M1 0w40 FS; 4,800 miles; '12 VW Tiguan 2.0t

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: zoli
Thx a lot for sharing it, motech!
Both 0W40 oils are very impressive for me by your - let's say - severe driving condition.

Drilling down into these perfect analytical reports: Mobil1 compensates the less shear stability by extra load of antiwear pack. Am I wrong? I would choose for my Volvo light pressure turbo engine the M1 oil for the proposed max 6K OCI.

Another open question for me for long time ago: why some car manufacturer (e.g. Volvo) recommends Castrol brand oils - only some marketing agreement? Or any high sophisticated chemistry in the background?

Ad pack does not have to do anything with how fast that oil became thin! This report does not provide us with TBN and TAN to see where is. By your argument, you could run 0W20 in this engine as long as you have strong ad pack.
By the way, VISOM version, that you use in Hungary had very good shear stability, but not so good TBN retention. Another question is with so much TBN how that affects CBU in DI engines, and TSI engines are know for that.
 
Last edited:
Thx for the comment, edyvw!
My understanding: thinner oil has less lubrication affect, but this weakness compensated by antiwear additves.
Another good feature of M1 0W40 is the extreme cleaning ability: it has proven at my both neglected Swedish high mileage engines (SAAB B205E, Volvo B5204T2). Saved my cars from the death by solving the burnt oil deposits together with highest quality oil filters.
 
Last edited:
And who knows if it sheared or if there is more fuel dilution than the flashpoint shows. If this is a Blackstone report, then call me suspicious but I don't trust their numbers including viscosity. But maybe that's just me.
 
Originally Posted By: zoli
Thx for the comment, edyvw!
My understanding: thinner oil has less lubrication affect, but this weakness compensated by antiwear additves.
Another good feature of M1 0W40 is the extreme cleaning ability: it has proven at my both neglected Swedish high mileage engines (SAAB B205E, Volvo B5204T2). Saved my cars from the death by solving the burnt oil deposits together with highest quality oil filters.

M1 0W40, Castrol 0W40, Shell, etc. they all have good cleaning capabilities. No one cans ay this oil is better then some other in that category when cleaning is in question.
However, TSI engine is not designed to run on such low cst. It is OK when engine is designed for that (Volvo for example), but TSI engines are designed for heavy W30 and light W40 oils.
Regardless, IMO, such level of thinning is IMO alarming if engine does not have injector issues. If fuel is below 0.5% then this really does not look good on M1.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: kschachn
And who knows if it sheared or if there is more fuel dilution than the flashpoint shows. If this is a Blackstone report, then call me suspicious but I don't trust their numbers including viscosity. But maybe that's just me.

Blackstone went to different ASTM testing procedure in order to provide more accurate UOA numbers. Where there could be now bigger errors is VOA.
Still, even if there is some level of error, 11.04cst is too thin after 4.8K if injectors are OK.
 
Originally Posted By: zoli
Should be great to know: was there any top-up oil before the sampling for analytics?

That would be even worse then.
 
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Unless the Castrol was topped up - OP has not mentioned ?

That could be too.
OP needs to provide fuel numbers, TBN and TAN numbers.
 
Originally Posted By: edyvw
...TSI engine is not designed to run on such low cst. It is OK when engine is designed for that (Volvo for example), but TSI engines are designed for heavy W30 and light W40 oils...

I tried long time ago M1 5W50 in my SAAB reducing the oil burning - I read somewhere that the too wide range of 5-50 also shears down quickly to 5w40 grade. But helped me also to postpone the piston ring, rod bearings and the valve stem seals replacement by some years.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: motech
No top off oil needed on either OCI; fuel below 0.5 on both samples. Didn't request TBN or TAN.


Fuel wasn't measured by gas chromatography though, correct? This was Blackstone Labs?
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
I'd stick with Castrol 0w40 since viscosity retention is critical for oil film thickness under hot conditions.
And the titanium in Castrol is nice to have. "Afton’s scientists believe the resulting compounds form protective FeTiO3films on the engine surfaces. ’The titanium chemistry gives us a large benefit in terms of engine protection,’ Bell says. "
there doesn't seem to be much difference between the wear metals in this case.
 
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: 69GTX
Actually YES.

As I said and meant above, the Castrol has magnesium and titanium. The M1 0w-40 has moly, boron, lots more calcium, and NO magnesium. I couldn't have stated it any plainer. Indeed, the 20/30 grades of M1 do have magnesium. Never been confused about that.

Oddly, those same 20/30grades of Castrol have no magnesium. I wish these guys were more consistent across all their grades.

Even you are better with Castrol 0W40 because this is example how oil stayed absolutely in grade. Cst of Castrol Edge 0W40 is 13.1. This UOA shows 13.26 which could be bit of difference due to testing equipment. But M1? Holy mole did it shear. What did they do to this oil? I did UOA twice with M1 0W40 old formula (VISOM) and it went from 13.5 to 13.3, absolutely staying in grade.
Now this just confirms more my thinking that there is a reason why M1 does not meet BMW LL-01 specification, and that is that oil just cannot meet it since they moved to GTL base stock.


I totally agree. It's not testing time or business agreements. There are no name oils like cam2 blue blood with LL01 approval. If Mobil 1 could make the grade they would but none of their current products do. I use Mobil 1 but not in my BMW.
 
Originally Posted By: HolyOilSeeker
I totally agree. It's not testing time or business agreements. There are no name oils like cam2 blue blood with LL01 approval. If Mobil 1 could make the grade they would but none of their current products do. I use Mobil 1 but not in my BMW.

That's some pretty epic weasel wording on that oil. The website makes it appear that it is Longlife-01 certified ("meets"), but the PDS for the product says this:

Quote:
CAM2 BLUE BLOOD ELITE EURO 5W-40 may be recommended for the following uses:
• When SN, SM, SL, SJ, SH, SG, SF, SE, SD or SC oils are required
• When CF oils are required
• Mercedes Benz 229.3
• Volkswagen 502 00/505 00
• Opel GM-LL B-025
• Renault 0700, 0710
• In gasoline engines and turbo-charged engines
• ACEA A3/B3-12, A3/B4-12


Which (besides the fact that it doesn't list Longlife-01) leads me to believe that it actually carries none of those approvals or certs listed. Note that not once anywhere does it use the word "approval" as you did.
 
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Which (besides the fact that it doesn't list Longlife-01) leads me to believe that it actually carries none of those approvals or certs listed. Note that not once anywhere does it use the word "approval" as you did.

Yup. It's certainly not on the MB 229.3 list.
 
Originally Posted By: HolyOilSeeker
If Mobil 1 could make the grade they would but none of their current products do.

Apparently there is a group III Mobil oil product available in Canada that still meets LL-01 spec.
 
It's amazing how easily people are deceived by certification language. Granted it is sometimes the manufacturer's fault for not being clear, but most of the time it's someone trying to make it look like something it's not. That whole thread on the Motomaster oil is a good example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top