BMW approved 0W-20 for N20 turbo four cyl.

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
What is the HT/HS of this Fuchs oil? Sorry if I missed it...

I haven't found any PDS spec's yet and when we do HTHSV won't likely be on it.


Certainly its got to be above an HTHS minimum of 2.3 (probably around 2.6 or so), if you go by Shell's "Improved Fuel Efficiency by Lubricant Design : A Review

"In our laboratory, it has been observed that in a modern gasoline engine, well designed
automotive bearings can be lubricated with oils as thin as 2.3 mPa.s without any observable wear on either con-rod or main bearings."

You mean a minimum of 2.6cP. A HTHS of 2.3cP in the minimum viscosity for the new SAE 16 grade.
The Fuchs Titan GT1 XTL 0W-20 had a HTHSV in the 2.7-2.8cP range.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
To get this thread back on track:

The Fuchs GT1 EVO 0W-20 oil is interesting, getting the new BMW LL-14 approval, and one wonders whether BMW will now back-spec it to BMW LL-01 cars. Anybody know? ... This could be a problem if SOPUS, who recently won the BMW dealership oil supply contract (from Castrol present/past) in the U.S., doesn't get a 0W-20 available with the LL-14 approval.


Doubtful. As noted in the Fuchs PDF the engine that spec's this oil was designed to run a lower viscosity lubricant, just like a few other BMW engines (that CATERHAM mentioned) that ran on the LL-04FE oils.

These categories are separated by HTHS. LL-01 and LL-04 are HTHS >=3.5cP, whilst the FE oils are below that threshold.

The engines that spec LL-01 were not designed with thin lubricants in mind, so it is doubtful that BMW would go through the hassle of testing the old designs and back-spec'ing the ones that handled the change OK like Ford did.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: jrustles
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: jrustles

Anybody 'can match its performance'. The F20/22C is really nothing special. If it impresses you that much, then I dunno what to tell you.

Which production engine other than few hand made Ferrari engines can make more than 120 HP per liter without Super or Turbo charged ? You can talk all you want, but you need some evidences to support your claim.

Those Ferrari engines are several years after Honda break through the 120 HP per liter barrier.

You clearly don't get it. Not only are there multiple production engines that exceed F20s specific peak HP output "per liter", but you still think that's somehow difficult to do.

I asked you a simple question "Which production engine other than few hand made Ferrari engines can make more than 120 HP per liter without Super or Turbo charged ? You can talk all you want, but you need some evidences to support your claim."

All you said was "Not only are there multiple production engines that exceed F20s specific peak HP output "per liter"". You didn't name any manufacture that can makes more than 120 HP/L from a normally aspirated car/light truck engine. Motorcycle engines of several hundreds CC don't count.

Name 1 engine other than exotic manufacture such as Ferrari, Lambo ... You don't need to name more than 1 even you claim "multiple production engines"

If you can't name any then be quiet, making false statement like yours is not exactly what most people like to see.

Every poster posted in this topic knows that there is no mass produced normally aspirated engine can generate more than 120 HP per liter. Exceptions are few hand made Ferrari engine models, and may be few Lamborghini engines.

 

[CATERHAM]

My Cdn Fuchs Importer contact got back to me with the following:

The current ester based Titan GT1 XTL SM 0W-20 will remain available.
The new BMW approved EVO 0W-20 will be available later this year along with a new generic SN 0W-20 targeted at the Asian/Domestic market.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I expected the auto industry should by now produce high efficient engines that can generate 140-150 HP per liter or more without resorting to turbo charged.


That's not a realistic expectation. To make power without forced induction (assuming deep breathing capabilities) you need one of two things:

1. RPM
2. Displacement

The BMW example I cited earlier, making over 100HP/L, did so out of a 5L engine. But it also is, like the S2000, relatively high strung with a redline north of 8,500RPM. While that may sound awesome, it made the car feel slower than the car it replaced, which was the E39 M5. It was of course actually faster, but perception is a big thing. And like the guys ragging on the S2000 for having to be wrung out to actually go anywhere, similar comparisons were drawn with the E60 vs the E39.

Remember, HP (work), in an automobile engine, is a product of torque and RPM. It is a measure of work being performed. The higher the rate, the smaller the units need to be to do the same amount of work. So you can provide a lot of force at a slow rate (low RPM, high torque) or a small amount of force at a high rate (high RPM, low torque) and end up with the same amount of work being performed. The S2000 doesn't make a lot of torque. Its power-band is very high RPM biased, which is how it is able to make the power it does. This means that low-speed performance suffers. As was pointed out, that kind of setup doesn't make sense for a regular production car.

Small displacement with high RPM may not suitable for sedan, SUV, Minivan ... but it is very applicable for small/sport coupe/convertible such as BMW Z4, MB SLK, Porsche Boxster, Mazda Miata ...

The problem is mass producing high rev engine above 9-10k reliably is not an easy task.

As of now there is no car, other than S2000, with normally aspirated engine with less than 2.5 L can generate these numbers: Accelerate 0-60 MPH in less than 5.5-5.6 seconds and top speed above 150 MPH.

May be Lotus Elise with curb weight less than 2,000 lbs can beat those numbers.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Every poster posted in this topic knows that there is no mass produced normally aspirated engine can generate more than 120 HP per liter. Exceptions are few hand made Ferrari engine models, and may be few Lamborghini engines.


I've already mentioned that Mazda makes an engine with 190HP/L. It's naturally aspirated, specs run of the mill dino 5w30 oil and it certainly was mass produced. But I already know you will not like that example.

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Easy now! I thought our discussions on the topic went pretty well in the past, LOL!

They sure did, no question about it, but aside from a good exchange of arguments, our stance stayed pretty much the same. It’s like that episode of Futurama where the characters meet their counterparts from a parallel universe. In one scene, the professor turns a wrench clockwise on some nut, while the professor from the parallel universe turns is counterclockwise. They were both exhausted at the end, but the nut neither got tighter nor looser.

 

[KrisZ]

To get back on topic...

The take away point here, as few members already mentioned, is that this BMW engine was specifically design to use low viscosity oils. How low the HTSV will be is yet to be determined.
But this should not in any way be used as "proof" that viscosity doesn't matter and that it's all about additives, as it was already proclaimed in several other threads.

 

[kjbock]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Every poster posted in this topic knows that there is no mass produced normally aspirated engine can generate more than 120 HP per liter. Exceptions are few hand made Ferrari engine models, and may be few Lamborghini engines.


I've already mentioned that Mazda makes an engine with 190HP/L. It's naturally aspirated, specs run of the mill dino 5w30 oil and it certainly was mass produced. But I already know you will not like that example.

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Easy now! I thought our discussions on the topic went pretty well in the past, LOL!

They sure did, no question about it, but aside from a good exchange of arguments, our stance stayed pretty much the same. It’s like that episode of Futurama where the characters meet their counterparts from a parallel universe. In one scene, the professor turns a wrench clockwise on some nut, while the professor from the parallel universe turns is counterclockwise. They were both exhausted at the end, but the nut neither got tighter nor looser.

I think he also mentioned "reliably", so that means the Mazda rotary engine is immediately disqualified.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Every poster posted in this topic knows that there is no mass produced normally aspirated engine can generate more than 120 HP per liter. Exceptions are few hand made Ferrari engine models, and may be few Lamborghini engines.


I've already mentioned that Mazda makes an engine with 190HP/L. It's naturally aspirated, specs run of the mill dino 5w30 oil and it certainly was mass produced. But I already know you will not like that example.

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Easy now! I thought our discussions on the topic went pretty well in the past, LOL!

They sure did, no question about it, but aside from a good exchange of arguments, our stance stayed pretty much the same. It’s like that episode of Futurama where the characters meet their counterparts from a parallel universe. In one scene, the professor turns a wrench clockwise on some nut, while the professor from the parallel universe turns is counterclockwise. They were both exhausted at the end, but the nut neither got tighter nor looser.

LOL!

Well I fully admit I used the wrong term above, it should have been power not work. It was late at night and I had consumed a few drinks with the wife......

The statement itself, aside from the improper term, was correct. I just had a 'tard moment and well, used work where I should have used power

The disagreement we had before was about the payload of a truck and two engines with the same HP but vastly different torque numbers being able to do the same amount of work.

I'm not in disagreement with you in this thread nor FetchFar. I fully admit that I screwed up the term in my post. But I don't feel it ties into our discussion from the other thread

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
As noted in the Fuchs PDF the engine that spec's this oil was designed to run a lower viscosity lubricant, just like a few other BMW engines (that CATERHAM mentioned) that ran on the LL-04FE oils. ... These categories are separated by HTHS. LL-01 and LL-04 are HTHS >=3.5cP, whilst the FE oils are below that threshold. .... The engines that spec LL-01 were not designed with thin lubricants in mind, so it is doubtful that BMW would go through the hassle of testing the old designs and back-spec'ing the ones that handled the change OK like Ford did.


Currently, BMW says to use the high-HTHS LL-01 spec oils in the turbo-4 N20 (since 2011). So for all the years the N20 has already been produced, BMW may back-spec that one at least to the new LL-14 recommendation. Unless the N20 engines have more surface area in their journal bearings, I don't see a difference between that engine and recent past BMW engines.

 

[FetchFar]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
What is the HT/HS of this Fuchs oil? Sorry if I missed it...

I haven't found any PDS spec's yet and when we do HTHSV won't likely be on it.


Certainly its got to be above an HTHS minimum of 2.3 (probably around 2.6 or so), if you go by Shell's "Improved Fuel Efficiency by Lubricant Design : A Review
"In our laboratory, it has been observed that in a modern gasoline engine, well designed
automotive bearings can be lubricated with oils as thin as 2.3 mPa.s without any observable wear on either con-rod or main bearings."

You mean a minimum of 2.6cP. A HTHS of 2.3cP in the minimum viscosity for the new SAE 16 grade.
The Fuchs Titan GT1 XTL 0W-20 had a HTHSV in the 2.7-2.8cP range.


That was my point, in that 2.3 is the lowest one can go without significant wear, as the researchers found, and the new Titan GT1 EVO would certainly have an HTHS >2.6 here.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
As noted in the Fuchs PDF the engine that spec's this oil was designed to run a lower viscosity lubricant, just like a few other BMW engines (that CATERHAM mentioned) that ran on the LL-04FE oils. ... These categories are separated by HTHS. LL-01 and LL-04 are HTHS >=3.5cP, whilst the FE oils are below that threshold. .... The engines that spec LL-01 were not designed with thin lubricants in mind, so it is doubtful that BMW would go through the hassle of testing the old designs and back-spec'ing the ones that handled the change OK like Ford did.


Currently, BMW says to use the high-HTHS LL-01 spec oils in the turbo-4 N20 (since 2011). So for all the years the N20 has already been produced, BMW may back-spec that one at least to the new LL-14 recommendation. Unless the N20 engines have more surface area in their journal bearings, I don't see a difference between that engine and recent past BMW engines.


Could have different oil pumps

Though I believe newer BMW engines use variable displacement pumps so perhaps that's a moot point.

I don't know if the N20 is back-spec'able or not. But it will certainly be interesting to see if BMW does in fact do some back-spec'ing, as historically that's not been something they've done from what I've seen.

I thought Ford's approach was quite interesting as certain engines weren't back-spec'd when then went 5w-20 across the board so it was quite obvious they had done some rather extensive testing as to which engines were OK with it and which weren't.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I don't know if it would be awful in a sedan, but it would take a properly geared manual trans or programmed auto to make it livable and it wouldn't be for everyone.


Extreme example of why it's not the best marriage

http://jalopnik.com/5983180/the-mazda-ro...for-some-reason

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR

Small displacement with high RPM may not suitable for sedan, SUV, Minivan ... but it is very applicable for small/sport coupe/convertible such as BMW Z4, MB SLK, Porsche Boxster, Mazda Miata ...


As far as BMW and MB they tend to use the same engines/variations of the same engines across multiple cars. If they were to produce an engine like that from the S2000 it would be exclusive to their roadster cars, which are low volume, and I don't think that's a financially viable endeavour. The high performance variants of those cars tend to share engines with something from the M-series which means the engine has to work properly in a big sedan. We are already in agreement that this engine wouldn't be, so I can't see BMW or Mercedes doing it.

Porsche's high performance cars have typically been turbocharged so that approach doesn't fit with them either.

Quote:
The problem is mass producing high rev engine above 9-10k reliably is not an easy task.


Well, as I noted, the V10 in the E60 M5 was an engine that ran right up there and is certainly reliable. The issue here is producing an engine that is expensive to develop and will be very limited in application. Honda did it because well, they are Honda and that's their thing. They don't make big V8's, are we to assume they can't do it because they don't? Of course not.

Quote:
As of now there is no car, other than S2000, with normally aspirated engine with less than 2.5 L can generate these numbers: Accelerate 0-60 MPH in less than 5.5-5.6 seconds and top speed above 150 MPH.

May be Lotus Elise with curb weight less than 2,000 lbs can beat those numbers.


With claims like that it comes down to who actually cares about those numbers though. And I don't mean the 0-60 or 150Mph thing, I mean that you've done it with a sub 2.5L engine

I have a portly sedan that does 0-60 in 4.8 and has a top speed of 190Mph. Nope, it doesn't make 100HP/L but it has a beautifully flat torque curve that makes the car a joy to drive and can motivate the 4K lbs into eager acceleration at any point in the power band.

Different strokes right? I'm 100% sure that BMW COULD have made 600BHP out of the V10 in the E60. It would have had to spin to 9,500 probably though and it would have made the car less fun to drive as BMW doesn't do split camshaft profiles (ala VTEC), they advance and retard the camshafts, so the same profile would have to be used, which ultimately means that low speed power IS going to suffer and that takes away from the driving experience, particularly in a heavy car, a situation where a high strung engine like that would become less fun than in a roadster.

I think the S2000 is a really neat car BTW, so don't think I'm dogging it. But I wouldn't own one as that's not my cup of tea. If I were to get a roadster I'd get an older Z8 with the S62, that's the experience I like

 

[buster]

Nice oil. This isn't surprising to me at all though. Mobil 1 0w20 racing has been used for full races in some of the NASCAR teams. Entirely different situation, but still shows a low viscosity can handle high heat and stress.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
:

The Fuchs GT1 EVO 0W-20 oil is interesting, getting the new BMW LL-14 approval, and one wonders whether BMW will now back-spec it to BMW LL-01 cars. Anybody know? ... This could be a problem if SOPUS, who recently won the BMW dealership oil supply contract (from Castrol present/past) in the U.S., doesn't get a 0W-20 available with the LL-14 approval.

The BMW LL-01 FE 0W-30 (HTHSV 3.0cP) has been available as an option in Europe for a few years now for a number of models. A while back I checked with my local BMW dealership parts guy that I know and there is a part number for the oil and I could put an order in for it but what would happen is that the order would receive permanent "back-order" status if BMW Canada has no interest in bringing it in. I'm sure this is the same situation in the States and this would likely be the same situation for the new 0W-20 with LL-14 FE approval.

So if one wants to source either oil here in NA, BMW won't help you, you're on your own.


In my estimation, North America would be the perfect market (U.S.'s CAFE, etc.) for a BMW LL-14 0W-20, and I was wondering if BMW (even in Europe) plans to say its OK to use the LL-14 in place of LL-01. ?? Still, it will take a long time for LL-14 to be trusted for durability in racing/tracked BMW engines, as their are good 30 and 40 weights for that extra peace-of-mind, giving up a little power and fuel economy though. Of course, Ford, Toyota, Mazda, GM, etc. have approved 20 weights, gradually getting people less nervous about them over the last 10 years.
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: FetchFar
:

The Fuchs GT1 EVO 0W-20 oil is interesting, getting the new BMW LL-14 approval, and one wonders whether BMW will now back-spec it to BMW LL-01 cars. Anybody know? ... This could be a problem if SOPUS, who recently won the BMW dealership oil supply contract (from Castrol present/past) in the U.S., doesn't get a 0W-20 available with the LL-14 approval.

The BMW LL-01 FE 0W-30 (HTHSV 3.0cP) has been available as an option in Europe for a few years now for a number of models. A while back I checked with my local BMW dealership parts guy that I know and there is a part number for the oil and I could put an order in for it but what would happen is that the order would receive permanent "back-order" status if BMW Canada has no interest in bringing it in. I'm sure this is the same situation in the States and this would likely be the same situation for the new 0W-20 with LL-14 FE approval.

So if one wants to source either oil here in NA, BMW won't help you, you're on your own.


In my estimation, North America would be the perfect market (U.S.'s CAFE, etc.) for a BMW LL-14 0W-20, and I was wondering if BMW (even in Europe) plans to say its OK to use the LL-14 in place of LL-01. ?? Still, it will take a long time for LL-14 to be trusted for durability in racing/tracked BMW engines, as their are good 30 and 40 weights for that extra peace-of-mind, giving up a little power and fuel economy though. Of course, Ford, Toyota, Mazda, GM, etc. have approved 20 weights, gradually getting people less nervous about them over the last 10 years.


In the EU LL01 was replaced by LL04 sometime after 2004. Interestingly there never was a LL04 FE spec (FWIW good FE is advertised as one of many attributes of LL04 oils).

Too bad we don't know the requirements of LL-14 and we're guessing with regards to the "FE". Currently all new BMW M's run on A3/B4(ll01) in the US. In the EU it is probably C3(ll04). When the US transitions to ULSG maybe it'll be LL04 or the new LL14.

I'm going to guess LL14 won't show up state side until we get ULSG.

 

[Geonerd]

As stated, turbo engines don't necessarily produce that much more peak cylinder/journal pressure/load. They do produce peak pressure for a much longer period.

(Maximum Boost - Corky Bell.)

Making a blown engine run well on thinner oil is just a matter of increasing journal/bearing area slightly, and possibly limiting boost at low revs, when the Stribeck curve is at its lowest.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
The German made Fuchs Titan GT1 EVO 0W-20 has the BMW LL-01 FE+ approval for use in the 245 hp turbo four N20 engine:
http://www.generaloils.net/2014-02-12_AIS-InfoFuchs_TITAN-GT1-EVO-0W-20_EN.PDF

Problem is it's not available in the US but should be in Canada.
I haven't found PDS info on this new oil yet.


I wonder if it's VI beats the old Titan GT1 0W-20's what 172 rating??

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: Noobie
I smell fanboyism.


I drive a 2004 S2000 turbo because it's an affordable sports car. I'm certainly not a "fanboy". I'd rather have a Z06, or Z51 convertible etc or any number of more capable, more refined cars.

In my case, the 2.2L engine runs 19.5Lbs boost, makes 407RWHP and 305Lb/Ft torque and will accomplish a mid-low 11's 1/4 mile at 130MPH. It's not more reliable than an LS3, nor does it make more power, nor is the engine significantly lighter, more simple or significantly more compact. It's just affordable and fun.

My plan is to look into the 2015-16 Mustang convertible when I can afford one, a few years down the road.

Still, I really have to give the S2000 it's due. It is the most fun car I've ever owned. The entire package is engineered to keep the driver happy.

As far as oil requirements go, I don't get good UOA's on thin oil. But remember that my engine redlines at 8500, and make double it's original power. That oil requirements match my experience with past turbo cars in S. Florida heat. I run 5W-40 TDT in the winter and 15W-50 M1 in the summer. Seems to work out well enough. I may even go to 15W-50 year round.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Motorcycle engines of several hundreds CC don't count.


Why not?