M1 0-40 vs. RL 5-30 Q's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,646
Location
Imperial Valley, California
Hello Everyone, first off I wish to say Happy Good Friday to my fellow Christians, and if your not a Christian, Good Afternoon to you. I have been on the boards picking peoples brains about these 2 oils for a little while now, and I am going to ask a few more Questions I would like answered, and some good opinions out there just for fun. I have been using RL 5/30 for about 3,000 miles now, and though my car seems to love the stuff, I keep thinking in the back on my mind "man I have to order more" and at that moment I miss the fact that I used to be able to just go to the local store and buy the M1 that I used to use. Im not wimping out on the RL just yet though, but just more like gathering intel on the competition so to speak. As I go back and forth on the manufactureres websites and doing my own searching I have come accross some minor details that I would like to know about. 1) Both RL 5/30 and M1 0/40 have a HTHS of 3.8 BUT done on diferent tests. I didn't know this. Can anyone tell me why this isn't a standard accross the board? M1 0/40 tested by ASTM D4683, RL 5/30 ASTM D4741 what gives? 2) M1 has 1.3 of Sulfated Ash? What the heck is this stuff? I heard in large amounts its not so great in oil, so what does it do? Is it for anti wear or? 3) I am still stumped on the VI of these 2 oils. The M1 is 185 and RL is 162, so wouldn't the M1 be better than the RL in this particular area? 4) Vis @ 100c for M1 is 13.5 vs 10.6 of the RL. This also puzzles me because they both have the same HTHS rating (I think, but done by diferent testing methods) but have totally different viscosities at temp. 5) if M1 is a 0w when cold then why is the Vis @ 40c 75 vs RL at 62 while it carries a 5w? This also puzzles me. The 5w flows better than the 0w? 6) The Flashpoint of M1 is 230C while RL is 252C so for a turbo charged motor wouldn't the higher the flashpoint be better to protect the bearings of the turbo? Especially when the Turbo is shut off? Even with the turbo being water cooled, when the key is turned off, and even if you havent been driving hard, its still hot enough to the touch to burn the skin off your hand haha. Some folks have read my posts and know I kinda am on the fence on stuff, so I don't want to seem like I am obsessing too much. Its just that if this M1 0/40 stuff aint that bad, and I can buy it at like 5 stores within 5 miles of my home, just sure would be more conveinent is all. I wont sacrifice protection for conveinence though, and that is why I am here again askign around. Thanks Guys.................Again smile Jeff
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
1) Both RL 5/30 and M1 0/40 have a HTHS of 3.8 BUT done on diferent tests. I didn't know this. Can anyone tell me why this isn't a standard accross the board? M1 0/40 tested by ASTM D4683, RL 5/30 ASTM D4741 what gives?
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=959396
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
2) M1 has 1.3 of Sulfated Ash? What the heck is this stuff? I heard in large amounts its not so great in oil, so what does it do? Is it for anti wear or?
It's not an additive; it's basically a measure of what would be left behind of the oil burned off. That's why less is better; it means the oil is less likely to leave deposits in the absolute hottest parts of your engine (among other things). Popular anti-wear additives like ZDDP will increase the ash number. There are ashless anti-wear additives but those can be very expensive.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
3) I am still stumped on the VI of these 2 oils. The M1 is 185 and RL is 162, so wouldn't the M1 be better than the RL in this particular area?
Yes. This is what one would expect when comparing a 0w-40 to a 5w-30.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
4) Vis @ 100c for M1 is 13.5 vs 10.6 of the RL. This also puzzles me because they both have the same HTHS rating (I think, but done by diferent testing methods) but have totally different viscosities at temp.
13.5 @ 100º C is in the SAE 40 range, hence the "40" in Mobil 1 0w-40. 10.6 @ 100º C is in the SAE 30 range, hence the "30" in Red Line 5w-30.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
5) if M1 is a 0w when cold then why is the Vis @ 40c 75 vs RL at 62 while it carries a 5w? This also puzzles me. The 5w flows better than the 0w?
At that temp, yes. At 0º C and below, it'll be the other way around (i.e. the Mobil 1 will be more pumpable). Here's another way to think about it: the Red Line 5w-30 is thinner at 40º C and up, but it thickens up more at low temperatures because of its lower viscosity index. The Mobil 1 0w-40 is thicker at most temperatures, but doesn't thicken up as much when it's really cold.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
6) The Flashpoint of M1 is 230C while RL is 252C so for a turbo charged motor wouldn't the higher the flashpoint be better to protect the bearings of the turbo? Especially when the Turbo is shut off? Even with the turbo being water cooled, when the key is turned off, and even if you havent been driving hard, its still hot enough to the touch to burn the skin off your hand haha.
Possibly. Then again, unless you have reason to suspect that 230º C is too low, you might not want to worry about it.
 

Jeffs2006EvoIX

Thread starter
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,646
Location
Imperial Valley, California
Thanks for the reply, I figured on the Viscosities at temp falling into the respective weight classes, but what confuses me is the HTHS. If RL 30w is in the 40w HTHS class, but falls out of a 40w class by 100C. What would be more important? The HTHS or the viscosity at 100C for engine protection under extreme temps/loads? I am not sure what Redlines Ash would be? I know it has 1500zinc and 1300 phos but not sure what the ash number is. Jeff
 

Jeffs2006EvoIX

Thread starter
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,646
Location
Imperial Valley, California
Additionally it seems from the link provided about HTHS Testing (thank you by the way) the two methods have never been tested back to back in a trial? Simply stated that "they should be the same" doesn't mean they are? So wouldn't M1's testing be the most recent of the 2? Considering that M1 has the credentials backing them while RL doesn't? Just out of curiousity if anything. Im not bashing RL, not at all, im just being the devils advocate. Jeff
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
4,380
Location
MS
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
1) Both RL 5/30 and M1 0/40 have a HTHS of 3.8 BUT done on diferent tests. I didn't know this. Can anyone tell me why this isn't a standard accross the board? M1 0/40 tested by ASTM D4683, RL 5/30 ASTM D4741 what gives?
Read: http://mceinriassoc.com/id61.html
Quote:
3) I am still stumped on the VI of these 2 oils. The M1 is 185 and RL is 162, so wouldn't the M1 be better than the RL in this particular area?
Mobil 1 0W-40 shears to a 30-grade in most engines, RL 5W-30 does not. M1 0W-40 likely wouldn't have retained it's HTHS viscosity by the end of the oil change, RL 5W-30 would have.
Quote:
4) Vis @ 100c for M1 is 13.5 vs 10.6 of the RL. This also puzzles me because they both have the same HTHS rating (I think, but done by diferent testing methods) but have totally different viscosities at temp.
Yep, because HTHS vis doesn't necessarily correlate with kinematic viscosity. Kinematic viscosity isn't measured under shear, HTHS is.
Quote:
5) if M1 is a 0w when cold then why is the Vis @ 40c 75 vs RL at 62 while it carries a 5w? This also puzzles me. The 5w flows better than the 0w?
It flows better at 40 degrees C, not at -40.
Quote:
6) The Flashpoint of M1 is 230C while RL is 252C so for a turbo charged motor wouldn't the higher the flashpoint be better to protect the bearings of the turbo? Especially when the Turbo is shut off? Even with the turbo being water cooled, when the key is turned off, and even if you havent been driving hard, its still hot enough to the touch to burn the skin off your hand haha.
The RL will just give you more buffer room against turbo coking, whether it ever needs it/uses it is another discussion.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
27,576
Location
Dallas,Tx USA
I`d just run the M1 since your car is a daily driver. Stock up on it when Oreilly runs the $4.99 sale. I stocked up on the M1 10W40. My Z runs insanely smooth on this oil! When it`s not on sale at Oreilly,I`ll just buy it in the 5 qt jugs at Walmart which comes to a lil over $5 a quart.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
135
Location
Southern California
Jeff, I'm sure you are well aware, but if not, Kragen O'Reilly Auto Parts has Mobil 0w-40 for $4.99 a quart until April 26th. I picked up a bunch. Over a $1.50 cheaper per quart than Wal-Mart. Kragen O'Reilly Auto Parts normally sells it for, I believe $8.69 a quart.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Thanks for the reply, I figured on the Viscosities at temp falling into the respective weight classes, but what confuses me is the HTHS. If RL 30w is in the 40w HTHS class, but falls out of a 40w class by 100C.
It's better to think of it this way: - Red Line 5w-30 is thinner under low-shear conditions. - Both oils have similar viscosity under high temperature, high shear conditions (e.g. around your piston rings).
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
What would be more important? The HTHS or the viscosity at 100C for engine protection under extreme temps/loads?
HTHS for sure. In fact, many people argue that kinematic viscosity (the measurement you're talking about at 100º C) is pretty much useless.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
I am not sure what Redlines Ash would be? I know it has 1500zinc and 1300 phos but not sure what the ash number is.
You're going to have to check with Red Line if you really want to know, but I honestly wouldn't be concerned about it. Even if it's higher than Mobil 1 0w-40's (which I would guess it is), it probably won't matter in your application.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Additionally it seems from the link provided about HTHS Testing (thank you by the way) the two methods have never been tested back to back in a trial? Simply stated that "they should be the same" doesn't mean they are?
Good question. They probably have been tested back to back; I just can't find any links discussing that. I also am not informed enough to comment further.
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
So wouldn't M1's testing be the most recent of the 2? Considering that M1 has the credentials backing them while RL doesn't?
Not necessarily. Maybe Mobil's lab is just set up for one test, whereas Red Line's is set up for another. The fact that Mobil 1 0w-40 carries all those approvals doesn't necessarily mean it's a better oil. It just means there is more evidence for how good it is and in what ways.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,170
Location
Michigan
I still like my idea from one of the threads a couple of weeks ago: 50/50 M1 15w50/M1 0w40. It would start out with an HTHS of ~4.1, and once it got done shearing would be similar to RL 5w30.
 

Y_K

Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
2,780
Location
WA (USA)
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
..so I don't want to seem like I am obsessing too much.
intelligent questions from an observant individual. Xristos Anesti!
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
528
Location
Arizona
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
I still like my idea from one of the threads a couple of weeks ago: 50/50 M1 15w50/M1 0w40. It would start out with an HTHS of ~4.1, and once it got done shearing would be similar to RL 5w30.
Sounds similar to the M1 5W50 I just put in my car yesterday ... KV = 17.3 cSt with HTHS = 4.22 cP.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,170
Location
Michigan
Except that both M1 0w40 & 15w50 are available at most decent parts stores, that M1 15w50 gives better wear protection due to higher zddp content, and the mix will probably be more shear stable than 5w50. I have yet to see M1 5w50 in a parts store around here.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
...50/50 M1 15w50/M1 0w40. It would start out with an HTHS of ~4.1, and once it got done shearing would be similar to RL 5w30.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
...that M1 15w50 gives better wear protection due to higher zddp content, and the mix will probably be more shear stable than 5w50.
I'm interested to know how you came to these conclusions, and hoping it's based on more than the commonly accepted facts about VIIs and ZDDP.
 
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
968
Location
NC, United States
Originally Posted By: KeithKman
Jeff, I'm sure you are well aware, but if not, Kragen O'Reilly Auto Parts has Mobil 0w-40 for $4.99 a quart until April 26th.
I just bought 7 qts 0W40 for my Volvo and 5 qts 0W20 for wife's 07 Camry. That's about all they had in those viscosities. I'll find another O'Reilly and do the same thing again tomorrow. Thanks again for the tip!
 

Jeffs2006EvoIX

Thread starter
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
1,646
Location
Imperial Valley, California
Thanks for all your comments everyone. Here is a different spin on the subject. The Moly in Redline and the Esters. I think these may be also valid points for me to add. Here is a quote from Terry about RL that intrigues me. I will post the link at the bottom of the post so you all you can go back and read all posts on the Subject that I am using as reference. Quote from Terry: My premise is that the Redline is one of a a very few oils that can actually clean deeply enough to strip away soft metals residuals from the engine internals, much like a vegetable based oil does. Similar acting esters, different sources. You were surpised at how much Rx cleaned after running a high end Amsoil IV,V based oil. Redline's chemistry seems to do the same. Back to my basic premise that motor oils can lubricate or clean but not do both, well. After the cleaning the Redline lubricated engine will demonsrate lower wear values in soft metals consistant with the virgin levels of Redline that we have recently discussed. So yes M1 will NOT clean effectively enough to strip away residual soft metals at the levels we see with the Redline product. M1 is however a great hydrodynamic lubricant in its current formulation, moly included. So let me put a "different spin" on this discussion about M1 0/40 vs RL 5/30. Moly and Esters. We all know that M1 uses Esters but to what degree no one really knows. Same for RL. I think it would be safe to "assume" that RL uses esters as a "majority" in the make up. As PAO is the "majority" in M1 (most likely). If Terry is correct in his analysis that RL will actually "Clean" your engine better than M1, and I know this is all heresay since I don't know exactly where Terry is gaining his info from, BUT I feel we all know that Terry is a VERY respected memeber of this site and thus should be noted. Link taken from (above) http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1447&page=3 Now the Moly issue. I do know that RL 5/30 in my car right now has about 800ppm of Moly (per my VOA see here) http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2141562 Additionally look at the ZDDP package as well. Now, in my debatge within myself, haha I find that Moly in itself may be the reason why my car has seen an increase in MPG's as well as quicker start ups. People can pick apart my testing on this fact and call it hearsay as well. BUT I am anal when it comes to MPG's and as "Ironic" as that sounds with a 4 cylinder car that gets what a v8 gets in mileage, haha, BUT I didn't buy this Evo of mine for its MPG's. I like to use the MPG's similar to how a dyno is used. Bare with me. The Dyno isn't there just for bragging rights about how much a car makes, who cares right? BUT it is used as a tool to see if your making power improvements over stock parts, and tune. Same goes for MPG's to me. If I use a product and the only variable is lets say the Oil. Now, considering your driving habbits are the same, same fuel is used (octane and location of purchase) and ambient air temp is all close to the previous test, in theory you should be able to validate the claim. In my car since the use of RL I have gone from 17/18 city to 19/20 city. From 23/24hwy to 26/27hwy. Now to the quicker starts. Here is the deal, and I don't want to seem like I am promoting RL Oil here. I am trying to be as "Un-Biases" actually as possible. Note that I was a LONG time M1 user and M1 was Factory fill on my car. The starts are rather subjective I know, but with my car I notice everything. Here is why. I am running a rather small racing battery called a "dyno-bat" in my car, while running very aggressive stage 3 cams in my car. Additionally I am running Brian Crower Race Valve Springs with Titanium retainers. So what does all this mean? Well I am painting a picture for you. The High Lift cams, Super stiff valve springs, and the small battery really test the ability of the car to start of cold days, or just plain old cool starts anyday. Winter being worst of course. The car turns over noticable quicker with the RL. The lifter tick is vurtually elliminated. So why consider M1 again? Why debate this whole thread?? Its to gain knowledge. We all know that ordering oil is a pain in the a s s. I just try to see things from all perspectives. Both sides of the coin so to speak. Though I have used M1 over the years, it was always 10/30EP nothing else. I have no experience with M1 0/40 and although the RL seems to be the ticket here, as an oil enthusiast so to speak, I can't help but fight the urge of always trying to find the next bigger, better thing. I guess its just the Plain Ol' American Way smile Happy Easter Everyone!! Jeff
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
528
Location
Arizona
I don't consider ordering oil by mail a PITA. Aside from paying shipping, I buy what I want and it's delivered to my door step in less than a week. I've been buying motor oil this way for my GT500 for several years now; Mobile 1 5W50 is almost impossible to find otherwise. If Red Line works for you, I'd stick with it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: Jeffs2006EvoIX
Thanks for all your comments everyone. Here is a different spin on the subject. The Moly in Redline and the Esters. I think these may be also valid points for me to add. Here is a quote from Terry about RL that intrigues me. I will post the link at the bottom of the post so you all you can go back and read all posts on the Subject that I am using as reference. Quote from Terry: My premise is that the Redline is one of a a very few oils that can actually clean deeply enough to strip away soft metals residuals from the engine internals, much like a vegetable based oil does. Similar acting esters, different sources. You were surpised at how much Rx cleaned after running a high end Amsoil IV,V based oil. Redline's chemistry seems to do the same. Back to my basic premise that motor oils can lubricate or clean but not do both, well. After the cleaning the Redline lubricated engine will demonsrate lower wear values in soft metals consistant with the virgin levels of Redline that we have recently discussed. So yes M1 will NOT clean effectively enough to strip away residual soft metals at the levels we see with the Redline product. M1 is however a great hydrodynamic lubricant in its current formulation, moly included. So let me put a "different spin" on this discussion about M1 0/40 vs RL 5/30. Moly and Esters. We all know that M1 uses Esters but to what degree no one really knows. Same for RL. I think it would be safe to "assume" that RL uses esters as a "majority" in the make up. As PAO is the "majority" in M1 (most likely). If Terry is correct in his analysis that RL will actually "Clean" your engine better than M1, and I know this is all heresay since I don't know exactly where Terry is gaining his info from, BUT I feel we all know that Terry is a VERY respected memeber of this site and thus should be noted. Link taken from (above) http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1447&page=3 Now the Moly issue. I do know that RL 5/30 in my car right now has about 800ppm of Moly (per my VOA see here) http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2141562 Additionally look at the ZDDP package as well. Now, in my debatge within myself, haha I find that Moly in itself may be the reason why my car has seen an increase in MPG's as well as quicker start ups. People can pick apart my testing on this fact and call it hearsay as well. BUT I am anal when it comes to MPG's and as "Ironic" as that sounds with a 4 cylinder car that gets what a v8 gets in mileage, haha, BUT I didn't buy this Evo of mine for its MPG's. I like to use the MPG's similar to how a dyno is used. Bare with me. The Dyno isn't there just for bragging rights about how much a car makes, who cares right? BUT it is used as a tool to see if your making power improvements over stock parts, and tune. Same goes for MPG's to me. If I use a product and the only variable is lets say the Oil. Now, considering your driving habbits are the same, same fuel is used (octane and location of purchase) and ambient air temp is all close to the previous test, in theory you should be able to validate the claim. In my car since the use of RL I have gone from 17/18 city to 19/20 city. From 23/24hwy to 26/27hwy. Now to the quicker starts. Here is the deal, and I don't want to seem like I am promoting RL Oil here. I am trying to be as "Un-Biases" actually as possible. Note that I was a LONG time M1 user and M1 was Factory fill on my car. The starts are rather subjective I know, but with my car I notice everything. Here is why. I am running a rather small racing battery called a "dyno-bat" in my car, while running very aggressive stage 3 cams in my car. Additionally I am running Brian Crower Race Valve Springs with Titanium retainers. So what does all this mean? Well I am painting a picture for you. The High Lift cams, Super stiff valve springs, and the small battery really test the ability of the car to start of cold days, or just plain old cool starts anyday. Winter being worst of course. The car turns over noticable quicker with the RL. The lifter tick is vurtually elliminated. So why consider M1 again? Why debate this whole thread?? Its to gain knowledge. We all know that ordering oil is a pain in the a s s. I just try to see things from all perspectives. Both sides of the coin so to speak. Though I have used M1 over the years, it was always 10/30EP nothing else. I have no experience with M1 0/40 and although the RL seems to be the ticket here, as an oil enthusiast so to speak, I can't help but fight the urge of always trying to find the next bigger, better thing. I guess its just the Plain Ol' American Way smile Happy Easter Everyone!! Jeff
Did you check the dates on that post from Terry? It's from 2002. That's nine years ago. All grades of Mobil 1 have been through several reformulations since then, and I would imagine that the same is true of most grades of Red Line. Regarding moly, I think your conclusions are more than a bit ambitious given the evidence at your disposal. Regarding fuel economy, it's not enough simply to think to yourself about what your driving habits have been and do some quick calculations. If you want to draw conclusions from fuel economy -- or dyno runs, for that matter -- you have to do several trials under absolutely identical conditions that you have gone to great lengths to control. Then, when you get the numbers, you have to do some sort of statistical testing to make sure that the difference you see isn't due to chance. This is what big companies do. Remember when Royal Purple got in trouble for their MPG and horsepower claims? They were taking numbers that hadn't been validated in that way, and just repeating them in their ads. Eventually, someone (BP) decided to put those claims to the test, and the claims failed. Yet, I would bet real money that if you confronted the people who made those claims for Royal Purple, they would swear on their lives that they were telling the truth and had observed things accurately. That's the way it goes, and that's why we have science. Horsepower increases, MPG increases, engine wear reduction -- these are not things that can just be eyeballed. If they could, it wouldn't take millions of dollars and years of work by large teams of highly educated people just to develop engines and engine oil.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
11,878
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: SIXSPEED
I don't consider ordering oil by mail a PITA. Aside from paying shipping, I buy what I want and it's delivered to my door step in less than a week.
Ditto.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top