GT350 Oil & Oil Analysis Thread

[Hack]

I have to disagree with your last point. If your own oil analysis comes back at 10k miles with plenty of additive left and below average contaminates then why not? Why waste a oil that has plenty of life left in it?

Because even if the analysis says that the number of contaminates is below average, there are still far more contaminants in the oil after 10k miles than when the oil is new.

And IMO if you want the benefit of the warranty you should really follow manufacturer recommendations at least during that period.

Sponsored

 

[galaxy]

I was planning to stay out of this thread, because I have a contrary opinion, but this post drew me in.

I don't think oil analyses are meaningful. They seem like a waste of money to me. Someone posted a bunch of them from earlier Ford engines and that information just solidified my thoughts. I didn't see any patterns in the data that was helpful to me in any way. I think individual operating conditions are so different between owners that there's just way too much variation in the data.

If the oil is in good shape, then it's in good shape. If viscosity is holding, TAN and TBN are healthy, and contaminants do not indicate a problem, then how/where/why is the oil bad just because it was driven in manner X or manner Y?

Now if we had a big catalog of oil analyses with very strictly controlled engine operating conditions and dyno reports all along the life of the engines, that might be useful. And then the oil analyses might become meaningful because it might be possible to associate certain contaminant levels with a specific operating condition that could be avoided..

I'm sure contaminant levels can be associated with a given operating conditions, but they can still darn sure can be used to identify a problem or malfunction somewhere, especially when they can identify things like fuel, water, silica, etc. And especially when you keep samples on your own engine, you can develop trends. Rather quickly too. For example, I know someone that identified a crappy air filter from oil analysis. Like most gear heads, guy thought he was doing good things by running a K&N air filter. Oil analysis identified unusually high silica (dirt) in the oil. After a few of these and trying a few things, changing out the K&N eliminated that problem. Have seen this one multiple times (and that's why I won't run a K&N, but that's a separate story).

But changing oil frequently - that actually removes contaminants and small particles from the engine. That seems useful to me.

Now if you believe that neither contaminants nor small particles in the oil have any impact on engine life, maybe then you can contend that frequent oil changes are not helpful in any way. I would disagree with you, of course..

Agreed. But there's a balance somewhere, right? That point between where you're just wasting money and actually doing something useful or removing something harmful (see last comment at the bottom)

I see no harm in oil analyses either, though. Unless you use an oil analysis to decide that you can extend your oil change intervals. Extending oil change intervals is definitely not good for engine life.

Again, I fail to see how extending oil changes solidified and backed up with positive oil analysis is detrimental to engine health.

Because even if the analysis says that the number of contaminates is below average, there are still far more contaminants in the oil after 10k miles than when the oil is new.

And IMO if you want the benefit of the warranty you should really follow manufacturer recommendations at least during that period.

So where do you draw the line? What are you basing your change interval on? Pocketbook? Need something to tinker with? Because with that logic, If you crank it up and drive it to the grocery store and back there are still far more contaminants in the oil than when new. Why not change every 100 miles? Every 500 miles?

Funny part is, at least the folks with oil analysis are making sound decisions based on scientific facts and evidence where as you are "well, I think maybe possibly certainly my oil has been in there long enough, so meh, let's change it".[/QUOTE]

 

[Hack]

If the oil is in good shape, then it's in good shape. If viscosity is holding, TAN and TBN are healthy, and contaminants do not indicate a problem, then how/where/why is the oil bad just because it was driven in manner X or manner Y?



I'm sure contaminant levels can be associated with a given operating conditions, but they can still darn sure can be used to identify a problem or malfunction somewhere, especially when they can identify things like fuel, water, silica, etc. And especially when you keep samples on your own engine, you can develop trends. Rather quickly too. For example, I know someone that identified a crappy air filter from oil analysis. Like most gear heads, guy thought he was doing good things by running a K&N air filter. Oil analysis identified unusually high silica (dirt) in the oil. After a few of these and trying a few things, changing out the K&N eliminated that problem. Have seen this one multiple times (and that's why I won't run a K&N, but that's a separate story).



Agreed. But there's a balance somewhere, right? That point between where you're just wasting money and actually doing something useful or removing something harmful (see last comment at the bottom)



Again, I fail to see how extending oil changes solidified and backed up with positive oil analysis is detrimental to engine health.



So where do you draw the line? What are you basing your change interval on? Pocketbook? Need something to tinker with? Because with that logic, If you crank it up and drive it to the grocery store and back there are still far more contaminants in the oil than when new. Why not change every 100 miles? Every 500 miles?

Funny part is, at least the folks with oil analysis are making sound decisions based on scientific facts and evidence where as you are "well, I think maybe possibly certainly my oil has been in there long enough, so meh, let's change it".

Good critiques and good points.

Sponsored