Best oil for Porsche 991

[OVERKILL]

BTW, as an aside here, I was elated when the updated MSDS for M1 0w-40 showed >50% PAO. The cold temp performance was better on the previous PAO blend and this is an important thing for those of us in the GWN. However, I don't believe the performance of the product in terms of protection was ever compromised and this is supported by the approval list never changing.

All things being equal, I prefer a majority PAO lube. But all things are seldom equal and that's why the topic of certifications and approvals is being discussed here.

 

[lubricatosaurus]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
This is a company who has contracted another company to develop an additive package for them and is using a single test to claim their product is superior despite having absolutely zero factory approvals.

Don't the M1 shear stability results disappoint you?
LN Engineering, Raby Engines, Gibbs, and Lubrizol all collaborated on a low-volume oil.
Mobil1 0w-40 is a high volume oil found in Walmart, using GroupIII (cheaper basestock).
Mobil1 is impressive, but all those other companies have what they believe is a more premium, higher performing product.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
This is a company who has contracted another company to develop an additive package for them and is using a single test to claim their product is superior despite having absolutely zero factory approvals.

Don't the M1 shear stability results disappoint you?


No.

1. It's a 0w-40, it has VII's, it is going to shear in a test designed to make an oil shear. Have you ever seen a UOA with this much shear? No, of course you haven't because this test in no way represents what happens in an actual engine.

2. This is the previous SM version of M1 0w-40, as seen by the 13.88cSt viscosity (current is 13.5) and 188 VI (current is 185) which was less shear stable in UOA's than the current SN formula, which has been on the market for years. So the bloody table not only uses a test designed to slag an oil using VII's but it uses an old version of the product on top of that, LOL!!

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
LN Engineering, Raby Engines, Gibbs, and Lubrizol all collaborated on a low-volume oil.


Good for them. That doesn't magically make the product awesome-sauce. They still (excluding Lubrizol, who, as we've agreed here, is not making any of these claims) have an engineering budget that is likely smaller than what XOM spends on approving a single grade.

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Mobil1 0w-40 is a high volume oil found in Walmart, using GroupIII (cheaper basestock).
Mobil1 is impressive, but all those other companies have what they believe is a more premium, higher performing product.


Mobil, Castrol, SOPUS...etc all sell their products at Walmart. That doesn't make them inferior, LOL! Good Lord by that metric Leupold makes junk optics because they can be bought at Bass Pro

What's impressive is that you can buy a product approved by VW/Audi, Mercedes, Porsche.....etc at Walmart for a reasonable price and be certain that it meets a minimum level of performance GUARANTEED by the certifications that it holds/approvals that it meets. This is backed by the companies that manufacture those cars as they are the ones giving the stamp of approval. They aren't trying to sell you oil, they don't care whose product you use as long as it carries the requisite approval.

They (the group you've mentioned) can believe their product is more premium and higher performance all they want, but it isn't approved by any of those OEM's and those OEM's aren't using the product. They've chosen to use Mobil, BP or SOPUS as their lubricant partner and will use either a purpose-blended product or an OTS product depending on what's appropriate for their application. This is the part you seem to be missing. Mobil could have blended Mercedes, Porsche....etc any lubricant they wanted. They have the resources of not only Mobil, but XOM Chemical and Infineum at their disposal. They can start-to-finish blend and test any product imaginable in-house. But these companies weren't using purpose-blended products, they were using an oil they had already approved in a situation where that wasn't necessary and in which there was no requirement to use an OTS product. Mobil's name is out there regardless, whether it was M1 0w-40 or some other lube they made up, their name is still on the car as a sponsor. Think that over.

 

[lubricatosaurus]

I notice how overkill always argues tangential issues, never the main relevant points. An internet around-the-edges kind of arguer. Loves to type like a lawyer on caffeine.

You can't explain why M1 0w-40 uses so much Group III. It's because of corporate cost cutting. The product passes all tests. Its just possible to do better if you're using Grp4/5 only, and DT40 is lauded as doing exactly that.

And your understanding of racing sponsorships is beyond naive, where money talks. Same goes for your understanding of high volume products vs. low volume targeted oils, as in LN Engineering, Raby Engines, Gibbs, and Lubrizol aren't idiots.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
I notice how overkill always argues tangential issues, never the main relevant points. An internet around-the-edges kind of arguer. Loves to type like a lawyer on caffeine.


I love how you've now taken the angle to talk about me rather than to me. As if you are speaking to a great audience and I, not the topic at hand, are the subject of discussion. Speaking of talking like a lawyer.......

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
You can't explain why M1 0w-40 uses so much Group III. It's because of corporate cost cutting. The product passes all tests. Its just possible to do better if you're using Grp4/5 only,


The previously (less shear stable) version of M1 0w-40 was majority PAO. Perhaps if you did less going on like you know what you are talking about and more reading up on the history of the products being discussed you'd already know that. Despite being "cheapened" the product is now the most shear stable it has been in its history. So clearly base oil selection has been an ongoing development in the evolution of this product. And I stress that because this is a product that is constantly in a state of development and improvement. And while of course cost is a factor in the final blended product, so is performance, and measured via numerous metrics via the certification and approval processes along with Mobil's in-house testing.

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
and DT40 is lauded as doing exactly that.


Advertised as doing that. Advertised. using a test that in no way reflects the conditions found inside an engine. Bravo for continuing to pander that steaming pile though, I admire your persistence.

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
And your understanding of racing sponsorships is beyond naive, where money talks.


Right, and you're a bloody expert on the topic. Like you are on everything else, right?

But I see where this is going.....

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Same goes for your understanding of high volume products vs. low volume targeted oils, as in LN Engineering, Raby Engines, Gibbs, and Lubrizol aren't idiots.


And here we have it, the scathing condescension of somebody who can't win the argument so they resort to ad hominem and hyperbole. Attempting to paint their opponent as naive, ignorant or both in an effort to avert the eyes from how flaccid their own argument has become.

Never once did I state they were idiots. And I specifically excluded Lubrizol as they are the source of the additive package here and not the company selling the product or advertising its performance. YOU continue to keep dropping their name in because you feel it adds credibility to an argument that otherwise focuses around the marketing of a product claimed to fill a niche where somehow the products that Porsche extensively tests and approves somehow fails. And this is supposedly validated using a test that has nothing to do with the conditions inside an engine.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus

Its just possible to do better if you're using Grp4/5 only, and DT40 is lauded as doing exactly that.


lubricatosaurus - Its just possible to do worse too if you're using Grp4/5 only!

The final product in its complex formulation, as freely available to the public, is why many mineral and synthetic lubricants do so well in service in many applications.
This especially applies to the application where MOST Porsche vehicles spend their lives and why the A40 specification lives!

My worst experience of a Grp5 lubricant in a Euro car engine was from a Porsche Approved (1996) lubricant from a major Oil Company

The base product is effectively only the carrier in the sum of the formulation - Grp5 lubricants also have some severe limitations in certain applications

And M1 0W-40 is used extensively at the Nurburgring by many players, some displaying other Brands in their Livery - or this was the case the last time I was there for the 24Hr event.............

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
This is a company who has contracted another company to develop an additive package for them and is using a single test to claim their product is superior despite having absolutely zero factory approvals.

Don't the M1 shear stability results disappoint you?


I'd be extremely disappointed if I was planning on using the Mobil 1 in a heavy duty transmission or final drive...but I'm pretty sure that mobil aren't designing a transmission oil in M1 0W40...

The product (older product) clearly stayed in grade when subject to the ACEA shear stability tests.

When a manufacturer cherry picks a test that's designed for another application (e.g. 4 ball for engine oils, and in this case a gearbox/diff test for engine oils), to promote their performance, I usually fall to the view that they are using the old "look over there a bunny" distraction technique.

But if I wanted a Euro engine oil for my diff, I'd seriously consider that result.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Yet another oil where you are given the privilege of paying (a lot) more for an oil that does not carry the specification required by the manufacturer.

What does it mean on their website where it says " *For Porsche approved lubricant we use and recommend Motul 8100 X-Cess 5w40."?

Agreed. They make a non-approved lube that they recommend, but use a fall back approach to an approved lubricant? Is this some kind of legalese?

And yes, it costs significantly more than most approved lubes available on Canadian shelves, let alone U.S. shelves.

lubricatosaurus: Anyone with enough money can contract Lubrizol to come up with a proprietary additive package of whatever sort they want, and claim whatever they want afterwards, with Lubrizol being able to say nothing about it. And, considering the price premium he charges, why can he not get approval? After all, if he's marketing this as a Porsche oil, get Porsche approval. Don't bother with API or MB or VW or BMW or Fiat approvals. Just stick to Porsche, right, and minimize costs?

Overkill: Views of oil sponsorship in racing have been seriously skewed in North America thanks to the sticker-fests that NASCAR and NHRA stuff have become. I dare someone to tell Ron Dennis or James Allison that Mobil or Shell have no clue how to formulate suitable lubricants for all kinds of racing, nor that they have no idea how to build lubricants for the exotics that their respective companies produce, either.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
So we know DT40 Unicorn Wee has excellent Lubrizol behind it in a no-GroupIII formula. Sounds good to me.

It simply makes many suspicious when M1 is cheapening the basestocks (partly GroupIII) because somebody at exxonMobil wanted to squeeze in more profits. Why not go all PAO and Esters, like DT40 and a few others do?


Sounds good, right? And that's just what their marketing people hope those who go by such things will think. It certainly helps their cause when you automatically believe that more PAO = better oil.

ExxonMobil developed Visom due to a projected shortage of PAO. And besides, neither you nor me nor anyone here (as far as I know) really knows the makeup of M1 oils. EM isn't telling and I haven't seen some uber analysis that shows what it is.

Oh and I don't think it makes "many" suspicious at all. Only a few that like to think they know better.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
I notice how overkill always argues tangential issues, never the main relevant points. An internet around-the-edges kind of arguer. Loves to type like a lawyer on caffeine.


You've got to be kidding.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
I notice how overkill always argues tangential issues, never the main relevant points. An internet around-the-edges kind of arguer. Loves to type like a lawyer on caffeine.


You've got to be kidding.

M0bil1 0W40 in SN version is one of the most sheer stable oils on the market (probably on par with old GC). We can argue about TBN retention which is for me a bit too low, but that is trying to find needle in hay stack.
Point is that manufacturers like Joe Gibbs, RedLine, Royal Purple are playing that conspiracy theory game which in this country always goes far (if you watch news you get my point) where corporations are in bed with car manufacturers and they are after consumers, but luckily for average American consumer Joe Gibbs or whoever came up with secret product.
I said before, getting approval is really easy. When I worked on oil that meet VW 504.00/507.00 that is produced by very, very small and unknown oil manufacturer confined to very small market in part of Europe, they paid around 3200 euros to get papers saying oil meets demands and it is approved by VW to be used in their engines and company can put that oil is approved on their bottles. Now you cans ay that testing oil before you send it for approval is expensive, of course depending on how you conduct tests. We worked with VW Polo 1.2tdi 3cyl car, SKoda Octavia 2.0tdi PD and oil company itself (I worked for car magazine) did their testings on VW Golf 2.0TDI PD. We did cycles of 10,000km without turning off engine in 50-50% HWY and city,a nd after 100,000km engines were disassembled and measured for wear and tear. Oil company made on Golf 500,000km before disassembling engine. Then they sent it to VW.
Car companies want their drivers to use good oil, oil that will protect components, emission system and give good reputation to the brand. I bet VW regret decision for not requiring VW 502.00 for 1.8T engines first time they brought them to the U.S. which resulted in sludge issues and of course people became sketchy about those engines.
However, more practical issue is that if someone uses Joe Gibbs or RedLine etc, and it is under warranty or CPO warranty and then turbo fails or some other component fails, what then? Dealership will say: Wait, you did not used approved oil, what do you want? Is driver going to say: Well it sounded good to me, it is PAO oil?
I use always approved oils and as you now, I have my opinions and likes and dislikes, but always approved. I do not care that Amsoil has its own guarantee or Redline, I do not want to deal with them in case of something.
So if they are so confident in their product (and Amsoil is doing that to CERTAIN point) then get f..... approval.

 

[buster]

FWIW, I spoke to a guy that worked for JGR a while back. He told me that prior to working with LZ, they had found M1 to be the best oil. They tested RP, Amsoil S2k (at the time that is what it was called). He emphasized how much money was spent on engine testing and how they developed the JGR oil with LZ. He spoke highly of M1 though.

If you look at the PDS for the 0w40 vs the other oils, they use the words "ultra" high end base oils. Even if there is III in the mix, it could be using a good amount of V and mPAO. Group III's have better solvency than PAO's. So you really don't know why they are using what they are using.

I also noticed that it states "exceptional" cleaning power for dirty engines. M1 0w40 is an outstanding oil.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
I do not care that Amsoil has its own guarantee or Redline, I do not want to deal with them in case of something.
So if they are so confident in their product (and Amsoil is doing that to CERTAIN point) then get f..... approval.


Actually, on that note, AMSOIL (a small blender relative to those being discussed), who also works with Lubrizol on their additive packages (LOL!) has now gotten at least two of their Euro products formally approved:

AMSOIL AFL 5w-40
Originally Posted By: AMSOI
Manufacturer Approvals:* BMW Longlife-04; MB-Approval 229.51; Porsche A40


AMSOIL EFM 5w-40

Originally Posted By: AMSOIL
Manufacturer Approvals:* MB-Approval 229.5; Porsche A40


Oh and hey look, one of those approvals is the one being discussed

And yes, they appear on the official Mercedes approval lists for those wondering:

Mercedes 229.51 List
Mercedes 229.5 List

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: edyvw
I do not care that Amsoil has its own guarantee or Redline, I do not want to deal with them in case of something.
So if they are so confident in their product (and Amsoil is doing that to CERTAIN point) then get f..... approval.


Actually, on that note, AMSOIL (a small blender relative to those being discussed), who also works with Lubrizol on their additive packages (LOL!) has now gotten at least two of their Euro products formally approved:

AMSOIL AFL 5w-40
Originally Posted By: AMSOI
Manufacturer Approvals:* BMW Longlife-04; MB-Approval 229.51; Porsche A40


AMSOIL EFM 5w-40

Originally Posted By: AMSOIL
Manufacturer Approvals:* MB-Approval 229.5; Porsche A40


Oh and hey look, one of those approvals is the one being discussed

And yes, they appear on the official Mercedes approval lists for those wondering:

Mercedes 229.51 List
Mercedes 229.5 List

That is what I said: to certain point. They did not get any VW approvals.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: buster
FWIW, I spoke to a guy that worked for JGR a while back. He told me that prior to working with LZ, they had found M1 to be the best oil. They tested RP, Amsoil S2k (at the time that is what it was called). He emphasized how much money was spent on engine testing and how they developed the JGR oil with LZ. He spoke highly of M1 though.


I have no doubt they've spent a lot of money developing the product. No different than what AMSOIL probably spends on a grade IMHO. And it makes perfect sense to have your own branded product as a source of revenue. However, like AMSOIL and the 4-ball wear test, they've chosen to "demonstrate" the virtues of their product via a dubious performance metric that will appear impressive to those who are unfamiliar with the test's relation to actual engine operating conditions. That, like the one armed bandit, rubs me, and others the wrong way. And I know you can relate to this buster, as a fan of the 4-ball test I know you are not, LOL!

I also question as to why the table has remained outdated, referencing the SM formula of M1 0w-40, whilst the SN version has been on the market for years now

We could theorize that updating it, since they don't actually list whether it is SN and SM, is unnecessary; the table shows what they want it to. Or that perhaps the SN version doesn't show the significant difference that was present with the SM formula. Or perhaps they've never re-run the test with the current version and don't care to.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: edyvw

That is what I said: to certain point. They did not get any VW approvals.


Understood. But of course you can see my point, which is that they've managed to get TWO of their lubes A40 approved so it obviously isn't as prohibitively expensive as has been suggested

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: edyvw

That is what I said: to certain point. They did not get any VW approvals.


Understood. But of course you can see my point, which is that they've managed to get TWO of their lubes A40 approved so it obviously isn't as prohibitively expensive as has been suggested

Absolutely. And obviously Amsoil figured it is good for business.

 

[buster]

Amsoil also uses Infineum. Common misconception they just use LZ. Not so.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: buster
Amsoil also uses Infineum. Common misconception they just use LZ. Not so.


True. I assume they source their PAO from more than just XOM too.