0w-40 or 5w-40 for BMW N52?

You can find answers you are wondering about easily here.
It is very unlikely you will stumble on 95ppm now anywhere in the US. In the beginning after ULSG became effective? Yes. But oil companies cannot just like that switch production. If I was betting, Citgo will have maybe higher sulfur gas.
It (higher sulfur) could happen in the blending.

And no, I have looked and not found the answer to the why lower sulfur in the gasoline means lower SAPS recommended motor oil. :rolleyes:
 
Thanks for that. I've seen that or a similar write up before. My question is why does the full saps specification go to the area that has the higher sulfur specification (or call it higher sulfur tolerance given the nature of the US rule on sulfur). It would seem the opposite - that in the US given the possibility of getting higher sulfur gas, motor oil would have a lower saps requirement. Maybe something to do with reaction with exhaust gas treatment ??

Fully realise this is a purely academic question and probably falls in the needless category. But education goes on a lot in forums like this. Just thought with all the knowledge on here someone could easily answer it.
 
Thanks for that. I've seen that or a similar write up before. My question is why does the full saps specification go to the area that has the higher sulfur specification (or call it higher sulfur tolerance given the nature of the US rule on sulfur). It would seem the opposite - that in the US given the possibility of getting higher sulfur gas, motor oil would have a lower saps requirement. Maybe something to do with reaction with exhaust gas treatment ??

Fully realise this is a purely academic question and probably falls in the needless category. But education goes on a lot in forums like this. Just thought with all the knowledge on here someone could easily answer it.

The sulfur messes with the pH balance of the oil, makes it acidic. The higher the saps, typically also has higher TBN (total base number) the more resistant the oil is to that change. Base of course being the opposite of acid.
 
I have used 0~40 M1 since it was introduced in my 150kmile engine at the time, then the new subsequet cars.

The old car engine started using oil which prompted mobile to add 10-50 to their range which solved my problem.

From this, my opinion is the 0-xx may affect the oil consumption and perhaps more engine rattles until it is at working temperature and also give a better fuel consumption.
 
The Liqui-Moly 5w40 is a great oil, and I use FCP's oil change kits for my sister's Jetta with that same oil. I wouldn't hesitate to use it in the N52. In fact I think I have a UOA with their oil from my N51, I'll have to see if I can find it. I wouldn't say the 5w40 or 0w40 is better, they are both great oils. Use whichever one is more convenient for you. (y)

The people in the BMW forum ***** about how liqui molly is mediocre oil and people only buy it because it has the big “MADE IN GERMANY” on the front. I mean, other brands like Mobil 1, Castrol, motul etc have made in Germany on the back. So what’s the difference 😂.
Liqui-Moly 5W-40 is junk. Find my old post about it. After just 150 miles its viscosity increased DRAMATICALLY. I posted a UOA to prove it. The reason I did the UOA was because I briefly used LM but could never figure out why I was down a 1/2 quart of oil within just a few hundred miles after an oil change. There is some component in LM that evaporates in short order. It's junk.

Castrol or Mobil 1 don't do that. And both are less expensive too.

Scott

Edit: See attached. A VOA and a UOA with just 150 miles on it. 150 miles! Look at the viscosity change! And I had used LM on the previous OCI so the UOA wasn't affected by the remains of another oil. I have detailed, written records to prove this.
VOA LM 5W-40 2016.jpeg


UOA E90 LM 5W-40 150 mile OCI 2016.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Liqui-Moly 5W-40 is junk. Find my old post about it. After just 100 miles its viscosity increased DRAMATICALLY. I posted a UOA to prove it. The reason I did the UOA was because I briefly used LM but could never figure out why I was down a 1/2 quart of oil within just a few hundred miles after an oil change. There is some component in LM that evaporates in short order. It's junk.

Castrol or Mobil 1 don't do that. And both are less expensive too.

Scott

Edit: See attached. A VOA and a UOA with just 150 miles on it. 150 miles! Look at the viscosity change! And I had used LM on the previous OCI so the UOA wasn't affected by the remains of another oil. I have detailed, written records to prove this.
View attachment 50022

View attachment 50023
Hmm, I haven't had to add any oil or anything in mine. I mean, you can't beat free oil changes
 
If the Liqui Moly product carries the required approval it's not junk, that's silly. Unless they are lying about their approval or changed the formulation since it was obtained.
 
If the Liqui Moly product carries the required approval it's not junk, that's silly. Unless they are lying about their approval or changed the formulation since it was obtained.
I feel like with that brand they usually say “recommended for” which is not the same as a certified approval. I encountered this when I was looking at their products for BMW LL-01
 
Liqui-Moly 5W-40 is junk. Find my old post about it. After just 150 miles its viscosity increased DRAMATICALLY. I posted a UOA to prove it. The reason I did the UOA was because I briefly used LM but could never figure out why I was down a 1/2 quart of oil within just a few hundred miles after an oil change. There is some component in LM that evaporates in short order. It's junk.

Castrol or Mobil 1 don't do that. And both are less expensive too.

Scott

Edit: See attached. A VOA and a UOA with just 150 miles on it. 150 miles! Look at the viscosity change! And I had used LM on the previous OCI so the UOA wasn't affected by the remains of another oil. I have detailed, written records to prove this.
View attachment 50022

View attachment 50023
I've done a VOA on the LM LL HT 5W40 as well and used it for 4 changes in my VW with up to 9K miles beating on it. 100 deg viscosity typically drops sharply initially then comes back up out at the end if you push it from oxidation as I understand it and my data show that. Zero oil consumption. No clue here but I'd cry foul on that particular sample/analysis. LM LL HT is hardly "junk" oil and does have the approvals - arguing about whether it's worth the cost, the marketing component, comparing to other like-approved oils sure, good discussions but not junk.
 
I feel like with that brand they usually say “recommended for” which is not the same as a certified approval. I encountered this when I was looking at their products for BMW LL-01
While LM does have several "recommended for" oils (Molygen would be the commonly available one in the U.S. that comes to mind), the oil here in question (Leichtlauf High Tech) has all the approvals as stated as do many of their oils - that is one of LM's big selling points (as they market it) - approvals.
 
Last edited:
Liqui-Moly 5W-40 is junk. Find my old post about it. After just 150 miles its viscosity increased DRAMATICALLY. I posted a UOA to prove it. The reason I did the UOA was because I briefly used LM but could never figure out why I was down a 1/2 quart of oil within just a few hundred miles after an oil change. There is some component in LM that evaporates in short order. It's junk.

Castrol or Mobil 1 don't do that. And both are less expensive too.

Scott

Edit: See attached. A VOA and a UOA with just 150 miles on it. 150 miles! Look at the viscosity change! And I had used LM on the previous OCI so the UOA wasn't affected by the remains of another oil. I have detailed, written records to prove this.
View attachment 50022

View attachment 50023
Can you post the previous UOA with the same oil (I take it the one shown is not it - that one has more boron and looks to be a different oil)?
 
Last edited:
Can you post the previous UOA with the same oil (I take it the one shown is not it - that one has more boron and looks to be a different oil)?
The first oil analysis in my message is the VOA. Notice the "virgin" in the top of the report. The second one is the UOA, but with just 128 miles on it. You can see from the similarities it's the same oil. The very slight differences are due to: 1) it was used oil, albeit with just 128 miles on it, 2) the normal variance in results I think you'd get with any oil analysis, 3) the UOA and VOA oils may have come from different LM batches. They were all bought on three orders from two different vendors, 26 liters total.

Notice like I said earlier, I had already run an LM OCI in the motor before doing the UOA. This means the UOA was not "contaminated" by another oil. Notice also, you can see in the last picture I observed the LM looked "cloudy" inside the motor (I looked at it through the oil filler cap). As you can see I drained the oil just because of these concerns, but after draining you can see in my scribble that the oil looked okay in the drain pan. This oil did not get reused and was dumped into my recycle container.

At any rate, you can see I maintain a full set of receipts and handwritten records. And, yeah, I know my handwriting sucks. I worked on a keyboard my entire career. But I am meticulously organized.

Scott

EDIT: The VOA results on either side of the "averages" column are both LM virgin. I just realized I did a VOA in both 2014 and 2016. Blackstone report for the standalone 2014 LM VOA is now attached. It seems that LM changed the formulation somewhere between 2014 and 2016. The value immediately to the RIGHT in the UOA is Geramn Castrol 0W-30. Don't confuse the wear numbers. GC had 4,147 miles on it, LM 128. That is why LM shows less wear.

Scan.jpeg
Scan 1.jpeg
Scan 2.jpeg
Scan 3.jpeg
Scan 4.jpeg
VOA LM 5W-40 2014.jpg
 
Last edited:
The first oil analysis in my message is the VOA. Notice the "virgin" in the top of the report. The second one is the UOA, but with just 128 miles on it. You can see from the similarities it's the same oil. The very slight differences are due to: 1) it was used oil, albeit with just 128 miles on it, 2) the normal variance in results I think you'd get with any oil analysis, 3) the UOA and VOA oils may have come from different LM batches. They were all bought on three orders from two different vendors, 26 liters total.

Notice like I said earlier, I had already run an LM OCI in the motor before doing the UOA. This means the UOA was not "contaminated" by another oil. Notice also, you can see in the last picture I observed the LM looked "cloudy" inside the motor (I looked at it through the oil filler cap). As you can see I drained the oil just because of these concerns, but after draining you can see in my scribble that the oil looked okay in the drain pan. This oil did not get reused and was dumped into my recycle container.

At any rate, you can see I maintain a full set of receipts and handwritten records. And, yeah, I know my handwriting sucks. I worked on a keyboard my entire career. But I am meticulously organized.

Scott

EDIT: The VOA results on either side of the "averages" column are both LM virgin. I just realized I did a VOA in both 2014 and 2016. Blackstone report for the standalone 2014 LM VOA is now attached. It seems that LM changed the formulation somewhere between 2014 and 2016. The value immediately to the RIGHT in the UOA is Geramn Castrol 0W-30. Don't confuse the wear numbers. GC had 4,147 miles on it, LM 128. That is why LM shows less wear.
Yes, I understand the VOA, your UOA in question, and all the particulars here. You said you had a UOA on the LM LL HT prior to this I thought - I was asking to see it is all. I think I was mistaken then. You just had used LM before so no contam - got it now.
 
Back
Top