Castrol Edge 0W30 has BMW LL01 again!

Yep, but all things being equal, if you don’t have a GPF to protect, seems like LL01 would be better.

If we’re arguing that the high SAPS are bad for IVD then I can see it, even if I don’t know if I’m convinced based on the Lubrizol study.
 
chris719 said:
Are you worried about IVD? No N55 shipped with an OPF, so I don't see a lot of reason for LL04.

I guess I am not convinced that low SAPS will materially affect IVD in engines like N55.
Click to expand...
From the photos I've seen the amount of IVD on US spec cars at 100k miles isn't excessive but it's there. I'm not worried per se but I have options to run something which may reduce the rate of IVD. It's not like I'm giving anything up except at the extremes and I'm not tracking the car. Besides the HPL I'm running was also formulated to 229.51 and C30.
 
Last edited:
chris719 said:
Yep, but all things being equal, if you don’t have a GPF to protect, seems like LL01 would be better.

If we’re arguing that the high SAPS are bad for IVD then I can see it, even if I don’t know if I’m convinced based on the Lubrizol study.
Click to expand...
Why would it be better?
 
kschachn said:
Why would it be better?
Click to expand...
More additive, and potentially more ZDDP. Porsche hasn't back-specified C40 for A40 engines, for example.

Of course, the specs have not gotten more permissive, so perhaps the difference is immaterial. I just find it hard to argue that a low SAPS add pack is better from a wear perspective. If there were no tradeoff, every updated LL01 or A40 formulation would be low/mid SAPS, no?
 
Last edited:
chris719 said:
More additive, and potentially more ZDDP. Porsche hasn't back-specified C40 for A40 engines, for example.

Of course, the specs have not gotten more permissive, so perhaps the difference is immaterial. I just find it hard to argue that a low SAPS add pack is better from a wear perspective. If there were no tradeoff, every updated LL01 or A40 formulation would be low/mid SAPS, no?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. We're speculating here but it could be something as simple as "why bother"?
LL04 was always the fill for the N55 in parts of Europe which had ULSG. This is going back to 2010. No back spec required.

BMWNA, around 2017, made the fleetwide transition to LL01FE and the US had not transitioned to ULSG. Speculation was that this was done for CAFE as the new B-series engines had not yet been deployed in significant numbers.

2020-21 ULSG transition has been made. B-series engines are on a low SAPS 20w and the N55 is no longer supported outside of extended warranties. BMWNA would never officially recommend LL04 for N55 cars because it contradicts their decision to use an FE oil in 2017. This could cause them problems from a regulatory perspective.

My OCI should be less than 5k miles.
 
Last edited:
chris719 said:
More additive, and potentially more ZDDP. Porsche hasn't back-specified C40 for A40 engines, for example.

Of course, the specs have not gotten more permissive, so perhaps the difference is immaterial. I just find it hard to argue that a low SAPS add pack is better from a wear perspective. If there were no tradeoff, every updated LL01 or A40 formulation would be low/mid SAPS, no?
Click to expand...
No.
But, you can run both and do UOA.
 
BMWTurboDzl said:
Not necessarily. We're speculating here but it could be something as simple as "why bother"?
LL04 was always the fill for the N55 in parts of Europe which had ULSG. This is going back to 2010. No back spec required.

BMWNA, around 2017, made the fleetwide transition to LL01FE and the US had not transitioned to ULSG. Speculation was that this was done for CAFE as the new B-series engines had not yet been deployed in significant numbers.

2020-21 ULSG transition has been made. B-series engines are on a low SAPS 20w and the N55 is no longer supported outside of extended warranties. BMWNA would never officially recommend LL04 for N55 cars because it contradicts their decision to use an FE oil in 2017. This could cause them problems from a regulatory perspective.

My OCI should be less than 5k miles.
Click to expand...

Point taken. I am sure the N55 is fine on either and realize in the EU it was filled with LL04 to start.

I guess I still don't quite buy into the logic of dismissing the manufacturers recommendation for the FE oil but accepting it for the low SAPS oil. If low SAPS oils provide the same or better wear protection, why does anyone care about this oil or M1 FS 0W-40 still? Almost every engine that shipped from factory with a full SAPS oil is out of warranty.
 
edyvw said:
No.
But, you can run both and do UOA.
Click to expand...
I might do this experiment next year. I don't have a lot of faith in UOA though. I almost bought an E92 M3 about 5 different times and followed the bearing threads closely. I never saw any correlation between UOAs and bearing conditions. I actually remember seeing a few good UOAs and then the guy spun a bearing a month later. Maybe it's just Blackstone? No idea...
 
chris719 said:
Point taken. I am sure the N55 is fine on either and realize in the EU it was filled with LL04 to start.

I guess I still don't quite buy into the logic of dismissing the manufacturers recommendation for the FE oil but accepting it for the low SAPS oil. If low SAPS oils provide the same or better wear protection, why does anyone care about this oil or M1 FS 0W-40 still? Almost every engine that shipped from factory with a full SAPS oil is out of warranty.
Click to expand...
I'm not dismissing. I just know the officially applicable certs for every engine BMW made as of 2019. After 2019 the information went behind a pay wall. I have the document itself. This isn't guessing.
 
BMWTurboDzl said:
I'm not dismissing. I just know the officially applicable certs for every engine BMW made as of 2019. After 2019 the information went behind a pay wall. I have the document itself. This isn't guessing.
Click to expand...
So do I. That's not what I meant.

I mean you are selectively speculating that the switch to thinner FE oils is detrimental while the switch to lower SAPS oils is not. They are both ultimately motivated by regulatory requirements. Even the FE oils pass the N42 Valvetronic RNT test.

You're out of warranty and choosing LL04 over LL01, and I was just curious as to why because LL01 probably provides better wear protection. If it's intake valve deposit reduction then so be it.
 
Last edited:
chris719 said:
So do I. That's not what I meant.

I mean you are selectively speculating that the switch to thinner FE oils is detrimental while the switch to lower SAPS oils is not. They are both ultimately motivated by regulatory requirements. Even the FE oils pass the N42 Valvetronic RNT test.

You're out of warranty and choosing LL04 over LL01, and I was just curious as to why because LL01 probably provides better wear protection. If it's intake valve deposit reduction then so be it.
Click to expand...
I made no such claim saying one spec performed better or worse. LL01 and LL01fe are virtually identical aside from hths.

Everyone is speculating to some degree.
 
Last edited:
chris719 said:
I might do this experiment next year. I don't have a lot of faith in UOA though. I almost bought an E92 M3 about 5 different times and followed the bearing threads closely. I never saw any correlation between UOAs and bearing conditions. I actually remember seeing a few good UOAs and then the guy spun a bearing a month later. Maybe it's just Blackstone? No idea...
Click to expand...
Actually there is. You have numerous UOA in M3 forum with spike in lead that leads to rod bearing failure.
 
edyvw said:
Actually there is. You have numerous UOA in M3 forum with spike in lead that leads to rod bearing failure.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I never saw one as clear as you are describing, and it became harder and harder to conclude anything via UOA once they switched to lead-free. Post 2010 S65s have the 702/703 lead-free bearings.

I'll probably still do the test. At the very least I can see if LL-04 is working for my OCI via TBN and TAN.
 
chris719 said:
I have to admit, I never saw one as clear as you are describing, and it became harder and harder to conclude anything via UOA once they switched to lead-free. Post 2010 S65s have the 702/703 lead-free bearings.

I'll probably still do the test. At the very least I can see if LL-04 is working for my OCI via TBN and TAN.
Click to expand...
Yes, order TBN and TAN. Wear metals are not hard to determine.
 
$52/6qts is boutique oil market positioning, and not the $24/5qt jug economy model we all know and love from Castrol.

It's about the same price wise as Pennzoil 0w-30 LX or some Motul oils.

Plus with Motul you can do the FCPEuro exchange.

Hopefully it comes down.
 
AspektZA said:
$52/6qts is boutique oil market positioning, and not the $24/5qt jug economy model we all know and love from Castrol.

It's about the same price wise as Pennzoil 0w-30 LX or some Motul oils.

Plus with Motul you can do the FCPEuro exchange.

Hopefully it comes down.
Click to expand...
It’s not that crazy. Nowhere near some of the actual boutiques like Ravenol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

twinscrolled
Castrol EDGE 0W-40 SP? I found it on the Castrol site but no where for sale. Anyone ever seen it anywhere?
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
riggaz
YZJB
Castrol Edge 0W-40 SP
Replies
11
Views
3K
SureshR
H
VOA Castrol EDGE HM 5W30 D1G3
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
53' Stude
A
Castrol EDGE 5W-40 M vs Castrol EDGE 5W-30 M
Replies
5
Views
5K
CleanSump
ClioWilliams
Castrol Edge 0W40 new formula for Renault Twingo RS
Replies
9
Views
2K
kschachn
Back
Top