DFM/AFM dropped from some 2021 GM trucks?

[customboss]

6 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

What I see is a motor bedding in nicely. Wear is declining per unit miles OCI on a very nice graphable track. His fuel dilution and water declining with miles as the rings play nicer with the cylinder. Nitration has been floating around since the first sample but fairly stable the last three samples.  It's also absent the new oil FTIR references so I wouldn't know what to make of that. He has also used various oils making apples to apples pretty hard without those references. 11/12 nitration on an oil with a background of 4 is quite a different number than an oil with a background of 7 or 8. 

 

If I know Nick, that man is all up in the maintenance grill of his pet ride.  

He runs Amsoil 0w20 exclusively,except for test 1. Correct me if I am wrong Nick. @Black02Silverado The rings were sealed a long time ago. His technique of using manual gear selection is what made the difference from this perspective. His air filter is even going a bit longer than normal too.  Nitration on this 6.2L sux.....LOL   The only big delta was manually shifting which disabled the AFM and Start Stop unless I am missing something. 

[customboss]

Anyone of you 6.2L with AFM delete folks have oil analysis to show?  

[Black02Silverado]

33 minutes ago, customboss said:

He runs Amsoil 0w20 exclusively,except for test 1. Correct me if I am wrong Nick. @Black02Silverado The rings were sealed a long time ago. His technique of using manual gear selection is what made the difference from this perspective. His air filter is even going a bit longer than normal too.  Nitration on this 6.2L sux.....LOL   The only big delta was manually shifting which disabled the AFM and Start Stop unless I am missing something. 

I changed out the oil at 500 miles over to AMSOIL OE 0w-20 and then the next oil change from there on out has been the Signature Series 0w-20.

[Grumpy Bear]

On 2/9/2023 at 6:13 PM, customboss said:

You’re latest oil analysis was best ever using this technique. 

 

17 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

And you believe that this correlation is causation?

 

13 hours ago, customboss said:

No, didn’t say that.

 

You sure? Cause (see below)

 

 

5 hours ago, customboss said:

His technique of using manual gear selection is what made the difference......

 

Come on, which is it?

 

 

 

[Grumpy Bear]

7 hours ago, customboss said:

He runs Amsoil 0w20 exclusively,except for test 1. Correct me if I am wrong Nick.

 

As requested

 

6 hours ago, Black02Silverado said:

I changed out the oil at 500 miles over to AMSOIL OE 0w-20 and then the next oil change from there on out has been the Signature Series 0w-20.

 

So, three oils are represented in that final report. And the reference sample results for the VOA of the Signature Series? 

 

Has the alcohol content been consistent over all six tests? 

 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Grumpy Bear

[Grumpy Bear]

6 hours ago, customboss said:

The rings were sealed a long time ago.

 

A compression test is to determine how much pressure the engine makes, and a leak down test measures its ability to hold pressure. 

 

Most think the rings are sealed if the motor is generating spec compression test pressure. I hold rings are SEALED when they are at the minimum leak down rate that is achieved over the useful life of the motor. Normal production standard ring sets should be in the 8 to 12% range when fully seated and gradually over the life of the motor slowly increase. Many will never do better than twice that. It's a sad state of affairs. OEMs' calling a quart in a thousand or two normal as well as leakage rates hovering 40%!! 

 

 

 

As long as wear is getting lower it isn't done "Bedding in", "wearing in' or whatever other word you fancy. 

 

The whole point of 'Better Lubrication' is flattening and lengthening the "Normal Wear" section of the process. That also means a much longer period from peak wear in rate to the minimum rate.

 

 

[customboss]

Grumpy, instead of drawing wildly incorrect conclusions just allow the data to speak. Nick can answer your specific questions over the tests results.

 

Keep in mind oil analysis is a measure of many functions not just one that you think you can graph.  That mechanical engineering  mindset will have you missing the forest for the trees of chemistry and physics. 

 

His ethanol contents vary over all tests since he has problems accessing ethanol consistently as far as I know.

 

This last test as far as I can see show much less fuels dilution which is MOST LIKELY a product of NOT USING AFM.  Thats really the only difference but can I say its the causal of the improved wear control and lower fuels dilution? Probably but it depends on what Nick shares.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Black02Silverado]

12 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

As requested

 

 

So, three oils are represented in that final report. And the reference sample results for the VOA of the Signature Series? 

 

Has the alcohol content been consistent over all six tests? 

 

 

Most of my driving is city and so I use manual to keep AFM off and Autostop off.  I did make a trip to mom's in PA.  1,000 miles round trip.

As for E85  use.  The PA trip had it at a 50/50 mix since I can get it up there easily at Sheetz.  Down here in NC not so much since only one station has it and it is a major pain to get to the pump.  But for the most part the last sample was taken with majority of E85 mixed in and using Manual mode.

[KARNUT]

[Grumpy Bear]

6 hours ago, customboss said:

Grumpy, instead of drawing wildly incorrect conclusions just allow the data to speak. Nick can answer your specific questions over the tests results.

 

Keep in mind oil analysis is a measure of many functions not just one that you think you can graph.  That mechanical engineering  mindset will have you missing the forest for the trees of chemistry and physics. 

 

His ethanol contents vary over all tests since he has problems accessing ethanol consistently as far as I know.

 

This last test as far as I can see show much less fuels dilution which is MOST LIKELY a product of NOT USING AFM.  Thats really the only difference but can I say its the causal of the improved wear control and lower fuels dilution? Probably but it depends on what Nick shares.  

 

 

It is not lost on me the complexity of any dynamic system. I just dislike the phrase "all other things equal'. They never are. So, when I explain something, I try not to make it sound like a textbook and hope the reader can follow without being distracted by 'what if's' not spoken ad nauseum. 

 

I also don't read tea leaves, and neither can you or anyone else. I don't extrapolate things not there based on observations that may or may not correlate. No amount of experience will allow one to draw a conclusion like that with such limited information with any degree of accuracy. 

 

Wildly incorrect conclusions? Well, I can't do much with that belief. It isn't mine. You're more that welcome to as much error as you like. Zero bearing on my equipment. 

 

People keep making the same mistake. Thinking I care if they use, believe or pass on a single thing I say. I try to be helpful, but I'm aware I can't force anyone, convince anyone. Have a nice day. 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Grumpy Bear

[customboss]

19 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

It is not lost on me the complexity of any dynamic system. I just dislike the phrase "all other things equal'. They never are. So, when I explain something, I try not to make it sound like a textbook and hope the reader can follow without being distracted by 'what if's' not spoken ad nauseum. 

 

I also don't read tea leaves, and neither can you or anyone else. I don't extrapolate things not there based on observations that may or may not correlate. No amount of experience will allow one to draw a conclusion like that with such limited information with any degree of accuracy. 

 

Wildly incorrect conclusions? Well, I can't do much with that belief. It isn't mine. You're more that welcome to as much error as you like. Zero bearing on my equipment. 

 

People keep making the same mistake. Thinking I care if they use, believe or pass on a single thing I say. I try to be helpful, but I'm aware I can't force anyone, convince anyone. Have a nice day. 

I love ya brother and having done testing for years that had to stand up to peer review I am sorry that I come across like a textbook.... I seem to offend many here. Apologies, its not personal. I just share what I know and when I don't know for sure I say so, however I have some good insight from 45 years of oil and fuels testing. 

[customboss]

On 2/11/2023 at 9:54 AM, KARNUT said:

I love you too Stan..... me and your younger Brother must be alot alike.  LOL 

[KARNUT]

4 hours ago, customboss said:

I love you too Stan..... me and your younger Brother must be alot alike.  LOL 

We worked together for most of our lives and experienced the same. And are pretty much alike. It was fun building cars and competing against each other. In business we had different skill sets that made us successful. My father cracked the whip.

[Cagern]

On 2/8/2023 at 6:37 PM, johnny Ainsworth said:

I'm really wanting the 6.2L, but would consider the 5.3L if I can get it without the DFM/AFM.

From one newb to another, just to throw you a bone, I searched for a 2022 because of the disabled DFM (in 5.3L 2022 only) rather than buy a 2023. Going through AFM drinking oil likes it Gatorade (even after reprogramming it off), I'm even less confident with multiple cylinders in DFM and not being able to reprogram. We'll see long term if the lifters, piston rings, et al will still lead to oil consumption problems with the '22. And the 6.2L has DFM as well.

I would guess that other reasons than cylinder deactivation should decide between a 5.3L and 6.2L though.