Summary of Delvac UOA in a VE TDI

[TornadoRed]

I have two recent tests to report, plus one from last spring that apparently was never reported. There were oil changes in Feb 2007 and Sept 2007 from which no samples were taken.

First number is Delvac. Second number is Elf Evolution CRV at 10.6k. Third is the same Elf at 14.0k. Fourth is Delvac at 9.6k. Fifth is Delvac at 9.8k. Sixth is Delvac at 9.5k. Seventh is Delvac at 9.9k with 300 ml of LubroMoly MoS2. Eighth is Delvac at 11.7k.

May 28 - Jul 29 - Aug 20 - Oct 29 - Dec 22 - Apr 29 - Jul 1 - Nov 25
161421 - 172095 - 175508 - 185142 - 194915 - 215121 - 225060 - 246883

Iron 38 -- 96 -- 152 -- 77 -- 41 -- 34 -- 24 -- 26
Chromium 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 1 -- 1 -- 2 -- 1 -- 0
Lead 2 -- 3 -- 6 -- 3 -- 3 -- 1 -- 1 -- 0
Copper 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 2 -- 2 -- 6 -- 4 -- 2
Tin 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 7 -- 0
Aluminum 7 -- 7 -- 6 -- 6 -- 5 -- 12 -- 8 -- 10
Nickel 0 -- 4 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0
Silver 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0
Silicon 5 -- 10 -- 8 -- 5 -- 1 -- 12 -- 8 -- 9
Boron 29 -- 82 -- 57 -- 34 -- 29 -- 41 -- 27 -- 28
Sodium 0 -- 0 -- 2 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0
Magnesium 615 - 367 - 287 - 582 - 491 - 663 - 698 - 652
Calcium 2775 - 3109 - 2381 - 2861 - 2346 - 3018 - 3412 - 3257
Barium 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0
Phosphorus 1231 - 1133 - 1108 - 1422 - 1256 - 1299 - 1254 - 1290
Zinc 1528 -- 1477 - 1322 - 1712 - 1577 - 1617 - 1505 - 1406
Moly 1 -- 0 -- 1 -- 0 -- 1 -- 0 -- 323 -- 6
all others 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0

Fuel <1 -- <1 -- <1 -- <1 -- <1 -- <1 -- <1 --<1
Visc @ 100C =15.33 - 11.39 - 11.52 - 16.05 - 16.33 - 16.36 - 16.36 - 14.65
Water 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0
Soot 1.28% - 1.64% - 1.94% - 1.47% - 1.25% - 1.05% - 0.68% - 0.70%
Coolant = none -- none -- none -- none -- none -- none --none --none

TBN = 7.35 -- 6.52 -- 6.32 -- 7.44 -- 5.42 -- 8.06 -- 7.15 -- 7.68

Driving pattern was normally 200-250 miles/day, a mix of city and highway.

New PP520 nozzles were installed Feb 1 2007. RC2 chip was installed June 30 2007. The soot and wear numbers were already declining prior to each performance upgrade.

All fuel since spring 2006 has been ULSD. A total of 22 gallons of B99 were used in Nov 2007, just prior to the last OC/UOA -- so about B08 during that interval.

I don't really understand why these last few test were so good, especially the last one which was 11,660 miles. That's about 2.2 ppm of Iron per 1000 miles!

 

[wjdell]

oh oh oh - I have a PD user that used the LM additive and did super with it. TUV tested it will not cause any imbalance in any oil. I bet the tin is actually a additive but LM will not admit to it. Had they tested for Sb they may have found a trace of it also. LM will tell you the effect will last into the following OC. Very nice TR glad you got your wear numbers back in line.

 

[TornadoRed]

Previous discussions about this engine and previous UOA from June 2006 until January 2007 can be found at:
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=142065

 

[tditom]

TR- Why MoS2 instead of Ceratec?
I thought you were one of us anti-oil-additive guys

 

[wjdell]

As I remeber he said he had it and it was free.

 

[TornadoRed]

TR- Why MoS2 instead of Ceratec?
I thought you were one of us anti-oil-additive guys

I bought it, on the spur of the moment. Then it sat on a shelf at home for nearly six months. I was curious to see what would happen, then felt kind of foolish about using it.
Something lowered the friction between moving parts and lowered the Fe numbers. If it goes up again at the next testing, by some significant amount like back up to 40-45 ppm per 10k miles, then I think that would indicate that the MoS2 worked. And as wjdell suggested, it continued to work in the next OCI, even after most of the MoS2 had been drained.

Edit: because there was another unsampled oil change in between samples #7 and #8, the MoS2 might have continued to be effective 10k-20k miles after it had been drained out. I had planned to test that time, but remembered after it was too late.

 

[SUNRG]

lowere soot in the last two UOAs i'm sure helped you achieve those great numbers. i also like that the last UOA has your D1 back in the 40 weight range.

important note: the last two runs both contained lower (and nearly identical) soot concentrations. in comparing these last two UOAs, the latter without the additive performed better than the MoS2 additivized D1. i.e. - this data does not support additivizing D1 to improve its performance.

but since that's not the whole story... IMHO the outstanding final UOA is potentially attributable the 22 gallons of B99 and/or maybe the performance optimization of RC2. with three significant variables it's not possible to confidently attribute the great UOA to any one of them.

the great news is that this is the very best i've seen your engine look! i really love UOA success stories. hey maybe it's that she's finally breaking in .

 

[Drivbiwire]

Here's my $.02

DB

 

[wjdell]

No but it sure proves it did not knock it out of balance. - not all additives are created equal. there are several companies who make products that will work in modern engines, many if not most are snake oils. Some of these have evne been tested with DPF. The work Arrgone labs have done has resulted in some of this. The other work was done at Penn State and it to has worked well.

 

[TornadoRed]

SUNRG:
1) the Fe wear numbers were almost identical before and after the RC2 upgrade.
2) and almost identical when the B99 was used and when it wasn't.

I am considering the following test strategy. My next oil change will be in mid-January, probably. I am going to try a B02 blend in every tank during that interval, but will continue to use Primrose since it's part of the baseline.

When I drain that, in March or early April, then I'll try another can of the LM MoS2. And may continue with the B02, depending on whether it's not too much of a hassle adding 40 oz of B99 to each tank.

You're right that with so many variables, including others that I might not have considered, it's impossible to give credit to any single factor.

One more thing: 0.70% soot is still fairly high compared to most TDI results. Mobil Delvac 5w40 again shows that it can easily handle that much soot -- when many other engine oils fail miserably.

 

[SUNRG]

it has been scientifically demonstrated that when diesel engines run high quality ASTM biodiesel in blends of 2% or greater the results are lower engine wear. so if i were a betting man, i'd bet the 22 gallons of B99 was your wear reducer. but i'm not a betting man, i'm a drinking man, so tonight one of'm will a toast to your great UOA

the MoS2 UOA cannot be apples to apples compared to the previous UOA because the UOA before had 52% more soot.

cheers!

PS - i feel emotionally attached to the idea that your TDI is just now breaking in.

 

[wjdell]

none of the UOA's on this forum are apples to apples - but if we look at all the data and make no presumptions there is somthing to be learned. There are people using additives but they will no post on this forum because of the attitude and its because of that we lose.

 

[wjdell]

This is the second TDI I have seen a UOA were MoS2 has been used with no negative imbalance to the oils capacity to perform, just as Lubro Moly claims.

TR your on again off agin use for only one interval may not be effective. Kinda like taking meds that way would not work. I would think it would be 2 or 3 OCI's with and 2 or 3 without. Keeping all other variiations to min and use the same fuel type throughout the test. Time of year is unavoidable and there must be variations to your routes..But fuel type and driving style could be controlled.

It was LM that claimed the additives can carry to the next OCI. But if thats true in your case it did not show up as there should have been some shedding and I saw none.

 

[mparker326]

Just a side note:

Has anyone else noticed that the additive package in D1 is very similar to that of the Elf 0w30? I bring this up because TR's UOAs prove that there is more going on in oil than you can tell by looking at the additive package in a VOA.

 

[tditom]

it has been scientifically demonstrated that when diesel engines run high quality ASTM biodiesel in blends of 2% or greater the results are lower engine wear. ...

injection pump, yes. engine wear? not so sure. I thought there was actually a danger to the engine lube from high bd concentrations. Polymerization was the issue. The standing advice has been to lower the OCI for engines running bd > 30%, IIRC.

 

[SUNRG]

SUNRG:
1) the Fe wear numbers were almost identical before and after the RC2 upgrade.
2) and almost identical when the B99 was used and when it wasn't.

i do realize that RC2 is probably not the wear reducer - but how cool would it be if it was!

the soot reduction of 52% correlated with your Fe wear dropping from 3.6 at ODO 215121 (DB's 1.7 number is incorrect in his table) to 2.4 at ODO 225060. this potentially means that while D1 handles soot well - it performs better with lower soot levels - as does every other oil in the universe. while 1.05 doesn't seem like that much more soot that 0.68 - it is 52% more than 0.68 and that IMHO will make a difference. all of your data supports what we all already knew: lower soot results in lower wear.

Fe wear rate dropped to an all time low of 2.2 in the final UOA that correlated with biodiesel use. but the difference between 2.4 and 2.2 is not statistically significant.

 

[TornadoRed]

DB: the oil was sampled at 172095 miles but not drained. The sample at 175508 miles was taken after approx 14400 miles. So the Fe/1k miles is a lot lower than your calculation.

The WRI looks like a useful way of quantifying all the UOA data.

 

[SUNRG]

There are people using additives but they will no post on this forum because of the attitude and its because of that we lose.

i'm not sure i understand this.

are you saying... because many TDIclub members don't personally support additivizing high quality synthetic oils, some members that are using oil additives will not post their experiences?

i am happy to post UOA results to the oil analyses forum for anyone that would like to remain anonymous - only vehicle, fuel and additive information along with the UOA data would be posted. just send results to me via email.

 

[Drivbiwire]

DB: the oil was sampled at 172095 miles but not drained. The sample at 175508 miles was taken after approx 14400 miles. So the Fe/1k miles is a lot lower than your calculation.

The WRI looks like a useful way of quantifying all the UOA data.

WRI = Sum of all wear metals + (soot*100)

The WRI works especially well in the PD motors where soot is a massive contributor to wear in the cam and lifter regions.

Also it's a conservative way of establishing extended drains since soot and wear metals are factored into the bottom line value.

With USLD, TBN is not taken into consideration.

DB

 

[volmaniac]

<snip> i.e. - this data does not support additivizing D1 to improve its performance.<snip>

Is the red word legal in Scrabble??

 

[Drivbiwire]

Only if I get triple points on my next move when I use "Supercalifragalisticexpialdocious"

DB

 

[tditom]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUNRG
it has been scientifically demonstrated that when diesel engines run high quality ASTM biodiesel in blends of 2% or greater the results are lower engine wear. ...

injection pump, yes. engine wear? not so sure. I thought there was actually a danger to the engine lube from high bd concentrations. Polymerization was the issue. The standing advice has been to lower the OCI for engines running bd > 30%, IIRC.

Rob- I respect your opinion and really want to know your thoughts on this. IMO, ANY fuel (bd or D2) in the sump will degrade the lube. I just don't get what you meant by bd reducing engine wear.

 

[wjdell]

Now SunRG, with your objectivity to additives and oil brands that you have demonstrated on this forum, who is likely to confide in you. I have had three people write about additves. I stayed objective, told them what I had learned, also that I am skeptical of most additives. But there are laboratories, universitys and some oil company's doing serious reseach, including BP and Diamler Crysler. As I stated Argonne and Penn State are two. The names of the German and Japanese company's escape me at the moment, I would have to dig them up.

According to DB's WRI formula I have 44 - 44 - 39 - 41

 

[TornadoRed]

It looks to me like the Lubro-Moly MoS2 did not add any measurable amounts of any other common elemental additives (detergent, dispersent, anti-wear, etc.). [Edit: wjdell noted 7 ppm of tin which was not present in other tests.] I have never seen a VOA of this product, but it appears to be nothing but molybdenum disulfide in a harmless basestock.

A recent VOA over at Bitog shows that M1 15w50 contains about 90 ppm of Moly. Shaeffer's 9000 5w40 has about 200 ppm of Moly, but about 1/3 less phosphorus. Royal Purple 5w40 has 170-230 ppm of Moly.

And a VOA from March 2007 of Mobil 1 0w40 showed 74 ppm of Moly and over 170 ppm of Boron (Delvac normally has about 30 ppm of Boron and 0 ppm of Moly).

So many diesel-rated PCMO's and HDEO's have moderate to high levels of Moly. Just because Mobil chooses not to put it in Delvac 1 does not mean that it is or would be harmful; it probably means that they spend money on other additives and if they put in Moly as well, then they'd have to charge even more.

The presence of Moly in the M1 0w40, in what is otherwise a "weaker" product, might be a marketing aid in the high-performance gas-engine segment of the oil market. Nearly all M1 0w30 and 5w30 motor oils have between 70 and 90 ppm of Moly. See the top of this thread.

The bottom line seems to be that Moly is very useful in a gas-engine oil. I don't know whether it has value in a diesel engine oil.

 

[SUNRG]

Rob- I respect your opinion and really want to know your thoughts on this. IMO, ANY fuel (bd or D2) in the sump will degrade the lube. I just don't get what you meant by bd reducing engine wear.

fuel in the sump is bad. that's not what i'm referring to.

when my UOA test results started coming back with far lower than average Fe wear rates many of the gurus here felt that my excellent results were in large part (if not completely) the result of my exclusive use of high quality virgin soy ASTM biodiesel which i picked up directly from the refinery. some dismissed my UOA results entirely as not being apple to apple comparable with everyone else's D2 fueled TDI UOA results.

if i understand this correctly, when diesel is injected, in some small way it does effect cylinder and ring lubrication. please contact tooslick for a better explanation - he knows his stuff and was among the gurus that attributed my very low UOA indicated engine wear to the fuel. this seems consistent with what I've seen regarding UOA indicated engine wear - i.e. those fueling with good BioD are generally returning lower than average wear numbers.

 

[TornadoRed]

it has been scientifically demonstrated that when diesel engines run high quality ASTM biodiesel in blends of 2% or greater the results are lower engine wear. so if i were a betting man, i'd bet the 22 gallons of B99 was your wear reducer. but i'm not a betting man, i'm a drinking man, so tonight one of'm will a toast to your great UOA

The Fe wear numbers from the Nov 25th sample (11.7k miles between August 28th and Nov 25th) -- during which 22 out of 319 gallons were B99, or 6.9% -- was nearly identical to the July 1st sample (9.9k miles between April 29th and July 1st). Yes, a few more miles, so a slightly lower ppm per 1k miles... but not significant.In this case ALL the B99 was used in the 10 days prior to the oil change and sampling. So I don't think the 6.9% of biodiesel has any effect at all. Maybe B20 or B50 or B100 in every tank would reduce soot.

PS - i feel emotionally attached to the idea that your TDI is just now breaking in.

I am going to have to rethink my future plans for this car. I intended to give it to a family member when she gets her license in a few years. But if it keeps performing like this, I might decide to keep it for myself. And in that case, I'll need to perform some cosmetic improvements. Glen's 1999 Golf has well over 400k miles but looks much nicer than mine, inside and out.

 

[wjdell]

Oh TR life is short give it to your daughter and get a 09.

 

[TornadoRed]

Oh TR life is short give it to your daughter and get a 09.

Niece, actually, but her 16th is in December 2010. Do you think the Mk6 Rabbit TDI will be available by then?

 

[wjdell]

Good things are coming - we may see the Polo diesel by 2010 but not the Lupo, although I read they are studying the possibility of marketing the Lupo. Which is small enough to make my wife happy. I would like to see a Chey Aveo with a turbo 3 cyl 75 hp.

 

[dhdenney]

I would definitely consider a Polo. To stay relevant, I am also definitely considering D1 if my LL3 experiment doesn't do well. D1 is a readily available oil and it's showing results in the PD.