Educate me on 0w40 please

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
28,524
Location
In the shop
Good evening folks. Most of you know I'm pretty dense or stupid on motor oil "specs" like NOACK and cold pour and cold flow. The 0w40 talk has me intrigued. What are the cold flow specs and NOACK values on 0w40 oils? How heavy or thick is a 0w40 at say -12F in a vehicle without a sump heater?


If you folks had to choose; and owned a vehicle that required a 0w40, which 0w40 would you use?

Thank You in advance folks. What are some of the differences between a 0w40 and a 0w30 also?
 
Most 0w-40 are euro spec so they must meet
HTHS >3.5
NOACK and most flow below -40
Most are just a little thicker than 5w-30
The best formulas meet Porsche A40 spec.
Buy Castrol edge 0w-40, best bang for the buck.
 
Both cars in my sig can use it under the VW 502 spec. Typical Euro 0W40's regardless of brand have a NOACK of 10.0 or under. I think it has to be at or below 10 to meet a certain Mercedes spec?

I self perform the maintenance on both cars and have pretty much used Castrol 0W40 in the Audi but not in my VW.
I prefer Castrol 0W40. Unlike other Castrol synthetics, I think the 0W40 viscosity is actually considered an old school PAO synthetic.
 
Originally Posted by 53' Stude
Good evening folks. Most of you know I'm pretty dense or stupid on motor oil "specs" like NOACK and cold pour and cold flow. The 0w40 talk has me intrigued. What are the cold flow specs and NOACK values on 0w40 oils? How heavy or thick is a 0w40 at say -12F in a vehicle without a sump heater?


If you folks had to choose; and owned a vehicle that required a 0w40, which 0w40 would you use?

Thank You in advance folks. What are some of the differences between a 0w40 and a 0w30 also?

M1 FS 0W-40 European Car Formula

Viscosity, cSt (ASTM D445)
@ 40º C - 70.8
@ 100º C - 12.9

Viscosity Index
186

MRV at -40ºC, cP (ASTM D4684)
21600

HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, (ASTM D4683)
3.6

Total Base Number (ASTM D2896)
12.6

Sulfated Ash, wt% (ASTM D874)
1.34

Phosphorous, wt% (ASTM D4981)
0.1

Flash Point, ºC (ASTM D92)
226

Density @15ºC, g/ml (ASTM D4052)
0.8456

It's like the Frank's Red Hot of motor oil. I don't trouble myself with Noack. The differences between a 0W-30 and 0W-40, both being A3/B4 and carrying similar approvals, are slim to none.
 
I use Castrol Edge 0W-40 in both BMW's, but that is because it is cheap, readily available, and approved by the manufacturer (LL-01). None of the other 0W-40's can beat that combo.
 
"0W" is a requirement for an extremely low temperature. A typical 0W-40 is going to be thicker than a typical 5W-30 or 5W-20 at ambient temperatures from freezing to 80ºF.

There was a really odd case where the original Mobil 1 0W-40 met the then "Energy Conserving" standard, although there was also a tougher "Energy Conserving II" standard. I heard it did it by shearing down quickly to the 30 range, but where it would thicken back up later so it would still meet the viscosity loss requirement.
 
Originally Posted by mattwithcats
Shell Rotella T6 in 0W-40

That is a good choice imo.
 
Originally Posted by 53' Stude
Good evening folks. Most of you know I'm pretty dense or stupid on motor oil "specs" like NOACK and cold pour and cold flow. The 0w40 talk has me intrigued. What are the cold flow specs and NOACK values on 0w40 oils? How heavy or thick is a 0w40 at say -12F in a vehicle without a sump heater?


If you folks had to choose; and owned a vehicle that required a 0w40, which 0w40 would you use?

Thank You in advance folks. What are some of the differences between a 0w40 and a 0w30 also?


I too get confused on all the 0w40 talk... and the 'require a 0w40'..

Rotella 5w40 Pour Point is -51C Mobil 1 0w40 pour point is -54C

What is the special sauce that makes 0w40 coveted above the much cheaper/easier to find Rotella 5w40?
 
Originally Posted by dbias
Most 0w-40 are euro spec so they must meet
HTHS >3.5
NOACK and most flow below -40
Most are just a little thicker than 5w-30
The best formulas meet Porsche A40 spec.
Buy Castrol edge 0w-40, best bang for the buck.


Good summary. To clarify, most 0W-40s meet European manufacturer approvals (MB, BMW, VAG, Porsche), which is the reason for their impressive specs, not the fact that they're 0W-40s.

M1, Castrol, and PP Euro are all great, and relatively inexpensive, options.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by 53' Stude
Good evening folks. Most of you know I'm pretty dense or stupid on motor oil "specs" like NOACK and cold pour and cold flow. The 0w40 talk has me intrigued. What are the cold flow specs and NOACK values on 0w40 oils? How heavy or thick is a 0w40 at say -12F in a vehicle without a sump heater?


If you folks had to choose; and owned a vehicle that required a 0w40, which 0w40 would you use?

Thank You in advance folks. What are some of the differences between a 0w40 and a 0w30 also?

Good 0W40 oils will have pour point below -50, Castrol 0W40 being probably best among them.
Old Mobil1 0W40 with VISOM base (discontinued in 2015) had this odd pour point of -48 for 0W40 oil, but flow numbers where there (though not as good as newer Mobil1 0W40 FS when it comes to cold starting).
-12f is not concern at all for 0W30, 0W40 or 5W30 and 5W40.
 
My car calls for these oils, and honestly any of them seem high quality. Between the most common 3 (Mobil 1/PP/Castrol edge), my preference has settled on Castrol all things being equal. I think it might be the only one still BMW LL01 approved. That said Pennzoil is in my car right now, I'm actually using it up first with the thought that I might buy a BMW/Mini product in the near future to replace my Audi.
 
0W40s are typically blended with thin base oils doped with big time VII addtives to bring it up to (technically) 40 grade specs. If you can't think of a con to running one of the top VM-adulterated grades of oil available, then enjoy every minute of it and sleep easy!
 
And yet the Euro 0W-40 oils have more manufacturer approvals and certifications than any other grade, how is that possible?

SonofJoe has repeatedly noted on here that modern VII are very resistant to mechanical induced shear and the hype often exhibited on here about this issue is misguided.
 
Originally Posted by PeterPolyol
0W40s are typically blended with thin base oils doped with big time VII addtives to bring it up to (technically) 40 grade specs. If you can't think of a con to running one of the top VM-adulterated grades of oil available, then enjoy every minute of it and sleep easy!


We say on bitog that it's the spec/approval that really matters, and 0W-40s typically carry the most stringent of approvals. Why speculate about the impact of VII?
 
Specs are fine for being assured minimum requirements in a handful of parameters, it's too bad real-life parameters are infinite and uncontrolled. Plenty of products (in general) pass QA and durability testing only to fail IRL.
The Euros, Germans in particular have always demanded certain specs and high viscosity (even if it's fake VII viscosity ;)), but let's be honest, their engines leave a lot to be desired in terms of oiling systems. Arguably, they get the most synthetic 0Ws around (because specs demand it), yet many of the engines are quite prone to sludge and varnish. Some even need 10W60 to stay together... [censored]? Compared to a Japanese engine running GrIII and II 20 blends, why don't they suffer such consistent varnishing and wiped cams (VW) or bearings (BMW) etc? (can't help but think how much differently, straighter the oils are formulated.....) It's a paradox!!

Or is it?
Compare the base viscosities used. Compare the reliance on VIIs.
If you take the driest base fluids like PAO, which absolutely rejects contaminant solubility/dispersency, choose the lowest viscosity of such and then load it up with plastic (acrylates) and rubber (OCP) VIIs that are less stable than the base oil to meet viscosity, and what will you expect? The oxidation stability of the PAO is mitigated by using a) the lowest viscosity of such (4cSt) AND b) the load of VIIs. Not even to mention relatively poor NOACK vs the other grades. The dispersant gets NO help from the base oil to keep junk in solution, so where is the next likely place for the junk to go than onto the internal surfaces of the engine? But wait, it gets better! Once a layer of polar junk varnish is established on the metal surfaces, those surfaces actively PULL more junk out of the oil which naturally wants to reject it and the varnish layer builds up even faster! No wonder so much varnish winds up on the metal surfaces instead. Then there's the temporary and permanent shearing. VII laden, wide-spread grades also feature oil films that break down more rapidly at high temperatures NOT tested for.

If UOAs are any indication, the HTHS and fake viscosity doesn't even yeild better ring wear vs a less VII laden oil. Why should that surprise anyone? What are the VIIs doing in the ring pack? Breaking down to the base oil viscosity that's what! (what does a 4-5cSt base@a lowly 100C look like at 250+C? What does 3.5cP of VII HTHSV look like at 250+C? No one seems to care about viscosity behaviors past CCS, 40C, 100C and 150C...


b-b-but that's a stereotype, not every German engine is varnished
And congratulations to all who have clean German engines, but what does it mean? That less VII-reliant oil won't do any better in any other part of the engine?
By time you're seeing varnish under your valve cover, better believe the filth is well established on your rings. Even if engines can run rather acceptably with varnished rings (like MOST engines do), that's not something I want to allow because things can go south fast, like oil burning and compromized ring sealing. I'm not an apologist for oil burning like many on here are.... I find it absolutely unacceptable and will do nothing to further enable it, and everything to mitigate it.

There is no HTHSV test higher than 150C that I'm aware of, but there are local areas in an engine that handily exceed 150C. No one likes ring deposits, and virtually every engine has them. Why would I want to put enormous plastic (or rubber) tumbleweed molecules in that environment, regardless of base oil? And especially when I'll never take advantage of the 0W rating it was built for..... the WHY begs for justification.... a reason that is more comprehensive than "but printed materials tell me so".
That's fine if that's what you're about but it's about optimization for me, not idiot-proofing. It's not about getting more miles out of the engine, it's about getting more QUALITY miles out of it ie. best compression, cleanest ring packs for as deep into the service life as possible... nuances of machinery maintenance

'Good enough', 'fine' and 'acceptable' aren't goals of mine. If I don't need the cold cranking, I don't need the base 4, the rubber or the plastic in my oil. Simple as that. This is the path my oil journey has taken me to
cheers3.gif
 
That post is full of imagination and made up stuff for which you have no proof whatsoever.

Nice and long though. What you lack in facts you rectify with length.

Oh and my old BMW is spotless on 0W-40 and doesn't burn oil. I posted a picture a while back. This is just one example of the nonsense you've managed to assemble.
 
Originally Posted by kschachn
That post is full of imagination and made up stuff for which you have no proof whatsoever.

Nice and long though. What you lack in facts you rectify with length.

Oh and my old BMW is spotless on 0W-40 and doesn't burn oil. I posted a picture a while back. This is just one example of the nonsense you've managed to assemble.



+10,000 kschachn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top