2017 Audi A6 2.0T Premium plus AWD

[wemay]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
.....That's because the newest Audi engines recommend 0W-20 -- yet an entirely different oil.


2019 Passat 2.0T EA888
After today's 180 mile road trip with 40 viscosity oil in the sump, i don't think I'm going back to 508.00 0w20. I averaged 40+mpg and the car was noticeably quieter and smoother. Not that I complained about the 0w20, but the 40 is different. I know, I know, "what about your warranty?" I'm not worried that I will have an oil related failure.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...und-trip-into-the-everglades#Post5410467

 

[raaizin]

Originally Posted by OtisBlkR1
Hey all, its been a minute! so Im letting go of the Milan after 8 years of use and about 85,000 on the clock. Im replacing it with an Audi A6 2.0T currently has 24,000 on the clock. Of course the first thing im going to start looking at is my upkeep.. So V.W. 502.00 (if memory serves) is the recommended oil and after reading a few online reviews and threads Im reading that I Don't what to use the equivalent oil from my local WalMart shelf. Even though the bottle says its safe for German autos.. Im completely cluesless on American v.s. German oils. so help me out. those that are in the know share some knowledge. What im reading says no don't do it, premature wear ect.. is this B.S ? I don't mind dropping the coin for German oil, however id rather just buy locally, However This is not a cheap auto and I want to make it last for a bit.

Otis.


I had a 2007 A6 3.2 that I ran for 12 years and 150k miles on walmart 0w-40 mobil 1 with zero issues. I wouldnt worry about that oil

 

[bbhero]

Originally Posted by Imp4
Originally Posted by Trav
Fact!
https://online.lubrizol.com/relperftool/pc.html
Fact!
Listed on the same Lubrizol web page, immediately below the linked information above:
Originally Posted by Lubrizol
NOTE: These performance charts are primarily designed to demonstrate relative performances within the same industry specification, for example, ACEA E6 versus ACEA E7, or API CH-4 versus API CJ-4. This tool has not been expressly designed to show relative performance between specifications.




Ahh Fact....

Look up those specs.... Porsche a40, C30, BMW LL-01


And compare them in terms of "wear" values vs API SN... .

And compare them in terms of noack volatility...

And it's no contest... None.

Fact.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Looks like it calls for VW 502.00 or VW 504.00, according to this:
https://www.audiusa.com/content/dam...ed_Maintenance_Flipbook_Pages_022317.pdf

The M1 ESP 5W-30 that Trav recommended should be just fine, IMO.

Expectation vs. reality: On the paper (such as Lubrizol charts), VW 504.00 (ACEA C3, M1 ESP 5W-30) may be a better oil than VW 502.00 (ACEA A3/B4, M1 FS 0W-40), but in reality M1 FS 0W-40 uses a more expensive base oil (more PAO and less Group III, same amount of POE) and a much, much stronger additive pack than M1 ESP 5W-30, and it would kick the cheaply made but expensively sold (the latter only due to lack of availability) M1 ESP 5W-30's rear in virtually every engine test.

The two specs are apples vs. oranges. VW 502.00 allows extended OCIs because of the higher ash content. VW 504.00 compromises on the OCI but is focused on protecting the diesel particulate filter (DPF) and other emissions components. Since Audi recommends either oil, they think your engine doesn't really care about the oil. Have they even changed their bearing design now? That's because the newest Audi engines recommend 0W-20 -- yet an entirely different oil.


This is the first time I heard anyone say ESP is not exceptional oil. It has far better wear properties than 502, sludges less, has lower piston and valve deposits. It is also capable of up to double the OCI depending on usage which is contrary to what you said above.

The spec is more important than the base oil... You don't agree?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Imp4
Originally Posted by Trav
If you don't want to believe it that's your prerogative.

Yeah, I'll stick with taking Lubrizol at their words, thanks....

Euro oils are far more sophisticated than anything API. Lubrizol has to distance itself bcs. legal issues.
When I was working on oil testing API was always afterthought. Getting approval from VW, BMW or Mercedes requires far more testing, re-testing, simulation of approvals etc.
Do not forget, API is lobbying arm of petroleum industry, not vehicle industry. ACEA is organization that represents vehicle manufacturers. All these Euro specifications start from ACEA baseline, and then each manufacturer adds their own requirement.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Looks like it calls for VW 502.00 or VW 504.00, according to this:
https://www.audiusa.com/content/dam...ed_Maintenance_Flipbook_Pages_022317.pdf

The M1 ESP 5W-30 that Trav recommended should be just fine, IMO.

Expectation vs. reality: On the paper (such as Lubrizol charts), VW 504.00 (ACEA C3, M1 ESP 5W-30) may be a better oil than VW 502.00 (ACEA A3/B4, M1 FS 0W-40), but in reality M1 FS 0W-40 uses a more expensive base oil (more PAO and less Group III, same amount of POE) and a much, much stronger additive pack than M1 ESP 5W-30, and it would kick the cheaply made but expensively sold (the latter only due to lack of availability) M1 ESP 5W-30's rear in virtually every engine test.

The two specs are apples vs. oranges. VW 502.00 allows extended OCIs because of the higher ash content. VW 504.00 compromises on the OCI but is focused on protecting the diesel particulate filter (DPF) and other emissions components. Since Audi recommends either oil, they think your engine doesn't really care about the oil. Have they even changed their bearing design now? That's because the newest Audi engines recommend 0W-20 -- yet an entirely different oil.


This is the first time I heard anyone say ESP is not exceptional oil. It has far better wear properties than 502, sludges less, has lower piston and valve deposits. It is also capable of up to double the OCI depending on usage which is contrary to what you said above.

The spec is more important than the base oil... You don't agree?

Forgive Gokhan, he is new to Euro oils.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by OtisBlkR1
Hey all, its been a minute! so Im letting go of the Milan after 8 years of use and about 85,000 on the clock. Im replacing it with an Audi A6 2.0T currently has 24,000 on the clock. Of course the first thing im going to start looking at is my upkeep.. So V.W. 502.00 (if memory serves) is the recommended oil and after reading a few online reviews and threads Im reading that I Don't what to use the equivalent oil from my local WalMart shelf. Even though the bottle says its safe for German autos.. Im completely cluesless on American v.s. German oils. so help me out. those that are in the know share some knowledge. What im reading says no don't do it, premature wear ect.. is this B.S ? I don't mind dropping the coin for German oil, however id rather just buy locally, However This is not a cheap auto and I want to make it last for a bit.

Otis.

This is what I would do.
You have 3rd generation EA888 which has better fuel dilution control. Yes, if you go Wal Mart route, I would go Castrol Edge 0W40. In case that one is not available, Mobil1 0W40. If that one is not available, Valvoline 5W40 European Vehicle. If that one is not, then as a last resort Castrol Edge 5W40.
However, I personally would go VW504.00/507.00 route. You can get Motul X-Clean+ 5W30 on Amazon for $39 for 5ltr jug. That oil looks really good on paper, and Motul has very good record.
Motul X-Clean+
You can also go Mobil1 ESP 5W30 route too. Reason for that is that these oils are Lower-SAPS, which should mitigate carbon build-up issue. Reason why you can use those oils now is that since 2017 we have ULSG in the US.
But, I would do UOA after 5k to check on TBN just in case.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
This is the first time I heard anyone say ESP is not exceptional oil. It has far better wear properties than 502, sludges less, has lower piston and valve deposits. It is also capable of up to double the OCI depending on usage which is contrary to what you said above.

The spec is more important than the base oil... You don't agree?

I wasn't comparing M1 ESP to average oil. I was comparing it to M1 FS.

This part is true: "It has far better wear properties than 502, sludges less, has lower piston and valve deposits. It is also capable of up to double the OCI depending on usage."

However, it's also true that: M1 FS has far better wear properties than 502 and M1 ESP, sludges even less, has even lower piston and valve deposits. It is also capable of up to double triple the OCI depending on usage.

As I said, you're comparing apples to oranges. The spec is important. M1 ESP is designed primarily for diesel engines with DPF so that the DPF doesn't clog -- that's your spec there. M1 FS is a full-SAPS oil -- that's your spec there -- that does everything M1 ESP does even better, except for the protection of the DPF, catalyst, oxygen sensor, and intake valves.

Basically you take M1 ESP and put more PAO, ZDDP, and detergent in it, and the resultant oil is M1 FS.

This is not to say that any VW 502.00 oil is better than M1 ESP. I am only comparing M1 FS to M1 ESP.

This is the explanation by ExxonMobil of the blending of the M1 FS SM (PAO-based), M1 FS SN (previous formula before some of the Group III+ Visom (GTL precursor) replaced with GTL), and M1 ESP (previous formula with a lower Noack called "Formula"), from left to right. It says on the previous page: "Mobil 1 ‘Ages' builds upon the strength of Mobil 1 0W-40 by incorporating some of the latest formulation advances contained in Mobil 1 ESP Formula 5W-30." So, M1 FS 0W-40 has all the strengths of M1 ESP plus more.

Presentation by ExxonMobil on the introduction of Mobil 1 0W-40 SN to the market

 

[edyvw]

Gokhan is trying to catch up with Euro specifications and oils and then comes up with some stew where he puts everything in.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years. There was NO Mobil1 0W40 FS that was API SM!
PAO based Mobil1 0W40 ceased to exists when Mobil1 encountered issues around PAO supply due to hurricane damage. VISOM successor was introduced. Same base stock was used on Mobil1 ESP Formula 5W30 that had Noack of 5.6%.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years ONLY! There was no FS designation before GTL based M1 0W40.
Mobil1 ESP 5W30 is approved against VW 504.00/507.00 which is more stringent than ANY approval that Mobil1 0W40 FS is approved for. All approvals that both oils have are already most stringent in industry, and you have no clue whether FS is any better than ESP when it comes to wear. What VW504.00/507.00 specifically addresses is wear due to cam lobe issues VW had before. When VW504.00/507.00 was introduced it was by far hardest specification to meet.
Today, both Mobil1 ESP 5W30 and 0W40 FS are GTL based.
Also, Mobil1 ESP 5W30 addresses all demands of gas engines. It is designed for BOTH diesel and gas engines. In Europe, since 2009 most vehicles require oils like ESP, gas or diesel.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

I don't see how it is possible for oil with much higher saps level to have less deposits. Doesn't really make sense. Also I don't understand how cleaner oil and exhaust systems is in any way a bad thing.

I think 0w40 M1 or Edge are both very good oils but they are just past their best before date. There are other choices for similar money with real benefits and now with low sulfur fuel here, very few drawbacks.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Gokhan is trying to catch up with Euro specifications and oils and then comes up with some stew where he puts everything in.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years. There was NO Mobil1 0W40 FS that was API SM!
PAO based Mobil1 0W40 ceased to exists when Mobil1 encountered issues around PAO supply due to hurricane damage. VISOM successor was introduced. Same base stock was used on Mobil1 ESP Formula 5W30 that had Noack of 5.6%.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years ONLY! There was no FS designation before GTL based M1 0W40.
Mobil1 ESP 5W30 is approved against VW 504.00/507.00 which is more stringent than ANY approval that Mobil1 0W40 FS is approved for. All approvals that both oils have are already most stringent in industry, and you have no clue whether FS is any better than ESP when it comes to wear. What VW504.00/507.00 specifically addresses is wear due to cam lobe issues VW had before. When VW504.00/507.00 was introduced it was by far hardest specification to meet.
Today, both Mobil1 ESP 5W30 and 0W40 FS are GTL based.
Also, Mobil1 ESP 5W30 addresses all demands of gas engines. It is designed for BOTH diesel and gas engines. In Europe, since 2009 most vehicles require oils like ESP, gas or diesel.

Honestly, edyvw? Give me a break. Do you think I didn't know everything you said in this brief lecture??

Of course, M1 FS is when they renamed the Visom-based M1 0W-40 SN after the GTL transition. I was using this oil in my car when the transition happened. I used FS to refer to the older version as well because it means full-SAPS. For the same reason, I referred to the previous ESP formulation as ESP, even though it was called ESP Formula, as ESP (emission systems protection) refers to mid-SAPS.

No, we do have a clue on FS being better than ESP in wear -- it has a lot more ZDDP.

By the way look at the Afton Specification Handbook. VW 502.00 has higher merits in the MB M271 sludge test than VW 504.00.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by edyvw
Gokhan is trying to catch up with Euro specifications and oils and then comes up with some stew where he puts everything in.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years. There was NO Mobil1 0W40 FS that was API SM!
PAO based Mobil1 0W40 ceased to exists when Mobil1 encountered issues around PAO supply due to hurricane damage. VISOM successor was introduced. Same base stock was used on Mobil1 ESP Formula 5W30 that had Noack of 5.6%.
Mobil1 0W40 FS exists last few years ONLY! There was no FS designation before GTL based M1 0W40.
Mobil1 ESP 5W30 is approved against VW 504.00/507.00 which is more stringent than ANY approval that Mobil1 0W40 FS is approved for. All approvals that both oils have are already most stringent in industry, and you have no clue whether FS is any better than ESP when it comes to wear. What VW504.00/507.00 specifically addresses is wear due to cam lobe issues VW had before. When VW504.00/507.00 was introduced it was by far hardest specification to meet.
Today, both Mobil1 ESP 5W30 and 0W40 FS are GTL based.
Also, Mobil1 ESP 5W30 addresses all demands of gas engines. It is designed for BOTH diesel and gas engines. In Europe, since 2009 most vehicles require oils like ESP, gas or diesel.

Honestly, edyvw? Give me a break. Do you think I didn't know everything you said in this brief lecture??

Of course, M1 FS is when they renamed the Visom-based M1 0W-40 SN after the GTL transition. I was using this oil in my car when the transition happened. I used FS to refer to the older version as well because it means full-SAPS. For the same reason, I referred to the previous ESP formulation as ESP, even though it was called ESP Formula, as ESP (emission systems protection) refers to mid-SAPS.

No, we do have a clue on FS being better than ESP in wear -- it has a lot more ZDDP.

If you knew it, you would not write what you did.
Also, how do you know FS is Full-SAPS? Then why ESP is not MS or LS?
Emission System Protection does not mean mid-SAPS. Mid-SAPS means Mid-SAPS. Emission System Protection could be low-SAPS, it ahs same intention, to protect emission system.
So what if it has more ZDDP? Tell us then, how much better is 0W40 FS? Tell me how many more miles my VW is going to make on 0W40 FS compared to M1 ESP 5W30? I guess those taxi drivers in Europe that make upwards of half a million miles on their diesels did not know about ZDDP.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
If you knew it, you would not write what you did.
Also, how do you know FS is Full-SAPS? Then why ESP is not MS or LS?
Emission System Protection does not mean mid-SAPS. Mid-SAPS means Mid-SAPS. Emission System Protection could be low-SAPS, it ahs same intention, to protect emission system.

You regularly claim to read my mind but you're failing. Of course, I knew it! Do I have to search my posts from years ago comparing M1 0W-40 without FS to M1 0W-40 FS? I've been tracking this oil on a regular basis now for many years.

FS does mean full-SAPS. Call Mobil 1 and ask if you want. If they choose to use ESP for their mid-SAPS oils, it's their choice of trademark.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by edyvw
If you knew it, you would not write what you did.
Also, how do you know FS is Full-SAPS? Then why ESP is not MS or LS?
Emission System Protection does not mean mid-SAPS. Mid-SAPS means Mid-SAPS. Emission System Protection could be low-SAPS, it ahs same intention, to protect emission system.

You regularly claim to read my mind but you're failing. Of course, I knew it! Do I have to search my posts from years ago comparing M1 0W-40 without FS to M1 0W-40 FS? I've been tracking this oil on a regular basis now for many years.

FS does mean full-SAPS. Call Mobil 1 and ask if you want. If they choose to use ESP for their mid-SAPS oils, it's their choice of trademark.

You obviously missed discussion about FS few years back, and one about ZDDP long time ago.
But yeah, tell us more about it.

 

[Gokhan]

Here is why the Lubrizol relative performance comparison tool is entirely useless.

According to the Afton Specification Handbook, which publishes the actual specs, VW 502.00 has 9.1 merits in the MB M271 sludge test in comparison to 8.5 for VW 504.00. However, the Lubrizol tool shows VW 504.00 being higher.

Do not take anything the Lubrizol performance comparison tool shows seriously. It can perhaps only be used within the same spec, such as an older version of VW 504.00 with a newer version of VW 504.00. I wouldn't even use it to compare API SP to API SN.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
You obviously missed discussion about FS few years back, and one about ZDDP long time ago.

Once again, you keep reaching conclusions without a knowledge of what the other person did or didn't and thinks or doesn't.

No, I did not. As I said I was using M1 0W-40 when M1 FS 0W-40 came. In fact I incorrectly predicted what it meant. Here is my post in that discussion.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...1-fs-v-s-mobil-1-old-version#Post4399418

Read my many posts on the M1 FS introduction in that thread. Are you convinced now that I'm more than familiar with this transition and name change?

As everyone here knows the reason the ZDDP is lowered is for the emissions components, not to improve wear.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by edyvw
You obviously missed discussion about FS few years back, and one about ZDDP long time ago.

Once again, you keep reaching conclusions without a knowledge of what the other person did or didn't and thinks or doesn't.

No, I did not. As I said I was using M1 0W-40 when M1 FS 0W-40 came. In fact I incorrectly predicted what it meant. Here is my post in that discussion.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...1-fs-v-s-mobil-1-old-version#Post4399418

As everyone here knows the reason the ZDDP is lowered is for the emissions components, not to improve wear.

Yeah, and again, how many miles I am going to gain on FS compared to ESP?
I did not reach any conclusion, your posts are obvious. When we discuss TGMO, then yeah.
And no, not that discussion I am talking about discussion in Euro forum, where people actually know Euro oils.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by edyvw
I did not reach any conclusion, your posts are obvious.

You said I didn't know the difference between the M1 0W-40 and M1 FS 0W-40.

Originally Posted by edyvw
And no, not that discussion I am talking about discussion in Euro forum, where people actually know Euro oils.

You and I were discussing the introduction of the M1 FS 0W-40 in the same thread. I thought you were the Euro-oil expert here.

 

[OtisBlkR1]

Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
Originally Posted by OtisBlkR1
I dont have the manual yet/or car.. I dont pick it up for a few days yet, only sharing what I've found online. The info I have may be an overview or just broad generic V.W./Audi info.


You should really skip the 2.0 and get the 3.0SC V6 version. It's a night and day difference in performance and lower nvh (engine not stressed when driving spiritedly).
In stock form it puts out 333hp and 325tq vs 252hp and 273tq for the 2.0.
Far better way to enjoy the car (for a small increase in price).

I have no doubt, this particular car could pass for showroom condition & considering I'm moving up from a Milan it feels amazing behind the wheel! I'm not so much of a speed demon anymore.

 

[OtisBlkR1]

Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Looks like it calls for VW 502.00 or VW 504.00, according to this:
https://www.audiusa.com/content/dam...ed_Maintenance_Flipbook_Pages_022317.pdf

The M1 ESP 5W-30 that Trav recommended should be just fine, IMO.



Help me learn, the book says 5-40 you & travis agree on the M1 Esp 5-30 ? Can you help me better understand your recommendation? Thanks for looking up the service manual, I've been studying it!