Logo

ugh, got my Blackstone reports back on new engines.

bobct

Advanced Contributor
I knew going into this I would need to catch up on deferred maintenance. I pulled oil samples from each engine and sent them out to Blackstone and just got the results back today.

The Starboard side report isn't great but I think it should be ok and I have fixed any of the offending bolt on parts that have contributed to some of the questionable numbers (oil coolers, risers). I'm not sure what to do about the port engine. The compression numbers were all within GM spec which is 20% I was around 12% at the widest range. I just ordered a better borescope and can do a visual inspection of the cylinder walls which was Blackstone's suggestion. My scan tool arrive and the total hours on the port engine is 236, no codes and no excessive RPM history.

If a visual of the cylinders looks ok, would you "ignore" the oil analysis and keep going or dig deeper? Sure wish you could do oil analysis real time.


Bob
 

Attachments

  • port_side.jpg
    port_side.jpg
    61.1 KB · Views: 60
  • Stb_side.jpg
    Stb_side.jpg
    58 KB · Views: 46
Bob: Looks like they used your 'starboard' as the baseline for the reports....The reports I've seen used their 'averages' which they never really quantified the source for. I'd be inclined to compare these reports to your other (older) analyses - for the average values....I can't believe they didn't offer different baseline values....maybe worth a call in the morning....

If the numbers really are that bad, it would be more time and money to strip them down and have a look at the bearings and the pistons....I don't think the bore scope will let you see much regarding scuffed pistons....but you will know just what you have and can remanufacture it if warranted. The report suggests extended oil change intervals may be a contributor and the time on the report isn't consistent with your latest data point. Only having a single data sample isn't conclusive either If pushed, I'd bet they weren't maintained very well. The positive is you will likely get 'like new' performance and you won't have to worry about the previous poor maintenance inducing other failures in the future....and you know that you are very unlikely to have to go thru another set of engine R&Rs....

I'd suggest the choice is yours based on your comfort level (risk tolerance), timeline and budget. The compression (or leakdown) tests just give you insight into the combustion chamber condition - nothing about the bearings' condition....

Its also possible you could get a few years of service as is.....use decent oil and get a few more kits from Blackstone to monitor the situation....and you should be able to manage the situation reasonably well....
 
I knew going into this I would need to catch up on deferred maintenance. I pulled oil samples from each engine and sent them out to Blackstone and just got the results back today.

Question:

Don't these engine oil analysis companies learn more from an actual oil filter media sampling?
 
That’s a good idea on the comparison. I have at least three reports from my 454’s. This new borescope has a second lens and should give me a good 360 degree view of the cylinder walls. I think I’ll pull the oil pan and do a visual inspection and could pop the bearing caps while I’m in there. I posted on a GM truck forum and a couple of guys said “don’t give it a thought, just run them”. One confirmed that he saw crosshatching with well over 100k.

Rick, I’ve only used Blackstone and they only accept oil samples. In hindsight, I should have saved the filters. It would be interesting to see what the filter media looked like.

Update to follow.

Bob
 
Back
Top