What the inside of a 350,000 engine looks like. (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

And Blackstone results arent an accurate depiction of normal wear and tear. In order to monitor normal wear of an engine a sample must be taken from the same oil throughout its life in the engine. Ideally this would be accomplished every so often (every 500 or 1k miles for 10k), not once after 10k. Once you've drained that old oil out the numbers are meaningless. Also, those machines are not capable of predicting catastrophic failure.
 
Last edited:
Are you trying to argue that regression analysis is meaningless? Disagree.
If you're only sending in one sample there is no chance for a trend to develop.

For example, if iron is in the acceptable range at 5ppm after 10k miles you have no idea when that 5ppm accumulated. If it was at 1 ppm until 9k miles and jumped 4ppm that could be an abnormal spike, but still shows up in the acceptable range.
 
A recent Youtube video by "the Car Care Nut" mentioned that Toyota engines should adhere to oil change every 6 months or 5k miles even if Mobile 1 synthetic is used. Is that recommended for the 4.7L also or overkill? Can this be stretched if mainly driving highway miles?

Overkill. Look at threads regarding oil changes where people have sent in samples to Blackstone Labs. Some are advised upwards of 7k to, I think, 9k intervals.

I'm running 10k to 11k (12-month interval) on Mobil1 "regular" synthetic, with mostly city driving (commute of 8 miles), and send a sample in to Blackstone at every change.

They always tell me that I can run it longer.
 
And Blackstone results arent an accurate depiction of normal wear and tear. In order to monitor normal wear of an engine a sample must be taken from the same oil throughout its life in the engine. Ideally this would be accomplished every so often (every 500 or 1k miles for 10k), not once after 10k. Once you've drained that old oil out the numbers are meaningless. Also, those machines are not capable of predicting catastrophic failure.

That's interesting, because most of the long-haul/fleet industry depends upon such analysis in order to arrive at cost/benefit conclusions.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom