1994 Volvo 945 / Q8 T1000D Dino 10w30 @8000 Km

[miniac007 53]

Hi all, this is my new report for my old Volvo.

 

This Volvo 940 only run cold for 5 to 10 km trip. The biggest trip is 60 km twice a month... Red block B200F engine.

 

The oil is a tractor oil, Q8 T1000D, base group I (http://www.oils.am/home/242.html)

 

Filter is a PureOne PL14670

 

The head was replaced during oil change by a second hand one.

 

Previous UOA is here: http://www.oil-club.ru/forum/topic/9774-1994-volvo-945-q8-t1000d-dino-10w30-8000-km/page__p__245084__hl__volvo+945__fromsearch__1#entry245084

 

 

 

1. Fist the good news: the Pureone give a better filtration than the Mann used previously (see previous UOA with PC), for the same price

 

Now the bad news:

 

2. High silicon: The air filter is a Volvo one, and it is the same than in the previous OCI. I used some silicon gasket for the head cover, which can explain the higher score. But anyway, Silicon is still high... I don't know why ...

 

I supposed the engine is eating salt (See Na) and sand during used in winter in Sweden, but is strange it pass threw the air filter...

 

So no idea...

 

3. High iron: no high associated Cr and Al, so I think it is not cylinders and camshaft.,

 

4. High Cu: There is Tin also, so combined with the high iron, I suspect valves/guide problem with the new old head... Why ? I don't know...

 

5. Viscosity drop: knwon problem with this low quality base...

 

Comments are welcome !

Изменено 22 октября 2014 пользователем miniac007

[miniac007 53]

@miniac007, I'd say if you stick to long intervals you should care about an oil filter. Changing oil every 7000-8000 km it's senseless but on condition you use high-quality products. MANN and Purolator are on the list. Take which is cheaper!

 

For me, wear caused by particles in suspension in the oil doesn't rely on how long is your OCI, it just depends on the number and sizes of particles at every moment, so depend only on the filtration ability of the filter.

 

What rely on the OCI is the ability of the filter to store a certain amount of wear material. Mann and Purolator are both able to store enough material for a normal OCI.

 

 

For the next OCI, I have Super Pace 5w40 + Mann W917. I will see the results, and next, I will go with Super Pace + PureOne. If I see again an increase in Fe+Cu+Sn, I will considere it is not coincidental, and that there is a (flow) problem with pureone filter. For now, I can just conclude "better filtration". I need more experiment...

Изменено 24 октября 2014 пользователем miniac007

[Dimmy 11 091]

Got you.

But you should also remember the more an oil filter is used the better it filters!

In a word, there are many points to count for concerning the comparison of filters.

Изменено 24 октября 2014 пользователем Dimmy

[miniac007 53]

Yes, to many So we cannot solve all the problems with a limited numbers of experiments, but we try to do the best

[Dimmy 11 091]

@miniac007, good luck! Looking forward to new analyses results from your car.

 

P.S. Of course, good tests are expected from car journals but in Russia it's a real problem! One issues tests (good ones) very seldom and another issues tests every year but they cause more questions than give answers.

[miniac007 53]

Btw, what I have read that the most damaging particle size by volume is 5-10 microns.

 

Comparing the 2 isocodes, <= 10µ particles drop from 18521 to 4351, so a 77% decrease. So thats why I think it should perform better.

[Dimmy 11 091]

Comparing the 2 isocodes,

Indisputable

[miniac007 53]

I think we can regard the difference in TBN measuring methods as the reason for such a strange figure.

 

Yes, it seems, I have just received an answer from BS about it:

PM,

 

Thanks for the email. You asked about a different methodology for TBN's and you're correct. Like any industry, oil analysis is always updating and this past summer we modified the TBN process. Since then, the TBN's have been coming back higher than before. The previous system was bad by any means, but what we have now is a more accurate assessment of the oil's acid neutralizing ability. Like you saw last time, the TBN should stabilize from here, just at a higher level. Let me know if you have any other questions and have a great day.

 

Alex Miller

Blackstone Labs

Изменено 24 октября 2014 пользователем miniac007

[Dimmy 11 091]

@miniac007, I wonder whether it means that ASTM 4739 is not accurate enough!

Is it possible to find out what method they used to use to measure TBN in UOA? ASTM 4739? And what now?

[miniac007 53]

What I can read is: "We have always run a modified version of ASTM D-4739, but our machine was calibrated using standards that more closely matched to ASTM D-2896. We are now moving to standards that are more closely aligned with D-4739" so now it should be "true" ASTM D-4739

Изменено 25 октября 2014 пользователем miniac007

[Dimmy 11 091]

In this case I understand nothing: 2896 shows greater result and is typically used for VOA. And 4739 is used to adequately measure TBN in UOA. They turn it upside down! There may be a mistake.

[miniac007 53]

Thats the new answer:

 

> Hi Alex,

>

> Thank you for your answer, but I still don't understand something ...

>

> I read on BITOG ( http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3407761/TBN_methodology_changing_at_Bl ) : "We have always run a modified version of ASTM D-4739, but our machine was calibrated using standards that more closely matched to ASTM D-2896. We are now moving to standards that are more closely aligned with D-4739"

>

> So, as I understand, the new true D-4739 should be less than the old D-2896 clone ? So for an older 4, I should have now 3, and not 8 ?

>

> Or, do I miss something ?

 

Hi PM,

 

You're not really missing anything except that Ryan was talking about virgin oil with that post. Used oil is a different thing altogether and we've been seeing TBN's on used oil come back either unchanged or little higher in most cases with the new standard. Hope that helps.

 

Alex

 

 

 

So, "little higher" is not 4 to 8 for me, so the exact cause of that remains...

Изменено 27 октября 2014 пользователем miniac007

[Dimmy 11 091]

@miniac007, I think I've solved the TBN riddle

1. Partly it's higher because of the 1 qt added (the main reason)

2. Partly it's higher because the engine is relatively clean after shorter OCI

3. Partly it's higher because of the new method of measuring (I'm not sure about it).

Now the received figure 8 in comparison with the previous 4.5 seems logical. At least to me...

[Dimmy 11 091]

I wonder what is the TBN of VOA Q8 T1000D.

[miniac007 53]

1. Partly it's higher because of the 1 qt added (the main reason)

 

1/4 x TBN 11.5 + 3/4 x TBN 4.5 = 6,25

 

2. Partly it's higher because the engine is relatively clean after shorter OCI

 

Well, quite the same OCI than the other 4,5

 

3. Partly it's higher because of the new method of measuring (I'm not sure about it).

 

6,25 + 25% = 7,8

 

 

Even with an optimistic computation, it is quite hard to reach 8,1 I have no VOA of the q8, but TBN should be arround 11

 

Maybe the cleaner oil has also some effect... We will see with next UOA...