MOBIL1 0W-40 vs. CASTROL EDGE 0W-40

[bigjl]

Which European countries have high sulphur fuels?

EU regs have made ultra low sulphur diesel compulsory for many years.

You can't really compare most of Eastern Europe with Western Europe, especially Russia.

That is like comparing Eggs and Apples.

I think you need to do a little more research on Europe.

As your opinion is based on flawed knowledge.

 

[phlfly]

Who cares about engine temp, its oil temp and water temp that's all we have. We are looking for balance between to heat in and out. Simple.
Second thing is lubrication - viscosity. This is a lot studies done, but auto maker on conservative side due the power train warranties went to 100,000 miles. It's easy be on safe side then on right side, meaning mpg vs oil viscosity.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
yes I agreed it's important of course but viscosity is resistance of flow, so high HTHS is produced high resistance to flow, so it's lead small volume of oil so it turns out the heat is not dissipating fast enough to the oil, so metal is getting heat spots.
Studies showed that double viscosity grade will cause as much 20C rise in oil temp. So the shear thinning can be good and bad , as I mentioned before, but I think Germans recommended high number HTHS due they are looking for 15,000 miles and still be in 3.0, so thier LL01 is more 3.5, when Mobil 1 is 3.2. But if you are not driving 15,000 miles on this oil, Mobil 1 should satisfied your engine for 5,000 miles, since LL01 will degradation as low 2.8-3.0 for 15,000 and you will drive at least 5,000 to 7,000 miles on oil that HTHS is about 3.0 anyway.

Well this very interesting read. (http://books.google.com/books?id=XjTaOqE...ity&f=false)
Somewhere there said 40 grade loses degrading more than 30 grade oil due more concentration VI improver required more to produce -40 oils. So I guess high HTHS has same tendency due same problem as -40 oils.

Oh my god!
There is a difference between I think and I know!
In the end I really do not know what is your problem in using LL-01 oils?

 

[bigjl]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
Who cares about engine temp, its oil temp and water temp that's all we have. We are looking for balance between to heat in and out. Simple.
Second thing is lubrication - viscosity. This is a lot studies done, but auto maker on conservative side due the power train warranties went to 100,000 miles. It's easy be on safe side then on right side, meaning mpg vs oil viscosity.



So, what is the difference between oil temp and engine temp?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
yes I agreed it's important of course but viscosity is resistance of flow, so high HTHS is produced high resistance to flow, so it's lead small volume of oil so it turns out the heat is not dissipating fast enough to the oil, so metal is getting heat spots.
Studies showed that double viscosity grade will cause as much 20C rise in oil temp. So the shear thinning can be good and bad , as I mentioned before, but I think Germans recommended high number HTHS due they are looking for 15,000 miles and still be in 3.0, so thier LL01 is more 3.5, when Mobil 1 is 3.2. But if you are not driving 15,000 miles on this oil, Mobil 1 should satisfied your engine for 5,000 miles, since LL01 will degradation as low 2.8-3.0 for 15,000 and you will drive at least 5,000 to 7,000 miles on oil that HTHS is about 3.0 anyway.

Well this very interesting read. (http://books.google.com/books?id=XjTaOqE...ity&f=false)
Somewhere there said 40 grade loses degrading more than 30 grade oil due more concentration VI improver required more to produce -40 oils. So I guess high HTHS has same tendency due same problem as -40 oils.


Again, you are talking about oil losing its HTHS with no data to back it up. Nobody here is going to even consider that this is the case unless you can actually prove it.

When speaking of the HTHS of the oils in question here, we are talking differences of less than 1cP. You make it sound like we are going from 35,000cP to 11cP. We aren't. Your speak of hot spots and the like and massive resistance to flow are all nonsense. The issue is not how thick, but how THIN the oils gets in the bearings under load. The engines in question were designed around a lubricant with a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP, so that is what they want you to run.

But then I've made this point what seems like 100 times so far and you appear to keep missing it and instead decide to keep spouting nonsense about LL-01 oils "degrading" to 2.8-3.0 with no source for this claim and that the Germans have some mystical agenda about OCI length.

newsflash: Many North American auto manufacturers with the advent of OLM's are now spec'ing OCI lengths that are just as long as BMW, Mercedes....etc. Dexos1 is one of those specifications for extended drains based on a vehicle's OLM. Yet it doesn't require a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP. This is because GM doesn't design their engines to require an oil with an HTHS of 3.5cP. Neither does Honda, Toyota...etc all of which do extended drains now.

Many of the Euro marques have chosen to design their engines for heavier lubricants due to the potential for Autobahn use. subsequently, the engines are tested with those lubricants and the performance and longevity of those engines can only be guaranteed by using an approved lubricant for the application. This is why BMW, Mercedes, VW, Porsche....etc all have their own certifications and approvals for motor oil. HTHS is not only a component of some or all of these certifications, but is also a component of the ACEA classification that the oils that meet these spec's fall under.

I don't understand how you think that you know better as to the lubrication requirements for your vehicle than the engineers who designed it and performed EXTENSIVE testing with regards to wear, deposit control and durability.

 

[phlfly]

Did you have a hard time to click and read on my link above?

"When speaking of the HTHS of the oils in question here, we are talking differences of less than 1cP. You make it sound like we are going from 35,000cP to 11cP. We aren't. Your speak of hot spots and the like and massive resistance to flow are all nonsense. The issue is not how thick, but how THIN the oils gets in the bearings under load. The engines in question were designed around a lubricant with a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP, so that is what they want you to run. "

Well a good point I'm taking about same thing BMW LL01 is about 3.5 when Mobil 5W-30 is 3.2. Yes we are talking about difference and degrading about less then 1cP.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
Did you have a hard time to click and read on my link above?


I'm not even sure what this means?

Quote:
"When speaking of the HTHS of the oils in question here, we are talking differences of less than 1cP. You make it sound like we are going from 35,000cP to 11cP. We aren't. Your speak of hot spots and the like and massive resistance to flow are all nonsense. The issue is not how thick, but how THIN the oils gets in the bearings under load. The engines in question were designed around a lubricant with a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP, so that is what they want you to run. "

Well a good point I'm taking about same thing BMW LL01 is about 3.5 when Mobil 5W-30 is 3.2. Yes we are talking about difference and degrading about less then 1cP.


What are you talking about in regards to "degrading". You keep posting this with ZERO data to back it up (and I've made mention of that fact several times now....)

Point blank: The manufacturer requires a lubricant with a MINIMUM HTHS of 3.5cP. You are going below that. If you can't understand why that is an issue, then we are done on this discussion.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
Did you have a hard time to click and read on my link above?

"When speaking of the HTHS of the oils in question here, we are talking differences of less than 1cP. You make it sound like we are going from 35,000cP to 11cP. We aren't. Your speak of hot spots and the like and massive resistance to flow are all nonsense. The issue is not how thick, but how THIN the oils gets in the bearings under load. The engines in question were designed around a lubricant with a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP, so that is what they want you to run. "

Well a good point I'm taking about same thing BMW LL01 is about 3.5 when Mobil 5W-30 is 3.2. Yes we are talking about difference and degrading about less then 1cP.


Do you know what is exactly cP of BMW-LL-01? Mobil 1 5W30 is 3.1.
Also, there are more stuff to LL-01. How fast those oils shear down? As far as I know, BMW LL-01 oil is 100% Fully Synthetic, Mobil 1 5W30 is Group III oil. What is shear rate of Mobil 1 5W30?
You are saying that LL-01 will shear down. OK, that is valid argument. Let's say hypothetically it will go down to 3.0 cP. How much will shear dowm Mobil 1 5W30? We are talking about 3.1cP while oil is new, that means that oil could shear down to 2.5cP??? Considering requirements of LL-01 specification, I cannot believe that Mobil 1 5W30 is shear stable as LL-01. Mobil has 5W30 that meets Euro specs, it is Mobil 1 5W30 ESP. Use that one if you want.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: phlfly
Did you have a hard time to click and read on my link above?

"When speaking of the HTHS of the oils in question here, we are talking differences of less than 1cP. You make it sound like we are going from 35,000cP to 11cP. We aren't. Your speak of hot spots and the like and massive resistance to flow are all nonsense. The issue is not how thick, but how THIN the oils gets in the bearings under load. The engines in question were designed around a lubricant with a minimum HTHS of 3.5cP, so that is what they want you to run. "

Well a good point I'm taking about same thing BMW LL01 is about 3.5 when Mobil 5W-30 is 3.2. Yes we are talking about difference and degrading about less then 1cP.


Do you know what is exactly cP of BMW-LL-01? Mobil 1 5W30 is 3.1.
Also, there are more stuff to LL-01. How fast those oils shear down? As far as I know, BMW LL-01 oil is 100% Fully Synthetic, Mobil 1 5W30 is Group III oil. What is shear rate of Mobil 1 5W30?
You are saying that LL-01 will shear down. OK, that is valid argument. Let's say hypothetically it will go down to 3.0 cP. How much will shear dowm Mobil 1 5W30? We are talking about 3.1cP while oil is new, that means that oil could shear down to 2.5cP??? Considering requirements of LL-01 specification, I cannot believe that Mobil 1 5W30 is shear stable as LL-01. Mobil has 5W30 that meets Euro specs, it is Mobil 1 5W30 ESP. Use that one if you want.


I know at least with M1 0w40, the old SM formulation, it was shown to shear in SOME applications (in others, it didn't shear at all.... like in my 5.4L) but would thicken back up eventually. It appeared to be a design characteristic of the lubricant. This was an oil that met LL-01 as well as the Mercedes and Porsche spec's. It also had an incredibly low NOACK of 8.8% and a -54C pour point. The newer SN version doesn't have quite as good cold performance, but doesn't shear seemingly at all in service and likely has an even lower NOACK.

All that being said though, that doesn't mean that an oil's HTHS (which was 3.6cP for the SM version of M1 0w40) has changed much, if any during use. Kinematic viscosity and HTHS are different things, as one is measured under a shear load to begin with and at an elevated (150C) temperature, whilst the other is just the viscosity of the oil at a given temp.

 

[edyvw]

Well, I agree with you.
But his argument does not make sense.
In his argument, LL-01 will shear, but M1 5W30 will not, something along those lines.

 

[phlfly]

Please read a link in the post ##2826019

 

[phlfly]

I said -40 grades share more then -30 grade read a link post #2826019

 

[phlfly]

Unbelievable ignorance or laziest to read an article about HTHS.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
Unbelievable ignorance or laziest to read an article about HTHS.

Oh i read that!
Why then for example Honda Accord in Germany has oil change interval of 20-30,000km and uses 5W30 that we use here for Honda's???
Your argument how europeans are using heavier oils is not valid, since many japanese and american mfg in EU are using lower HTHS oils with same intervals.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: phlfly
Unbelievable ignorance or laziest to read an article about HTHS.


Did you read it?

Apparently not.

Originally Posted By: Link posted by phlfly

Turning now to engine tests, Spooren et a. [7] compared the shear stability of four 20w50 oils, each containing the same SE quality DI package, in several engine tests and in the DIN 51382 shear stability test. The latter test was the basis for the CEC L-14 test and Procedure A of the ASTM D 3945 test. The viscosity changes, expressed as a percentage of the new oil viscosity, in a 12-h version of the Cortina High Temperature Test (CHTT) and in the CEC L-14 shear stability tests are shown in Fig. 4. The new-oil and used-oil viscosities are show in Table 1. The CHTT test was a 12-h version of what is normally a 100-h test; the shortened duration was chosen because the viscosity of most oils has reached the minimum value by that time and has begun to increase.

As can be seen in Figure 4, the HTHS viscosity change of all four oils was less than the NTLS viscosity change. For the olefin copolymer (OCP) and the hydrogenated styrene isprene (HSI) oils, the HTHS viscosity increased over the new-oil viscosity, indicating that thickening had overwhelmed the viscosity loss caused by polymer degradation. Also, it can be seen that the NTLS and HTHS viscosity losses from the Co-ordinating European Council (CEC) L-14 test were appreciably greater than those in the engine, showing that the oils were susceptible to large viscosity losses in this rather severe shearing environment.

However comparing the the NTLS and HTHS viscosity changes does not tell the whole story; the HTHS viscosity itself is important. As indicated in Fig. 4, the HTHS viscosity of the HSI oil after the test was appreciably higher than at the beginning of the test. However, table 1 shows that the HTHS viscosities of this oil were the lowest of all the oils. The viscosities of this oil were the lowest because the thickening power of of the HSI VI improver decreases at high temperatures.

Considering only the other three oils, this work showed that the thickening in this test had a relatively larger effect on the HTHS viscosity change than on the NTLS viscosity. The HTHS viscosities of the three oils changed very little, whereas the NTLS viscosities of all three oils decreased appreciably.


This proves the point I made about HTHS not correlating with kinematic was spot on.

It also proves exactly what I was saying and that you are completely off your rocker with regards to the oils "degrading", as the HTHS stayed right around the same value between new and used in the Cortina (engine) test.

The results of the Cortina (engine) test:

Oil New/Used (HTHS)
OCP 7.05/7.12
OCP/PMA 6.75/6.72
PMA 5.81/5.80


Please also note that the reference to SE additive packages is extremely relevant here. This publication is from 1989. Lubricants have changed significantly since then and are FAR more shear stable.

 

[JAG]

There is more of a mess of incorrect statements made above than I care to address but I will address the matter of how much the HTHS viscosity of M1 may reasonably drop. Multiple studies have shown that the percent drop in HTHS viscosity is roughly one half the percentage drop in kinematic viscosity at 100C. So assume a drop in KV at 100C that could reasonably happen, assumed to going from 13.5 cST to 12.0 cSt. Assume the virgin HTHS viscosity is 3.8 cP. Doing the math as stated above yields a final HTHS viscosity of 3.59 cP.

Edit: Just read quote above from the article. Base oil oxidation indeed increases HTHS viscosity just as a more viscous base oil does. Polymer breakdown drops both KV at 100C and HTHS but more so the former than the latter. Combined effects of oxidation and polymer shearing determined what the study observed.

 

[phlfly]

true but it said there the grade 40 degrated more then grade 30, since all LL oil are just almost grade 40, as they have 3.5 or more, then we can assumed those do same as grade 40.

But in the end the difference and change so small .2 - . 3 so I don't see to be concern to use M1 5W-30 instead LL01 oils. I was more concern with Mobil1 0W-30 since this oil has 3.0 so it's .5 plus degrading another .1-.2 that could be not so good for engine. But at same time 0 weight can protect better on morning start up since it's winter time.
But in the I would be rather to use Amsoil or Red Line oils.
Thanks for conversation.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: JAG
There is more of a mess of incorrect statements made above than I care to address but I will address the matter of how much the HTHS viscosity of M1 may reasonably drop. Multiple studies have shown that the percent drop in HTHS viscosity is roughly one half the percentage drop in kinematic viscosity at 100C. So assume a drop in KV at 100C that could reasonably happen, assumed to going from 13.5 cST to 12.0 cSt. Assume the virgin HTHS viscosity is 3.8 cP. Doing the math as stated above yields a final HTHS viscosity of 3.59 cP.


I saw that mentioned in the article actually, that it can be roughly half of the kinematic loss but the one set of results don't readily support that. Though again I must add that the article is from 1989.....

That being said, if we look at M1 0w40, a recent UOA shows a kinematic visc of 13.26 after 7,000 miles in a Corvette with extensive track use. Virgin is 13.5. We end up with an HTHS of 3.79 using your formula, LOL

I would say that is insignificant, wouldn't you?

 

[JAG]

3.8 to 3.79 cP sure is insignificant! Maybe you saw it after you quoted me above but I added a second paragraph later addressing that study.

 

[phlfly]

yes it's more like .1 - .3 then .01-.03. at least in this article. I think most auto manufacture wanted be on safe side and confused people with all LL and other numbers.
I don't know, as I said before my friend car works better on M1 5W-30. I can't tell why but this a fact. We tried M1 0W-40, GC 0W-30 then back to BMW oil, and M1 fixed a problem.