BMW B58 Engine Oil Recommendation
- Thread starter afree
- Start date
There's no harm unless you're worried about ash.
Not necessarily. Currently catless unless there is something internally that would be of concern.
Ash is contributor to CBU. However, BMW is generally good in that department.
There's no advantage, similarly as there is no advantage to using VW 504 over 502.
You're not doing extended 2yr/18,500mi intervals in America, so why not just use 502?
There's places to gain access if you know where to look, or just pay the access fee ($30/day or $2500 for 12mo).
Here are the caveats from a technical document dated 02/2019:
1) For petrol engines, only BMW Longlife-04 and BMW Longlife-12 FE oils are permitted in Europe (EU plus Switzerland, Norway and Liechtenstein). They must not be used outside this area.
2) ”Others” includes all AG engines/models which are not listed in the above table, for example M10, M20, M30, M40, M42, M43, M44, M50, M52, M60, M62, M70, M73, etc.
3) ”Others” includes all Motorsport engines/models which are not listed in the above table, for example S14, S38, S50, S50U, S52, S70, etc.
4) Vehicles with a petrol engine and petrol particulate filter can be identified on the vacuum hose, which is installed on the petrol particulate filter, as well as on the optional equipment SA1DEA RDE exhaust emissions standard.
5) BMW Longlife-14 FE+ oils are only approved for petrol engines in Europe (EU plus Switzerland, Norway and Liechtenstein), USA and Canada. They must not be used outside this area.
Again, I don't see any particular reason to switch from the 0w-20 FE 17 oil unless you're experiencing temperature warnings, or oil consumption - which seems unlikely for a daily driver.
I don't have the exact time stamp, but this Liqui Moly engineer suggests that oil viscosity isn't important in modern (read: the last or second to last ICE generation) engines as much as it used to be. It's pretty much just a conveyance for additives, detergents, dispergents, and other goodies.
There's really no doubt in my mind that BMW engineered the B58 to be just happy with 0w-20, and I've yet to hear of a lubrication failure involving this engine generation.
Here is parachuter trying to tell something digested long time ago.
Yes, there is advantage using VW504.00/507.00 over VW502.00. Actually, there is 167% of reasons why VW504.00/507.00 is better than VW502.00 in direct injection engines.
Cx will result in a reduced rate of buildup on the valves.
What exactly is the benefit, if you're not doing 30,000mi intervals as they do in central europe?
I'd hate to be chucking 504 oil at 5,000/7,500 intervals or whatever the current fashion is.
With that EA888 Gen 2 I'd say the timing chain is a bigger concern than theoretical deposits on your intake valves ;-)
I'd say since you joined last Thursday to research board. Numerous topics on this issue.
Also, not sure Liqui Moly videos will cut among this crowd.
As someone who has done intake valve cleaning on a Gen2, it's not theoretical, it's a real thing.
I now have a gen 3 (2.5T) which uses 504 and I haven't scoped it or anything but the exhaust tips stay WAY cleaner. Not even a comparison. That's even with the fact it also uses like three times as much oil as my old Gen2.
I now have a gen 3 (2.5T) which uses 504 and I haven't scoped it or anything but the exhaust tips stay WAY cleaner. Not even a comparison. That's even with the fact it also uses like three times as much oil as my old Gen2.
Give him some time
Give him some time
If you have specific documentation or proof on the efficacy of VW504 vs 502 in the North American auto market, and have a series of UOAs on the trends of engines operated under various conditions demonstrating the effects of low-SAPS, unapproved motor oil used in conjunction with very specific driving styles - then by all means shoot your shot.
Sorry, but I don't suffer Forum Kings when I have both:
1. A Product Applications Engineer from Liqui Moly's R&D department stating there's no point to VW504 in North America
2. Technical Documentation from BMW stating that LL-04 has no applications in North America for petrol engines
Say what you will about LM, they're one of the few mid-size companies that go out and get these approvals from the manufacturers.
Case in point, they have a BMW 17FE+ approval for their new 0w-20 that others - such as Scamsoil - don't.
Anecdotally, the VW techs I've spoke to have seen intake deposits mostly on Jettas and Passats - not so much Golf Rs and GTIs.
Wonder why that might be
Deposits on your tailpipe are subject to more variables than oil alone I would bet.
2.5T like in the RS3? That thing should get hot enough that the valves will decarbonize on their own if you're driving it properly.
If you have specific documentation or proof on the efficacy of VW504 vs 502 in the North American auto market, and have a series of UOAs on the trends of engines operated under various conditions demonstrating the effects of low-SAPS, unapproved motor oil used in conjunction with very specific driving styles - then by all means shoot your shot.
Sorry, but I don't suffer Forum Kings when I have both:
1. A Product Applications Engineer from Liqui Moly's R&D department stating there's no point to VW504 in North America
2. Technical Documentation from BMW stating that LL-04 has no applications in North America for petrol engines
Say what you will about LM, they're one of the few mid-size companies that go out and get these approvals from the manufacturers.
Case in point, they have a BMW 17FE+ approval for their new 0w-20 that others - such as Scamsoil - don't.
Anecdotally, the VW techs I've spoke to have seen intake deposits mostly on Jettas and Passats - not so much Golf Rs and GTIs.
Wonder why that might be
Deposits on your tailpipe are subject to more variables than oil alone I would bet.
2.5T like in the RS3? That thing should get hot enough that the valves will decarbonize on their own if you're driving it properly.
That video is several years old now, I remember watching it when it was published. The guy also says there no more OE oil specs that are not full synthetic oil - Which is absolutely wrong, unless he's referring to Euro only specs, which makes me question his knowledge on the North American market. Low sulfer gasoline was widely available starting early 2017.
502, LL01 etc have basically been obsolete in Europe for ~12 years. The only real reason for that was low sulfur fuel allowing 504/LL04 to be used instead. The LSF also allows their service interval to be twice as long.
In the last three years or so the only place full saps oil has some advantage is on a race track. Aside from that the mid saps specs are typically adequate and usually preferred. There is really no downside other than perhaps slightly higher cost and perhaps a little hard to get your hands on (neither of which are true in Canada where I live).
For example here is a link with the oil requirements for 2020 Audis. If you scroll to the bottom there is not a single high saps oil specified anymore.
I worked on development of VW504.00/507.00. DOcumentation is not free. Also, you are stating bunch of nonsense. Already discussed here. You do not suffer from forum kings, but you do expect things to be done for you.If you have specific documentation or proof on the efficacy of VW504 vs 502 in the North American auto market, and have a series of UOAs on the trends of engines operated under various conditions demonstrating the effects of low-SAPS, unapproved motor oil used in conjunction with very specific driving styles - then by all means shoot your shot.
Sorry, but I don't suffer Forum Kings when I have both:
1. A Product Applications Engineer from Liqui Moly's R&D department stating there's no point to VW504 in North America
2. Technical Documentation from BMW stating that LL-04 has no applications in North America for petrol engines
Say what you will about LM, they're one of the few mid-size companies that go out and get these approvals from the manufacturers.
Case in point, they have a BMW 17FE+ approval for their new 0w-20 that others - such as Scamsoil - don't.
Anecdotally, the VW techs I've spoke to have seen intake deposits mostly on Jettas and Passats - not so much Golf Rs and GTIs.
Wonder why that might be
Deposits on your tailpipe are subject to more variables than oil alone I would bet.
2.5T like in the RS3? That thing should get hot enough that the valves will decarbonize on their own if you're driving it properly.
That does everything to show your knowledge on this subject.
Thoroughly.
My 2 cents, having taken a look at running low-SAPS in my N55 last summer when I was forced to pick a new oil because they stopped selling my current choice...
1/ I am very familiar with the TIS "suitable engine oil" grid which is no longer easy to link to. I'm pretty sure I took a PDF copy of it that I could post. It has said no LL-04 (more or less equivalent to LL-01 but low SAPS) in North America for decades. This was due to high sulphur permitted in, and found in the fuels which dramatically decreased the service interval because low SAPS means lower ability to fight acid build up.
A lot has changed, even in the two years since that bulletin has come into effect, with sulphur level restrictions coming into place in both the US and, finally, Canada in that time. These changes put sulphur levels on par with Europe where LL-04 is permitted. I expect that those "suitable engine oil" bulletins could be updated. Whether they are is probably a matter of whether anyone at BMW HQ cares enough to bother since there are so many other products to choose from and the older engines will all have warranties and dealer support expire.
2/ You're asserting that the advantages of running LL-04 "against recommendation" would be shown in a UOA. They won't. The benefits will be shown by having less build up on your intake valves and the rest of your intake manifold. These benefits do not show in an OC or two, but over years of operation. What you WOULD see in a UOA is that there is no disadvantage from a lubrication and wear standpoint to running LL-04, and you would need to monitor TBN and TAN for a while to verify that your choice in fuel has appropriate sulphur levels and that you are changing "often enough" (whatever that is for your application).
Disclosure - I ended up sticking with LL-01 this time around, but I am still considering going LL-04 and monitoring closely via UOA with TBN/TAN. My annual mileage is low and I change oil way earlier than the factory interval anyways so I'm probably a good candidate to give it a shot.
Similar threads
- Locked