Any oil analysis to share?

[jimg]

Im not exactly sure how to say this so Ill just start and see where it goes. It seems to me (my mostly uninformed impressions) that the filter is the weak link in this chain not the oil. While most oils are capable of very good performance filters may not be. So how do you know if its the oil or filter that needs to be changed? I know some of the bigger NH tractors recommend filter changes before filter/oil changes so changing the filter only is accepted practice. It would seem much more cost effective to only have to change a filter rather than many qts of oil.

 

[snoboy]

When you say "the bigger tractors" are you talking big, big? It could be that the sumps on those big units hold enough oil that the filter achieves capacity before the oil. You are probably correct about the oil remaining clean after the oil but in tractors of the size we're operating we're not talking about much motor oil at all. Refer to cowboydoc's statement/philosophy when in doubt. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

snoboy

 

[jimg]

Not really big...NH TL/TS class.

Im confused then (not unusual)...why mess w/ testing at all in compact tractors? If its not that much oil I would think the test more costly than simply changing the oil/filter after a set number of hrs.

At the Baldwin site they mention testing/extended changes but it sounded like they were counselling caution in its use.

Back to my original 'question'....if the oil test comes back 'bad' does that mean change oil and filter or would simply changing the filter be enough to clean the oil up again..or does it depend on what sorts of contaminates were found?

 

[snoboy]

</font><font color="blueclass=small">( Not really big...NH TL/TS class.

Im confused then (not unusual)...why mess w/ testing at all in compact tractors? If its not that much oil I would think the test more costly than simply changing the oil/filter after a set number of hrs.

At the Baldwin site they mention testing/extended changes but it sounded like they were counselling caution in its use.

Back to my original 'question'....if the oil test comes back 'bad' does that mean change oil and filter or would simply changing the filter be enough to clean the oil up again..or does it depend on what sorts of contaminates were found? )</font>

Jimg I can understand why Baldwin might advise caution. Interpreting oil analysis is kind of an art that I do not claim to have even come close to mastering. I've been taking samples on 4 vehicles at least semiannually for 6 years total. I've been using Dyson Analysis as a interpritive service for 2 years. Thats when the schooling started for me. I will say I have developed a reasonable level of ability to read my UOAs. I will continue to use his service more on a limited basis whenever I see a sample that looks a little funky to me. That brings me right to your last question which YOU basically answered yourself.
The whole purpose of UOA is preventive maintenence. NO just changing the oil and filter will not fix the reason the sample came back bad. It could be an air filter not sealing well, a generally poor tune like an EGR issue. I would never run a vehicle of this expennse a whole calender year without knowing whats happening in my engine. A $500 dollar lawn mower sure whynot but not a $20,000 plus vehicle. This is all my opinion of course but it gives me peace of mind and it helps me stay ahead of possible catastophic failure. One more thing, oil samples are not expensive @ $20 IMO

snoboy

 

[jimg]

Thanx that makes it clearer. So, if the test comes back bad youre still on the hook to figure out whats wrong...which means youd need someone w/ expertise to understand the report -- as you mentioned. I take it that service is extra $$$? I assume if an error is reported that would generally point to a wide range of problems that would need to be narrowed down? Does the report generally give any clue as to the immediacy of the problem?

Now that I think of it a common dodge to pass a vehicle emissions test is to change the oil right before. Marginal vehicles can usually pass. So, given a failed oil analysis changing the oil/filter may well mask the problem giving it time to become worse. Am i on the right track here?

 

[snoboy]

I'd say it's as much of a crap shoot as getting blood work done for your annual physical. The Lab has certain levels that are considered high for a specific item ie. liver enzymes. If a level is higher than the established limit he printer spits it out in bold or says high next to the number. Same thing with oil analysis but its based on their universal averages for a given vehicle ie. iron, aluminum or lead.
(snoboy's cheesy analogy) If cholesterol is supposed to be below 200 and mine is consistently 199 the lab printout wont be bold or put "high" next to the number. So I pay a doctor to interprit the lab work and he looks at the whole picture of the lab report to make an educated guesstimation of my condition. Now I have an option here, I can bet that I'm OK because I'm only 199 and continue doing things my way. But most of us are not gonna go that route , we're gonna do what the Doc says to do (as best we can) and probably see an improvement on the next lab report. I know this is a pretty corny analogy but its kind of a similar comparison.
Dyson Analysis plays the Doctor in my analogy. I pay Blackstone for the lab work $17 (20 is the single purchase price, I always do a 6 unit prchase) and $19 for the Dyson read $36 bucks total. Do you need this all the time? Its up to you of course. My point is (as far as this thread goes) If I'm going to do annual oil changes on my tractor I really want to know if the engine package is up to the task. Oil analysis tells us more than whether the oil is dirty or not. It also tells us how the whole engine package is performing. I'm lucky because in 65 hrs./calender year (not much I know) my Kukje 40 hp turbo is showing almost no wear and the oil is super clean as well. Be it known also that thats not because of the Amsoil (although it did a great job) its just a awesome engine package. The best in my personal fleet. Oil analysis is also a hobby of mine so I don't for a moment expect everybody to get as **** as I am about it. Everytime I send in a sample I'm like Ralphy waiting for his Orphan Anny code decipher toy, just to see how my particular component is doing. Waiting for my hydraulic sample as we speak. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[dmccarty]

JimG,

When I get an anaylysis done, Blackstone always has given me some info regarding the numbers. What you want to do with the analysis is to have enough tests so you have a baseline of numbers. Then when you get a report you will see if a value is out of line compared to the past reports.

On both my truck and the tractor the analysis in the past have shown 2% diesel in the oil That is a border line bad number. It could indicate engine problems. At the time I was in major stop and go traffic with lots of idling, maybe 20-30 minutes in a 60 minute trip. I assumed that the extra highway speed driving would have cleaned up the oil. I was wrong. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif I don't have to drive in those conditions now but the tests showed what was happening. And the problem has gone away.

I change my tractor oil by hours. The last change I should have changed it at 12 months but I did not do so. I think this caused the fuel to show up in the oil. If I start the tractor I generally don't turn it off until I'm done. So if I have to go run the chainsaw for an hour I let the tractor run. Its not idling but running around 1700ish RPM which is where I run the tractor for 80% of its use. Its also the peak of the torque curve. I don't know if running like this cause the fuel in the oil or not. It has not shown up before. I'll change the oil at 12 months next time and retest. I think the problem will go away. If not I'll have to dig into the problem.

Hopefully with oil analysis you can get an early warning of a problem. Maybe before failure and more expensive repairs.

My last truck oil change, I took a sampe but I have not sent it in and I doubt that I will. I did not increase the milage on the oil or do anything different so I don't think its worth spending the money this time. Next time I'll get the test done just to keep the baseline up to date.

Hope this helps,
Dan

 

[snoboy]

dmccarty, Outstanding information and an excellent example of an absolutely common sense approach to the whole UOA thing. My guess is your using Blackstone Labs and you now have a surplus of kits so if you decide not to send the sample in you're out nothing.
Thanks for the great input.

snoboy

 

[jimg]

Thanx for all the explaining, I appreciate your willingness to detail and candor. In the vein of lab tests have you even known one to be wrong...as can happen in human lab tests? Its hard though to understand how the money spent on oil tests can really give a payback. I think for a new machine it would be hard to justify though a used one it might be worth it at least on aquisition and then for a period afterwards. I suppose also if youre changing out many gallons of lube (or whatever) it could save some $$$ there or youre churning out lots of hours. I like to do PM based on hours and that gives me a good reason to poke around under the hood so I can keep an eye on things. If I dont have a reason to be under the hood then Id probably be doing something else.

 

[jimg]

So, it sounds as though the tests just proved that what the mfg recommends is true...not letting a diesel idle for long periods. Being in stop and go traffic is hard to avoid (I know it is here!). I would thin delivery trcuks would be considered severe service as they do mostly in town plus lots of idling while loading/unloading. The tractor is another thing. Having had a couple diesel vehicles prior to my tractor I just let the turbo cool down and then shut if off if I know I wont be using it for a bit -- saves fuel too.