First thought, piston cylinder walls. You are using a lubricant with low HT/HS High Temp/High Shear sub 3.0 range. HPDE suggested lubricants are in the 4.5-5.0 range.
Official GT 5.0/Boss 302 UOA thread
- Thread starter UnleashedBeast
- Start date
First thought, piston cylinder walls. You are using a lubricant with low HT/HS High Temp/High Shear sub 3.0 range. HPDE suggested lubricants are in the 4.5-5.0 range.
That's interesting. I haven't done much research into the relationship between oil specs and engine wear. The ring / cylinder wall interface is certainly high temp, high shear.
Did I read in another thread that you run at the drag strip with 20w oil and without issue?
Did I read in another thread that you run at the drag strip with 20w oil and without issue?
Yes you did, but that's a bolt on only car at short throttle bursts, not sustained high engine rpm. The engine in a drag car will never achieve and maintain as high of heat levels as an engine on a twisty track.
Agreed.
But, towing would be similar, to a lessor degree. Long periods of high load operation. It's not uncommon to have trucks spec'd for 20w oil.
Point taken.
My 2009 Dodge Ram 1500 Crew Cab is recommended for 5W-20 as well. However, since I do tow the car sometimes, I use Amsoil 0W-30 with a bypass oil filtration system. I'm sure it's overkill, but I had it laying in the garage. The engine does consume some oil, so I have to top it off every few months. Obviously I don't tow with the Mustang. It's a weekend car only for drag, street, and car shows.
I wouldn't call it very similar or the same order of magnitude. GT or Boss on the road course will see much higher average and sustained RPM. And all the HP is made up top. Sure, towing is hard on the oil, but I really doubt it gets anywhere near the abuse levels at the track.
Agreed that RPM is definitely going to be lower on average.
I said similar, but not the same order of magnitude.
If we are looking to the ring interface for excessive wear, cylinder pressure acting on the back side of the rings is what forces them against the cylinder walls, and it peaks at maximum torque (generally well below max RPM).
RPM plays a part too, in the speed and frequency of the motion. But think about the average amount of time spent between someone who tows a lot, and someone who turns a few hot laps now and then.
Not to side-step the discussion, but I'm more concerned about bearing surfaces over ring/sleeve wear.
If you compare your data to some of the other GT's in UB's other UOA thread, I think you can see more similar numbers to yours, considering the extended use and harder driving.
http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/showthread.php?805918-Official-GT-5-0-Boss-302-UOA-thread
Cool, thank you for the link! I'm curious why there are two almost identical UOA threads.
It would be awesome to push all this data into a Google sheets document. Then you could sort and do some further analysis easily.
I would tend to agree that rings/cylinder are expected wear parts (within reason), but cam, rod, main bearings, etc are not. The zeros in my UOA for tin and lead suggest that I am not making any contact in the main and rod bearings, but I don't think that valvetrain wear would show up there.
It's interesting that in the first OAI result posted in the other thread, an iron content of 44 ppm shows white, which is 0 out of 4 on their scale. Does anyone know where the demarcation occurs on OAI's iron content?
It would be awesome to push all this data into a Google sheets document. Then you could sort and do some further analysis easily.
I would tend to agree that rings/cylinder are expected wear parts (within reason), but cam, rod, main bearings, etc are not. The zeros in my UOA for tin and lead suggest that I am not making any contact in the main and rod bearings, but I don't think that valvetrain wear would show up there.
It's interesting that in the first OAI result posted in the other thread, an iron content of 44 ppm shows white, which is 0 out of 4 on their scale. Does anyone know where the demarcation occurs on OAI's iron content?
Glad to help. They used to have the same Boss/GT data, but they got split at some point. IIRC, there's an explanation in one of the 4 threads.
I think that example might not be flagged if it's from an engine at break-in mileage.
I think that example might not be flagged if it's from an engine at break-in mileage.
Received more UOA's, will be updating the chart soon. Added the current recommendation list to post #1 for easy reference.
Any UOA's on Driven oil?
Gamstar
New Member
Hello,
I'm new to this site, and have been reading on UOA threads which are about 6 months old, but new and interesting to me. I bought a 2013 Roush Super Charged mustang about 9 months ago with 1,200 miles on it. I put, 3,500 miles on it and assume that it has MC 5w-50 synthetic oil in it. You recommend the AZF 0w-40 for the type of driving I do which is, daily driving to the store, occasional open throttle, but no track racing type use of this car. Should I have the 5w-50 analyzed even though its obvious on your comparison charts that it shears rapidly. And / Or should I analyze the 0w-40 after maybe 9 months of service which would be about 5k miles. Also wondered if there was a comparison chart for Roush supercharged vehicles or would it probably fall on the 302 chart ?
None to my knowledge.
We have so many Motorcraft 5W-50 samples out there, we already know what to expect. I'm eagerly awaiting samples of Amsoil AZF 0W-40, as I'd like to see trends from Amsoil's new lubricant.
All Coyote and Roadrunner engines fall under the same comparison charts, regardless of specialty builder.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
