 2.4 ppm for a 20%. This is on the same sample. 3ppm is in no way considered abnormal and should not trigger an oil change.

Another point is that limits are set for the manufacturer's standard oil change interval. Higher levels are normal for extended drain intervals. Generating iron at 2ppm per 10,000 miles will mean that one should expect to see 4ppm for a 20,000 mile OCI and 6ppm for a 30,000 mile OCI. If, for example, the iron level becomes abnormal at 40ppm for a 10K change, that limit raises to 60ppm at 15K, and 80ppm at 20K miles.

It is normal for wear metal production to be high at break-in, then vary for the life of the engine. Numbers will rise again as the engine breaks down.

Oil analysis is a trend device - the first thing that should happen if one report shows odd numbers (that are below condemnation limits) is to note the changes, keep driving, then pull another sample at the next interval.

VW should set acceptable limits. In the absence of VW guidelines, general limits are used. These are the numbers labs use for automotive diesel engines:

Element Normal Abnormal Excessive
Iron 10-40 100 300
Chrome 1-8 12 15
Lead 15 30 75
Copper 3-15 50 150
Tin 15 20 30
Aluminum 10 15 25
Nickel 5 10 15
Silver 3 10 30
Silicon/Silica 15 25 30 (over new oil baseline)
Sodium 25 100 150

Physical property changes are normally looked for first. Most people want to change the oil before the additive package degrades enough for you to see engine damage.

As a rule, these are normal, abnormal, and excessive signs of physical degradation and contamination:

Normal: glycol 0, water < .05%, fuel dilution < 1%, viscosity in grade, solids < 1.5%, soot < 2%, oxidation/nitration less than 30% (petroleum) and 50% (synthetic), TBN greater than 2 or greater than 50% of new

Abnormal: Glycol trace, water .05%, fuel dilution 2%, viscosity up or down one SAE grade, Solids 2%, Soot 4%

Excessive: trace of glycol, >.1% water, >5% fuel dilution, viscosity up or down one grade, >4% solids, >6% soot, oxidation & nitration greater than 50%, TBN at/below 2 or below 50% of new

I hope that helps,
Andy

 

[tditom]

Thank you both for all of the information!

 

[SUNRG]

Generating iron at 2ppm per 10,000 miles will mean that one should expect to see 4ppm for a 20,000 mile OCI and 6ppm for a 30,000 mile OCI.

when i note that an Fe wear rate is 2.13ppm, i mean 2.13 ppm of Fe are generated every 1000 miles (Fe ppm / 1000 miles). i just wanted to clarify this because the above, when considered in Fe ppm / 1000 miles terms, reads like it's OK for the engine to be wearing at double the rate for a 20k OCI. but i know that not what you mean because your example below is of a consistant wear rate and linear increase in total wear metals.

If, for example, the iron level becomes abnormal at 40ppm for a 10K change, that limit raises to 60ppm at 15K, and 80ppm at 20K miles

agreed.

thanks for taking the time to put all that info together. in the future (hopefully not too distant) i'm going to re-do the first post of this thread to make it a FAQ for Oil Analysis and all TDI oil specifications (VE - 505.00 & 506.00, PD - 505.01, 506.01, 507.00 & CR - 50?.??). when i do get around to this i will include a link to your last post.

cheers!

 

[AndyH]

Rob and Tom,

For more info, consider this user-level guide to analysis: https://www.amsoil.com/lit/g2047.pdf It includes much of what I've posted above.

For more depth, consider AMSOIL's G1866 "Oil Analysis" - part of the Dealer Training Series. The book is $19.95, comes with a CD-ROM, and has about 52 pages on analysis and basic interpretation. It's not available to the public thru the on-line store, but is available for on-line ordering for PCs and dealers.

I'm glad it's useful.

Andy

 

[SUNRG]

Below is an update to my earlier post regarding the analyses on the ELF Evolution CRV 0w-30 506.01 oil that is currently in my 04 Golf PD-TDI including GRAPHS of V@100C and Fe Wear Rate.

V@100C

1. 1. mile 228 - 10.2
   2. mile 2016 - 10.2
   3. mile 4319 - 10.3
   4. mile 8108 - 10.4
   5. mile 10042 - 10.6
   6. mile 12093 - 10.7
   7. mile 14125 - 10.6
   8. mile 16004 - 10.7

Oil Sample Interval / Fe Wear Rate

1. 1. mile 228 to mile 2016 / 2.79
   2. mile 2016 to mile 4319 / 0.00
   3. missed mile 6000 sampling
   4. mile 4319 to mile 8108 / 1.84
   5. mile 8108 to mile 10042 / 2.58
   6. mile 10042 to mile 12093 / 0.98
   7. mile 12093 to mile 14125 / 2.95
   8. mile 14125 to mile 16004 / 2.13

Fuel: is 66% common LSD (500ppm low sulfur diesel) / 33% ASTM Virgin Soy ULSBioD
OilFilter: OEM MANN

oil will be sampled and lab analyzed again at 18,000 miles. oil will stay in service until lab oil analysis results show that the oil is no longer functioning optimally (equal to or better than new oil).

all analyses are listed in their entirety below.

after 16,004 miles soot is approximately 0.21% (CAT tables were used to convert UFM # to % Allowable and then to the common Soot % by Weight). V@100C has gone from 10.2 to 10.7 - and increase of 0.5 cSt. both of these values are excellent.

 

[tditom]

Rob, could you refresh us again on the type of driving you do most commonly? And how do you shift? TIA.