Difference between M1 0w30 afe and 0w30 esp?

[Fahrvergnügen]

We'll look forward to your UOA of M1 ESP 0W-30 SP.

It looks like the LSPI additive packages, including the Euro ones, all are API-SP-certified now; so, I expect the UOA results to show ~ 500-ppm Mg and ~ 1,200-ppm Ca for your M1 ESP 0W-30 SP when you could buy one.

https://www.oronite.com/products-technology/automotive/passenger-car-motor-oils.html

Regarding whether Euro oils are better, it's hard to compare apples to oranges. At the end of the day, all oils use the same or similar additives but at different treat rates. I was saying that TGMO used high boron (dispersant), high moly (AW/EP/FM), and some POE (cleaning solvent) for example and also mentioned high antioxidant (AO) in extended-performance oils. Euro oils may have stronger treat rates for some additives but not necessarily for others. You may or may not notice a performance difference in real life, depending on your engine and driving conditions.

@edyvw is too much organo moly bad for deposit buildup or something on those lines. The Asians like to use high moly, but it’s organo and not trinuclear moly, which a small amount is needed, compared to organic moly

 

[bhvrdr]

Pay attention on pds from 2016:
https://www.platinuminternational.com/externalpages/oilresults/download/151902.pdf

I posted this some 5 pages behind. You don’t pay attention to anything bcs. you are looking for confirmation bias.

I know which formulation I have.

That was not the usa formulation like i already told you. Even posted this already. That is from uk site and not what was sold here. Gotta pay attention man.

Always stay on the countries site where the product is being sold. Easy mistake...

Heres the USA site...

https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-esp-0w-30/


The USA pds...

And now here you see the new API SP product that will be sold in the usa soon.

https://www.mobil.com/en/sap/our-products/products/mobil-1-esp-0w-30

 

[edyvw]

That was not the usa formulation like i already told you. Even posted this already. That is from uk site and not what was sold here. Gotta pay attention man.

Always stay on the countries site where the product is being sold. Easy mistake...

Heres the USA site...

https://www.mobil.com/en/lubricants/for-personal-vehicles/our-products/products/mobil-1-esp-0w-30/


The USA pds...


View attachment 125846


And now here you see the new API SP product that will be sold in the usa soon.

https://www.mobil.com/en/sap/our-products/products/mobil-1-esp-0w-30

Aha, and now, tell me, what is the difference between the 2016 pds and SP one?
We were discussing that but you completely missed that discussion. SP version is 2016 version! Do you get it now?
EU version was always this 2016 version, and now it is relabled to API SP, because it was always able to meet API SP as API is generally not as stringent. Not the first time! Pennzoil relabled their SN+ PPE as SP in Quaker State Euro version (QS Euro 5W40 API SP is SN+ version of PPE). oil.ru VOA you posted (that @OVERKILL posted initially) is 2016 version. EU had a slightly different version that could be due to logistic or blending process reasons. Not unheard of. That is the 2016 version and Mobil1 wants to bring that version here. Why? It could be cheaper to make. It had a higher pour point too.

You are picking what fits your narrative. 2016 version has Ca levels above 1600.

 

[bhvrdr]

.

Aha, and now, tell me, what is the difference between the 2016 pds and SP one?
We were discussing that but you completely missed that discussion. SP version is 2016 version! Do you get it now?
EU version was always this 2016 version, and now it is relabled to API SP, because it was always able to meet API SP as API is generally not as stringent. Not the first time! Pennzoil relabled their SN+ PPE as SP in Quaker State Euro version (QS Euro 5W40 API SP is SN+ version of PPE). oil.ru VOA you posted (that @OVERKILL posted initially) is 2016 version. EU had a slightly different version that could be due to logistic or blending process reasons. Not unheard of. That is the 2016 version and Mobil1 wants to bring that version here. Why? It could be cheaper to make. It had a higher pour point too.

You are picking what fits your narrative. 2016 version has Ca levels above 1600.

You have an odd way of thanking people who keep correcting you. That wasnt the formulation in your car like you thought it was. I showed you the one that is.

In the future you will have that SP formulation in your car and in the future you will see the calcium and magnesium levels reflect similarly to what every other m1 api sp looks like.

 

[edyvw]

.


You have an odd way of thanking people who keep correcting you. That wasnt the formulation in your car like you thought it was. I showed you the one that is.

In the future you will have that SP formulation in your car and in the future you will see the calcium and magnesium levels reflect similarly to what every other m1 api sp looks like.

Where did I say that was SP formulation? Stop giving yourself any kind of credit on this subject. @Gokhan obviously did not think I thought that was SP.
I posted that UOA for @Gokhan to see Zinc, Ca levels and drastic increase of Ca from VISOM version of ESP that was available until 11/2015.

Go back and start from basics, like that VW504.00/507.00 is not only for V6 engines and not small turbos. Although, you do have the privilege that you are only one stating something like that here, ever.

 

[Gokhan]

MB, BMW etc. mostly went to C3 in 2009. Some engines they kept at A3.
It is not just Germany, these are recommendations for all EU. In Russia it is A3 due to high sulfur levels.

I know that oil is not SP. My point was that M1 actually increased Ca in 2016 even though LSPI was known issue and they knew MB229.52 is going to have LSPI test.
Also Zinc is just at the limit.

Since ExxonMobil PDSs often tend to be garbage, we won't know what is inside the API-SP bottle until we do a VOA/UOA on one.

There is no zinc upper limit.

M1 ESP phosphorus (800 ppm) is 100 ppm below the ACEA/MB C3 upper limit (900 ppm). M1 FS phosphorus (1,000 ppm) is 100 ppm below the MB A3/B4 upper limit (1,100 ppm) and 600 ppm below the ACEA A3/B4 upper limit (1,600 ppm).

We're looking forward to the M1 FS SP and M1 ESP SP VOAs/UOAs. I would be very surprised if they didn't have ~ 500-ppm magnesium. LSPI is serious business for additive companies, and they won't monkey around with all-calcium detergents in newly formulated additive packages, as they want to have a failsafe for even the strictest LSPI tests.

 

[edyvw]

Since ExxonMobil PDSs often tend to be garbage, we won't know what is inside the API-SP bottle until we do a VOA/UOA on one.

There is no zinc upper limit.

M1 ESP phosphorus (800 ppm) is 100 ppm below the ACEA/MB C3 upper limit (900 ppm). M1 FS phosphorus (1,000 ppm) is 100 ppm below the MB A3/B4 upper limit (1,100 ppm) and 600 ppm below the ACEA A3/B4 upper limit (1,600 ppm).

We're looking forward to the M1 FS SP and M1 ESP SP VOAs/UOAs. I would be very surprised if they didn't have ~ 500-ppm magnesium. LSPI is serious business for additive companies, and they won't monkey around with all-calcium detergents in newly formulated additive packages, as they want to have a failsafe for even the strictest LSPI tests.

Will see what SP brings. I would not say M1 pds is garbage. Of all companies they are usually most consistent.
You guys argued that change in additive pack will change oil properties. Ok. I provided you EXACTLY same properties from 2016 that was on sale in EU since then. So now argument is: yeah, same oil but more magnesium?
The fact is: ESP is tested for LSPI!
The fact is: it has MB229.52 approval which means it passed LSPI test.
The fact is: it can be used, besides MB engines, in other turbo engines if LSPI is concern.
There is no other way around. PPE 5W40 was SN+ with Ca levels in 2,300 range.
There was first Ca argument, and I clearly stated in the beginning that Ca doesn’t mean anything if other additive properties are not taken into consideration. M1 was able to pass LSPI test with current/old (this is just for those that cannot comprehend) additive pack.
This all discussion came to point where we debated: “but when REALLY MB started LSPI test?” I mean, think a bit about it.
I posted UOA to see that Mobil1 actually increased Ca levels from VISOM version, and increased it dramatically, although LSPI was known issue for more than a decade. They increased it although they should know in 2016 that MB will require LSPI tests. BMW informed blenders 4-5 years in advance about changes they were introducing in 2018. Manufacturers (serious ones though) don’t just wake up one morning on left foot and decide they will introduce LSPI test.

 

[4WD]

Will see what SP brings. I would not say M1 pds is garbage. Of all companies they are usually most consistent.
You guys argued that change in additive pack will change oil properties. Ok. I provided you EXACTLY same properties from 2016 that was on sale in EU since then. So now argument is: yeah, same oil but more magnesium?
The fact is: ESP is tested for LSPI!
The fact is: it has MB229.52 approval which means it passed LSPI test.
The fact is: it can be used, besides MB engines, in other turbo engines if LSPI is concern.
There is no other way around. PPE 5W40 was SN+ with Ca levels in 2,300 range.
There was first Ca argument, and I clearly stated in the beginning that Ca doesn’t mean anything if other additive properties are not taken into consideration. M1 was able to pass LSPI test with current/old (this is just for those that cannot comprehend) additive pack.
This all discussion came to point where we debated: “but when REALLY MB started LSPI test?” I mean, think a bit about it.
I posted UOA to see that Mobil1 actually increased Ca levels from VISOM version, and increased it dramatically, although LSPI was known issue for more than a decade. They increased it although they should know in 2016 that MB will require LSPI tests. BMW informed blenders 4-5 years in advance about changes they were introducing in 2018. Manufacturers (serious ones though) don’t just wake up one morning on left foot and decide they will introduce LSPI test.

 

[edyvw]

View attachment 125866

I did. But the love for those water based ILSAC garbage doesn’t know boundaries.

 

[Gokhan]

Will see what SP brings. I would not say M1 pds is garbage. Of all companies they are usually most consistent.
You guys argued that change in additive pack will change oil properties. Ok. I provided you EXACTLY same properties from 2016 that was on sale in EU since then. So now argument is: yeah, same oil but more magnesium?
The fact is: ESP is tested for LSPI!
The fact is: it has MB229.52 approval which means it passed LSPI test.
The fact is: it can be used, besides MB engines, in other turbo engines if LSPI is concern.
There is no other way around. PPE 5W40 was SN+ with Ca levels in 2,300 range.
There was first Ca argument, and I clearly stated in the beginning that Ca doesn’t mean anything if other additive properties are not taken into consideration. M1 was able to pass LSPI test with current/old (this is just for those that cannot comprehend) additive pack.
This all discussion came to point where we debated: “but when REALLY MB started LSPI test?” I mean, think a bit about it.
I posted UOA to see that Mobil1 actually increased Ca levels from VISOM version, and increased it dramatically, although LSPI was known issue for more than a decade. They increased it although they should know in 2016 that MB will require LSPI tests. BMW informed blenders 4-5 years in advance about changes they were introducing in 2018. Manufacturers (serious ones though) don’t just wake up one morning on left foot and decide they will introduce LSPI test.

We are going in circles.

Facts as Sir @4WD requested:

If you look at the Infineum plot, LSPI starts at ~ 1,000-ppm calcium (Ca). This means that:

• There will be twice as many LSPI events at 1,200-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100-ppm Ca.
• There will be seven times as many LSPI events at 1,700-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100 ppm Ca.
• There will be 23 times as many LSPI events at 2,300-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100-ppm Ca.

https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/passenger-cars/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition/

• The upper phosphorus limit is 1,100 ppm in ACEA A3/B4 with MB 229.5 and 900 ppm in ACEA C3; so, there is only so much ZDDP quenching you can get.
• Moreover, the MB and PSA OEM LSPI tests didn't start until at least late 2018 and perhaps were not required until 2020.
• Additionally, the MB LSPI test could be far less strict than the API SP/ACEA A5/B7/ACEA C6 test as far as we know.
• Last but not least, we don't know what the current, API-SP formulations are, which I presume to be mixed-calcium–magnesium and not all-calcium.

 

[edyvw]

We are going in circles.

Facts as Sir @4WD requested:

If you look at the Infineum plot, LSPI starts at ~ 1,000-ppm calcium (Ca). This means that:

• There will be twice as many LSPI events at 1,200-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100-ppm Ca.
• There will be seven times as many LSPI events at 1,700-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100 ppm Ca.
• There will be 22 times as many LSPI events at 2,300-ppm Ca vs. at 1,100-ppm Ca.

https://www.infineuminsight.com/en-gb/articles/passenger-cars/quenching-low-speed-pre-ignition/

• The upper phosphorus limit is 1,100 ppm in ACEA A3/B4 with MB 229.5 and 900 ppm in ACEA C3; so, there is only so much ZDDP quenching you can get.
• Moreover, the MB and PSA OEM LSPI tests didn't start until at least late 2018 and perhaps were not required until 2020.
• Additionally, the MB LSPI test could be far less strict than the API SP/ACEA A5/B7/ACEA C6 test as far as we know.
• Last but not least, we don't know what the current, API-SP formulations are, which I presume to be mixed-calcium–magnesium (not all-calcium).

PPE 5W40 API SP has Ca level at 1,400ppm.
Again, you are trying to argue that maybe few months of requirements are an issue, or it is not that strict (MB has strictest requirements on everything else, highly doubt they are not strict on this).
Companies don’t formulate oil from month to month. Doesn’t make absolutely any sense.
UOA analysis that I posted is from 2021 oil. Per approvals, it is LSPI tested!
Everything else you are trying to argue (maybe they gave them grace period, which doesn’t make any sense for so long) is guessing, at best.
MB said: LSPI test in 2020.
Oil is 2021: therefore it is LSPI tested.

Now if you have a paper where they got grace period of 2yrs, I would be happy to see it. But, that is ridiculous bcs. that means that MB told its US supplier: sure, we will sell cars that need LSPI test for 2 years, but you guys take your time.

And you are assuming that he requested that. Give me a break.

 

[Gokhan]

@edyvw is too much organo moly bad for deposit buildup or something on those lines. The Asians like to use high moly, but it’s organo and not trinuclear moly, which a small amount is needed, compared to organic moly

All moly types used in engine oils are organic moly. Inorganic moly is molybdenum disulfide (MoS₂), which is only used in grease because it does not mix with oil, which is an organic compound.

Trinuclear moly contains three molybdenum atoms per molecule, and dinuclear moly contains two per molecule, etc. According to Infineum, trinuclear moly is more potent than dinuclear moly, but not all researchers agree, and some think dinuclear moly is more potent.

Most organic moly types contain sulfur atoms in the molecules, but some don't, which are arguably considered less effective. High-moly oil formulations may be using sulfur-free moly.

Contrary to the common belief, there is no correlation between moly and engine deposits. However, oils with high moly cannot pass the TEOST 33C test, which in turn has no correlation with an actual engine, and for this reason, SAE 0W-16 and SAE 0W-20 oils are exempt from TEOST 33C, as they often tend to contain high moly.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...n-for-deposits-with-teost-33c-or-moly.305163/

 

[Gokhan]

PPE 5W40 API SP has Ca level at 1,400ppm.
Again, you are trying to argue that maybe few months of requirements are an issue, or it is not that strict (MB has strictest requirements on everything else, highly doubt they are not strict on this).
Companies don’t formulate oil from month to month. Doesn’t make absolutely any sense.
UOA analysis that I posted is from 2021 oil. Per approvals, it is LSPI tested!
Everything else you are trying to argue (maybe they gave them grace period, which doesn’t make any sense for so long) is guessing, at best.
MB said: LSPI test in 2020.
Oil is 2021: therefore it is LSPI tested.

Now if you have a paper where they got grace period of 2yrs, I would be happy to see it. But, that is ridiculous bcs. that means that MB told its US supplier: sure, we will sell cars that need LSPI test for 2 years, but you guys take your time.

And you are assuming that he requested that. Give me a break.

• As I have been saying, the API-SP formulations have reduced calcium (Ca) and added magnesium (Mg).
• 1,400-ppm Ca is very low for an ACEA-A3/B4 oil.
• I have been saying that the mid-SAPS API-SP formulations should have ~ 1,200-ppm Ca and full-SAPS API-SP formulations ~ 1,400-ppm Ca, with the rest of the detergent being ~ 500-ppm Mg.
• Therefore, I have no idea what you are arguing about.
• As for the rest, we are going in a circle.

 

[edyvw]

• As I have been saying, the API-SP formulations have reduced calcium (Ca) and added magnesium (Mg).
• 1,400-ppm Ca is very low for an ACEA-A3/B4 oil.
• I have been saying that the mid-SAPS API-SP formulations should have ~ 1,200-ppm Ca and full-SAPS API-SP formulations ~ 1,400-ppm Ca, with the rest of the detergent being ~ 500-ppm Mg.
• Therefore, I have no idea what you are arguing about.
• As for the rest, we are going in a circle.

Whole your argument in this thread comes down to: if, should, but, maybe.

Mobil1 ESP 5W30 from 2016 per oil.ru has Ca level at 1,600ppm. That is THE SAME oil that Mobil1 now lists as API SP. That is what we know so far. Is it actually different or nit comes under: maybe, if, should etc.
MB had LSPI test in 2020. Only thing that we can take as a fact that all MB229.52 oils after that (M1ESP 0/5W30, PPE LX 0W30, Valvoline XL3 5W30 etc.) are LSPI tested. Everything else is: should, if, maybe, but.

You have my UOA from 2021. You saw additives pack. It is LSPI tested. Everything else is: should, if, but, etc.

Until we see VOA/UOA of API SP oil here, it is all speculation.

How much Ca full SAPS oil should have is irrelevant. PPE SN+ had much lower Ca level as far as I remember, but I will try to find it. In API SP PP increased everything, Ca, Mg, Zinc, Phosphorus etc.

 

[Gokhan]

Until we see VOA/UOA of API SP oil here, it is all speculation.

How much Ca full SAPS oil should have is irrelevant. PPE SN+ had much lower Ca level as far as I remember, but I will try to find it. In API SP PP increased everything, Ca, Mg, Zinc, Phosphorus etc.

It is only a speculation on your side. I could easily place a safe bet with anyone regarding the API-SP FS and ESP oils having added magnesium (Mg) and reduced calcium (Ca).

Ca is the most relevant additive in LSPI. You simply cannot have a 2,500-ppm-Ca oil and expect it to pass any halfway-decent LSPI test. Even ACEA A3/B4 restricts phosphorus (P) to 1,100 ppm (with MB 229.3/MB 229.5 specs); therefore, you don't get much help from ZDDP in LSPI. ~ 1,500-ppm Ca seems to be the upper limit for API-SP oils. These are simple facts.

No, Pennzoil Platinum Euro 5W-40 A3/B4 SN had 2,400-ppm Ca vs. 1,400 for SP. Your recollection was wrong.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/uoa-pennzoil-plat-5-40-euro-results.298166/

As for the rest, we have been going in a circle.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

This thread is something else

 

[Gokhan]

This thread is something else

The real strange thing is that I have not even been making any controversial statements (as I sometimes do ) but only stating the fact that all API-SP-certified oils have reduced calcium & added magnesium as far as from what we have seen in VOAs and UOAs to date.

But some turned this simple fact inside out and into a matter of pride for European oils not previously API-SP-certified and won't stop trying to prove 2 + 2 = 3, and they will keep saying that no, a European oil can be all-calcium/high-calcium even if it is API-SP-certified because—it is European and thus invincible.

By the way, most new LSPI-certified Euro oils also carry API-SP approval; so, it is a moot issue whether European-OEM LSPI approval alone without API-SP approval could/would/should change the oil composition.

I am looking forward to seeing VOAs/UOAs from European API-SP-rated oils that will show high calcium/all calcium, as some are claiming that there could/would/should be such oils. I don't know how the additive companies will succeed in doing it, but apparently they can because they are formulating additive packages for European oils as opposed to American/Japanese oils. OK, that's enough sarcasm.

 

[edyvw]

It is only a speculation on your side. I could easily place a safe bet with anyone regarding the API-SP FS and ESP oils having added magnesium (Mg) and reduced calcium (Ca).

Ca is the most relevant additive in LSPI. You simply cannot have a 2,500-ppm-Ca oil and expect it to pass any halfway-decent LSPI test. Even ACEA A3/B4 restricts phosphorus (P) to 1,100 ppm (with MB 229.3/MB 229.5 specs); therefore, you don't get much help from ZDDP in LSPI. ~ 1,500-ppm Ca seems to be the upper limit for API-SP oils. These are simple facts.

No, Pennzoil Platinum Euro 5W-40 A3/B4 SN had 2,400-ppm Ca vs. 1,400 for SP. Your recollection was wrong.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/uoa-pennzoil-plat-5-40-euro-results.298166/

As for the rest, we have been going in a circle.

Again you are betting.
UOA I posted has Ca at just above 1700ppm.
It has MB229.52.

That is where story ends.

 

[Gokhan]

Again you are betting.
UOA I posted has Ca at just above 1700ppm.
It has MB229.52.

That is where story ends.

No, that M1 ESP 0W-30 was API-SN-rated, not SP. We will see your M1 ESP 0W-30 SP UOA. That's where the story will end.

 

[edyvw]

No, that M1 ESP 0W-30 was API-SN-rated, not SP. We will see your M1 ESP 0W-30 SP UOA. That's where the story will end.

I know. It has MB229.52, which means it has LSPI test.
That is the fact. I understand if you cannot comprehend this, but again: MB229.52=LSPI test.