Grumpy Bear

Notes 6/18/2026 Back on E-85. At current War pricing there was not way to make that work. Not even close.

On our 100 mile jaunt today regular was $3.83 in Rochelle and $4.68 rural. There was also a dollar difference in road diesel. I know where the OTR's are fueling.

Practical Application ISO 4406 I think this oil cleanliness thing is going to boil down to ones personal resolve. The information is there but applying it I believe will test your commitment to the machine. Implementation would involve building or buying a prefilter or purchase of an "ISOCLEAN" oil. Then installing a single digit micron bypass system. A good deal of testing and about 99.9% of you are saying at that point....yea.....not my cuppa tea. So what can you do? You already did the first step. Get educated and leave the bias at the door. Be aware of the its, cleanliness, importance. Do your own work if you can. Keep the equipment clean. Not just your funnel but the engine bay. Use sealed containers. Think it through. I believe you will find, as I did, that the tightest absolute full flow filters (Beta 200) will be around 20 micron. That will yield on average a Beta 75 of 10-15 micron. They are few in number by brand and price point. Loose filters are a dime a dozen and even the best brands have lines of loose filters. Some cleverly marketed as "Extended Service". Others will market flow over efficiency. But I think the take away once informed is that the extra cost of the best offered is a bargain. There are cheaper filters with good efficiency that are equal in performance to niche brands with big prices. Your Quick Lube is about a 40 micron unit. This is where your dealer is a plus. the AC-Delco filter is a good step up from those places. Even better if you specify the UPF line. Be skeptical of marketing. Buying an oil that is made from GTL advertised as the cleanest base oil is using a truth to support a lie. While GTL's are made from debris free gas the processing equipment and post handling is just like any other oil. It also ignores the fact that PAO's and Esters are also gas in origin. Any private prescreening testing you would do, and some have done, would yield a result only good for the batch you tested. AMSOIL and Schaeffer's have built a reputation for paying attention to this detail. Context. Cold starts account for at least 75%, or more, of an engines wear. But of the remaining 25% ish, over 80% is caused by particle count. Now where do we find high milage motors that use this type of information efficiently? OTR trucking! Now, anyone want to build a prefilter or off line cleaning system anyway?

Here's a starter kit: CC Jensen, a Danish oil testing Concern gives us the following guidelines: ISO 14/12/10 Very Clean Oil ISO 16/14/11 Clean Oil ISO 17/15/12 Lightly Contaminated ISO 19/17/14 New Oil ISO 22/20/17 Very Contaminated and not suitable for any service. In addition CC Jensen gives a table showing how engine life is increased by cleaning up the oil. For example cleaning the oil from 19/17/14 to 13/11/8 will extend motor life by a factor of 6X. But even cleaning it two “Life Extension Classes” will double motor life. So perhaps giving those classes would be useful: 21/19/16 20/18/15 19/17/14 18/16/13 17/15/12 16/14/11 15/13/10 14/12/9 13/11/8 ************************************* https://testoil.com/program-management/setting-iso-cleanliness-targets/ Third paragraph from the bottom will give a starting point. Your next question should be, okay 10um at what Beta ratio and the answer is in the graph Beta 75. Then the next question is what is your chosen filters profile? (Purolator PL series below) The red dot is Beta 75. This was the information I obtained from MANN a few years ago. So the best filters, Purolator One, AMSOIL EA, FRAM Ultra, Royal Purple, Bosch Premium should get a doubling engine life over filters like Purolator L, any service filter from any quick lube, WIX, NAPA, STP, Mobil 1, Purolator BOSS. And as noted by CC Jensen a 2-5 micron @ Beta 200 bypass system has the capability of a six fold improvement. AMSOIL has such a system as does Donaldson. Now having said all that testing is the touchstone. Test the oil NEW and test it with your chosen filter. Then test over milage. Do the work, get the result. But understand this in NOT absolute BECAUSE this is one factor in isolation. Example: A valve spring supplier can state that with cam X and a valve train of Y grams the valves will not float to 7K rpm. is that true if the builder choose a system 20 grams over limit? Common sense must be used and limits understood.

Thank you for keeping the train on the tracks and for a thoughtful engagement. I enjoyed the reflection on a previous stance to refine and improve your position. I like that inquisitive flexibility about you Atlas. No the process isn't sterile. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of miles of piping, vessels, pumps. Chevron, the people I worked for, were keenly aware that there is a market for what is known as their "ISOCLEAN" line of lubricants. These are lubricants that are the same as those sold bulk that are further processed by filtration to a level your particular application demands. They will filter and package and provide lab documentation as required. Do not kid yourself. Every gallon of oil that goes into a Chevron Turbine, reciprocating compressor, generator is prefiltered and tested before being charged. Lest wise it was when I was there in the plants I worked in. There are requirements set by manufactures for the cleanliness of the oils used in their equipment. OTR such as CUMMINS has standards shared with customers on this. Commercial interest selling to Ma and Pa do, but don't share that information. Not even upon request but internally, they do exist. The GM study sited, (Graph from Machinery Lubrication in previous post) only shows "relative" importance. I find that fascinating. By constructing the graph like this they admit there are dozens of factors in engine life and via scientific method determined the effect of 'relative cleanliness' on engine life not in miles but in 'FACTORS'. This allows a certain amount of reverse engineering does it not? They even provided some touchstones. Beta 75 as a reference point. Wonderful stuff!! Smaller blenders CAN and some DO take the time and effort to do better than a refinery or large bulk blender, like Warren Oil, in improving the "in the can" cleanliness. No I don't have a list but testing could generate that information. Again, but one of several levers we can pull to improve engine life. The simplest is keeping a clean work station while doing your own oil changes.

I just spent the last 45K miles doing samples every oil change over more than a full year to get the data for seasons and break-in to broke in. I found the same thing to be true. Something was always teetering on done or had stepped off the cliff long before the OLM was DOA. In fact, I found about a thousand mile difference between summer and winter. That is during the winter half the OLM was STILL too long. Even the severe schedule was to long in the winter. Now having done the work I can say I was NOT DISAPOINTED. I saw nothing I didn't already know. Nothing my father hadn't already demonstrated in his 2K OCI's pushing dated iron on dated oils and weak filters to mileages well beyond 300K. Building on his work through use of Lab testing it wasn't hard to find the correlation between 'sight/feel/odor, the things dad relied on, and test results. Use of current viscosity stable chemistries & filters has pushed that marker for my motors out to 3K summer, 4K winter. So the early lies were 3K on conventional oil and the lie upon the lie was 7K+. turns out to be off by a factor of two. So... it is true that modern chemistry has doubled the useful oil life. But the base milage that came from was off by double. It's how good lies work. Partly true, sometimes mostly true so that your meter isn't set off. It also means that non-shear-stable shelf oils are only now as good as the old oils were in their best case scenario. So the question now is how do we improve on that? Thus the question into cleanliness among the other items listed in the post quoted below. If this bores you, feel free not to participate.

Stan....YOU'RE bored. Do you hear yourself?

Morality and Profit are two dogs fighting over the same bone. The bone looses. Profit isn't always monetary. Position, power, leverage, prestige, celebrity, notoriety, fame; all forms of profit and those wanting whatever their currency is, don't care about who that pursuit hurts.

@KARNUT a few days (pages) ago I ask a specific question about the ISO 4406 test. The WHAT and WHY. I hadn't posted to this thread in awhile an yet the response had nothing to do with the CURRENT question, but continued the same rehash of "What we do" and 'What we've done". It ignored the question in its entirety. Now the CURRENT query is further being derailed. "I like what I've got and I don't want to talk about your question I want to talk about why I don't want to talk about your question". Stan that isn't interesting. It's disruptive and unproductive. I tired again further up this page with post on the same ISO method expanding that thought and this below Irrational, it doesn't and it can't and it was explained not just by me but by the MANUFACTURE and was disregarded and Stan I find it tiresome. I get it when people are satisfied with there routines. I get it that some don't like having those routines questioned. Know what I don't get? That these people insist on making sure that no one else gets to explore something they DO find interesting and worth the pursuit. Guy's if you don't like chocolate ice cream and chocolate ice cream is the topic why the compulsion to pick it up and disrupt the exchange of people that do?

18-NA-125 is the document from the OEM, GM, and yet; and although they give a full and detailed discussion of the inputs and outputs your conclusion is ? Am I reading that right? They gave you the answer and your response is , I'm trusting it anyway? Have you ever heard me say, "I don't do irrational"?

Sir, economics doesn't have a moral compass. Just say'n.

One would think. BUT....This is what a Google search gives for the GM OLM system: It doesn't measure oil condition save the highly indirect water temperature. It should measure oil temperature and as we've discussed they are not as closely related as one might assume. The algorithm is based on expected conditions at the end of a certain number of miles or revolutions. And sirs, this estimated value is not tilted in the engines favor. It favors the OEM's bottom line. There are no magical number of miles nor revolutions. No magical time limit. There is only what can be measured directly and only in the broadest of terms would the values used even come close to reality. It samples nothing. It has no idea where the oil started or where it will finish given the limited values use to create the algorithm. It is just a reminder for the brain dead to do something at some time to keep the warranty in tact. Pure fiction. Key Factors in Oil Life Calculation The OLM calculates the remaining oil life percentage based on the following factors: Factor Description Engine Revolutions Tracks the number of engine revolutions since the last reset, decreasing oil life with use. Mileage Since Last Reset Monitors the distance driven since the last oil change, capped at 7,500 miles for most models. Time Since Reset Decreases oil life over time, dropping to 0% after one year, regardless of mileage. Engine Temperature Adjusts oil life based on coolant temperature; exceeding 260°F sets oil life to 0%.

I understand. It is disturbing to think a manufacture asks so much and gives so little in engineering support. This is not a GM issues, this is a greed issue and one the ALL practice. My intent was not to remove the wind from anyone's sail but rather to point out the areas deficient so that they can be discussed with improvements the goal. But to do that you have to know the truth and what that truth is. The commercial interest are honed in on a few select issues in which they control all the variables and are not forthcoming in the least with their customers about the details. Failure is the only thing that drives these people to improvement. One way not to fail it to manage public "expectations". The set a bar they can clear and put their thumbs under the suspenders with chest puffed.... Only the internal data tells the story fully. As we don't have access to that for decades then we have to generate it ourselves. UOA's with data that matters.

Engine Wear and ISO 4406 1.) Cold Starts. 2.) High Particle Count. 3.) Low operating temperature viscosity and high low temperature cranking viscosity. 4.) Depleted AW, Friction and Acid packages. 5.) High engine load. https://me.caltexlubricants.com/en_me/home/learning/from-chevron/heavy-duty-diesel-vehicles-and-equipment/The-Importance-of-Clean-Engine-Oil-and-Its-Impact-on-Equipment-and-Business-Performance.html High particle counts have five sources. 1.) They are manufactured within the engine. Both wear debris and amalgamation of degradation products and combustion driven soot (worse in GDI). 2.) They are ingested via intake air. Ever hear the best oil filter is a good air filter? 3.) They are entrained in the fuel. 4.) This one is insidious. They are introduced in 'fresh oil'. 5.) They are introduced during the oil change. ISO 4406 is the test that measures and quantifies the combine effects of all of the above particle related issues. You can mitigate your way into multiples of engine life by being attentive to them all. https://www.hyprofiltration.com/blog/is-new-oil-clean (from the link above) [Quote] What Is the Recommended ISO 4406 Cleanliness Code for New Oil? A good upper limit for new oil cleanliness is 16/14/11 (ISO 4406). Typical new oil usually has ISO codes of 19/17/15 or worse, which is far too dirty for sensitive components. This can be a major cause of degradation and premature failure. [Close quote]. Source of graph: Machinery Lubrication (GM Study)

So.....everything but the topic.

$3.85 as of two days ago. Regular.

I would not argue that with you. It would be pointless to argue against the truth and you speak the truth. My question and in fact the entire point of this thread is an exploration into the levers of wear which happens no matter how well we maintain our powertrains. Some of these levers we exert a good deal of influence over which can and do result is lower wear, longer powertrain life. Some others we are sort of stuck with. An engine is typically done when the ring to bore seal no longer is able to do the job effectively. Normally the first thing to go in a engine otherwise well maintained and adult driven is this seal. Looking into the means, methods, products and attitudes that influence the rate of wear seems a worthwhile inquiry to me.

No one will care for you like you care for you. Do what you can for as long as you can. IMHO of course.

How about them NICKS!!!

One of the most useful post I've seen. Thank you.

Ops, Right you are. Okay I can still work with that. The USA has 129 working Refineries with a total crude capacity of 17,943,810 barrels per operating day Split proportionally to their size over them all that is 5.6 days of run time. He could sneak out 10X that much and not keep them cooking for two months. Now about that Titanic Shall we continue to argue about rearranging the deck chairs?

1,500,000 barrels of oil would run a Class 1 refinery for about 3 days. You guys are deep into where the ants on the boat came from as the Titanic is sinking.

I appreciate your sharing that. I would opine that you then hold the same view as the majority. I do note the + behind the 200,000 of the earlier models. I expect this means you would not find it unusual to run across pre-AFM/DFM engines with considerably higher miles which begs the question; at what point would you start to be impressed and say, "Now that's truly exceptional"?

Thanks for the point of reference

Great question. Answer....depends. One the volume of the crankcase, the driver that will actually be using the vehicle and the amount it uses plus the distance expected for that next trip. Couple of for instances: Wife is going to drive Dizzy to Moline and back plus a bit around town so say 500 miles on the day. I know from years with that SUV that around town and local rural it uses about a quart in 1250 miles. But on the Interstate and her at the wheel without her anchor nagging her she'll push it and it will drop a quart in about 800 miles. Hence, around town I wait to somewhere between a quarter down to a quart down. On her trip I'd top it if it was down a few ounces and hope for the best. Have I overfilled one? You mean by adding before it needs a full quart I assume. No, not once after finding the true fill mark. I know the dipsticks of everything I drive and add what it needs. I learn this by doing the first oil change a quart low. Run the motor for a few minutes. Let it sit over night. Check and mark. Then add half a cup at a time making note of the place on the stick. I add through the dipstick tube with a barbeque basting bottle. Give it a few minutes to drain down and check again. A vehicle like Dizzy that uses this much oil will take a few quarts between 3K changes. I keep one in the vehicle with the bottle and a bag. (Mindful of it's fullness) Not a big deal and never makes a mess of it. There is no such thing as "multiple quarts' in my shop for any specific oil. There will be a maximum however of the number of different oils used over the fleet. Dizzy holds a nominal 5 quarts. So the first fill was indeed over as it actually took 4.75. My vehicles are fit with Valvomax valves so I can meter an ounce on the drain if need be. Found her mark first crack at it. Never to be repeated. Pepper uses none between changes so I don't keep a quart in that one. Straight up 6 quarts put her dead on the full line. Check it ever fuel stop. They will surprise you when they start using. Raven holds 3 liters or 5.44 ounces over three quarts. I add 3 quarts and 6 ounces. That gives me 5 oil changes on my orphan quart. Lawnmower holds about 3/5 of a quart. I don't over fill it to prevent an orphan. So yea, depends.