Mobil 1 0W-40 or GC 0W-30 for Northeast Winters?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
...............Or what would be better is viscosity spec' at say 0C using the HTHS or MRV methodology. But there isn't so we work with what we're given...........


That would be very usefull, wouldn't it! After all these years, you would think someone at API or ILSAC would have proposed such an idea.
21.gif



Seems so un-radical an idea. The oil companies could even use it as a marketing strategy for us cold weather folks.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: pipo
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
M1 AFE 0w-30 may be a more modern formulation, but it was designed with a different purpose/target in mind: mainly improvement of fuel economy. If you need an oil meeting VW 502.00 spec (HT/HS of at least 3.5 cP), then M1 0w-30 isn't your oil.

As far as GC getting old comment, from what we know, GC's formulation hasn't changed since about 2004 or so. However, that does not necessarily make it bad. It is certainly still good enough to meet all the stringent German mfg specs. Also, we don't know for sure that GC's formulation hasn't changed. Not everything will show up on a $20 VOA... But most likely it's still the same.




I was thinking maybe 4 quarts of M1 0w-40 and 2 quarts of M1 0W-30, to keep the HTHS viscosity at about 3.5. Anything else about the M1 0W-30 that varies significantly from the 502 spec that I should be concerned about? I noticed that the TBN and SAP are a bit lower, so the oil might deplete faster, but I believe some of the other 502 oils have lower TBN and SAP also. Maybe I would gain a bit of cold start wear and tear protection with this mix?

I guess another way of asking the question would be: Is HTHS the most important spec to be concerned about generally, or am I missing something important?

Also, even though VW uses one spec for various gas engines, presumably to avoid marketing problems and consumer confusion, are there likely to be differences in the optimal HTHS viscosity for these different engines? I wish I had an oil pressure gauge.



But why even thin out the M1 0w40? It's great straight from the bottle. HTHS 3.8 gives you some "safety" over the 3.5 minimum.

I was just thinking it might be a good idea to make it even a little less viscous for cold starts during the winter months, and I would shorten the oil change interval to be sure not to deplete the oil beyond its safety margins. Not having received any ringing endorsements, I will probably take the conservative route and stick with the straight M1 0W-40.

If you are willing to mail-order/Internet-order, there's a whole world of other oils out there, such as 0w30s and 0w40s with very high VIs, HTHS of about 3.6, and extremely high-quality (group V) basestocks.
 
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Originally Posted By: pipo
.........Is this perhaps a prescription for fresh oil just before the start of the coldest months in cold weather climates?


Yes. See this paper from Infineum: "Assessment of Ageing Mechanisms in Lubricants and Their Effects on Retained Low Temperature Pumpability of Top Tier Oils"

http://www.infineum.com/Documents/Crankc...icants-2010.pdf


I have taken the liberty of excerpting below a few paragraphs from this paper. One thing I have definitively decided is that blending oils to reduce the low temperature pumping viscosity is a fool's errand, and might actually have the opposite effect due to unforseen interactions of the various oil components. Also, using fresh oil at the beginning of winter and shortening the oil change interval in winter are likely to help maintain the oil's low temperature pumpability. Finally, does anybody know which oils use crystalline viscosity modifier (VM) chemistries, such as
HE-OCP, which apparently are more prone to adverse ageing and low temperature pumpability problems?

"oil can undergo a number of changes during its lifetime in the
engine which adversely affect low temperature pumpability.
Industry stakeholders are now expressing concerns about the
potential risk of engine failures due to deterioration of low
temperature pumpability of oils during their life cycle in the
engine. Concerns have also been raised over the last few
years that the move to Group III base stocks, while improving
many of the properties of oil formulations, may also impact
their retained low temperature pumpability.

The oil in the engine is exposed to a variety of
processes, such as (a) oxidation, nitration and thermal
degradation; (b) mechanical shearing; (c) evaporation; (d)
contamination with combustion by-products; and (e) comingling
with fuel and top-up oils. These processes can have
profound effects on the pumpability of the oil, potentially
leading to catastrophic lubrication failure.

mixing two
well performing oils, commonly known as top-up, can result
in a lubricant mixture failing low temperature pumpability

oils blended
with crystalline viscosity modifier (VM) chemistries, such as
HE-OCP, were much more prone to loss of pumpability upon
ageing than other VM chemistries.

some formulation
decisions, such as the choice of viscosity modifier in
European formulations, have been shown to move a
formulation with a strong additive system into the failing
aged oil pumpability regime

In the
current formulating environment, when interactions of all
lubricant components are carefully balanced, it is particularly
important to understand ageing mechanisms and their effect
on this intricate balance. The importance of such
understanding was demonstrated by analyzing the causes of
low temperature pumpability field failures which resulted
from the formation of a waxy, quasi-solid gel. The ageing of
the oil in this case was not particularly severe with mild
oxidation and a low level of biodiesel fuel dilution. But these
ageing routes led to a change in the interactions between
additive package components, base oil, viscosity modifier
and pour point depressant. These interactions resulted in
apparent gel formation and loss of low temperature
pumpability in field service. Ageing of the oil in service can
have a profound effect on low temperature pumpability."
 
You have to look at the intended use of M1 AFE 0w30 vs M1 0w40. AFE is designed for improved fuel economy in more "docile" motors. The 0w40 is a performance-oriented oil for high-output motors.

As such, their formulations and additive packages are likely very different. I don't know how those interact, nor do I think the AFE additives will offer any improvement over the 0w40 ones.

I doubt you'll grenade a motor or cause any serious harm. You could run the cocktail for one OCI, get an analysis, and see how it holds up.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
M1 AFE 0w-30 may be a more modern formulation, but it was designed with a different purpose/target in mind: mainly improvement of fuel economy. If you need an oil meeting VW 502.00 spec (HT/HS of at least 3.5 cP), then M1 0w-30 isn't your oil.

As far as GC getting old comment, from what we know, GC's formulation hasn't changed since about 2004 or so. However, that does not necessarily make it bad. It is certainly still good enough to meet all the stringent German mfg specs. Also, we don't know for sure that GC's formulation hasn't changed. Not everything will show up on a $20 VOA... But most likely it's still the same.


+1. How many BITOGer's that advised using non-spec oil would donate money for repairs in the event of a lubrication related failure?

-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: pipo
Mobil 1 0W-40 wins!:what:


Yeah, but question is what happens after cca 3.000 kilometers? As we all know (based on many UOAs) that M1 0w-40 shears down to cca 11,7 CsT at 100 degrees after that millage , just exactly like SLX 0W-30 does after that millage (shears also down to cca 11,7). But M1 starts (new oil) with 14,3 and SLX starts with 12,2. What does that mean?
Also, after years of using both oils, i have discovered that SLX is actualy thicker oil in all temperatures, even though specs are up side down compare to my observations. Altough thicker does not always mean better.

P.S. How did you get your viscosity results?
 
Originally Posted By: SnogardE55AMG
Originally Posted By: pipo
Mobil 1 0W-40 wins!:what:


Yeah, but question is what happens after cca 3.000 kilometers? As we all know (based on many UOAs) that M1 0w-40 shears down to cca 11,7 CsT at 100 degrees after that millage , just exactly like SLX 0W-30 does after that millage (shears also down to cca 11,7). But M1 starts (new oil) with 14,3 and SLX starts with 12,2. What does that mean?
Also, after years of using both oils, i have discovered that SLX is actualy thicker oil in all temperatures, even though specs are up side down compare to my observations. Altough thicker does not always mean better.

P.S. How did you get your viscosity results?


It doesn't shear in all applications. It didn't shear in my Ford Modular for example.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
It doesn't shear in all applications. It didn't shear in my Ford Modular for example.


In that (rare) cases where M1 doesnt share (or share down a little)SLX share even less.

Do you prefer M1 0W-40 over GC and why if i may ask?

P.S. I dont prefer neither, both are great oils, i just collect user infos...
 
Sometimes a bit of initial shearing is actually okay; the oil will quickly stabilize and become a very heavy 30, in this case.
 
Originally Posted By: SnogardE55AMG
Originally Posted By: pipo
Mobil 1 0W-40 wins!:what:


Yeah, but question is what happens after cca 3.000 kilometers? As we all know (based on many UOAs) that M1 0w-40 shears down to cca 11,7 CsT at 100 degrees after that millage , just exactly like SLX 0W-30 does after that millage (shears also down to cca 11,7). But M1 starts (new oil) with 14,3 and SLX starts with 12,2. What does that mean?
Also, after years of using both oils, i have discovered that SLX is actualy thicker oil in all temperatures, even though specs are up side down compare to my observations. Altough thicker does not always mean better.

P.S. How did you get your viscosity results?


Here are the viscosity results down to -10C from the Widman calculator. The results show a cold weather starting viscosity advantage to M1 0W-40 compared to GC beginning at 68F.

At 20 C (68 degrees F), the viscosities of the two oils are almost equal: M1 180.8 GC 181.8

At 0 C (32 degrees F), the M1 already has substantially lower viscosity: M1 563.3 GC 608.3

At -5 C (23 degrees F): M1 787.9 GC 871

At -10 C (14 degrees F): M1 1129 GC 1281
 
I say go with the M1 0w40. It may seem like overkill for a VW 2.5-liter, but through the winter, it will give you better starting behavior and fuel economy compared to GC.
 
Originally Posted By: SnogardE55AMG
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
It doesn't shear in all applications. It didn't shear in my Ford Modular for example.


In that (rare) cases where M1 doesnt share (or share down a little)SLX share even less.

Do you prefer M1 0W-40 over GC and why if i may ask?

P.S. I dont prefer neither, both are great oils, i just collect user infos...


I do prefer it, but only based on the fact that I prefer M1 in general over Castrol's products. I've never tried GC in any of my vehicles.
 
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
I say go with the M1 0w40. It may seem like overkill for a VW 2.5-liter, but through the winter, it will give you better starting behavior and fuel economy compared to GC.


My sentiments exactly!
 
Originally Posted By: pipo
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
M1 AFE 0w-30 may be a more modern formulation, but it was designed with a different purpose/target in mind: mainly improvement of fuel economy. If you need an oil meeting VW 502.00 spec (HT/HS of at least 3.5 cP), then M1 0w-30 isn't your oil.

I was thinking maybe 4 quarts of M1 0w-40 and 2 quarts of M1 0W-30, to keep the HTHS viscosity at about 3.5. Anything else about the M1 0W-30 that varies significantly from the 502 spec that I should be concerned about? I noticed that the TBN and SAP are a bit lower, so the oil might deplete faster, but I believe some of the other 502 oils have lower TBN and SAP also. Maybe I would gain a bit of cold start wear and tear protection with this mix?
I guess another way of asking the question would be: Is HTHS the most important spec to be concerned about generally, or am I missing something important?
Also, even though VW uses one spec for various gas engines, presumably to avoid marketing problems and consumer confusion, are there likely to be differences in the optimal HTHS viscosity for these different engines? I wish I had an oil pressure gauge.

Mobil gets asked all the time about mixing various grades of their oils and the answer is always "no problem" from what I remember. I think your suggested mix is a good one but you could always write MI to get their OK.
Another well regarded oil formulator on this forum, Red Line, actually recommends the mixing of any of their oils including their race oils and street oils to optimize the viscosity (and other attributes) to your own particular application.

The history of the adoption of the minimum HTHS vis of 3.5cP 10 years or so ago that most German manufacturers have taken coincided with dropping the recommendation of 20wt and light 30wt oils for winter use based on ambient temperatures.
It's not that it is no longer safe to use sub 3.5cP oils when oils temps are kept reasonably low, the problem was what happened if a comsumer or dealer forgot to change out the light oil in the summer. The high oil temp's resulting from crusing at 150 mph on the autobahn on a hot summer day no doubt would increase engine wear.
The advent of high VI heavy 5W-30 and 0W-30 oils not to mention 0W-40 oils eliminated the need for winter only use oils and the problems associated with there use.

Having stated the above, I don't run 3.5cP oils in a couple of my cars that it is specified for because I do have oil pressure and oil temp' gauges to monitor the actual operational viscosity at any given time.
There is little doubt that you could run M1 0W-30 in your VW in the winter without issue, and if all your trips are short ones, under half an hour in duration, (we know you're not doing any 120 mph blasts) then it would be fine. But anything other than that, for the sake of piece of mind I'd recommend sticking to the 3.5cP oil unless you install an OP gauge.
 
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
Originally Posted By: pipo
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
M1 AFE 0w-30 may be a more modern formulation, but it was designed with a different purpose/target in mind: mainly improvement of fuel economy. If you need an oil meeting VW 502.00 spec (HT/HS of at least 3.5 cP), then M1 0w-30 isn't your oil.

I was thinking maybe 4 quarts of M1 0w-40 and 2 quarts of M1 0W-30, to keep the HTHS viscosity at about 3.5. Anything else about the M1 0W-30 that varies significantly from the 502 spec that I should be concerned about? I noticed that the TBN and SAP are a bit lower, so the oil might deplete faster, but I believe some of the other 502 oils have lower TBN and SAP also. Maybe I would gain a bit of cold start wear and tear protection with this mix?
I guess another way of asking the question would be: Is HTHS the most important spec to be concerned about generally, or am I missing something important?
Also, even though VW uses one spec for various gas engines, presumably to avoid marketing problems and consumer confusion, are there likely to be differences in the optimal HTHS viscosity for these different engines? I wish I had an oil pressure gauge.

Mobil gets asked all the time about mixing various grades of their oils and the answer is always "no problem" from what I remember. I think your suggested mix is a good one but you could always write MI to get their OK.
Another well regarded oil formulator on this forum, Red Line, actually recommends the mixing of any of their oils including their race oils and street oils to optimize the viscosity (and other attributes) to your own particular application.

The history of the adoption of the minimum HTHS vis of 3.5cP 10 years or so ago that most German manufacturers have taken coincided with dropping the recommendation of 20wt and light 30wt oils for winter use based on ambient temperatures.
It's not that it is no longer safe to use sub 3.5cP oils when oils temps are kept reasonably low, the problem was what happened if a comsumer or dealer forgot to change out the light oil in the summer. The high oil temp's resulting from crusing at 150 mph on the autobahn on a hot summer day no doubt would increase engine wear.
The advent of high VI heavy 5W-30 and 0W-30 oils not to mention 0W-40 oils eliminated the need for winter only use oils and the problems associated with there use.

Having stated the above, I don't run 3.5cP oils in a couple of my cars that it is specified for because I do have oil pressure and oil temp' gauges to monitor the actual operational viscosity at any given time.
There is little doubt that you could run M1 0W-30 in your VW in the winter without issue, and if all your trips are short ones, under half an hour in duration, (we know you're not doing any 120 mph blasts) then it would be fine. But anything other than that, for the sake of piece of mind I'd recommend sticking to the 3.5cP oil unless you install an OP gauge.


Good to understand the history of the specification, and to hear that mixing oils is approved by some oil manufacturers. I may follow up with Mobil as you suggested.

It sounds like the auto manufacturers are taking the safe route for the average consumer and recommending a one-size-fits-all spec for all climates and seasons. Similar to recommending all-season tires for winter use - probably ok but not ideal for serious winters...

Not to overstate the analogy, the in spec 0W-xx oils seem to be pretty good for real world winter use. I'm going to run the M1 0W-40 through the winter and see how it does.
 
Originally Posted By: pipo
................ I'm going to run the M1 0W-40 through the winter and see how it does.


how is it doing?
 
To be honest, I don't think your car would notice the difference between the two at real low temps. You would probably want to plug in your block heater anyway once you started getting down to around -30C.
 
I've used M1 products in 3 different cars with different results.

In a 4.0l equipped Ford Explorer I ran M1 5-30 for 8k mile OCI's with no problems and the engine didn't seem to know the difference. The oil seemed awfully thin when it came out, but all was good.

In a 2.8l equipped Audi I ran M1 0w-40. Only made it 4k miles before changing it out due to valvetrain noise. Was quiet for the first 3k miles then things went south. Switched back to GC and everything quieted back down for the the full 8k mile OCI.

In a 2.7t equipped Audi I went for the M1 0w-40 for it's higher VI and better cold flow in sub freezing starts. Previously ran GC. The M1 made it 4500 miles before it came out early due to valvetrain noise which started at about 3k miles and gradually got worse. Went back to GC and everything is quiet.

IMHO M1 is great oil in many vehicles, but sucks in others. Don't know why, but it just seems to shear horribly in certain applications. GC seems to be excellent in everything that meets it's specs with very little shear. I'll just stick to GC from now on in my Audi's at least.
 
Let me try to keep this simple.
Where A1/B1-A5/B5 SN, GF-5 "low viscosity" oils are called for, as in a Ford or a Jaguar I religiously uise M1 AFE 0W30

In my German Cars, which require an MB 229.5 and/or BMW LL-01 "higher viscosity and HTHS" oil, I religiously use
TOTAL QUARTZ ENERGY 9000 0W30. It's about the lightest high HTHS oil on the market that is approved in writing by MB & BMW.

Nothing wrong with using GC or M1 0W40, simply a bit thicker on cold start.... and in the BMW it makes a heck of a difference.

Have a great day!
 
Originally Posted By: BritGerCarLuvr
Let me try to keep this simple.
Where A1/B1-A5/B5 SN, GF-5 "low viscosity" oils are called for, as in a Ford or a Jaguar I religiously uise M1 AFE 0W30

In my German Cars, which require an MB 229.5 and/or BMW LL-01 "higher viscosity and HTHS" oil, I religiously use
TOTAL QUARTZ ENERGY 9000 0W30. It's about the lightest high HTHS oil on the market that is approved in writing by MB & BMW.

Nothing wrong with using GC or M1 0W40, simply a bit thicker on cold start.... and in the BMW it makes a heck of a difference.

Have a great day!


Even at 0C, M1 0W-40 is only 5% more viscous than Total 0W-30. That's the benefit of a high VI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom