Sie sind nicht angemeldet! Jetzt interner Link kostenlos im Forum registrieren, weniger Werbung sehen, aktiv teilnehmen und weitere Vorteile nutzen! Diese Website nutzt Cookies. Bitte beachten Sie unsere interner Link Datenschutzerklärung.
  Start » Forum Impressum/Datenschutz | Site-Map
7-forum.com   ModelleForummein.7erService


Forumsfunktionen

VIN Decoder
Fahrgestell-Nr. im Fahrzeugschein
 
Für Infos, Ausstattungs-liste und Füllmengen Ihres BMW, folgend Fahrgestell-Nr. eingeben (die letzten 7 Stellen):
 

 
Dies ist ein Service des externen Anbieters etkbmw.com. Es kann keine Garantie für Funktion und Inhalt des Dienstes gegeben werden.
 
- Anzeige -

Zurück   BMW 7er-Forum > BMW 7er Modelle > BMW 7er, allgemein



Antwort
 
Thema teilen Themen-Optionen Ansicht
Alt 09.02.2004, 14:38   #1
Erich
Shogun
 
Benutzerbild von Erich
 
Registriert seit: 19.07.2002
Ort: Joso
Fahrzeug: E32 750iL 11/88
Standard Oel-Analyse

Kopiert aus roadfly. sehr interessant:

15,000 mile oil analyses results!
The Previous Owner of my 1989 735iL owned the car for 17,000 miles and only changed the oil once. The last oil change was at 140,781 miles, the mileage at time of sample was 155,909 which equals 15,128 on the Mobil 1 SuperSyn 10W-30 oil. BTW, this is NOT the correct weight oil for the M30 in my climate, 15W-50 would have been the correct weight. I decided to send the oil in for analyses. I just got the results today and thought I would share them will all of you.
The results are as follows:

Iron:38
Chromium:2
Lead:5
Copper:18
Tin:0
Aluminum:13
Nickel:0
Silver:0
Silicon:2
Boron:106
Sodium:23
Magnesium:52
Calcium:3062
Barium:0
Phosphorus:1116
Zinc:1297
Molybdenum:81
Titanium:0
Vanadium:0
Potassium:0

Fuel(%vol):<1
Vis.@100C:10.91
Water(%vol):0
Glycol:NEG
TBN:8.60
OXID:14.0
NITR:13.0

Analyses Recommendations:
NO CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED. OIL IS SUITABLE FOR CONTINUED USED. RESAMPLE AT NEXT REGULAR INTERVAL.

BTW, I changed the oil before I even got the results and I am still going to change my oil at 4k.
Erich ist offline   Antwort Mit Zitat antworten
Alt 09.02.2004, 19:07   #2
730@jv
Neues Mitglied
 
Registriert seit: 20.05.2003
Ort: Frankfurt
Fahrzeug: 730i R6 Bj:10/92
Standard

Mobil 1 5W30 Super-Syn Formula

Mobil 1 currently enjoys the distinction of being the only readily available true PAO synthetic motor oil. You can get the stuff at Wal-Mart for Pete's sake! Perhaps because of its wide availability and comparatively low price, we entered this test with both hope and skepticism: hope that it would do well and vindicate millions of M1 users, and skepticism that it would pull it off. We were expecting it to look pretty beat up by 8,000 miles or so; to say we missed the mark would be polite understatement. Mobil 1 really delivered: 18,000 miles later, it was showing its age but was still hard at work protecting the engine.
As our first phase of the Synthetic Oil Life Study, it was as much a learning experience for the process as it was for the results. We changed some things along the way -- moved the filter change from a mileage-based rule to a performance-based rule, altered the tolerable limits for viscosity, learned a lot about TBN, and a few other things -- which set precedents for the remainder of the study.

But the big question is, what have we learned so far? Here are a few points to ponder, based on our experience with the Mobil 1 phase.


Getting just one oil analysis only tells a tiny piece of the picture. It essentially would serve only as a pass/fail mechanism; without a trend to monitor, the most interesting parts of the analysis would be impossible to see.
Total base number is a moving target. There are multiple methods for testing it, which makes comparisons between laboratories worthless, and none of the methods have repeatability rates worth getting excited about. While TBN is worth considering as part of the larger picture, as a singular measure it is too flawed to rely on.
Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages. This has also been substantiated in testing conducted by Ford Motor Co. and ConocoPhillips, and reported in SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119. What this means is that compulsive oil changers are actually causing more engine wear than the people who let their engine's oil get some age on it.
Topping up the crankcase is a critical component of extended oil change intervals, and frequent filter changes are most likely the key to extreme-length intervals. The cumulative effect of even minor top-ups, let alone a filter change, substantially increases the longevity of the oil.
Based on the results we've got here, we'd recommend 8,000 miles between oil changes on an engine that uses no oil at all, perhaps 10,000 miles on an engine that uses some oil, and 15,000 miles or beyond with a filter change every 5,000 miles. This, of course, isn't any kind of guarantee, and you must evaluate for yourself what your engine requires. One thing we're pretty sure about though: 3,000-mile intervals is a huge waste of resources.


Mile 0 -- Brian Schreurs, November 9, 2002.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 0 / 9,939
Oil added after sample: none

The baseline run (mile 0) indicates the composition of the additive package in Mobil 1 Super-Syn Formula, as well as the physical characteristics of the oil before spending time in an engine. This baseline will allow us to track the degradation in oil quality over the miles. Some people have suggested that the TBN is way too high and may be a testing error. However, the long-term TBN trend seems to indicate otherwise.

* Blackstone was kind enough to conduct a second virgin oil analysis because of the new TBN test method. We're glad they did a full test though, because in addition to seeing the relative TBN numbers it's also interesting to note that Mobil seems to have tweaked their formula a bit. Check out the significantly higher levels of boron and calcium, and marginally higher phosphorous and zinc. Now, some of this could just be production variances, but the fact that it's up across the board suggests to us, at least, a more robust package. It's too late to do anything about this for the current test, but the Amsoil test will not face the same problem: we bought all 18 quarts as one lot.

Mile 1000 -- Gregory Wells, December 3, 2002.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 1,070 / 11,009
Oil added after sample: none

So far the oil is showing virtually no appreciable degradation. Both viscosity and flashpoint are down somewhat, probably due to the fuel contamination. Blackstone Laboratories let us know that fuel contamination is typical for new engines, though we suspect we may not have allowed enough oil to drain before taking the sample; we'll improve the technique for next time. Copper is rather high but the lab says that is typical of the LS1 engine up to as far as 30,000 miles. The TBN is actually up slightly from the baseline, which is highly unusual. However, bear in mind that the crankcase oil is an average of roughly six quarts of oil, whereas the virgin sample was from just one quart; evidently, the one we sampled was on the low side of the average. All other numbers seem quite reasonable.

Mile 2000 -- Joshua Scott, December 12, 2002.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 2,044 / 11,983
Oil added after sample: none

We put a lot of extra miles on the car due to a trip to Washington, but it was still a healthy mix of city and highway. Copper is still high, which concerns Blackstone Laboratories somewhat. The fuel issue has gone away (we did a better job sampling this time); viscosity and flashpoint are down slightly while TBN has dropped significantly.

Mile 3000 -- Charlie Nowlin, December 31, 2002.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 3,082 / 13,021


Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

For the first time, we had to top off the oil. The oil is still holding up quite well, with the TBN far higher at 3,000 miles than standard oils even start out with. The lab is concerned with the copper levels and is recommending that we change the oil. However, our own research indicates that this level of copper is normal -- or at least acceptable -- for this engine. Therefore we are going to continue with the study. Anyone who has an LS1-powered vehicle with an oil analysis conducted on it, we would really like to know what your copper level is.


I think we can all agree that this here... this is nuts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mile 4000 -- Andrea Holladay, January 21, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 4,036 / 13,975
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

We retrieved this sample in the snow. It wasn't as fun as it sounds. Thanks to everyone who offered garage space for the next sample. For this sample, we again had to top off the oil, suggesting that somehow the engine is using more of it as the oil ages. Copper is still increasing, but not at a frightening pace -- it should look pretty normal after we flush the system. Viscosity and flashpoint are still commendably stable, but TBN is dropping like a rock. Of course, we could be surprised -- the TBN could level off. We'll see.

Mile 5000 -- Jay Rasberry, February 10, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 5,008 / 14,947
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

The Camaro seems to fairly consistently use half a quart of oil every 1,000 miles, typical but not terribly impressive. Major thanks to Ryan and his family, who generously provided garage space to pull this sample indoors. Interestingly, the oil indicator activated at 14,999 miles, just 52 miles after we drew this sample, which would seem to be extremely premature. TBN did in fact level off -- perfectly level, no degradation at all. Before you start typing those e-mails inquiring how this is possible, we'll give you our definitive answer: we have no idea. All other critical measurements remain in excellent shape, and even the copper is slowing down.

Mile 6000 -- "Patman", March 6, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 6,010 / 15,949
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

The TBN has again not dropped; indeed, it actually went up slightly. If it keeps this up, it'll last forever. We're doing a little research to learn how TBN works, as it certainly hasn't behaved the way we would expect. Meanwhile, copper seems to have leveled off, so whatever was slowly dying in the engine must be dead by now. Since all wear levels remain good, and the filter is still hard at work, we'll give it another thousand and see what happens!

Mile 7000 -- Sunny Garofalo, March 22, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 6,994 / 16,933
Oil added after sample: none

Much to our surprise, the oil level was only marginally below the full mark, so we didn't bother with a top-up. Nothing looked particularly unusual with this sample when we took it, and nothing particularly unusual showed up in the analysis results. Notice how copper is now completely flat; it'll be interesting to see what happens when we start over with Amsoil. Confused about TBN behavior? So were we, so we gathered a bunch of SAE reports to find out what we're missing. More to come on this fascinating subject. We'll probably have to change the filter soon, but otherwise this oil is holding up fine.

Mile 8000 -- "Orange 01SS", April 4, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 8,011 / 17,950
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

Here we go again -- the drop in oil consumption unfortunately proved to be nothing but a pause. Ah well, if it keeps using 1/4 quart per 1,000 miles, that's mostly from the samples anyway. The viscosity has crept upward close to the maximum allowable for this oil (62 SUS) and TBN is finally slipping a little, so that bears watching. Iron also spiked; Blackstone noted it but isn't worried yet. Is the end near? We've been fooled before, but this oil is starting to show some age.

Mile 9000 -- Tommy Lawson, April 24, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 9,011 / 18,950
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

Pretty freaky that we managed to hit exactly 1,000 miles eh? Man we're good. Visually the oil is pretty skanky at this point. If we were going on appearance alone we would have changed it a long time ago. Analysis shows this oil is reaching its limit; iron, lead, and copper are up again, and viscosity has thickened out of range for this specific oil (but not out of grade yet). That crazy TBN continues to behave unpredictably. We'll probably drain the oil soon.

Mile 10,000 -- Timothy Bundrick, May 8, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 10,089 / 20,028
Oil added after sample: none

Wow, here we are at 10,000 miles (or slightly more, due to the misfortunes of bad timing). At this point we hesitate to make predictions about the longevity of the oil, as we are constantly being surprised. We're as shocked as almost anyone else that at 10,000 miles the oil is still good, the filter is still good, everything really looks just fine in there. 3,000-mile oil changes? Puh-leeze. Never again for us. But just how long will it last?

Mile 11,000 -- Paul Seminara, May 24, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 11,002 / 20,941
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

Another sample down the drain. Ar ar ar. We know, we've said before that the oil is about done, but this time we're really getting antsy. Iron, copper and lead are all up noticeably -- particularly lead. Viscosity is creeping up. Insolubles are near their upper limit. TBN is down 2.5 points, a rather sharp drop, no doubt in part because this sample didn't benefit from any make-up oil but clearly showing that the equilibrium in this engine is in a very delicate state. Blackstone wants us to change. Overall, quite a shocker considering how good everything looked at the last sample.

Mile 12,000 -- Neil Womack, June 12, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 12,025 / 21,964
Oil added after sample: 1.5 quarts

Thanks to advice from Terry Dyson, we elected to carry on for a bit longer, but with a filter change. So, this sample officially ends the no-filter-change portion of the Mobil 1 test. Used to be that adding half a quart of top-up tended to prop the oil up for a bit longer, but no more -- or at least, if this oil is propped, then we shudder to think what it would have looked like without the top-up. The next sample will show us what a new filter and a large top-up is capable of doing for the oil, but on its own the oil here is definitely past its equilibrium point. In fairness it must be noted that the laboratory changed TBN test methods so this number is not directly comparable to previous numbers. We're going to double-test some samples to determine the conversion between the two methods.

Mile 13,000 -- "Jerry", July 3, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 13,030 / 22,969
Oil added after sample: none

After the larger-than-normal top-up, we expected the oil to have some new life in it. That certainly proved true, but it ended up being a curious mix. Many of the wear metals are down quite a bit, perhaps a result of changing the filter. If it is, it's the only significant result of doing so; insolubles were unaffected. The filter might have been able to keep going. Adding a quart and a half of make-up oil sure propped up the TBN. Even so, these new TBN numbers will take some getting used to. Overall, the filter change seems to have "bought" about 5,000 miles of wear back -- compare this sample to the 8,000-mile sample to see what we mean. Looks like we're going to at least 15,000 miles now.

Mile 14,000 -- "Joee12", July 16, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 13,976 / 23,915
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

We came in a little early on this one, but it was either that or come in a couple hundred miles late. We're putting an unusually high amount of highway miles on the car right now, which will accelerate the pace of this and the next sample. The oil still looks decent to our eyes, with wear metals continuing to increase but not at an alarming rate. Viscosity is finally thickening up but it's still a ways off from being out of grade. The difference in readings between the two TBN methods is troubling -- by the old method, it has really tanked; by the new method, it's steady. We keep expecting this oil to expire, but it keeps surprising us.

Mile 15,000 -- Gary Heidebrecht, August 4, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 14,986 / 24,925
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

We had a bit of a scare a few miles before pulling this sample. Sitting at a traffic light, oil smoke started billowing out from under the hood in all directions. "Holy crap we went too far!" was our immediate thought. Fortunately, it turned out to be the mosquito-killing Chrysler minivan in front of us. The sample itself had nothing unusual about it; thanks to Jon Satterfield's donation, we have a few TBN kits of our own now and gave one a try with this sample in addition to Blackstone's readings. We got a 3.5, which is nothing like Blackstone's 5.0, but it should be noted that they've run thousands of these things and we've run... two. One thing that's rather disappointing is the seeming total lack of correlation between the old method and the new. TBN drama aside, the oil soldiers on, barely harmed by this interval. The flashpoint and fuel readings means that they ran out of oil and couldn't test it.

On several internet forums discussing this study, there have been calls for us to stop now and move on to Amsoil. While we heartily sympathize with the impatience to give Mobil 1's arch rival a run, it is worth noting that at this juncture we have 15,000 miles and 10 months invested in this sample. We will never again have a chance to look at this data. It would be a shame to pull the plug now; please be patient.

Mile 16,000 -- George Michaels, August 23, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 16,026 / 25,965
Oil added after sample: none

Here we are at another sample. With the way Mobil 1 had been going, we instituted a maximum test run of one year. That's only a couple of months away, but it looks like Mobil 1 won't make it after all. The oil has thickened up in a serious way; 30-weight oil tops off with a viscosity of 12.49 cSt, and the 67.8 SUS of this sample converts to 12.36 cSt. The slightest increase in viscosity at the next interval will push it out of range and out of the study.

It's kind of odd, though, that otherwise the oil hasn't aged a bit. Perhaps there's something to all that balderdash about less wear in the summer.

Mile 17,000 -- Stephen Scheifler, September 17, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 17,031 / 26,970
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

Oil pressure is noticeably higher than it was before the viscosity went nuts on us, so we're looking forward to finishing this test and moving on. We've decided against using viscosity as a test-ending value, but we'll certainly flag the oil when it creeps out of grade. The viscosity has slipped back down a little, keeping it safely in grade, but the TBN sure has taken a dive. Also note the sudden increase in wear numbers, especially iron and lead. As of this writing we're waffling on whether to continue. Another wrinkle: the insolubles have again reached the trigger point for an oil filter change. Is it worth it, or is it time to put this to bed? Hm.

Mile 18,000 -- John Richardson, September 29, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 18,021 / 27,960
Oil added after sample: drained oil!

Well, it's done. At long last, we drained the oil. Considering that we've gone two and a half times longer than we thought we'd go, we're pretty impressed by Mobil 1's longevity. Our Dexsil TBN test resulted in a 6.0, comparing favorably to Blackstone's 6.5. But speaking of high TBNs, what happened to this oil? If it had posted these numbers at the last interval, we wouldn't have dumped it. This oil could have kept going based on the numbers we have now, but they sure weren't looking this good a thousand miles ago. Viscosity was dropping, TBN rising, and what's going on with the insolubles? Meanwhile, despite all these paper improvements, the engine still had higher oil pressure and wasn't running as smoothly as normal, so clearly not all was perfect with the oil.

Thanks to the help of reader Doug Hillary, we had the final sample analyzed by Mobil 1's laboratory. Their results matched Blackstone's analysis pretty well; we certainly didn't receive any surprises.

Honestly, this first phase of the study has probably raised as many questions as it has answered.

Presently, the Z28 is enjoying a relaxing flush fill of Amsoil "ASL" 5W30 synthetic oil, the same oil we will be using (with a refill of course) for the next phase of the study. We're going to begin the Amsoil test when the odometer turns 31,000 miles, which we currently anticipate to be early November.

The Effect of Top-Up Oil
The Mobil 1 oil in this test indisputably ran for 18,000 miles; 12,000 miles without a filter change.


Some would point out, though, that the make-up oil along the way skewed the numbers. This is a valid point, and the effect is cumulative across the test, especially after the filter change. Fortunately, we know the quantity of oil we added, so conjuring up a hypothetical "corrected" oil age, based on the effect of refreshing the oil periodically, is simply a matter of tedious mathematics. This corrected oil age assumes zero oil consumption -- something that few if any engines can match, especially over 18,000 road miles -- so for most engines the truth will be somewhere in between. For us, the corrected oil age is 10,300 miles.

Here's a chart showing how the corrected oil age drops off compared to the actual oil age. The table we used to construct this chart is too large to display here; to see it in a separate window, follow the link in the sidebar.



More than anything, what this shows is the incredible effect top-up oil has on the longevity of the motor oil. Even with the minute amounts of oil we added over the course of the study, we extended the "age" of the oil by 8,000 miles compared to adding no oil at all. Indeed, the filter change at 12,000 miles refreshed the oil so well that its corrected age actually remained below the 12k sample's corrected age for almost 3,000 miles! It's no wonder extended-use oil change schemes demand frequent filter changes. The top-up that follows the fresh filter is practically a time machine for your oil.

Interpreting Wear Metals
Looking at a single oil sample's wear metals wouldn't impart much useful information. Frozen in time, with no trend to compare it to, it would serve solely as a pass or fail mechanism: either the wear metals are excessively high or they're not. While that's useful to know, it's only part of the story. The rate of accumulation is actually the more useful measure, as it allows us to see whether the oil's protective ability is improving or weakening. Iron, copper, and lead are the three most important wear metals, as they derive from the components most prone to wear, such as piston rings and various bearings. This chart shows the wear metal trend over the course of the Mobil 1 test. We've standardized the values so that they're directly comparable to each other.


The solid lines are the standardized cumulative totals of wear metals in parts per million for iron, copper, and lead. The shaded lines are the standardized totals of wear metals in ppm per mile -- in other words, the shaded lines represent how quickly the wear metals accumulate as compared to how quickly the miles accumulate.

While the wear metals all accumulated steadily over the course of the test, the highest concentrations of accumulation per mile occurred in the first 3,000 miles of the test! From the 3,000-mile mark all the way to 18,000 miles, only lead showed an increase in per-mile wear beyond 3,000 miles. Yet even with an increased wear rate, lead wore the least in terms of absolute wear. For iron and copper, the longer the oil remained in service, the lower the wear rate got.

In case it isn't obvious yet, this means that the most wear occurs in the first 3,000 miles.

The filter change at 12,000 miles also substantially affected the wear metals. Though changing the filter by itself wouldn't have a significant effect on the concentration of metals -- the metals picked up in spectrometric analysis are too small for a filter to capture -- the amount of top-up oil required to fill the crankcase after the filter swap substantially alters the chemistry of the oil. Iron and lead didn't reach their 12k levels for another four or five thousand miles, and copper never reached its 12k level in the remainder of the test. It's easy to see here why proponents of extreme oil changes demand filter changes at regular intervals. Indeed, one is forced to wonder whether an engine with a high-quality PAO synthetic combined with a bypass filtration system and regular filter changes would ever need its oil changed at all.

Introductory Remarks
Over the years of writing hardcore technical articles here at Paradise Garage, we've watched the Oil Wars with some detached amusement. We switched to synthetics when we started racing the Paradise Garage
Down the hatch! Our LS1 gets its Mobil 1.

Firebird, and it was so obviously superior that we gradually switched all our cars to the expensive stuff. On the other hand, we have to admit that we've owned several cars that went well beyond 150,000 miles on dinosaur juice without the slightest trouble, so it's entirely possible that we're wasting a lot of money for oil performance that most cars will never use. Whether most cars will use it or not isn't a question we plan to address here, because we run our cars pretty hard and will continue using synthetic oil.
But then, the Oil Wars don't stop at the dino/synth argument -- no, once you've decided to go synthetic, the major synth manufacturers start slinging mud at one another as well! Each one of them claims long drain intervals, intervals like 7,500 miles, 12,000 miles, or even 25,000 miles, intervals that we cannot even imagine actually using. Are you going to trust a $5,000 engine to $40 worth of motor oil that supposedly can go 25,000 miles without a change?! We sure as hell won't!

Yet the claims continue to intrigue us. Honestly, we hate oil changes, and if we really can run our oil to 10,000 miles without harming the engine, then we will. Unfortunately, the only way to be really sure that everything is going okay in there is through oil analysis -- and at $20 a pop, you might as well just change the oil.

The best solution would be to conduct a long-term oil analyis study to track the degradation of oil and determine the mileage that it's at, say, 20% of its remaining life. Then once we've got a relatively "safe" number to live by, we can use that as our lifelong oil change interval, as long as we don't do anything drastic like take up desert racing or something.

Not finding anyone else willing to do it, we accepted the task provided readers expressed enough interest to keep it going. And has that deal ever worked out! This study is now the single most popular section of the entire website.

Just to keep it interesting, we figured it might be fun to try several different brands of synthetic oil and see how they stack up against each other. We'll start by running Mobil 1 to its limit, followed by Amsoil, then Red Line, and finally Royal Purple. If we can still stand to draw samples after all that time, then we'll look into including other oils such as Motul and Castrol GTX.

Finding objective analysis data is tricky -- we've noticed several purportedly independent oil analysis labs actually have very cozy ties with one of the competitors in this study. That makes it difficult to accept some of the online oil analysis results as objective! After examining the credentials, background, and reputation of several companies, we have selected Blackstone Laboratories as our analysts. They are not providing us any consideration or service that you couldn't get just the same as us. We're even paying for the tests just like anybody else would.



The test vehicle is a 2002 Chevrolet Camaro Z28. It has an aluminum 5.7L V8 (dyno tested at 307 hp) and a six-speed manual transmission. Its miles are split nearly 50/50 between city and highway, about 60 to 80 miles a day in spurts of 15 to 30 miles per trip. It tends to get around 20 mpg over the course of a month.
Its regimen prior to this study was Mobil 1 5W30 oil and a NAPA Gold filter every 5,000 miles. This study began at the 10,000-mile mark; at that point, we filled it again with Mobil 1 5W30 and installed a new NAPA Gold filter. We sent a sample of new oil as a baseline. Then, we've been sampling the oil every 1,000 miles to clearly establish trends. We change the filter whenever the insolubles level reaches 0.5% (hey, we want to keep this test as objective as possible, but not at the cost of our engine!). The oil stays in the engine until analysis shows it is no longer safe to use.

Keeping the crankcase filled to the right level can definitely be an issue with change intervals far beyond the standard 3,000 miles. All cars naturally consume a small amount of oil; for this test, we also lose oil to the analysis samples and to filter changes. The samples and filters are a static quantity so they will be equal across all brands of synthetic; however, if one type of synthetic is more prone to consumption than another, it might appear to have an advantage from more frequent refreshing. To mitigate this, we will return the oil level to the full mark immediately following each sample extraction. We will also record the amount of oil required to top it off and provide this information along with the test results. If a synthetic oil has a "long life" because it loses an inordinate amount and must be topped off frequently, that's important to know as it significantly alters the cost and longevity of the oil.

If any brand of oil should make it to a second filter change -- which, at this stage, we doubt will happen -- then it will naturally get an extra boost from the post-filter top-off. However, this is not a concern because it reflects the real-world economics of using that particular brand of oil. We will, of course, report all filter changes.

To prevent a previous test oil from contaminating a new test oil, we run a 3,000 mile buffer of the new oil between tests. During the buffer interval we put in fresh spark plugs. After 3,000 miles, we drain the crankcase and refill with fresh oil, change the oil and air filters, then resume the study.

Also, just for grins, we reset the car's oil change indicator to see how GM's engineers did when they calibrated the oil life computer.

Oil Analysis
The oil is analyzed for many different things. The most critical characteristics for the purposes of oil longevity are:

Viscosity: This is the SUS viscosity at 210 degrees. It is the standard SAE viscosity measure; SUS is the unit of viscosity. This value should remain within its grade, or plus or minus 20%, whichever is greater.
TBN: The Total Base Number. This is a measure of acid-combatting additives. Oil is essentially expired once it reaches a TBN around 2.
Insolubles: This is the percentage of the test sample consisting of solids. Solids are always bad; the value should be less than 0.6%.
Wear Metals: The presence of wear metals is a contaminant and the rate of accumulation is an indicator of the oil's protective condition. The exact values representing oil change time is rather subjective; we use Blackstone's conservative guidance in conjunction with other industry experts. Iron, copper, and lead are normally the ones to watch.

Think your corner station mechanic is gonna do this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The oil analysis also checks for fuel, antifreeze, and water in the oil. Of course, ideally all of these values should be zero, but realistically the tolerable limits are: fuel, 2%; antifreeze, 0%; and water, 0.05%.

Also, there's the analysis of elements expressed in parts per million. Some of these elements are indicators of engine wear, while others are additives in the oil. For any of these, the presence or absence of any element is less important than how the values change over time.


Engine Wear: aluminum, chromium, iron, copper, lead, tin, molybdenum, nickel, manganese, silver, titanium, posassium, and silicon.
Anti-Wear Additive: molybdenum, phosphorus, and zinc.
Antifreeze Inhibitor: potassium, boron, silicon, and sodium.
Detergent Additive: boron, calcium, magnesium, and barium.
Note that molybdenum and silicon can be both an additive and an indicator of engine wear.

Past Results
To date we have completed our test of Mobil 1. It held on for 18,000 miles, and didn't need its first oil filter until 12,000 miles. For all the details, visit our Mobil 1 Test Results page.

Mile 0 -- Kristin Huff, November 19, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 0 / 30,976
Oil added after sample: none

As with Mobil 1, this first sample is a virgin sample straight out of the bottle. This is our first opportunity to directly compare Amsoil to Mobil 1, and what we see is fascinating. Amsoil seems to take a completely different approach to its additive package than Mobil. Where Mobil relies on molybdenum, boron, and huge doses of calcium, Amsoil has no moly at all, less than half as much boron, and almost a third less calcium. Phosphorus is similar in both formulas, but Amsoil uses more zinc and almost thirty times more magnesium!

Amsoil's viscosity is also higher, putting it midrange for a 5W30 oil while Mobil 1 tends toward the low end of the range. TBN is marginally higher for Amsoil, 12.5 over 11.8 for Mobil 1. Whether this edge will hold over time is something that remains to be seen.

Mile 1000 -- C. Philip Houck, December 11, 2003.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 997 / 31,973
Oil added after sample: none

Okay, with our first Amsoil sample in, you can start sending the hate mail. We know that from this point forward, nothing we say will go un-flogged by the armchair critics out there.

We note that initial wear is significantly reduced from the Mobil 1 sample. Is it the oil at work, or just the natural aging of the engine? Time will tell, we suspect. The first 3,000 miles showed the most wear on Mobil 1, so if Amsoil can buck that trend then it will hold a significant advantage in the long term. Also note that even with over 30,000 miles the copper is still crazy high (hello GM, do your cams ever break in or what?). Insolubles once again jump immediately to 0.3%. If we had to guess, we'd say this is the limit of the filter's abilities, and we're not likely to ever see better than that. Viscosity dropped a bit, something Mobil 1 didn't do, but it remains significantly higher than Mobil 1's viscosity at this stage. Round one, advantage: Amsoil. Clapclapclap.

Mile 2000 -- Stephen Schreurs, January 5, 2004.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 1,985 / 32,961
Oil added after sample: 1/2 quart

The Amsoil still looks like yummy maple syrup -- as it should. This part of the test is what we technically refer to as the "boring part" -- any oil ought to get through the first 5,000 miles without incident. But, it's instructive to watch its behavior nonetheless -- viscosity fluctuation, the TBN plunge, and so on. It also looks like the LS1's cam bearings haven't finished breaking in, as the copper wear is still quite high. We also note with great interest that Amsoil has already lost over 50% of its virgin TBN, whereas Mobil 1 had lost perhaps 30% by this stage. But it's long-term TBN retention that matters, so it could hold steady yet.

Mile 3000 -- Stephen Schreurs, January 27, 2004.
Oil/Vehicle miles: 2,996 / 33,972
Oil added after sample: none

The oil looks fine -- dark amber syrup still -- but the car's sprung a coolant leak, so we were curious to see if anything unusual showed up in testing. Nothing did, thankfully; the dealer's had no luck tracing the leak, so whatever it is, it's darn minor. Copper isn't increasing quite as quickly as it was with Mobil 1, but it's too early to tell with other wear metals. The continued drop in TBN is expected; Mobil 1 didn't level off until 4,000 miles (and keep in mind that these TBN figures aren't directly comparable to the Mobil 1 figures in terms of absolute value). All in all, everything's going swimmingly, but to this point there doesn't seem to be a clear advantage of one over the other.

We expect to take the next sample in mid-February.
730@jv ist offline   Antwort Mit Zitat antworten
Alt 09.02.2004, 19:51   #3
Dr. Kohl
Erfahrenes Mitglied
 
Registriert seit: 01.03.2003
Ort: Heidelberg
Fahrzeug: E39 V8 19.3 l/100 km & AUDI
Standard

hier die (schlechte) Übersetzung:

das 15.000 Meile Öl analysiert Resultate! Der vorhergehende Inhaber meiner 1989 735iL besaß das Auto für 17.000 Meilen und änderte nur das Öl einmal. Der letzte Ölwechsel war bei 140.781 Meilen, die Meilenzahl zur Zeit der Probe war 155.909, die 15.128 auf dem Mobil 1 SuperSyn 10W-30 Öl entspricht. BTW, dieses ist NICHT das korrekte Gewichtöl für das M30 in meinem Klima, 15W-50 würde gewesen sein das korrekte Gewicht. Ich entschied, das Öl für Analysen innen zu senden. Ich erhielt gerade die Resultate heute und gedacht würde ich sie wille die ganze Sie teilen. Die Resultate sind, wie folgt: Iron:38 Chromium:2 Lead:5 Copper:18 Tin:0 Aluminum:13 Nickel:0 Silver:0 Silicon:2 Boron:106 Sodium:23 Magnesium:52 Calcium:3062 Barium:0 Phosphorus:1116 Zinc:1297 Molybdenum:81 Titanium:0 Vanadium:0 Potassium:0 Fuel(%vol):<1 Vis.@100C:10.91 Water(%vol):0 Glycol:NEG TBN:8.60 OXID:14.0 NITR:13.0 Analysen Empfehlungen: KEINE KORREKTUR-MASSNAHME ERFORDERT. ÖL IST FÜR FORTGEFAHREN VERWENDET VERWENDBAR. RESAMPLE IN FOLGENDEM REGELMÄSSIGEM ABSTAND. BTW, änderte ich das Öl, bevor ich sogar die Resultate erhielt und ich noch mein Öl an 4k ändern werde.


Mobil 1 Super-Syn Formel 5W30 Mobil 1 genießt z.Z. die Unterscheidung des Sein-s das einzige bereitwillig vorhandene zutreffende PAO synthetische Bewegungsöl. Sie können das Material am Wal-Handelszentrum für Grund Peters erhalten! Möglicherweise wegen seiner breiten Verwendbarkeit und verhältnismässig niedrigen Preises, trugen wir diesen Test mit Hoffnung und Skepsis ein: hoffen Sie, daß er gut tun und Millionen Benutzer M1 vindicate würde, und Skepsis, daß sie sie hinabziehen würde. Wir erwarteten sie, um hübschen Schlag durch 8.000 Meilen oben zu schauen oder so; um vermißten uns zu sagen die Markierung würden sein höfliche Untertreibung. Mobil 1 wirklich geliefert: 18.000 Meilen später, zeigte es, sein Alter aber war noch an der Arbeit hart, welche die Maschine schützt. Als unsere erste Phase der synthetischen Öl-Leben-Studie, war es so viel eine Lernenerfahrung für den Prozeß, wie es für die Resultate war. Wir änderten einige Sachen entlang der Weise -- verschob die Filteränderung von einer Meilenzahl-gegründeten Richtlinie auf eine Leistung-gegründete Richtlinie, geändert den erträglichen Begrenzungen für Viskosität, viel erlernt über TBN und einige andere Sachen -- die Präzedenzfälle für den Rest der Studie einstellten. Aber die grosse Frage, ist was haben wir erlernt bis jetzt? Sind hier einige Punkte, zum zu erwägen, gegründet auf unserer Erfahrung mit dem Mobil 1 Phase. Das Erhalten von von gerade einer Ölanalyse erklärt nur ein kleines Stück der Abbildung. Es im Wesentlichen würde nur als pass/fail Einheit dienen; ohne eine Tendenz zu überwachen, würden die interessantesten Teile der Analyse unmöglich sein zu sehen. Totalbasiszahl ist ein bewegliches Ziel. Es gibt mehrfache Methoden für die Prüfung sie, die zwischen Labors wertlos vergleicht, und keine der Methoden haben Wiederholbarkeitrate wert das Erhalten ungefähr aufgeregt. Während TBN wertIST, als Teil der größeren Abbildung zu betrachten, da ein einzigartiges Maß es auch, an zu bauen entstellt wird. Maschine Abnutzung wirklich Abnahmen als Ölalter. Dieses ist auch bei der Prüfung bestätigt worden, die durch Ford Motor Co. und ConocoPhillips geleitet wird und in SAE technischem Referat 2003-01-3119 berichtet ist. Was dieses Mittel ist, daß zwingende Ölwechsler wirklich mehr Maschine Abnutzung als die Leute verursachen, die ihr Motoröl irgendein Alter auf ihr erhalten lassen. Den Kurbelkasten aufzuschichten ist ein kritischer Bestandteil der ausgedehnten Ölwechselabstände, und häufige Filteränderungen sind der Schlüssel zu den Extremlänge Abständen am wahrscheinlichsten. Der kumulative Effekt des gleichmäßigen Minderjährigen Oberseite-top-ups, geschweige denn eine Filteränderung, erhöht im wesentlichen die Langlebigkeit des Öls. Gegründet auf den Resultaten haben wir hier, würden wir 8.000 Meilen zwischen Ölwechseln auf einer Maschine, die kein Öl an allen benutzt, möglicherweise 10.000 Meilen auf einer Maschine, die etwas Öl benutzt, und 15.000 Meilen oder jenseits mit einer Filteränderung alle 5.000 Meilen empfehlen. Dieses ist selbstverständlich keine Art Garantie, und Sie müssen für selbst auswerten, was Ihre Maschine erfordert. Eine Sache sind wir ungefähr zwar recht sicher: Abstände 3,000-mile ist eine sehr große Vergeudung der Betriebsmittel. Meile 0 -- Brian Schreurs, November 9, 2002. Oil/Vehicle Meilen: Öl 0/9.939 fügte nach Probe hinzu: keine Der Grundlinie Durchlauf (Meile 0) zeigt den Aufbau des additiven Pakets in Mobil 1 Super-Syn Formel, sowie die körperlichen Eigenschaften des Öls vor Ausgabe Zeit in einer Maschine an. Diese Grundlinie erlaubt uns, die Verminderung in der Ölqualität über den Meilen aufzuspüren. Einige Leute haben vorgeschlagen, daß das TBN die hohe Weise zu ist und eine prüfenstörung sein kann. Jedoch scheint die langfristige TBN Tendenz, anders anzuzeigen. * Blackstone war genug freundlich, eine zweite Analyse des reinen Öls wegen der neuen TBN Testmethode zu leiten. Wir sind sie durchführten einen vollen Test zwar froh, weil zusätzlich zum Sehen der relativen TBN Zahlen er auch interessiert, um zu merken, daß Mobil tweaked ihre Formel Aspitze scheint. Überprüfen Sie aus den erheblich höheren Niveaus des Bors und des Kalziums und am Rand höheres phosphoriges und Zink. Jetzt konnten etwas von diesem Produktion Abweichungen gerade sein, aber die Tatsache, daß sie oben das allgemeine ist, schlägt zu uns mindestens ein robusteres Paket vor. Sie ist zu spät, alles über dieses für den gegenwärtigen Test zu tun, aber der Amsoil Test stellt nicht das gleiche Problem gegenüber: wir kauften alle 18 Quarts als ein Los. Meile 1000 -- Gregory Brunnen

[Bearbeitet am 9.2.2004 um 19:54 von Dr. Kohl]

[Bearbeitet am 9.2.2004 um 20:02 von Dr. Kohl]
Dr. Kohl ist offline   Antwort Mit Zitat antworten
Antwort


Aktive Benutzer in diesem Thema: 1 (Registrierte Benutzer: 0, Gäste: 1)
 
Themen-Optionen
Ansicht

Forumregeln
Es ist Ihnen nicht erlaubt, neue Themen zu verfassen.
Es ist Ihnen nicht erlaubt, auf Beiträge zu antworten.
Es ist Ihnen nicht erlaubt, Anhänge hochzuladen.
Es ist Ihnen nicht erlaubt, Ihre Beiträge zu bearbeiten.

BB-Code ist an.
Smileys sind an.
[IMG] Code ist an.
HTML-Code ist aus.
Gehe zu


SiebenPunktSieben - das siebte 7er-Jahrestreffen - jetzt den Foto-Bericht anschauen!
Alle Zeitangaben in WEZ +1. Es ist jetzt 22:27 Uhr.

7-forum.com Forum Version 6 powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Mit der Nutzung des Forums erklären Sie sich mit den Nutzungsbedingungen einverstanden.
 

 
www.7-forum.com · Alle Rechte vorbehalten · Dies ist kein Forum der BMW Group