Interesting, how does it do that?
Mobil 1 FS 0w40 has bmw longlife 01 again
- Thread starter travis8352
- Start date
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
I am also all ears.
that would be an unusual face profile
I hate to say this but I seem to remember reading somewhere that the ash limits on C3 oils forced companies use more friction modifiers. This use of friction modifiers was why a fuel efficiency claim will typically appear on labels of C3 oils (ex, M1 ESP 5w30 meets FE component of ACEA C2 ).
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
That is very few oils that claim both C2 and C3. I would like to see actually that. Sounds interesting.
Translated: "I don't have anything to back that up"?that would be an unusual face profile
Translated i was about to answer to you ,agree or not, but if only the attitude..
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
The new formula will contain AI similar to Castrol MagicTec
your humour overkilled me!
oh boy,oh boy...here we go ,
the heavier the oil though, the greater the drag and hence more heat may be generated.
https://penriteoil.com.au/assets/pdf/tech/Nov2015/Engine_Oils.pdf
ll01 mobil 0-40 is heavier than most ll04 oils.
bimmerpost quotes:
edycol:
"Mobil1 across the range of their Euro oils that are High-SAPS have very high sulfated ash, much higher than competition. Their additive package is super strong, where it is actually a problem for direct injection cars (CBU)."
mobil 1 0-40- ring a bell?
edycol:
"If you get tempted with Mobil1 0W40, do not get it. It is exceptional oil, but I would not use it in DI engine due to
very high sulfated ash level, which is culprit behind CBU."
carbon build up = possible drivability degradation=less drag
edycol:
"Carbon Build Up (CBU). Sulfated ash and phosphorous (SAPS) are main drivers behind CBU. Poorly designed PCV will dump deposits on intake valves, but deposits are made out of SAPS. More SAPS, more deposits. Two things to look to limit CBU:
1. Low SAPS
2. Low Noack (evaporation loss)."
https://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1792788
https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1764629&page=2
edycol :
"167% more CBU due to higher SAPS oil."
https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1478510&page=10
edycol :
"Lower SAPS oils means additives used are of such nature that they have lower SAPS "production." That means lower CBU, lower DPF/GPF pollution= less drag.That does not mean elimination of the problem itself! No one here claimed that. But, low SAPS oil will buy you more time if CBU needs to be cleaned or might pollute DPF/GPF in such manner that one doesn't need to be changed during lifetime of a vehicle."
https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1478510&page=10
, thank you edycol
High SAPS engine oils can block particulate traps/filters, reduce catalyst efficiency and may ultimately result in aftertreatment devices needing to be replaced.
Failure of emissions equipment means more vehicle downtime=less drag with extra maintenance and repair costs
i have to agree with that quote:
interesting?
i am all ears,
oh boy,oh boy...here we go ,
the heavier the oil though, the greater the drag and hence more heat may be generated.
https://penriteoil.com.au/assets/pdf/tech/Nov2015/Engine_Oils.pdf
ll01 mobil 0-40 is heavier than most ll04 oils.
bimmerpost quotes:
edycol:
"Mobil1 across the range of their Euro oils that are High-SAPS have very high sulfated ash, much higher than competition. Their additive package is super strong, where it is actually a problem for direct injection cars (CBU)."
mobil 1 0-40- ring a bell?
edycol:
"If you get tempted with Mobil1 0W40, do not get it. It is exceptional oil, but I would not use it in DI engine due to
very high sulfated ash level, which is culprit behind CBU."
carbon build up = possible drivability degradation=less drag
edycol:
"Carbon Build Up (CBU). Sulfated ash and phosphorous (SAPS) are main drivers behind CBU. Poorly designed PCV will dump deposits on intake valves, but deposits are made out of SAPS. More SAPS, more deposits. Two things to look to limit CBU:
1. Low SAPS
2. Low Noack (evaporation loss)."
https://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1792788
https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1764629&page=2
edycol :
"167% more CBU due to higher SAPS oil."
https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1478510&page=10
edycol :
"Lower SAPS oils means additives used are of such nature that they have lower SAPS "production." That means lower CBU, lower DPF/GPF pollution= less drag.That does not mean elimination of the problem itself! No one here claimed that. But, low SAPS oil will buy you more time if CBU needs to be cleaned or might pollute DPF/GPF in such manner that one doesn't need to be changed during lifetime of a vehicle."
https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1478510&page=10
, thank you edycol
High SAPS engine oils can block particulate traps/filters, reduce catalyst efficiency and may ultimately result in aftertreatment devices needing to be replaced.
Failure of emissions equipment means more vehicle downtime=less drag with extra maintenance and repair costs
i have to agree with that quote:
interesting?
i am all ears,
Last edited:
Shear heating would be directly connected to the HT/HS, and both Longlife-01 and Longlife-04 have the same required minimum HT/HS. Neither one will have any significant difference in that regard.
And as far as that lower SAPS = less drag thing, I have no idea what you're after there.
And as far as that lower SAPS = less drag thing, I have no idea what you're after there.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
If you have a DPF/GPF, don't use a full-SAPS oil, that's why the lower SAPS oils were developed, because if you are consuming oil (and all engines consume some, in varying amounts) then the higher SAPS oils have a higher propensity to damage that aftertreatment device. If you've only got catalysts, then it doesn't matter.
Perhaps. Or just said something that they didn’t really understand.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
I was referring to N54. Personally, I would avoid M1 0W40 FS (SN version) in any engine with known CBU issues.
In some engines with huge fuel dilution (VR6) it might be really good option.
I know of the Lubrizol report, but I still find it a bit hard to believe that a difference of <0.5% SAPS content in whole oil makes such a difference in intake valve deposits. Obviously N54 has a big problem even compared to N55 or B58 so I agree with you on erring on the side of caution.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Does it make difference? I bet it does. However, question is whether is it worth it? I personally wouldn’t touch M1 0W40 FS with ten foot pole if I had N54. As soon as NA switched to ULSG, I stopped using it in Tiguan and switched to VW504.00.
In my N52 on other hand, I used it on track, ran it to 300f, and still did 5k OCI.
I would avoid it in N54 just out of caution I suppose. I think these engines, like the early VW GDI engines, are destined to need blasting no matter what you use. I saw a teardown of an N55 with 100k miles that spun a rod bearing due to oil starvation on a YouTube channel and it was using LL-01 full SAPS in the US for its entire life and the valves were shockingly clean for 100k miles. You almost never see anyone blasting S55 either and S55 has been around for a long time now and is always filled with LL-01 or LL-01FE in the US. In BMW engines I would run whatever you think protects the bearings and valvetrain best, because you can clean intake valves, but you can't undo wear.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Yes, BMW does PCV much better than others. I think the issue on N55 with rod bearings is multifaceted, as I have seen them with more than 200k. So, I would say it is the contribution of several factors that damage sensitive rod bearings (which were updated in 2014).
I know a guy who had several N55 on valve cleaning but it is a waste of money.
The truth is, valve cleaning is in line for the N54 crowd and, for example, for my Tiguan, regardless of what oil one uses. The question is just can one postpone that a bit?
i already said to my best of my knowledge.but if low saps oils were developed only for cars with DPF/GPF then why in Europe they suggest in ALL the gasoline DI engines to use ll04 oils until 2018? could this be maybe because higher saps oils have a higher propensity to damage their (gasoline) catalysts device TOO? just wondering.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Simplicity. It was easier to just recommend the mid/low SAPS oils for everything at that point since it was safe.
When these oils first appeared on the scene it was only for DPF equipped vehicles, as the DPF came before the GPF, it was at that point that sulphur was being reduced in fuels and it was safe to recommend these oils (which won't stand up for extended drains with high sulphur fuels since they have far lower TBN), since they had many of the same performance requirements, for other applications, streamlining the stocking and spec'ing process. This was, IIRC, already underway when GPF's were introduced, which further expedited the process.
Another component that comes into play here is viscosity. If you pay attention to what happened with the API oils in North America, phosphorous was limited for catalyst protection on xW-30 and below. xW-40 and higher are exempt. As oils get thinner the risk of consumption increases and of course it's consumption that results in these aftertreatment devices, be they catalysts or DPF's/GPF's, being exposed to phosphorous, which risks damaging them. Of note is that the ACEA regulations don't limit phosphorous to as low as the API ones.
Unnecessary complexity in the marketplace does nobody any favours and makes stocking and tracking a nightmare, so it's far easier to consolidate if you can.
Similar threads
