Official GT 5.0/Boss 302 UOA thread

[UnleashedBeast]

would you be willing to go a little into more detail about my spicific results? my TBN was low was it now? also, could you explain the shear rating you mentioned as well?

The lubricant didn't shear, meaning it didn't "thin" to a lighter viscosity.

TBN (detergent additives) still had useable life in it when you drained the lubricant, but that was also increased by constantly adding fresh oil to your engine. It would still make 15,000 miles, but I'd never exceed that in a one year period. TBN of 1.0 or less is the warning barrier telling you it's time to change the oil.

Iron and Aluminum: Both are elevated, but if you see there is another 9,900 mile UOA with over 100 ppm iron and 15 ppm Aluminum. Yours is a little lower for two reasons.

1. It's a better lubricant
2. You have more miles on your engine and have changed the oil once before.

If you have more specific questions, please let me know.

 

[ace72ace]

Sent in my OA results

Waiting for the spread sheet update. Motorcraft or Motor-crap? :shrug:

 

[UnleashedBeast]

Waiting for the spread sheet update. Motorcraft or Motor-crap? :shrug:

Sorry for the delay. I will not be back in Pensacola (home) until Friday the 29th. All the spreadsheets are on the home desktop, not my work laptop.

I promise to update them asap soon as I am home.

Troy

 

[ace72ace]

No worries, business before pleasure, safe travels.

 

[Fordman9870]

So what's the difference between the amsoil XL, OE, and signature series. Which one should we use?

 

[LS Boss]

Unleashed,

Aren't the analysis you present here largely influenced by factors such as the effects of the products of combustion, the fuel blend(s) used in the vehicle, and are not necessarily indicative of the quality of (or lack thereof) the particular oil used in the vehicle? Wouldn't you need to take many more samples of any one particular motor oil before you could draw conclusions regarding the properties and/or chemical constituents of the motor oil tested? Please convince me that these analyses actually mean anything and serve any useful purpose (other than sell Amsoil prducts) to your customers who do not have degrees in chemistry, combustion physics, or an understanding of tribology. Could these results possibly be influenced by the "tune" of the vehicle as well?

Just curious - are you STLE certifiied?

LS Boss

 

[ace72ace]

Coming in pretty hard and fast at UB with your 2nd post aren't ya? Why should he put in any effort to "convince" you? What certifications do you have?

All I am hoping to get from UB is an informed opinion on my OA results, not a 'definitive' analysis (which you imply may be driven by greed). I already changed to Royal Purple on my last change, and expect the next OA results to confirm my belief that it will outperform Motorcraft by a wide margin.

Perhaps the words you chose were not meant to have any negative connotation? Or maybe they were carefully considered... Either way it will be interesting to see what happens next.

 

[UnleashedBeast]

So what's the difference between the amsoil XL, OE, and signature series. Which one should we use?

Signature Series - 100% true PAO and Ester synthetic
XL - mixture of true syn and group III hydrocracked petroleum (Mobil 1)
OE- 100% group III hydrocracked petroleum (Pennzoil Ultra is 100% group III+)

Hydrocracked petroleum is another term for highly refined "dino" oil.

Give me Signature Series.....or give me death!

Unleashed,

Aren't the analysis you present here largely influenced by factors such as the effects of the products of combustion, the fuel blend(s) used in the vehicle, and are not necessarily indicative of the quality of (or lack thereof) the particular oil used in the vehicle? Wouldn't you need to take many more samples of any one particular motor oil before you could draw conclusions regarding the properties and/or chemical constituents of the motor oil tested? Please convince me that these analyses actually mean anything and serve any useful purpose (other than sell Amsoil prducts) to your customers who do not have degrees in chemistry, combustion physics, or an understanding of tribology. Could these results possibly be influenced by the "tune" of the vehicle as well?

Just curious - are you STLE certifiied?

LS Boss

STLE, no....I'm not a tribologist. I fix their computers, some of these guys can't even change the tire on a car. Many of them lack common sense and only see molecules. Lubricant formulations are a hobby for me, not a career.

I think you are missing the point of a UOA thread, to build trends. Many of the cars here are very much the same. The UOA thread in the GT500 section has evolved to the same engine presenting UOAs from long periods of time. There is a lot of useful data there.

In my experience, the only people who discredit UOA information were those discovered working for big oil companies using cheaper base stock formulations and trying to say the numbers are better.

Concerning the combustion process, I watch for massive fuel dilution in the sample and make note of it if it's presence. Driving styles also effect the sample, and notes are made of cars that are using E85 and constantly raced instead of highway driven. In all the results I've seen thus far in the GT500, on average, Amsoil retains better TBN, higher shear resistance, lower average wear metal ppm, and users comment on lower engine noise with better efficiency.

I guess my final remark for you is......

Submit UOAs of the lubricant you choose. Let's see how they add up. That's the purpose of this thread.

Coming in pretty hard and fast at UB with your 2nd post aren't ya? Why should he put in any effort to "convince" you? What certifications do you have?

All I am hoping to get from UB is an informed opinion on my OA results, not a 'definitive' analysis (which you imply may be driven by greed). I already changed to Royal Purple on my last change, and expect the next OA results to confirm my belief that it will outperform Motorcraft by a wide margin.

Perhaps the words you chose were not meant to have any negative connotation? Or maybe they were carefully considered... Either way it will be interesting to see what happens next.

It's not the first time I been asked that question. I've always been humbled on formulation decisions by Amsoil being made in the lab by their chemists, not like Big Oil been counters.

 

[UnleashedBeast]

I'm finally back from out of town work I was doing for my company. Please, if any of you have sent me a UOA and I have not put it on this chart, please let me know so I can get this done today.

The UOA spreadsheet has been updated in post #1 with a UOA from a 2012 GT and this one from a Boss 302 with the OEM fill.

Wear metal PPM is much better than expected, obviously Iron and Copper are elevated. Those will reduce on the new UOA.

The lubricant sheared to a light 40 grade lubricant, near heavy 30 grade, no shock there. This is the typical Motorcraft UOA from the factory fill. MC5W-50 is really nothing more than 5W-30 with VI (Viscosity Improving Polymers) added to the formulation. When the lubricant gets hot, the polymers expand to prevent the lubricant from "thinning" past a 50 grade formulation. The problem is, those polymers wear out...fast, leaving you with a light 40 grade or heavy 30 grade lubricant depending on miles of use.

Thank you for the submission.

 

[86Fbody]

For Unleashed,
I know I can send samples to a UOA company, however where are people getting these nifty sampler pumps to take the samples with. Also, why is it recommended to take a sample from the dipstick reservoir and not after draining the oil?

 

[LS Boss]

STLE, no....I'm not a tribologist. I fix their computers, some of these guys can't even change the tire on a car. Many of them lack common sense and only see molecules. Lubricant formulations are a hobby for me, not a career.

I think you are missing the point of a UOA thread, to build trends. Many of the cars here are very much the same. The UOA thread in the GT500 section has evolved to the same engine presenting UOAs from long periods of time. There is a lot of useful data there.

In my experience, the only people who discredit UOA information were those discovered working for big oil companies using cheaper base stock formulations and trying to say the numbers are better.

Concerning the combustion process, I watch for massive fuel dilution in the sample and make note of it if it's presence. Driving styles also effect the sample, and notes are made of cars that are using E85 and constantly raced instead of highway driven. In all the results I've seen thus far in the GT500, on average, Amsoil retains better TBN, higher shear resistance, lower average wear metal ppm, and users comment on lower engine noise with better efficiency.

I guess my final remark for you is......

Submit UOAs of the lubricant you choose. Let's see how they add up. That's the purpose of this thread.



It's not the first time I been asked that question. I've always been humbled on formulation decisions by Amsoil being made in the lab by their chemists, not like Big Oil been counters.

UB,

I gather from everything you present in your post that you are a "hobbiest" with an interest in motor oils? Does your interest also include promoting and selling Amsoil products? Do you have a professional background in either chemistry or lubrication?

Please do not take my post as a personal attack - it is not. However you present yourself to forum members here being an oil expert and I am just curious as to what are your technical qualifications.

You indicated that you "watch for massive fuel dilution in the sample." This would indicate you are looking for fuel/vapor leaks which could be attributed to numerous internal mecanihcal problems such as a "blown" head gasket or a piston ring. However you seem to have no understanding of the products of combustion (exhaust gases) that permeate throughout the low pressure internals of the internal combustion engine. You do not seem to understand the effects these gases have in chemically reacting with the oil within the engine. I can only assume you would not understand anything about the various chemical products of combustion, how they differ dependent upon different fuel blends, additives, different driving habits, different engine "tuning", atmospheric conditions, etc... As the chemical reactants are in a continuous state of change, so are the chemical processes that take place between engine oils with exhausts gases circulating within the low pressure side of the engine. As a result, your UOA analses can produce totally different results from the same identical car using the same oil for a myriad of reasons such as just changing to a different fuel being used. Do you ever indicate this to your customers?

You indicated "I've always been humbled on formulation decisions by Amsoil being made in the lab by their chemists, not like Big Oil been counters." You totally ignore the car manufacturers" lubrication engineers and staff tribologist. Don't you think these highly trained, highly educated individuals are also making similar decisions about what lubricants are needed in their automobiles as well? Is it possible that they are probably more in tune with the demands of their products and have a better understanding of the lubrication requirements for their engines/drivetrains than Amsoil chemists are?

You probably are not aware that auto/engine manufacturers recommend oil chemicals formulations to prolong the life of the catalytic convertor and also to meet numerous various Federal and State emission mandates. Oil producers also need to comply with these standards as well.

What does this all mean? I am of the belief you have a novice understanding of the complexity of the demands placed on motor oils in the modern combustion engine nor do you understand the complex chemical processes that produce the results your UOA indicate. I also believe that you are representing to folks on this forum something that you are not. Sure your UOA can help determine that someone may have a anti-freeze leak or some other internal malfunction like a head gasket, piston ring or even a tuning issue. I would disagree with you that this UOA chemical analysis is of any benefit in assessing the performance merits of the lubricant nor can it tell which oil is performing better than some other oil. However, this is something I do not think you will ever admit to.

Anyway, best wishes.

LS Boss

 

[86Fbody]

UB,

I gather from everything you present in your post that you are a "hobbiest" with an interest in motor oils? Does your interest also include promoting and selling Amsoil products? Do you have a professional background in either chemistry or lubrication?

Please do not take my post as a personal attack - it is not. However you present yourself to forum members here being an oil expert and I am just curious as to what are your technical qualifications.

You indicated that you "watch for massive fuel dilution in the sample." This would indicate you are looking for fuel/vapor leaks which could be attributed to numerous internal mecanihcal problems such as a "blown" head gasket or a piston ring. However you seem to have no understanding of the products of combustion (exhaust gases) that permeate throughout the low pressure internals of the internal combustion engine. You do not seem to understand the effects these gases have in chemically reacting with the oil within the engine. I can only assume you would not understand anything about the various chemical products of combustion, how they differ dependent upon different fuel blends, additives, different driving habits, different engine "tuning", atmospheric conditions, etc... As the chemical reactants are in a continuous state of change, so are the chemical processes that take place between engine oils with exhausts gases circulating within the low pressure side of the engine. As a result, your UOA analses can produce totally different results from the same identical car using the same oil for a myriad of reasons such as just changing to a different fuel being used. Do you ever indicate this to your customers?

You indicated "I've always been humbled on formulation decisions by Amsoil being made in the lab by their chemists, not like Big Oil been counters." You totally ignore the car manufacturers" lubrication engineers and staff tribologist. Don't you think these highly trained, highly educated individuals are also making similar decisions about what lubricants are needed in their automobiles as well? Is it possible that they are probably more in tune with the demands of their products and have a better understanding of the lubrication requirements for their engines/drivetrains than Amsoil chemists are?

You probably are not aware that auto/engine manufacturers recommend oil chemicals formulations to prolong the life of the catalytic convertor and also to meet numerous various Federal and State emission mandates. Oil producers also need to comply with these standards as well.

What does this all mean? I am of the belief you have a novice understanding of the complexity of the demands placed on motor oils in the modern combustion engine nor do you understand the complex chemical processes that produce the results your UOA indicate. I also believe that you are representing to folks on this forum something that you are not. Sure your UOA can help determine that someone may have a anti-freeze leak or some other internal malfunction like a head gasket, piston ring or even a tuning issue. I would disagree with you that this UOA chemical analysis is of any benefit in assessing the performance merits of the lubricant nor can it tell which oil is performing better than some other oil. However, this is something I do not think you will ever admit to.

Anyway, best wishes.

LS Boss

You seem to bring up some good points, and also read like you know what you're talking about, however may I ask what qualifications you have. I only ask so that I know that what I am reading is something that someone has an intimate knowledge of and not someone who has just done their research.

 

[UnleashedBeast]

For Unleashed,
I know I can send samples to a UOA company, however where are people getting these nifty sampler pumps to take the samples with. Also, why is it recommended to take a sample from the dipstick reservoir and not after draining the oil?

For the most accurate sample, it's recommended to drive the car about 15 minutes and take the sample from the dipstick with a pump. This insures the oil is mixed evenly throughout the sump.

Taking it from the drain hole is acceptable, but you would want to wait until it was half way drained before taking the sample. You would never want to take the sample from the first oil that exits the drain hole. Particles settle, and a higher concentration would be measured around the magnetic drain plug. This can give inaccurate results about your engine and condition.

Here is the pump I use.

Pump

 

[86Fbody]

For the most accurate sample, it's recommended to drive the car about 15 minutes and take the sample from the dipstick with a pump. This insures the oil is mixed evenly throughout the sump.

Taking it from the drain hole is acceptable, but you would want to wait until it was half way drained before taking the sample. You would never want to take the sample from the first oil that exits the drain hole. Particles settle, and a higher concentration would be measured around the magnetic drain plug. This can give inaccurate results about your engine and condition.

Here is the pump I use.

Pump

Thanks.

 

[LS Boss]

You seem to bring up some good points, and also read like you know what you're talking about, however may I ask what qualifications you have. I only ask so that I know that what I am reading is something that someone has an intimate knowledge of and not someone who has just done their research.

86,

Yes. I am a rocket scientist with a major defense firm. I have mulitiple advanced graduate degrees in Mechanical, Aeronautical, and Electrical degrees from prominent American universities in addition to other graduate work. I have been a practicing engineer for 30+ years, have published numerous technical papers and have designed, developed, and tested numerous major defense systems over the course of my career. I have done quite a bit of graduate work researching & testing internal combustion engines and I have a strong background in chemistry, thermodynamics, propulsion systems, combustion physics, structural analysis, aeronautics, control systems, heat transfer, thermal systems and design. I can go on further but I don't want to bore you any further than I have.

And yes - I have had a life long passion for high performance automobiles also.

LS Boss
:coolman:

 

[ace72ace]

Golf clap

And a hush falls over the crowd, bravo sir, well played...

Will you be lending your expertise to help with the interpretation of OA results?

Quite an impressive résumé sir. I hope that you may be one of the few highly intelligent people who can play nice in the sandbox with the rest of us common folk.

I'm married to a rocket scientist, who also works for a major DoD company, so I'm really not too impressed with your degrees. Most of the brightest scientists who have genius level IQs, numerous patents, and 'distinguished engineer' status are first class aholes. I have worked with many such men over the years, and only 1 guy was nice, the rest were arrogant selfish prigs. There seems to be some sort of social graces gene that is missing. So when I saw your first post in this thread, I feared the worst.

Thank you for replying with your background, a pedigree such as yours would be a boon to this forum. I don't claim to be the arbiter of cool. I'm not. Just another guy who loves Boss Mustangs. Since you do too, you can't be all bad... :beer:

 

[LS Boss]

Will you be lending your expertise to help with the interpretation of OA results?

No. For the reasons I have cited I am not a believer in OA. This service is of little benefit and I consider it no more than modern high-tech (using primarily a mass spectrometer) snake oil. The best advice I can offer you or anyone else with an interest in maintaining your 12000 dollar engine is first and foremost keep it simple. By this I mean, follow the manufacturer's maintenance recommendations!!! I know you and others have a difficult time with this recommendation as you may be of the belief there has to be somebody out there on the planet who offers a better solution maintaining my vehicle. Wrong! Just follow your owners manual. I would recommend if you want to be more "proactive," what you can do is periodically monitor your oil dipstick looking for the proper level, look for bubbles, look for frothing, look for color and transparency. This are all indications that there may be issues with your engine. These indicators are just as good as the recommendations you will receive from a detailed OA and cost you nothing.

I would also recommend that, if you put say 10000 or more miles on your vehicle a year, you flush your radiator/engine and refill with a 50/50 mix (no more or no less) of a name brand anti-freeze.

I know - pretty boring stuff huh? You are right - there is nothing more to it from a lay-persons point of view. Maintaining your car properly should not be rocket science. If you follow these recommendations there is no reason you cannot get 300000 miles out your engine. Now be aware that if you track your car often, then all bets are off. The Boss engine, as advanced as it is, still runs quite hot. Take a look at your track gages this summer and see what your oil temperature reads when it is hot outside. I have seen my oil temperatures exceed 230 deg F. Heat shortens the life span of oils, it decreases the oils ability to lubricate by thinning it out (lowers viscosity). This will result is greater engine wear and decreased combustion efficiency resulting in reduced performance. If it is your ambition to be a modern day Mario Andretti then I would seriously investigate the purchase of an high flow, higher cooling capacity radiator. There may even be options out there to attach an electric fan to cool your radiator.These options are particularly important to you folks living and racing in the sun belt were summer time track tempertures hover round 130 deg F or more.

At a minimum - check your oil wear indicator that is part of the track apps (for you 13 owners). For you 12 owners, get those owner guides out and read them.
This is all the advice you need.

Anyway, good luck to all.

Regards,

LS Boss
:coolman:

 

[UnleashedBeast]

I would recommend if you want to be more "proactive," what you can do is periodically monitor your oil dipstick looking for the proper level, look for bubbles, look for frothing, look for color and transparency. This are all indications that there may be issues with your engine. These indicators are just as good as the recommendations you will receive from a detailed OA and cost you nothing.

Cool, I had no idea that the dipstick could tell you TBN (how much more life the lubricant has remaining), oxidation, wear ppm (specifically what type of metal has excessive wear), viscosity (shearing), fluid dilution, and solubles.

Neat, no more UOAs for me.

/sarcasm

Now be aware that if you track your car often, then all bets are off. The Boss engine, as advanced as it is, still runs quite hot. Take a look at your track gages this summer and see what your oil temperature reads when it is hot outside. I have seen my oil temperatures exceed 230 deg F. Heat shortens the life span of oils, it decreases the oils ability to lubricate by thinning it out (lowers viscosity). This will result is greater engine wear and decreased combustion efficiency resulting in reduced performance.

True synthetics resist viscosity reduction (shearing) and dissipate heat faster than group II and III base stocks. The goal is to make sure you have the perfect viscosity for the engines intended use. Just enough viscosity to protect metal on metal contact, but not too much viscosity that would decrease efficiency, increase lubricant temps, and increase oil pressure excessively.

This is the prime example of why it's foolish to think Motorcraft 5W-50 in a street driven Boss 302 or Track Pack GT is a good idea.

 

[Beernuts]

No. For the reasons I have cited I am not a believer in OA. This service is of little benefit and I consider it no more than modern high-tech (using primarily a mass spectrometer) snake oil.

Heat shortens the life span of oils, it decreases the oils ability to lubricate by thinning it out (lowers viscosity). This will result is greater engine wear and decreased combustion efficiency resulting in reduced performance.

So when a UOA indicates that a particular oil commonly shears below an acceptable viscosity level, you're saying that isn't useful information?

If so, isn't that a bit contradictory of your second statement above?

 

[LS Boss]

So when a UOA indicates that a particular oil commonly shears below an acceptable viscosity level, you're saying that isn't useful information?

If so, isn't that a bit contradictory of your second statement above?

Your premiss is flawed. Let me aak you. - Do you believe that the lubrication professionals at Ford who make highly technical, educated decisions regarding lubrications recommendations for their vehicles are more or less qualified than the recommendations you receive from these OA recommendations offered here? Keep in mind that any mistakes in their recommendations could potentially cost their company millions of dollars in warranty claims? These people are highly educated (PhDs) and have all the qualifications any chemist or tribiologist has at Amsoil. They actually know more about the demands placed on oils in their vehicles than Amsoil does. When Ford recommends you change your oil at XXXX miles, then this is all you need to be concerned with. You can rest assured knowing that this recommendation will fulfill requirements Ford deems as necessary to meet the demands of the engine. All tech specs including kinematic viscosity, service life, bearing wear, heat dissipation, oxidation, operating temperature, etc. have all been factored in determining their recommendations. Isn't that nice? ... and they don't even charge for this advice.

If you feel you need the added peace of mind it gives you in engaging this service then go for it. However, I am saying they are not necessary and you can still get 300,000 miles on your engine by just following Ford's service recommendations. These were carefully thought out and proven through extensive testing.

This is all I have to say on this topic.

Best Wishes,

LS Boss
:coolman: