OilGuard Bypass Filter

[Tsckey]

Awhile back jbplock posted a question whether anyone was using an OilGuard bypass filter. I don't think he got an answer, but I have the same question. I've read many posts from happy users on other sites but not here. I'm aware of the Amsoil bypass filters, Filtersolutions, Gulf Coast and some others, but would like to get some first hand info on the OilGuard set up. Right now I'm waffling between that and the Amsoil.

Thanks,

TC

[jbplock]

TC,

I was very close to trying the OilGuard but decided to wait and see what JK comes up with. His products are always top shelf. The AMSOIL bypass is OK except I prefer a solution that still uses the OEM full flow filter.
smile.gif

[ 02-17-2003: Message edited by: jbplock ]</p>

[LanduytG]

jbplock

The Amsoil BMK-11 will work great on the Dmax and simple to plumb. The brackert that i am having made for the fuel filter will double as a mount for the BMK-11. The supply will come from the oil filter housing and return will be via a banjo fitting on the pan. The banjo is very low profile and can be used as a drain plug as well. I will try to post a pic later so you can see what it looks like.

Greg

[a bear]

Bill,
I recieved an info pack from Filtration Solutions World Wide. It comes with all the info.; oil analysis reports From 3 different 3rd party companies and a detailed video presentation. I am done viewing the information. It looks very impressive. If you would like you can e-mail your address and I will mail you the pack. These filters are becoming popular with the new EGR diesel PU trucks to control soot. Some of the Ford dealerships have started stocking these for installation on the new PS diesels at the request of some of the owners. Not hear say as I spoke to one myself.
PS Whats going on with the Oil Guard filt?

[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: a bear ]

[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: a bear ]</p>

[biglouieky]

I also got the package from Filtration Solutions. The video was amazing to watch! The only problem is the price of the system for the Duramax. They quoted me 429.00 plus 15 dollars for shipping.

[JustWondering]

Hey a bear & biglouieky,

I purchased one of the first Filtration Solutions By-pass filters for the Duramax a while back. I was very impressed with the quality and heavy duty built of the unit. However, I never did install the filter, (procrastinating, lack of time, etc,etc) Seeing you guys write about this filter, makes me want to install it over the weekend but I think I lost the instructions. Does the video you guys are writting about include installation instructions?

[biglouieky]

JustWondering
THe video just shows how the filter system works against other filters. The only install info on their website is Ford F250 and John Deere.Phone number for them is 1-888-440-9056

[TraceF]

At the risk of another 300 post forum- why bypass? What are you trying to solve or avoid?

[biglouieky]

engine oil fuzzies!!

[a bear]

Trace,
First bear with me as I am no expert on lubrication and oil additives. However in my line of work I do get to realize the benefits of bypass filtration, both centrifugal and filters. And IMHO THEY WORK.
My reason for bypassing are for much of the same reasons we are looking for 2 micron particle removal for the fuel system. By removing particles in the 3-25 micron range we are able to reduce a large amt. of the particulate causing ware of our engines. Also with the elevated EGR temps of the newer diesel engines (especially with performance chips) an increased amt. of soot is generated which causes an increased chance of acid formations/erosion/pitting. A quality bypass filter will remove a large amt. of these soot particles and acid causing water which will then free up the oil additives to continue their work suspending solids and reducing sludge and acid formation etc. The end result is a cleaner/healthier/longer lasting engine, not to mention that warm fuzzy feeling. The extra oil capacity is also a plus. :D Even with the mentioned benefits of by-pass filtration I still change my DINO oil @ the recommended intervals of 5-7K. :D
Judging from your previous posts I know you knew this already. tongue.gif

JustWondering,
The instructions are not included with the info. I think you can call the 1-888 number posted above and obtain instructions specific to the Duramax.

God bless the USA. smile.gif

[TraceF]

Relative to this subject my opinion can be stated in one word- overkill.

IF, 5-7k interval and CI lube you can drive this DMax easily 250k and probably more like 400k miles provided the other systems all are serviced and maintained, cooling, etc. Don't forget the IF 'cause this is where a lot of people will let slide and that's a bad thing. As you say, in this application- dino is good.

Bypass filters are like Todd says- KOOL. But unless the elements are significantly (and I mean SIGNIFICANTLY) better you are not gaining much.

Show me the significantly better filtration evidence and I will buy in.

Oh geez- here comes another 300 posts, I can just FEEL IT.


:(

[Kennedy]

Results? It'll happen soon enough...

Seriously though, having a super fine filter helps remove much of the small stuff that a full flow filter cannot get. If one were to run a 2 micron full flow it would plug quickly, and/or restrict flow. While Our oil may LOOK relatively clean, there is a lot of soot in it. The media I have chosen does an excellent job of absorbing this soot.

[biglouieky]

seeing is believing---order free video from www.fs2500.com

[TraceF]

John- in my view this will be more complicated than fuel filtering.

I'm not sure I have the tenacity.

When you all decide on the fuel filter and oil filter, somebody e-mail me please.

tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif

PS biglouieky- This ain't one of them run the engine a hundred miles with no oil type videos is it? When I try to go check the credentials of swri.org I get "Page cannot be found".

[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

I take it back- I'm in. You got the video?

[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]</p>

[biglouieky]

Trace
Like John said--a lot of soot gets by any full -flow filter. The video just shows how a by-pass system really cleans up oil that just passed through a new stock full-flow filter. They put carbon black powder in oil to make the visual statement.

[JustWondering]

a bear ~ biglouieky, thanks for the info. tongue.gif

[RVGuy]

TraceF,

You know, there might be some folks out there, like myself, who simply enjoy modifying and improving their truck. Not every mod has a return on its money. In fact, very few mods do.

But I would enjoy knowing that I have an oil filtration system that is removes the smallest of particles. Call it piece of mind.

If one really looks at it, it would be hard to justify any of the mods I've made to my truck. Does that stop me? NOPE!!

tongue.gif tongue.gif tongue.gif

[a bear]

Trace,
You can rest easy. I don't think were at the risk of another 300 post forum here, although I enjoy sharing information with friends. Good solutions usually result. The reason for the large amt. of posts on fuel filtering is simple. We all seek a solution that would extend the life of our $6500 (23000 PSI)injection system. It has also become my top priority at this time. I'm not going to continue to beat that familiar drum now because I have made a desision to go with the Mega filter when it's available. My decision - because I like the size for longer service, system pulsation dampening,low diff. and low AV for better filtering efficiency. Also as JK pointed out I have no doubt that smaller particles will find their way between those untorqued post threads W/O a positive seal. Remember a spin on does not torque at the threads. Also the water shedding lining JK mentioned was also another plus to reinforce my decision. Well, enough on that allready.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I have to say that I disagree with your opinion on the oil bypass filter. First of all it is not more complicated than our fuel filtering situation, nor is it just KOOL looking. It's very inexpensive, easy to install, maintain and you definitely see results. If you would still like to see the significatly better filtration evidence as you mentioned I would be more than happy to provide you with more than you would care to read. I can supply oil sample results and evidence of 99.7% avg. uptime with loads running as high as 97% of rated HP and overhauls extended as much as 80% beyond factory recommendations. We are currently running bypass filters on Waukesha, Caterpillar, Detroit and Solar Turbine engines. If you would like I can also send PICs of the bypass filters as they are pulled so you can see what a fullflow filter misses.(not so KOOL looking) I will do this as a favor to you. I'm not saying I can't run 250K or more W/O a BP filter but as much as I like this truck theres a good chance I may want to continue running it a while longer. Then my friend this would have been a KOOL filter. As far as the investment goes, I consider it life long as it can be used on several vehicles in the future. Also I agree that this setup is not for every one. Depends on how long someone plans to keep their vehicle, how fast they accumulate miles or for many other reasons. Its for the individuals to decide whats right for them.
In closing, the one thing I can say is that the reason I will not comment about something I have not tried or am sure about is because I wouldn't want to have the guilt of misleading anyone. Any I hear short of that I consider hear say and take it as just that.

No harm intended smile.gif

[TraceF]

a bear-

Many if not most of you are obviously far more experienced and far more knowledgable than I am on these matters. I do have some relative experience in the lubricants industry though.

On the bigger front, a "newbie" coming into the DP forums to learn and communicate (seek information) about the Duramax 6.6 gets the impression that without better fuel filtration the DMax could and probably will suffer injector failure before 100k miles and in some illustrated cases as soon as 12 or 15k miles.

Further, one could conclude the same fear that without better lubrication filtering the DMax engine will wear out much sooner.

I gotta tell you, I feel really sorry for the 99.8% of the consumers that bought these trucks and will never know these potential problems exist.

I understand that diesel engine oil gets soot in it. Today's additive packages are designed to deal with soot, varnish, acids, water, and all other cranckcase related oil degredation issues better than ever before and the advances in base stock quality allows these additive packages to be more stable (helps them last longer) than ever before.

I agree with fuel filtration although I am not as concerned about the injector issue as some of you seem to be.

I agree with good lubricants filtration.

The basic point I have been making in several different forums is that with the right maintenance intervals and the correct lubricants, coolants, filters, etc. these trucks can and I submit will prove out to be completely capable of 250 to 400 thousand miles of operation without a major failure.

Sure, this can be improved on, no doubt about that. I just don't think these problems are as critical as they seem to be perceived by some of you.

No harm, no foul. smile.gif

[TraceF]

On this subject- here is an interesting link:

http://p2library.nfesc.navy.mil/P2_Opportunity_Handbook/6_II_1.html

Sorry if it has already been posted.

[TraceF]

From Mobil's website:

http://www.prod.mobil1.com/index***p

Do edit/find-


&lt;&lt; 06/17/2002 Bypass Oil Filtering
I read through the archive but could find nothing on "bypass oil filtering." I'd like to add the Oilguard System to my 1995 Ford F-150 with 50,000 miles. The literature and reports of performance of this type of system are quite positive. I've been using Mobil 1 in all my vehicles for 20 years and plan to continue that use. Has Mobil done any tests or does it have any recommendation regarding bypass filtering?
-- Paul Edstrom, Stanchfield
The average conventional spin-on filter for an automobile typically has a 40-50 micron absolute rating. That means particles larger than this size will be caught by the filter element. The Mobil 1 oil filter has a 15 micron absolute rating. Some bypass systems are rated at 1-3 microns absolute. We have not done any performance testing with the bypass oil filtering system you have suggested. Although a good filter is vital to the health of an engine, bypass oil filtering systems are capable of extremely fine filtration. It is usually not necessary to filter an engine oil down to cleanliness levels below the 10-15 micron range. We do not recommend filtering an engine oil down to below 1 micron particle size. Below this size, a filter may begin to capture vital components of the additive package. &gt;&gt;


Who wants to start with additive component micron size? Are they all below 1 micron and could a very efficient by-pass filter pick up some of the components? Seems possible.

It appears that if you use this system you should do on-going oil analysis.

[ 02-16-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

Trying to fill in the *** from the Mobil page address- put dot,j,s where the *** is.

[ 02-16-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

[ 02-16-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

[ 02-16-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]

I got this from the OilGuard website:

Sub-micron filtration does occur within the OilGuard bypass filter, and possibly within other competitive bypass filters. But this sub-micron filtration is a natural adhesion process of contamination simply sticking to the filter, much the same as dust sticks to the screen of a window. The filter is not trapping sub-micron particles, it is merely collecting them without any rate of regular consistency. To claim nominal sub-micron filtration would require proof that a filter can trap 50% of ALL sub-micron particles within a single pass. OilGuard knows of no such bypass oil filter which can achieve this.

:confused:

[ 02-17-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]</p>

[TraceF]

In summary-

Mobil tech writes this: &lt;&lt; The average conventional spin-on filter for an automobile typically has a 40-50 micron absolute rating. That means particles larger than this size will be caught by the filter element. The Mobil 1 oil filter has a 15 micron absolute rating. Some bypass systems are rated at 1-3 microns absolute. We have not done any performance testing with the bypass oil filtering system you have suggested. Although a good filter is vital to the health of an engine, bypass oil filtering systems are capable of extremely fine filtration. It is usually not necessary to filter an engine oil down to cleanliness levels below the 10-15 micron range. We do not recommend filtering an engine oil down to below 1 micron particle size. Below this size, a filter may begin to capture vital components of the additive package. &gt;&gt;

I think we can agree, at least I haven't read anything negative on the DP about Mobil tech services, that Mobil is a reputable company and a reputable source of information.

OilGuard writes this: &lt;&lt; Sub-micron filtration does occur within the OilGuard bypass filter, and possibly within other competitive bypass filters. But this sub-micron filtration is a natural adhesion process of contamination simply sticking to the filter, much the same as dust sticks to the screen of a window. The filter is not trapping sub-micron particles, it is merely collecting them without any rate of regular consistency. To claim nominal sub-micron filtration would require proof that a filter can trap 50% of ALL sub-micron particles within a single pass. OilGuard knows of no such bypass oil filter which can achieve this. &gt;&gt;

One could read some warning into this. This is what I meant by this being a similarly complicated issue to fuel filtration. As the bypass filter begins to accumulate lubricant contaminants the possibility exists for the additive package to be diminished. Kind of like the dirt that gets onto the K&N filter helps to catch more dirt concept.

[Kennedy]

Oil analysis will show what the status is of your oil. Now I'm not sure how large some of these additive molecules can be, but I believe if they were large enough to stick in a filter, they could be large enough to harm the engine.

Analysis lists the additive package elements, so if they all disappeared, we'd know something was up...

[TraceF]

John- you reaffirm a point I made in an earlier post- oil analysis needs to be sop with a by pass filter capable of 1-mic filtering.

Again we are adding cost that may or may not give a measurable return.

Additives suspend contaminants by design, as the contaminants are captured in the filter I believe some of the additive has to remain with it.

[biglouieky]

The additives are present to perform basic jobs:to clean the engine by reducing deposits and holding solids in suspension, to neutralize acids,and to coat metal syrfaces to help reduce wear. When levels of contamination rise in these areas, additive depletion occurs. The by-pass filter effectively keeps contamination far below levels that would cause additive depletion within a healthy engine; therefore, the additive package of oil maintains a much higher level than the manufactures requirements.

[Kennedy]

No, analysis does NOT have to be SOP unless you want to stretch the drain intervals. My ferrography reports show a LOT of large soot agglomeration in the 15+ micron size as will many others. This is NOT measured by spectro analysis as they look only at small particles.

Knowing that I have the best possible filtration for my engine oil adds peace of mind that pays for itself.

While I WILL continue to analyze my oil to watch for trends, I am not specifically looking for how many miles I can get from a fill. If the results indicate that I can, so be it, but when you find nearly soot particles measured in THOUSANDS in a ferrography it is time to take notice...

[TraceF]

JK- I agree with your first paragraph, last post.

[a bear]

Trace,
I'm not sure where we are going with this but to date I have never seen or heard an oil analysis showing additives removed via bypass filtering. Unless someone can show me measurable/documented evidence that this occurs I will just have to stick with the results that are measurable and documented.

[TraceF]

a bear- Did you read the Navy analysis of the bypass filters? A clear purpose (not exclusive) was to extend the life of the lubricant. They measure this extension in terms of pay back against the expense of the filtration system.

It goes without saying that this extension is determined by oil analysis.

Did you read the Mobil tech section re bypass filtration? They're documented experts and they seem to believe that "It is usually not necessary to filter an engine oil down to cleanliness levels below the 10-15 micron range."

The point here and that I have tried to make in other forums is that I question whether the perceived gain is worth the actual cost of some of these "add-ons".

If the lubricant is utilized throughout the usefull life, the value to the bypass system gets greater. In my humble opinion.

If you are still changing it at 4k miles and you are running it through a bypass system the oil is practically fresh when you dump it. Overkill.

Regardless of whether there is a study proving additives can be picked up via bypass filtration, I am telling you that it is my belief- that as additives suspend contaminants and those contaminants become trapped by the filter, some additive quantity/quality is lost.

No. I can't prove it.

[jbplock]

The following is a quote from an email I received from Mark Meddock at OilGuard.
(Posted here with his permission)

"I finally had a chance to read the posts on the forum and the contributor who
wrote this is absolutely right on the money::

"The additives are present to perform basic jobs: to clean the engine by
reducing deposits and holding solids in suspension, to neutralize acids, and
to coat metal surfaces to help reduce wear. When levels of contamination rise
in these areas, additive depletion occurs. The by-pass filter effectively
keeps contamination far below levels that would cause additive depletion
within a healthy engine; therefore, the additive package of oil maintains a
much higher level than the manufactures requirements."

The bypass filters do not remove additives, period.

Bypass filters extend the life of additives in exactly this manner. As soot
and other contaminates agglomerate, the filter will remove them. Many
particles are held in suspension by the additives and pass through the filter
until they agglomerate, (especially soot). Our testing over the last ten
years clearly show that running a bypass filter with capability down to 1
micron maintains the additive pack and oil TBN (Total Base Number) much
longer than engines that are running only factory full flow. Our website
reference to catching an undetermined amount of sub-micron particles in no
way makes any inference that oil additives are removed. In fact they are not
and OilGuard customers do not have to test for it via oil analysis. We only
recommend oil analysis for customers that are going to go to extended oil
drain intervals, as a means to monitor oil condition and wear metals.

Thank You, Mark Meddock"

[TraceF]

I repeat my previous post and amend it by removing the last paragraph and the sentence that follows it afterwhich I add the following:

Since the Navy says this:

&lt;&lt; According to Mr. Mike Schleider, Chief Engineer for the Support Equipment and Vehicle Management Directorate at the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, the use of oil bypass filters in Air Force vehicles has been approved for use once a base has petitioned their MAJCOM for an exemption from the periodic oil change intervals called out in T.O. 36-1-171. However, if approved, these filters will be required to be used in conjunction with an oil analysis program. The oil analysis program is to be used to determine oil change intervals. &gt;&gt;

and since Mobil says this:

&lt;&lt; Although a good filter is vital to the health of an engine, bypass oil filtering systems are capable of extremely fine filtration. It is usually not necessary to filter an engine oil down to cleanliness levels below the 10-15 micron range. &gt;&gt;

and I have repeatedly said this:

&lt;&lt; I agree with good lubricants filtration.

The basic point I have been making in several different forums is that with the right maintenance intervals and the correct lubricants, coolants, filters, etc. these trucks can and I submit will prove out to be completely capable of 250 to 400 thousand miles of operation without a major failure.

Sure, this can be improved on, no doubt about that. I just don't think these problems are as critical as they seem to be perceived by some of you. &gt;&gt;

and since my general approach to issues such as this is based on (my own) economic analysis, and the fact that I don't want to do oil analysis at 10k, 12k, 14k, etc to first establish a baseline and then less frequently to be sure the $180 bypass system and extra expense of filters will eventually pay off (somehow)...

I ain't gonna buy one. It's not kool enough.

If you want it- by all means- BUY IT.

I spent my money on Juice instead. That's kool. You all have convinced me of that !!!


:D

[jbplock]

Well, I installed an OilGuard on my Dmax today. I had decided to wait for JK’s solution (which I’m sure will be excellent) but the folks at OilGuard made me an offer I couldn’t refuse: A filter kit in exchange for documenting the Dmax install. The unit is very well made and was easy to install. It also does not alter the OEM full-flow filter installation. The bypass is fed from the 3/8 plug on the oil filter adapter/cooler assy and is returned through a custom fitting that attaches in place of the oil-pan drain plug. I took a bunch of pictures and will be writing up a description of the installation along with a few interesting things I found out in the process. As soon as it’s complete I’ll put up a link to the write up and pictures. The folks at OilGuard also gave me two oil sample kits for doing a before and after ISO particle count test. More to come… (I have to make up some family time – dad has been in the garage too long)

smile.gif

[ 02-21-2003: Message edited by: jbplock ]</p>

[jkm_dmax]

I installed the Filtration Solutions bypass filter on my '01 Dmax almost 2 years ago. The unit is very well made. The outer casing would probably stop a small caliber bullet which certainly provides a little "piece of mind" when driving rough rock roads.

I change the bypass filter every 10,000 miles and send samples for analysis. I perform a complete oil and filters (OEM and bypass) change every 20,000.

[TraceF]

This is very interesting to me. It seems you are satisfied with the analysis result.

You are getting your money's worth from this add-on.

At only around $7 though- I would probably feel more "warm and fuzzy" doing the oem every 10 as well.

Are you using synthetic or dino oil?

[jkm_dmax]

I have been very pleased with the oil analysis results to date. I used Rotella T 15-40 until the truck had 50,000 miles then switched to Rotella Synthetic. The main reason for Rotella is that its readily avilable, reasonably priced, and that's what my dad had used for years in farm equipment and several Petes and Int'l over-the-road rigs...

[Kennedy]

jkm,

Have you ever done a ferrography on your oil? MUCH more detailed than a typical spectro analysis, and a real eye opener! I just installed my prototype bypass system, and now need to rack up some miles. I have 2k on it now and the oil color as bloted on a paper towel has gone from a clear to a light caramel, kind of like the difference between Quaker State and older Valvoline. Just a hint of darkening.

[jkm_dmax]

Kennedy,
The oil analysis I have had done was typical spectrographic. A company called Blackstone Labs performed the tests. Each analysis includes a brief narrative written by the technician regarding the results.

I have never heard of the analysis you referred to, please tell me more...

[TraceF]

Not to answer for Kennedy but I think the basic difference is that ferrography seperates the wear components from the carrier either by centrifuge or magnet filtration.

Spectography measures the suspended wear components in ppm relative to the carrier.

[Kennedy]

Ferrography also looks at the BIG stuff.

George Morrison www.avlube.com is who I do my ferrography through. He has an ad banner on this site.

[a bear]

Trace,
In responce to your post where a Mobil (rep?) stated that Mobil doesn't recommend filtering motor oil below 15 microns, did you notice that in the very next sentence the mobil 1 - 15 micron absolute filter was advertised. Just found the exact numbers to be a little strange. Also engine wear does happens below the 15 micron level. Reduced componet clearances with higher loads and thinner films will cause more wear from smaller particles. My truck for one is a loaded work truck. Pulling a 40' cattle trailer and heavy equipment.
I won't comment on that persons assumption of removing additives as this does not show in oil analysis. There is no doubt that Mobil products are top shelf but with a 15 micron absolute rating and the aggressive oil flow of the DMAX I would have to wonder how long would it be before the media becomes restricted and oil starts to flow through the (GM recommended) bypass valve thus washing off the filter media particles back into the oil stream ? After pricing the Mobile 1 filters that are near our specs (none available for the DMAX) it appears that the cost is nearly equal to the full flow and bypass element combined. I personally feel that a by-pass oil filter is a one time investment that will bring measurable returns and can be transfered between vehicles. As I said before it's not for everyone but good if you plan on running high miles on the vehicle. Personally I just want to see how far this truck will go so I will give it what ever it needs to see it there.

By the way check out G.Morrison's sig. He just happens to be a lube enginner working for Mobil that I think all here have come to respect. Do I see a bypass filter there?
:D

[TraceF]

Hey a bear!

I think you misread the Mobil document. I read it to say the MOBIL 1 (brand) 15-micron filter meaning 15-mic absolute.

Regarding George Morrison, I thought he worked for a distributor that sells Mobil products. I'll go find his sig to get straight on that.

OilGuard went on the record saying that their filter will not remove additives. I am not technically qualified to confirm or deny this. But, other than from the product seller and advertiser- I have seen no other statement to support this.

I do know with certainty that additives suspend contaminants- so in my mind, logic tells me that if the contaminants are stopped by a 1-mic filter, at least SOME of the additive gets stopped there too.

BTW- I haven't said the by-pass filter doesn't work, just that it's overkill for the majority of us.

If it gives you peace-of-mind, that adds value.

[ 02-27-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]</p>

[a bear]

Trace,
I also read it as 15 mic. absolute meaning it would filter out 98% of all particles 15 mic or larger in a single pass.

I agree by-pass filters are not for everyone. I guess the need would have to be determined case by case. :D :D

[TraceF]

JK-

Help me understand... why ferrography? I have been rolling this around in my head for the past 24 hours trying to see the benefit.

If the spectography is saying no elevated wear metals, no H2O indicating possible glycol intrusion, and the analyzed lubricant still represents that it meets the original specification, why go the extra expense of ferrography?

I can understand you wanting this data to support the development of a by-pass system as you are in process of, in this way this info is valuable, but to the consumer- how is this information important?

The "big stuff" as you refer to it is apparently suspended and doing no damage or harm as indicated by non-elevated wear metals. The soot is also being managed by the additive package, in other words, "suspended".

In my mind, the real value of oil analysis is to recognize elevated wear metals in advance of engine failure or significant damage, and to recognize the presence of water (coolant) in advance of engine failure or significant damage.

Additionally, if using oil analysis as an economic tool, it can be used to effectively extend drain intervals. This does not come without some associated risk though if not approached properly.

If you extend drain intervals as a result of having established by way of oil analysis, a "baseline" for the useful life of your preferred lubricant, and have a component failure or a coolant leak into the lubricating system, it is more likely to do significant damage than if oil analysis is routine and frequent.

Here again we come face-to-face with an economic issue. How much would it cost to analyze several times versus changing the lube? This is easy to calculate and compare. Changing oil is cheaper at about $25 per service. In the case of extremely large crankcases or sumps, oil analysis can be economically advantageous. It just doesn't work for 10 quarts.

Once again, in my mind... oil analysis is interesting, but if you change the lubricant at the proper interval, and use a premium current spec product (CI); you are going to get A LOT of miles out of these engines unless you have the fluke.

Then we can hope GM steps up to the plate through 100,000 miles.

Finally, by now I am sure you think I thrive on debate but I am truly just trying to understand your reasoning and understand why you think ferrography is valuable to us consumers.

[Kennedy]

Because a spectro analysis looks right through the soot globules and any large particles. I've seen passing grades on spectro analysis on an engine with the cam bearings literally SHREDDED into the crankcase. This was on my second failed 6.5 block...

[TraceF]

What would the ferrography have shown John? What killed the motor?

The larger metallic and non-metallic particles are usually what causes the ppm wear metals seen by the spectography.

Spectography is generally the first evidence that ferrography may be needed.

[ 02-28-2003: Message edited by: TraceF ]</p>