2015 BMW N20 X1 UOA 5K MILES NON-EURO OIL

[pbm]

This is what makes these forums useful. Disagreement and differing points of view.

Most definitely there are experts, and there are "experts".

I agree and we can look at recent event to know this is absolutely true. ('experts' get things wrong a lot for various reasons.)

Back on topic...In a low tech (European) engine like the VW 2.slow or VW 2.5 5 cylinder I would have no problem running an ILSAC 5w30 synthetic oil even though it doesn't meet VW specs (I'd shorten OCIs to 5 to 7K). On a high tech small turbo like the BMW in question....I'd stick to an oil that met BMW specs. especially since they cost about the same at Walmart (at least they did before the unsolved 'supply chain issues' made everything hard to get).

 

[kschachn]

Again,

Its not about the money, gents.

I am sure this thread will get rather active soon.

Who said that it was? You seem to major on this minor and disregard the rest.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

Who said that it was? You seem to major on this minor and disregard the rest.

That was well said

 

[KEVINK0000]

Who said that it was? You seem to major on this minor and disregard the rest.

Maybe go back and read the thread. I am not disregarding anything, I am disagreeing. Also, money has been brought up multiple times, as my motivation for using a different oil in this car, or my misallocation of same in doing UOA. In your own reply as well, the cost of the UOA is mentioned, but for a different purpose.

 

[BMW Dom]

I just still don't understand your logic.
If it's not a money concern or availability concern, then what is it?
You can go on Amazon or Walmart and have an ll-01 oil shipped to your house, and not have to worry about potentially damaging your engine.

 

[KEVINK0000]

I just still don't understand your logic.
If it's not a money concern or availability concern, then what is it?
You can go on Amazon or Walmart and have an ll-01 oil shipped to your house, and not have to worry about potentially damaging your engine.

Thank you for your forthright post. One of my reasons for putting this on here at all, is that I am not worried about this oil damaging the engine. There will be more later, as soon as I have some more UOA and other things we can discuss. And, I may ultimately retreat from my current view, and settle on something else.

 

[kschachn]

Maybe go back and read the thread. I am not disregarding anything, I am disagreeing. Also, money has been brought up multiple times, as my motivation for using a different oil in this car, or my misallocation of same in doing UOA. In your own reply as well, the cost of the UOA is mentioned, but for a different purpose.

Perhaps I just figured you'd be more secure in your decision making process by now.

 

[kschachn]

Thank you for your forthright post. One of my reasons for putting this on here at all, is that I am not worried about this oil damaging the engine. There will be more later, as soon as I have some more UOA and other things we can discuss. And, I may ultimately retreat from my current view, and settle on something else.

But the thing is, no $30 spectrographic analysis is going to show if an oil meets the entirety of BMW's approval requirements.

 

[KEVINK0000]

But the thing is, no $30 spectrographic analysis is going to show if an oil meets the entirety of BMW's approval requirements.

Agreed, but that is not what I am looking for. BMW approval is only one thing I would consider, not the only thing. Their own spec for this engine has changed, due to factors other than absolute compatibility with this engine type, that they have deemed to be more important as time has passed. Therefore I discount their recommendations to a certain extent. But, I do not disregard them.

 

[BMW Dom]

Agreed, but that is not what I am looking for. BMW approval is only one thing I would consider, not the only thing. Their own spec for this engine has changed, due to factors other than absolute compatibility with this engine type, that they have deemed to be more important as time has passed. Therefore I discount their recommendations to a certain extent. But, I do not disregard them.

LL-01 (2018) has a timing chain test for the N20 and uses the N20 as the test engine. I'm not sure what your API SP and GF-6 use, but I guess they're better???

 

[KEVINK0000]

LL-01 (2018) has a timing chain test for the N20 and uses the N20 as the test engine. I'm not sure what your API SP and GF-6 use, but I guess they're better???

Possibly, maybe not, but like I said, certs are only one thing to consider in my opinion. But, for many or most, going with the manufacturer certs will result in a long lasting engine, that will likely be trouble free until the car is taken out of service for other reasons than any engine failure or wear. That's fine by me. As this is an "oil enthusiast" forum, and this is a bit of an experiment, that I think many will enjoy seeing the outcome of. At least, it provides an area for discussion and debate.

 

[BMW Dom]

Possibly, maybe not, but like I said, certs are only one thing to consider in my opinion. But, for many or most, going with the manufacturer certs will result in a long lasting engine, that will likely be trouble free until the car is taken out of service for other reasons than any engine failure or wear. That's fine by me. As this is an "oil enthusiast" forum, and this is a bit of an experiment, that I think many will enjoy seeing the outcome of. At least, it provides an area for discussion and debate.

You do you. I run 1 year OCIs in my mom's X3 with the N20, which is about 1,500 miles. I guess I'm technically going against what they recommend. The car says 15k OCI or 2 years. It's an interesting experiment, but it's at your expense.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

LL-01 (2018) has a timing chain test for the N20 and uses the N20 as the test engine. I'm not sure what your API SP and GF-6 use, but I guess they're better???

It's a Ford I4 Ecoboost. Keep in mind it's not so much the engine but also the test itself. As you can see with the test under SP the piston ring gap is increased in order to increase blow-by. BMW is mum about their test protocol on the N20.

TEST

 

[Deleted member 89374]

To add fuel to the fire, @KEVINK0000 picket an oil that's chock-full of VII. If you want something that won't actually render your N20 totally useless, use Castrol EDGE EP 5W-30 or Mobil 1 EP 5W-30. Though I'm a Mobil 1 fanboy, for this application, if I had to choose between the two, I would go with the Castrol EDGE EP 5W-30 because it claims ACEA C2, has almost no VII, and it's derived from a formulation that Castrol uses for their MB229.71, BMW LL 17 FE+, and Jaguar Land-Rover STJLR.03.5006 motor oils. To be more specific, the oil it's derived from is Castrol EDGE C5 0W-20 / Castrol EDGE EP 0W-20. I hope this helps. Unless, of course, you love Quaker State to (the) death (of your N20).

 

[Eugenius]

To prove one oil is better than another, it is only make logical sence to tear down an engine after certain amount of thousand miles of using specific oil only and check the wear of pistons, cylinder walls, bearings, cam lobs. The manufacturers claim they are doing it before slapping approvals on a bottle, aren't they? How trustworthy the labels? There is no documented evidence, everything kept in secret, unless you are a lubrication engineer and seeing it with your own eyes as part of your daily job. For others it is only hope that approvals will work and prolong life of an engine beyond an auto manufacturing warranty period.
But relying on cheap UOA to tell how healthy your engine is, how much wear, is the same as believing in horoscopes and unicorns.

 

[FZ1]

No GC, Motul, Ravenol, Liqui-Moly, M1. Plain old American QS. The Horror!

New formula QS Full Synthetic. Chosen for low SAPS formula to avoid LSPI potential issues. (I know N20 is not known for this but... Arizona heat and son's car. He talks about "brake boosting" from stoplights ). No posted HTHS on QS website, but 100c vis is high for SP 5w-30. Took a look at this oil due to 540i Rat (The Double- Horror) mentioning it and rating it in his rating with the highest rated rating anything ever rated. Looks good, even with an abundance of short trips, and apparent fuel dilution. This was the second fill of this oil. Previous to that was dealership bulk whatever. Comments welcome. I am sticking with this, it looks pretty robust, even with the weak vis from fuel content.
View attachment 83762

Looks really good. 8.36 vis is o.k. No wear. 5000 oci.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

To prove one oil is better than another, it is only make logical sence to tear down an engine after certain amount of thousand miles of using specific oil only and check the wear of pistons, cylinder walls, bearings, cam lobs. The manufacturers claim they are doing it before slapping approvals on a bottle, aren't they? How trustworthy the labels? There is no documented evidence, everything kept in secret, unless you are a lubrication engineer and seeing it with your own eyes as part of your daily job. For others it is only hope that approvals will work and prolong life of an engine beyond an auto manufacturing warranty period.
But relying on cheap UOA to tell how healthy your engine is, how much wear, is the same as believing in horoscopes and unicorns.

Well said. However, lubricant manufacturers can self-certify by performing in-house engine testing and submitting the results to the manufacturers. At least that's how Valvoline does it in their engine test lab in Ashland, KY. Then the OEM issues the approval letter. FWIW that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Looks really good. 8.36 vis is o.k. No wear. 5000 oci.

You can't infer wear from a cheap UOA. If there were any truth to that, then Red Line Oil would eat up most engines it's used in.

 

[FZ1]

Well said. However, lubricant manufacturers can self-certify by performing in-house engine testing and submitting the results to the manufacturers. At least that's how Valvoline does it in their engine test lab in Ashland, KY. Then the OEM issues the approval letter. FWIW that's how I understand it. If I'm wrong, please correct me.


You can't infer wear from a cheap UOA. If there were any truth to that, then Red Line Oil would eat up most engines it's used in.

Who's "inferring"? I'm lookin' at the report.

 

[Deleted member 89374]

Who's "inferring"? I'm lookin' at the report.

Good luck reading the "tea leaves."

 

[OVERKILL]

Who's "inferring"? I'm lookin' at the report.

You are. That's what looking at spectrography results is doing, inferring wear from diluted metallic particles in solution within a very narrow size range, the sources of which can be myriad including chelation, corrosion, dissolution of existing deposits and of course mechanical. To actually measure wear you need to perform extensive tear-down analysis, the only person I'm aware of who has actually done that on here was @Doug Hillary and his use of UOA's in his commercial OTR fleet does not mirror the method in which many try to use them to contrast lubricant performance, particularly between brands, on here. This is why he went to the effort to author his article on UOA's that is featured on the main page of this site, because of the misunderstanding as to their utility by many on here.