2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 7134 mi

D

d00df00d

Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,917
Location
PA
Previous UOA here. 136939 miles on the engine at the time of sampling.

Longer OCI this time. Figured that wouldn't be horrible given that a lot of these miles were from multiple 7+ hour road trips.

Just after this OCI, I had a crazy misfire issue that seems to have been due to an O2 sensor fault. Assuming that failure didn't happen overnight, I'm sure it affected this sample.

Last time I noted what looks like a formulation change. Much more moly than the sample before that one, titanium making an appearance, ~half as much boron, and a little less phosphorus. Looks like that was real. Also looks like this new formulation has better viscosity retention. Given BMW's recent switch from Shell back to Castrol, maybe this product is back in the TWS lineage.

In the pic, ignore the flag on titanium. They probably flagged it because it wasn't showing up in previous samples and they didn't know this engine has no titanium in it.

Copying the numbers here because I don't like how Polaris's reports are formatted:


Wear Metals

Iron - 7
Chromium - 0
Nickel - 0
Aluminum - 3
Copper - 2
Lead - 0
Tin - 1
Cadmium - 0
Silver - 0
Vanadium - 0

Particle Quantifier (PQ) Index - 12


Contaminant Metals

Silicon - 7
Sodium - 3
Potassium - 0


Multi-Source Metals

Titanium - 44
Molybdenum - 178
Antimony - 0
Manganese - 0
Lithium - 0
Boron - 30


Additive Metals

Magnesium - 18
Calcium - 2772
Barium - 0
Phosphorus - 791
Zinc - 950


Other Contaminants

Fuel Dilution - 2.0% (GC)
Soot - <0.1% by vol.
Water - <0.1% by vol. (FTIR)


Fluid Properties

Viscosity @ 100º C - 19.0 cSt
TBN - 4.45
Oxidation - 13
Nitration - 8
 

Attachments

  • Pic.jpg
    Pic.jpg
    132.9 KB · Views: 35
d00df00d said:
Previous UOA here. 136939 miles on the engine at the time of sampling.

Longer OCI this time. Figured that wouldn't be horrible given that a lot of these miles were from multiple 7+ hour road trips.

Just after this OCI, I had a crazy misfire issue that seems to have been due to an O2 sensor fault. Assuming that failure didn't happen overnight, I'm sure it affected this sample.

Last time I noted what looks like a formulation change. Much more moly than the sample before that one, titanium making an appearance, ~half as much boron, and a little less phosphorus. Looks like that was real. Also looks like this new formulation has better viscosity retention. Given BMW's recent switch from Shell back to Castrol, maybe this product is back in the TWS lineage.

In the pic, ignore the flag on titanium. They probably flagged it because it wasn't showing up in previous samples and they didn't know this engine has no titanium in it.

Copying the numbers here because I don't like how Polaris's reports are formatted:


Wear Metals

Iron - 7
Chromium - 0
Nickel - 0
Aluminum - 3
Copper - 2
Lead - 0
Tin - 1
Cadmium - 0
Silver - 0
Vanadium - 0

Particle Quantifier (PQ) Index - 12


Contaminant Metals

Silicon - 7
Sodium - 3
Potassium - 0


Multi-Source Metals

Titanium - 44
Molybdenum - 178
Antimony - 0
Manganese - 0
Lithium - 0
Boron - 30


Additive Metals

Magnesium - 18
Calcium - 2772
Barium - 0
Phosphorus - 791
Zinc - 950


Other Contaminants

Fuel Dilution - 2.0% (GC)
Soot - <0.1% by vol.
Water - <0.1% by vol. (FTIR)


Fluid Properties

Viscosity @ 100º C - 19.0 cSt
TBN - 4.45
Oxidation - 13
Nitration - 8
Click to expand...
Better viscosity retention? It's 19. How much do you need?
d00df00d said:
Previous UOA here. 136939 miles on the engine at the time of sampling.

Longer OCI this time. Figured that wouldn't be horrible given that a lot of these miles were from multiple 7+ hour road trips.

Just after this OCI, I had a crazy misfire issue that seems to have been due to an O2 sensor fault. Assuming that failure didn't happen overnight, I'm sure it affected this sample.

Last time I noted what looks like a formulation change. Much more moly than the sample before that one, titanium making an appearance, ~half as much boron, and a little less phosphorus. Looks like that was real. Also looks like this new formulation has better viscosity retention. Given BMW's recent switch from Shell back to Castrol, maybe this product is back in the TWS lineage.

In the pic, ignore the flag on titanium. They probably flagged it because it wasn't showing up in previous samples and they didn't know this engine has no titanium in it.

Copying the numbers here because I don't like how Polaris's reports are formatted:


Wear Metals

Iron - 7
Chromium - 0
Nickel - 0
Aluminum - 3
Copper - 2
Lead - 0
Tin - 1
Cadmium - 0
Silver - 0
Vanadium - 0

Particle Quantifier (PQ) Index - 12


Contaminant Metals

Silicon - 7
Sodium - 3
Potassium - 0


Multi-Source Metals

Titanium - 44
Molybdenum - 178
Antimony - 0
Manganese - 0
Lithium - 0
Boron - 30


Additive Metals

Magnesium - 18
Calcium - 2772
Barium - 0
Phosphorus - 791
Zinc - 950


Other Contaminants

Fuel Dilution - 2.0% (GC)
Soot - <0.1% by vol.
Water - <0.1% by vol. (FTIR)


Fluid Properties

Viscosity @ 100º C - 19.0 cSt
TBN - 4.45
Oxidation - 13
Nitration - 8
Click to expand...
Retained it's vis better? VIs is at 19. How much vis do you need? All runs were good and the lower vis runs were the same. If the oil cap spec is 10-60 why are BMW's spec's so much higher than , say , my Camry? lol
 
FZ1 said:
Retained it's vis better? VIs is at 19. How much vis do you need?
Click to expand...
xW-60 should be above 21.9 cSt @ 100º C. All runs with the previous version of this oil ended up below 19. This version stayed at or above 19.

FZ1 said:
If the oil cap spec is 10-60 why are BMW's spec's so much higher than , say , my Camry? lol
Click to expand...
The high-RPM (8k+) naturally aspirated engines from BMW's M division all spec a 10W-60. Not 10W-60 generally, or 10W-60 oils that meet a certain spec; one specific 10W-60.

There's a ton of speculation about why. No one knows but BMW. Though plenty of people seem happy to act like they know...

The only explanation I've seen that makes any sense to me is that these engines are designed to run all day at the track, including in hot climates, and under that usage they can produce oil temps up to 300º F.

It started when BMW partnered with Castrol in the late '90s, when Castrol brought a killer engine oil with a long and successful history in racing to the table (TWS). That oil happened to be a 10W-60. Castrol tweaked it for BMW M. Whatever their reasons for picking it in the first place – because it was a 10W-60, or because they liked it for other reasons, or because of some corporate corruption, or whatever – BMW M then designed later engines (including the one in my car) with it in mind.

Guessing none of that applies to your Camry. ;)
 
a5m said:
I got it now. That's the name of the oil. Wow 🙄

Sorry for the derailment.
Click to expand...
😂 No worries.

It is kind of mystifying that they used the "TwinPower Turbo" branding for this oil given that exactly zero turbocharged engines spec it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: a5m
d00df00d said:
😂 No worries.

It is kind of mystifying that they used the "TwinPower Turbo" branding for this oil given that exactly zero turbocharged engines spec it.
Click to expand...
Lmao of course. I was so confused, went through your previous threads looking for mention of motor swap or turbocharging, saw pic of 8 spark plugs. Now I can rest easy :LOL:

Btw very nice car. My dream car. Hope I own one some day.
 
d00df00d said:
Previous UOA here. 136939 miles on the engine at the time of sampling.

Longer OCI this time. Figured that wouldn't be horrible given that a lot of these miles were from multiple 7+ hour road trips.

Just after this OCI, I had a crazy misfire issue that seems to have been due to an O2 sensor fault. Assuming that failure didn't happen overnight, I'm sure it affected this sample.

Last time I noted what looks like a formulation change. Much more moly than the sample before that one, titanium making an appearance, ~half as much boron, and a little less phosphorus. Looks like that was real. Also looks like this new formulation has better viscosity retention. Given BMW's recent switch from Shell back to Castrol, maybe this product is back in the TWS lineage.

In the pic, ignore the flag on titanium. They probably flagged it because it wasn't showing up in previous samples and they didn't know this engine has no titanium in it.

Copying the numbers here because I don't like how Polaris's reports are formatted:


Wear Metals

Iron - 7
Chromium - 0
Nickel - 0
Aluminum - 3
Copper - 2
Lead - 0
Tin - 1
Cadmium - 0
Silver - 0
Vanadium - 0

Particle Quantifier (PQ) Index - 12


Contaminant Metals

Silicon - 7
Sodium - 3
Potassium - 0


Multi-Source Metals

Titanium - 44
Molybdenum - 178
Antimony - 0
Manganese - 0
Lithium - 0
Boron - 30


Additive Metals

Magnesium - 18
Calcium - 2772
Barium - 0
Phosphorus - 791
Zinc - 950


Other Contaminants

Fuel Dilution - 2.0% (GC)
Soot - <0.1% by vol.
Water - <0.1% by vol. (FTIR)


Fluid Properties

Viscosity @ 100º C - 19.0 cSt
TBN - 4.45
Oxidation - 13
Nitration - 8
Click to expand...
How mucj longer do you intend on keeping the car
 
BMWTurboDzl said:
Just curious. Is it going to be a keeper as a third car/track toy?
Click to expand...
Ah.

I plan to keep it as long as I need a single car that does everything from errands to family trips to track days – and not a moment longer.

No idea how long that'll be, though. :ROFLMAO:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 5953 mi
Replies
11
Views
640
d00df00d
D
2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 5851 mi
Replies
0
Views
819
d00df00d
D
2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 5369 mi
Replies
6
Views
1K
remilia
D
2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 4672 mi
Replies
5
Views
1K
d00df00d
D
2008 BMW M3, BMW TwinPower Turbo 10W-60, 4966 mi
Replies
3
Views
1K
d00df00d
Top