Used Oil Analysis at 5732 Miles
03-28-2015, 12:15 PM
#1
Advanced
Thread Starter
Used Oil Analysis at 5732 Miles
This is the second UOA for my 2015 Z51. The first oil change was at 2230 miles. This report was from a sample drawn on 03/15/15, primarily to see if wear metals and silicon had decreased, since they were both high in the break-in oil sample.
15 CORVETTE-031515_anon.pdf
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
15 CORVETTE-031515_anon.pdf
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
The following users liked this post:
BenCasey (09-25-2015)
03-28-2015, 04:20 PM
#2
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Louis MO
Posts: 4,761
Likes: 0
Received 219 Likes
on
110 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14-'15
Thanks for sharing! Will be interested to compare these with mine using the same oil.
I noticed you spoke to Blackstone about it, but have you contacted Insight? We use their advanced testing programs for our comparison tests against competitors, and they have some excellent equipment on the higher end. It's not terribly overpriced to the end user, that I know of. We move a lot of samples through them, but I want to say the top tier tests are between $45 and $80 without high volume.
I noticed you spoke to Blackstone about it, but have you contacted Insight? We use their advanced testing programs for our comparison tests against competitors, and they have some excellent equipment on the higher end. It's not terribly overpriced to the end user, that I know of. We move a lot of samples through them, but I want to say the top tier tests are between $45 and $80 without high volume.
03-28-2015, 06:22 PM
#4
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Louis MO
Posts: 4,761
Likes: 0
Received 219 Likes
on
110 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14-'15
I was using the M1 filter after the first UOA. It appears that the PF64 may be back on there after the work was done on my car - I don't blame them for using factory parts. The oil they used is Valvoline VR1 racing oil, which I don't have experience with.
I'll run this combo for a while and see what comes of it.
I'll run this combo for a while and see what comes of it.
03-28-2015, 07:45 PM
#5
Advanced
Thread Starter
Thanks for sharing! Will be interested to compare these with mine using the same oil.
I noticed you spoke to Blackstone about it, but have you contacted Insight? We use their advanced testing programs for our comparison tests against competitors, and they have some excellent equipment on the higher end. It's not terribly overpriced to the end user, that I know of. We move a lot of samples through them, but I want to say the top tier tests are between $45 and $80 without high volume.
I noticed you spoke to Blackstone about it, but have you contacted Insight? We use their advanced testing programs for our comparison tests against competitors, and they have some excellent equipment on the higher end. It's not terribly overpriced to the end user, that I know of. We move a lot of samples through them, but I want to say the top tier tests are between $45 and $80 without high volume.
My current two top choices are Titan Laboratory in CO and Wichita State Univ, pending follow up on details Monday.
I hope others will post their UOA's on this forum, including the oil type, filter, mods done, etc. Having a baseline for one car and seeing the trends with mileage, OCI, mods, driving modes, etc. is useful. But being able to compare that car to a larger population of similar cars over several years is even more useful in identifying best filters, oil, failure trends, etc.
But then I spent several decades managing process control in the computer industry, so I tend to collect & analyze data on everything around me, even though I'm retired now.
For owners that don't change their own oil, a $30-40 vacuum hand pump kit allows collecting samples through the dipstick tube. A standard oil analysis costs around $25, with TBN and particle count tests extra.
03-29-2015, 06:54 AM
#6
Try this
This is the second UOA for my 2015 Z51. The first oil change was at 2230 miles. This report was from a sample drawn on 03/15/15, primarily to see if wear metals and silicon had decreased, since they were both high in the break-in oil sample.
Attachment 47874590
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
Attachment 47874590
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
Try the Amsoil micro fiber oil filter .
03-29-2015, 11:57 AM
#7
Premium Supporting Vendor
AMSOIL EA15K50 is the part number for the LT1. Filtering efficiency in accordance with industry standard ISO 4548-12 of 98.7 percent at 20 microns. 
__________________
C66 Racing #66 NASA ST2, SCCA T2
AMSOIL Dealer (Forum Vendor)
AMSOIL Ordering Information (Retail sales using reference #1206638 benefit the forum.)
AMSOIL Preferred Customer Program (Members buy at Wholesale - a savings of about 25%)
AMSOIL Catalog
C66 Racing #66 NASA ST2, SCCA T2
AMSOIL Dealer (Forum Vendor)
AMSOIL Ordering Information (Retail sales using reference #1206638 benefit the forum.)
AMSOIL Preferred Customer Program (Members buy at Wholesale - a savings of about 25%)
AMSOIL Catalog
03-29-2015, 03:27 PM
#8
Advanced
Thread Starter
AMSOIL EA15K50 is the part number for the LT1. Filtering efficiency in accordance with industry standard ISO 4548-12 of 98.7 percent at 20 microns.
Once I get "believable" particle counts on the PF64/FilterMAG, I plan on switching to the Amsoil filter for a comparison.
It sure would be nice if C7 owners would post their oil analysis reports showing why they recommend a particular oil or filter. Besides mine, I only have found one other (redacted) UOA on the forum. There are several on the C6 forums, but usually with little info changes to oil or filter type over the sample history.
It seems that many owners use the Mobil 1 filter, but my inquiry about its flow rate spec met with a canned marketing reply that was totally irrelevant. The flow rating for one Mobil 1 filter was reported as only 1-3 gpm, which I suspect is too low for the LT1 engine, which is reportedly designed for higher volume, lower pressure lubrication.
It's frustrating to know that extensive test data per published standards exists, but the manufacturers treat it as proprietary data.
Coming from the electronics industry, I'm used to access to detailed spec's with tolerances, life test data, revision history, etc.
But in the end, I guess an Amsoil or PF64 filter, a Dexos approved oil and regular UOA's will be "good enough" and I'll focus more on getting ready for some track time....
03-29-2015, 03:30 PM
#9
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Louis MO
Posts: 4,761
Likes: 0
Received 219 Likes
on
110 Posts
St. Jude Donor '14-'15
Sorry about that. That's a long story that I can't go into, but suffice to say the numbers were way off due to a premature engine failure.
I wouldn't use either of mine to compare to, since there were (literally) chunks of metal swimming around in there. Poor little filter...
I'll post my next one on here after I run this setup for just a bit.
I wouldn't use either of mine to compare to, since there were (literally) chunks of metal swimming around in there. Poor little filter...
I'll post my next one on here after I run this setup for just a bit.
03-29-2015, 09:50 PM
#11
Advanced
Thread Starter
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...200-miles.html
I added the second one a little later. It traps ferrous particles <10 microns that will flow right through the filter media. I first saw them used on airplane engines around 1965, but this is my first experience with them on a car.
What are your criteria for "stellar results" for the Pennzoil UP?
03-30-2015, 11:34 PM
#13
Advanced
Thread Starter
Plus I get turned off by their 99.9% efficiency claims -- at 40 microns. 5-20 micron efficiency affects engine wear more than >20.
03-30-2015, 11:36 PM
#14
03-30-2015, 11:48 PM
#15
This is the second UOA for my 2015 Z51. The first oil change was at 2230 miles. This report was from a sample drawn on 03/15/15, primarily to see if wear metals and silicon had decreased, since they were both high in the break-in oil sample.
Attachment 47874590
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
Attachment 47874590
This sample is after 3502 miles, using Mobil 1 5W30 Extended Performance (not 5W2O like Blackstone's report says). Two FilterMAG SS300 magnetic wraps were added to the PF64 filter at 2450 miles for the first one and 3100 miles for the second.
A Mighty Mouse PCV catch can/breather was added at 3230 miles, prior to leaving on a 2400 mile trip from NC to MO.
The main purpose of this sample analysis was to determine if the FilterMAG's were effective at reducing the iron debris in the oil. This sample has 17 ppm of iron, versus 35 ppm in the original sample. One would expect wear metals to decrease after the initial break-in period, so it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease can be attributed to the FilterMAG's. The Universal Average for this type engine at 6000 miles OCI is 34 ppm, per Blackstone's database.
I had hoped that the particle count analysis would provide some insight into the FilterMAG's performance, but the particle counts don't seem reasonable. Particle counts in all size categories increased by 285% from the initial sample, despite wear metal analysis showing decreases by 50%. I did an optical comparison of the initial oil sample and this sample under a 100X microscope, which seems to indicate fewer particles of all types and sizes in the current sample.
After several communications with Blackstone Labs, I have decided to send new samples to 1 or 2 additional labs that use a Spectro Q200 LaserNet Fines particle analyzer, which is more accurate. Blackstone has agreed to retest that sample at no charge, to compare results. Blackstone uses a pore blockage device with a 15 micron mesh (Rockwell Automation Entek IRD Digital Contam Alert). I'll update this thread with the new particle counts when the reports are available in a couple of weeks.
The second purpose of this sample was to see if the silicon levels dropped to more reasonable levels. The first sample was very high at 93 ppm, which I assumed was a result of the silicone sealant contamination which prompted the 500 mile first oil change bulletin. Silicon has decreased to 24 ppm in this sample, compared to 41 ppm in the Universal Average. Blackstone's comments flags this as twice the average level, but I don't know where they get this number.
I used the Mobil 1 Extended Performance oil at my first change, but probably will go back to the standard formula. Mobil 1 has a moderately high ash level and the EP version has higher magnesium content, which supposedly leads to a more abrasive ash deposit.
My goal is to reduce the wear metal particles in the 5-20 micron range, which the PF64 filter is not effective at. Hopefully the new particle count reports will see if the oil filter magnetic wraps are effective.
03-31-2015, 09:53 AM
#16
Advanced
Thread Starter
Sorry for the long answer, but:
I haven't found enough credible data from manufacturers or owners to answer that question in my own mind.
The manufacturers of filters have the data, but don't share it with consumers, claiming it's proprietary (like all the other manufacturers haven't already tested competitive products on a regular basis).
Some of the DIY filter tests on the web provide some insight to some aspects of a filter's performance, but aren't enough to make a choice of one over another, other than to eliminate the real losers.
Probably the best data is from how oils and filters perform in the actual engine of the C7, based upon oil analysis data and other factors. But there are many variables, such as mods, driving styles, frequent switching among products, that can make it hard to analyze the results.
My plan is to stick with GM's recommended oil and filter initially. Since no filter appears to have decent efficiency in the 5-15 micron range, I've added magnetic traps and am monitoring wear metals via regular oil analysis. Once the oil analysis results reach a steady state, then I plan on switching to the Amsoil filter, plus the magnetic wraps, and monitor for 5k miles. I would like to switch to a lower sulfated ash oil soon and might do it when I switch filters.
But I would like to get some track time this summer in HPDE and maybe autocross -- which will ruin my "experiment" which is based upon DD usage, since I would switch oils and change engine wear patterns.
Which is why I was hoping a couple of other C7 owners had done regular oil analysis and could say "this filter and oil reduced wear metal levels to x% of Mobile 1 5W30 and the PF64 filter" over 10K miles of regular monitoring.
But to finally answer your question about the Royal Purple filter, it seems to be a close second to Amsoil, but the best "unofficial" rating I've found for it is 25 micron nominal, compared to Amsoil's 20 micron absolute and Purolator Pure 1 at 20 micron nominal. None of these are directly from the manufacturer or supplier, nor have detail behind what the test conditions were. And of course, there are many other important factors in matching a filter to an application besides filtration efficiency.
Any of the top tier filters are probably OK, but since none provide high efficiency filtration below 20 microns, I plan on keeping the filter magnet wraps on until I find evidence of a better solution.
I haven't found enough credible data from manufacturers or owners to answer that question in my own mind.
The manufacturers of filters have the data, but don't share it with consumers, claiming it's proprietary (like all the other manufacturers haven't already tested competitive products on a regular basis).
Some of the DIY filter tests on the web provide some insight to some aspects of a filter's performance, but aren't enough to make a choice of one over another, other than to eliminate the real losers.
Probably the best data is from how oils and filters perform in the actual engine of the C7, based upon oil analysis data and other factors. But there are many variables, such as mods, driving styles, frequent switching among products, that can make it hard to analyze the results.
My plan is to stick with GM's recommended oil and filter initially. Since no filter appears to have decent efficiency in the 5-15 micron range, I've added magnetic traps and am monitoring wear metals via regular oil analysis. Once the oil analysis results reach a steady state, then I plan on switching to the Amsoil filter, plus the magnetic wraps, and monitor for 5k miles. I would like to switch to a lower sulfated ash oil soon and might do it when I switch filters.
But I would like to get some track time this summer in HPDE and maybe autocross -- which will ruin my "experiment" which is based upon DD usage, since I would switch oils and change engine wear patterns.
Which is why I was hoping a couple of other C7 owners had done regular oil analysis and could say "this filter and oil reduced wear metal levels to x% of Mobile 1 5W30 and the PF64 filter" over 10K miles of regular monitoring.
But to finally answer your question about the Royal Purple filter, it seems to be a close second to Amsoil, but the best "unofficial" rating I've found for it is 25 micron nominal, compared to Amsoil's 20 micron absolute and Purolator Pure 1 at 20 micron nominal. None of these are directly from the manufacturer or supplier, nor have detail behind what the test conditions were. And of course, there are many other important factors in matching a filter to an application besides filtration efficiency.
Any of the top tier filters are probably OK, but since none provide high efficiency filtration below 20 microns, I plan on keeping the filter magnet wraps on until I find evidence of a better solution.
03-31-2015, 11:04 AM
#17
Advanced
Thread Starter
I'm still evaluating which oil to try next. My current focus to narrow the selection is the RAT 540 Wear Protection testing (Dexos 1 approved, no added treatments) at:
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/
Also, ASTM D6335 TEOST total deposits test ranking.
Royal Purple 5W30 ranks 70th in the wear protection test at 84,009 psi, compared to Mobil 1 5W30 ranked 10th at 105,875 psi.
Royal Purple had less than half the total net deposits in the ASTM D6335 test (10mg vs. 23 mg. for Mobil 1 EP), which is good, but doesn't offset the low wear protection rating. To meet API SN RC and ILSAC GF-5 spec's, the total net deposits must be less than 30mg.
I'm still looking for numbers on some of the newer Dexos 1 approved oils before I decide on a short list to look at other equally important characteristics.
For now Mobil 1 5W30 standard (not EP, which I'm currently using) seems OK.
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/
Also, ASTM D6335 TEOST total deposits test ranking.
Royal Purple 5W30 ranks 70th in the wear protection test at 84,009 psi, compared to Mobil 1 5W30 ranked 10th at 105,875 psi.
Royal Purple had less than half the total net deposits in the ASTM D6335 test (10mg vs. 23 mg. for Mobil 1 EP), which is good, but doesn't offset the low wear protection rating. To meet API SN RC and ILSAC GF-5 spec's, the total net deposits must be less than 30mg.
I'm still looking for numbers on some of the newer Dexos 1 approved oils before I decide on a short list to look at other equally important characteristics.
For now Mobil 1 5W30 standard (not EP, which I'm currently using) seems OK.
Last edited by sahlbom; 03-31-2015 at 02:10 PM. Reason: Typo
03-31-2015, 11:11 PM
#18
I'm still evaluating which oil to try next. My current focus to narrow the selection is the RAT 540 Wear Protection testing (Dexos 1 approved, no added treatments) at:
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/
Also, ASTM D6335 TEOST total deposits test ranking.
Royal Purple 5W30 ranks 70th in the wear protection test at 84,009 psi, compared to Mobil 1 5W30 ranked 10th at 105,875 psi.
Royal Purple had less than half the total net deposits in the ASTM D6335 test (10mg vs. 23 mg. for Mobil 1 EP), which is good, but doesn't offset the low wear protection rating. To meet API SN RC and ILSAC GF-5 spec's, the total net deposits must be less than 30mg.
I'm still looking for numbers on some of the newer Dexos 1 approved oils before I decide on a short list to look at other equally important characteristics.
For now Mobil 1 5W30 standard (not EP, which I'm currently using) seems OK.
https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/
Also, ASTM D6335 TEOST total deposits test ranking.
Royal Purple 5W30 ranks 70th in the wear protection test at 84,009 psi, compared to Mobil 1 5W30 ranked 10th at 105,875 psi.
Royal Purple had less than half the total net deposits in the ASTM D6335 test (10mg vs. 23 mg. for Mobil 1 EP), which is good, but doesn't offset the low wear protection rating. To meet API SN RC and ILSAC GF-5 spec's, the total net deposits must be less than 30mg.
I'm still looking for numbers on some of the newer Dexos 1 approved oils before I decide on a short list to look at other equally important characteristics.
For now Mobil 1 5W30 standard (not EP, which I'm currently using) seems OK.
03-31-2015, 11:13 PM
#19
Sorry for the long answer, but:
I haven't found enough credible data from manufacturers or owners to answer that question in my own mind.
The manufacturers of filters have the data, but don't share it with consumers, claiming it's proprietary (like all the other manufacturers haven't already tested competitive products on a regular basis).
Some of the DIY filter tests on the web provide some insight to some aspects of a filter's performance, but aren't enough to make a choice of one over another, other than to eliminate the real losers.
Probably the best data is from how oils and filters perform in the actual engine of the C7, based upon oil analysis data and other factors. But there are many variables, such as mods, driving styles, frequent switching among products, that can make it hard to analyze the results.
My plan is to stick with GM's recommended oil and filter initially. Since no filter appears to have decent efficiency in the 5-15 micron range, I've added magnetic traps and am monitoring wear metals via regular oil analysis. Once the oil analysis results reach a steady state, then I plan on switching to the Amsoil filter, plus the magnetic wraps, and monitor for 5k miles. I would like to switch to a lower sulfated ash oil soon and might do it when I switch filters.
But I would like to get some track time this summer in HPDE and maybe autocross -- which will ruin my "experiment" which is based upon DD usage, since I would switch oils and change engine wear patterns.
Which is why I was hoping a couple of other C7 owners had done regular oil analysis and could say "this filter and oil reduced wear metal levels to x% of Mobile 1 5W30 and the PF64 filter" over 10K miles of regular monitoring.
But to finally answer your question about the Royal Purple filter, it seems to be a close second to Amsoil, but the best "unofficial" rating I've found for it is 25 micron nominal, compared to Amsoil's 20 micron absolute and Purolator Pure 1 at 20 micron nominal. None of these are directly from the manufacturer or supplier, nor have detail behind what the test conditions were. And of course, there are many other important factors in matching a filter to an application besides filtration efficiency.
Any of the top tier filters are probably OK, but since none provide high efficiency filtration below 20 microns, I plan on keeping the filter magnet wraps on until I find evidence of a better solution.
I haven't found enough credible data from manufacturers or owners to answer that question in my own mind.
The manufacturers of filters have the data, but don't share it with consumers, claiming it's proprietary (like all the other manufacturers haven't already tested competitive products on a regular basis).
Some of the DIY filter tests on the web provide some insight to some aspects of a filter's performance, but aren't enough to make a choice of one over another, other than to eliminate the real losers.
Probably the best data is from how oils and filters perform in the actual engine of the C7, based upon oil analysis data and other factors. But there are many variables, such as mods, driving styles, frequent switching among products, that can make it hard to analyze the results.
My plan is to stick with GM's recommended oil and filter initially. Since no filter appears to have decent efficiency in the 5-15 micron range, I've added magnetic traps and am monitoring wear metals via regular oil analysis. Once the oil analysis results reach a steady state, then I plan on switching to the Amsoil filter, plus the magnetic wraps, and monitor for 5k miles. I would like to switch to a lower sulfated ash oil soon and might do it when I switch filters.
But I would like to get some track time this summer in HPDE and maybe autocross -- which will ruin my "experiment" which is based upon DD usage, since I would switch oils and change engine wear patterns.
Which is why I was hoping a couple of other C7 owners had done regular oil analysis and could say "this filter and oil reduced wear metal levels to x% of Mobile 1 5W30 and the PF64 filter" over 10K miles of regular monitoring.
But to finally answer your question about the Royal Purple filter, it seems to be a close second to Amsoil, but the best "unofficial" rating I've found for it is 25 micron nominal, compared to Amsoil's 20 micron absolute and Purolator Pure 1 at 20 micron nominal. None of these are directly from the manufacturer or supplier, nor have detail behind what the test conditions were. And of course, there are many other important factors in matching a filter to an application besides filtration efficiency.
Any of the top tier filters are probably OK, but since none provide high efficiency filtration below 20 microns, I plan on keeping the filter magnet wraps on until I find evidence of a better solution.
Where do you get the Amsoil filters from? Online there like $18 each from Amsoil.
04-03-2015, 08:51 PM
#20
if you use a filter with a bypass built in every time you start the engine till the oil pressure equalizes on both sides of the valve unfiltered oil goes thru the engine. there is a good reason why race engines do not use a bypass valve or a filter with a built in bypass