What's the best oil for YOUR Shelby, answers within.
03-09-2011, 04:24 PM
#31
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
The UOA for Amsoil 10W-40 has returned, and everything is working out just fine.
Sample #1 was Amsoil 20W-50 from the previous sample run
Sample #2 was Amsoil 10W-40 from the current sample run (this oil is still in the sump, only a sample was taken with a pump from the dip stick tube)
Iron, Copper, Lead and Aluminum:
the wear numbers are consistent with the previous fill of 20W-50. In fact, my car was raced more (and harder) on the fill of 10W-40 than it was on 20W-50.
Silicon:
I see a reduction in the ppm content of silicon, about 37 ppm less, but still not what I expected. I was hoping to see normal content around 15 ppm. Yes, it's a big reduction from the previous sample of 89 ppm, so that tells me the new Amsoil EaU air filter is doing the job better than the oiled wet gauze type filter I was using prior. I'm curious if the higher ZDDP formulations of Amsoil 10W-40 and 20W-50 have higher amounts of silicon in the virgin sample. I know their lower viscosity passenger car formulations have ~10 ppm of silicone in virgin samples.
Although, even though I'm not 100% satisfied with the outcome of the silicon report, it's still world's better than any other UOA I have seen from other GT500s. Other UOAs have silicon content ranging from 150-300 ppm in engines with similar mileage. I do have a sample from a GT500 using Castrol 5W-50, the silicon was only 24 ppm, but the engine had 10,500 miles at the time the sample was taken. This may be evidence that the high levels of silicon in the 5.4L engine are in fact due to the manufacturing process, and it takes a few oil changes to remove the bulk of it. The jury is still out, and I will have to wait until I drain the sump, refill again, and then get a UOA with some miles in it.
Boron:
Why are they flagging Boron? It's native in the virgin samples of Amsoil. This time less than before.
ZDDP:
Good levels of anti-wear additive here, and plenty to go another UOA. In fact, even higher than the last sample.
Viscosity:
This is where I am most pleased. Amsoil 10W-40 did exactly what I expected it too.....it didn't shear at all (not even 1%). Amsoil spec's this lubricant in virgin samples to be 14.6, this sample measured in at 14.9. This is great news, and backs up my theories of superiority over Motorcraft, Castrol, and Mobil 5W-50.
TBN:
Detergent additives, still strong, and even better than the first sample. This lubricant has many more miles to go before a change in required.
Oxidation:
They flagged this as green (normal). Amsoil lubricants will have an oxidation reading around 25-30 on fresh non-used oil. 50 is still in the usable range. I will of course be keeping an eye on this area for the next sample.
Final thoughts:
Overall, this sample of Amsoil 10W-40 performed just as well as the previous fill of 20W-50. In fact, in the viscosity (shearing), ZDDP, and TBN areas, it was superior. The prior UOA report was deemed "normal". I believe this report to be mis-marked "abnormal". The silicon content is why it was marked as a level 2, and not level 1 (even though it's the lowest silicon ppm in any Shelby UOA with similar miles). I'm leaving this sample in the 5.4L for another 2,000 miles. We will see how well it holds up to a 4,000 mile interval.
Sample #1 was Amsoil 20W-50 from the previous sample run
Sample #2 was Amsoil 10W-40 from the current sample run (this oil is still in the sump, only a sample was taken with a pump from the dip stick tube)
Iron, Copper, Lead and Aluminum:
the wear numbers are consistent with the previous fill of 20W-50. In fact, my car was raced more (and harder) on the fill of 10W-40 than it was on 20W-50.
Silicon:
I see a reduction in the ppm content of silicon, about 37 ppm less, but still not what I expected. I was hoping to see normal content around 15 ppm. Yes, it's a big reduction from the previous sample of 89 ppm, so that tells me the new Amsoil EaU air filter is doing the job better than the oiled wet gauze type filter I was using prior. I'm curious if the higher ZDDP formulations of Amsoil 10W-40 and 20W-50 have higher amounts of silicon in the virgin sample. I know their lower viscosity passenger car formulations have ~10 ppm of silicone in virgin samples.
Although, even though I'm not 100% satisfied with the outcome of the silicon report, it's still world's better than any other UOA I have seen from other GT500s. Other UOAs have silicon content ranging from 150-300 ppm in engines with similar mileage. I do have a sample from a GT500 using Castrol 5W-50, the silicon was only 24 ppm, but the engine had 10,500 miles at the time the sample was taken. This may be evidence that the high levels of silicon in the 5.4L engine are in fact due to the manufacturing process, and it takes a few oil changes to remove the bulk of it. The jury is still out, and I will have to wait until I drain the sump, refill again, and then get a UOA with some miles in it.
Boron:
Why are they flagging Boron? It's native in the virgin samples of Amsoil. This time less than before.
ZDDP:
Good levels of anti-wear additive here, and plenty to go another UOA. In fact, even higher than the last sample.
Viscosity:
This is where I am most pleased. Amsoil 10W-40 did exactly what I expected it too.....it didn't shear at all (not even 1%). Amsoil spec's this lubricant in virgin samples to be 14.6, this sample measured in at 14.9. This is great news, and backs up my theories of superiority over Motorcraft, Castrol, and Mobil 5W-50.
TBN:
Detergent additives, still strong, and even better than the first sample. This lubricant has many more miles to go before a change in required.
Oxidation:
They flagged this as green (normal). Amsoil lubricants will have an oxidation reading around 25-30 on fresh non-used oil. 50 is still in the usable range. I will of course be keeping an eye on this area for the next sample.
Final thoughts:
Overall, this sample of Amsoil 10W-40 performed just as well as the previous fill of 20W-50. In fact, in the viscosity (shearing), ZDDP, and TBN areas, it was superior. The prior UOA report was deemed "normal". I believe this report to be mis-marked "abnormal". The silicon content is why it was marked as a level 2, and not level 1 (even though it's the lowest silicon ppm in any Shelby UOA with similar miles). I'm leaving this sample in the 5.4L for another 2,000 miles. We will see how well it holds up to a 4,000 mile interval.
Last edited by Unleashedbeast; 03-28-2012 at 10:33 AM.
03-20-2011, 09:42 PM
#32
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
I would like to add that I am noticing another advantage of using a true synthetic lubricant with less viscosity spread. Say a 10W-40/20W-50 versus a 5W-50.
NOACK Volatility:
Amsoil 10W-40 = 6.7%
Amsoil 20W-50 = 6.5%
Red Line & Schaeffer 5W-50 = 8.5-8.9%
MC, Castrol, Pennzoil, and Mobil 1 5W-50 = 10-12% *Thanks to a group III base stock*
The lower the % of NOACK Volatility, the less % of mass of the engine lubricant that is lost due to evaporation and burn off. If you have less evaporation, this means less of the engine lubricant is lost in vapor form, less will be sucked out of the crankcase via the PCV system, and less will be injected back into your supercharger.
For those with catch cans, this means longer intervals before you have to dump what is caught.
For those without, this means decreased contamination to the supercharger rotors and intercooler.
Just food for thought.
NOACK Volatility:
Amsoil 10W-40 = 6.7%
Amsoil 20W-50 = 6.5%
Red Line & Schaeffer 5W-50 = 8.5-8.9%
MC, Castrol, Pennzoil, and Mobil 1 5W-50 = 10-12% *Thanks to a group III base stock*
The lower the % of NOACK Volatility, the less % of mass of the engine lubricant that is lost due to evaporation and burn off. If you have less evaporation, this means less of the engine lubricant is lost in vapor form, less will be sucked out of the crankcase via the PCV system, and less will be injected back into your supercharger.
For those with catch cans, this means longer intervals before you have to dump what is caught.
For those without, this means decreased contamination to the supercharger rotors and intercooler.
Just food for thought.
03-28-2012, 10:27 AM
#34
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
What are they hiding?
03-28-2012, 10:35 AM
#35
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
I noticed that all images were broken in this thread, so I fixed them.
Also, the UOA Excel spreadsheet was created to show trends (post #1 has a lot of valuable added information). The efforts of this thread have come a long way since the beginning of criticism over a year ago.
Also, the UOA Excel spreadsheet was created to show trends (post #1 has a lot of valuable added information). The efforts of this thread have come a long way since the beginning of criticism over a year ago.
04-06-2012, 10:07 PM
#37
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
It's big in industry, not so much in passenger automotive applications.
Industry guys never have break downs that are lubricant related using it in the field. That means it must be more than adequate to get the job done. Here is a quote taken from BITOG about it.
Industry guys never have break downs that are lubricant related using it in the field. That means it must be more than adequate to get the job done. Here is a quote taken from BITOG about it.
The railroad uses Hydrotex in quite a lot of equipment. Just about every forklift, tractor, loader, and Kubota RTV runs Hydrotex. Either 10w30 or 15w40. The Kubota's run 24 hours a day non-stop. They run for weeks on end either idiling or WOT in sub-zero temps during the Winter. The maintenance dept tries to change oil I believe every 50 hours but I know they can't keep track of all the machinery.
A guy I move power with tells me Hydrotex is nothing special. I think they are either just blenders or a part of a bigger oil company. Not really sure. There are barrels of it in the heating plant. Must be where maintenance keeps their stash. There is a guy in Scottsbluff NE who must be a dealer. Has Hydrotex decals on his truck. If he sells to the railroad he makes a ton.
I have never seen a piece of equipment that runs Hydrotex down for an oil-related failure. It must be adequate.
A guy I move power with tells me Hydrotex is nothing special. I think they are either just blenders or a part of a bigger oil company. Not really sure. There are barrels of it in the heating plant. Must be where maintenance keeps their stash. There is a guy in Scottsbluff NE who must be a dealer. Has Hydrotex decals on his truck. If he sells to the railroad he makes a ton.
I have never seen a piece of equipment that runs Hydrotex down for an oil-related failure. It must be adequate.
Last edited by Unleashedbeast; 04-06-2012 at 10:17 PM.
04-06-2012, 11:41 PM
#38
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Virginia
Posts: 37
I was just wondering if you had heard of it or not. My dad sells the stuff, we use it in our cars, havent changed the oil in my shelby yet, so i need to find out if he has an adequate weight for you it. I know he doesnt have a 50w that it recommends.
04-07-2012, 07:27 AM
#39
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 1,465
If you have the 170* thermostat, use something in a 30 grade. 10W-30 preferred for shear strength.
07-18-2012, 09:01 PM
#40
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,652
When it comes to all of this info...again from a layman's perspective...is Mobil1 and other synthetics like it crap? This is a serious question because anymore it's not that motors are failing from what I see, it's the stuff hanging off of the motor that takes a dirt nap.