Mutul 300V 5W30 4500km/8months Audi S5 4.2 V8 thread #2

Joined
Aug 24, 2020
Messages
4
Dear BITOG members,

Some time ago I posted the following oil analysis: Motul 300V 5W30 11500km/6months

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...-11-500km-audi-s5-4-2-v8.331145/#post-5519122

The results showed good wear protection however a critically low flashpoint. In the topic we have debated to what the cause could be. The silicon levels were a bit up which I suspected the air filter might be due for change.

I had my spark-plugs changed and the air filter. I speculated that perhaps the combustion was not optimal leaving fuel behind. This in turn caused the fuel contamination that led to the sharp decrease of the flashpoint. Changing the air filter should also put the silicon levels down. Also the oil was replaced with again, 300V 5W30.

After driving for 4500km over a period of 8 months I did another analysis. Which is the this (attached) one. The (most relevant) results:

Wear;
All <1 other than copper (3) and iron (8) mg/kg

Additives;
Moly: 620

Properties;
Visc @ 100c: 11.59
Flashpoint: 160-190c
BN: 7.4
TAN: 1.97

Others;
Silicon: 105

Again it looks like lubrication and prevention of wear is spot on. Viscosity is great and so is the BN and TAN. However, again, the flashpoint has lowered quite a lot in a short running interval. From 232c factory spec to 160-190c. Also the silicon content is higher than expected at 105. Considering the air filter was new, it is strange it has gone from 60 to 105.

Comparison of 1st and 2nd analysis:

1st (11,5k @ 6mth) --------------------------------------------------- 2nd (4,5k @ 8 mth)

Wear:

All <1 other than copper (3) and iron (9) mg/kg ------------------- All <1 other than copper (3) and iron (8) mg/kg

Additives;

Moly: 540 --------------------------------------------------- ---------- Moly: 620

Properties;

Visc @ 100c: 11,34 --------------------------------------------------- Visc @ 100c: 11.59
Flashpoint: <160c ---------------------------------------------------- Flashpoint: 160-190c
BN: 6.8 ----------------------------------------------------------------- BN: 7.4
TAN: 3.58 --------------------------------------------------- ---------- TAN: 1.97

After the first analysis I contacted Motul Germany by mail and phone but got no reply, which was disappointing. After the second analysis I contacted a Dutch representative, Eric who was very helpful and we discussed both reports. We drew the conclusion that the 300V was not suitable (enough) for street driving, at least not for my car. Our idea was that the 300V oil is designed with high oil temperatures in mind and not resistant enough against 'low intensity road driving'. I.e. 'commuting'. After all, I am not racing all of the time on the freeway. Because, let's say 60% of the time the car is running at 25% WOT the combustion is not at its very best and fuel residue might dilute the oil too much. As opposed to racing ,where a car runs 95% at 100% WOT, the combustion and temps are higher, there is less chance for fuel residue to stay behind. On top of that, I drew the conclusion that the silicon levels might have to do with gaskets being dissolved by the additives in the 300V. For a racing car, no problem but for a road car that needs to do 300.000km over a period of 20 years, that is a problem.

Conclusion: 300V is not the most optimal oil for spirited street driving. It is good enough to get your car on and off the racetrack from home.

However, Eric told me a new formulation of 300V has been launched with a more street-spec formula. They are awaiting the results of tests in the real world to backup their expectations.

So now what? I still want the best protection! Together with Eric we decided to test the Motul 8100 X-clean+ C3 5W30 which also has the VW/Audi 504/507 specification for my car. The car has done 14.100 km over a period of 6 months with the Motul 8100 Xclean and the lab results are in which I have posted here: https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...14-100km-6mth-audi-s5-4-2-v8-thread-3.347739/
 

Attachments

  • Olieanalyse April 2021 Motul 300V 5W30 bij 44.500 km (+TAN).PDF
    558.9 KB · Views: 57
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,128
Location
Suomi
Are you sure the silicon is from the oil? Tbn is pretty good and tan. I am gonna run the 300v 5w-40 just for fun in my Rav4.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
3,083
Location
Ontario, Canada
Leave the race oils to race cars. Very different environment. Just like racing brake pads are terrible on the street, and vice versa. Good to see actually numbers backing that up though.

If you are stuck on using Motul, why not use the 8100 X-Cess 0W40 or 5W40 which should provide better protection, and is designed for street use.
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
15,415
Location
Colorado Springs
I think 300V and FSI are bad combination. It is known fuel diluter. There are several UOA here with exceptional results of 300V in dual use.
I have on the shelf 8ltrs of 300V. I will use it when track season starts in the spring, so let’s see how it does in my port injected engine compared to FSI.
 
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
1,653
Location
open range
.
Despite seeing no reason not to use a VW 504 00 (or VW 511 00) approved
oil in that engine* wear is exceptionally low: Al 0 ppm, Fe 8 ppm, Cu 3 ppm.
That's simply excellent even given the low distance of 4500 km.
The only concerns are Si at 105 ppm and a decrease in flash point, though
Si is probably caused by some leakage post the airfilter or a poor fitment of
that filter unless a repair has been performed recently using a Si containing
sealant.
Given that wear metals are that exceptionally low and I've never seen an
analysis of that lab before - is this lab even reliable? Shouldn't that much
silicon cause more wear if this silicon is from dust? Is it even possible to get
just 0 ppm Al on a engine that's built from Al to a large extent?

*On many European forums there does still some popular believe exist that
VW LL oils (supposedly) are crap. They just don't realize that's the extended
interval of up to two years and up to 30,000 km is what causes issues in some
cases, not the oil. Actually both VW 504 00 and VW 511 00 are tough specs.
Going boutique stuff rarely results in better UOA numbers, even though it
didn't harm in this case but it probably didn't help either.
.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
15,563
Location
Kendall, FL
.
Despite seeing no reason not to use a VW 504 00 (or VW 511 00) approved
oil in that engine* wear is exceptionally low: Al 0 ppm, Fe 8 ppm, Cu 3 ppm.
That's simply excellent even given the low distance of 4500 km.
The only concerns are Si at 105 ppm and a decrease in flash point, though
Si is probably caused by some leakage post the airfilter or a poor fitment of
that filter unless a repair has been performed recently using a Si containing
sealant.
Given that wear metals are that exceptionally low and I've never seen an
analysis of that lab before - is this lab even reliable? Shouldn't that much
silicon cause more wear if this silicon is from dust? Is it even possible to get
just 0 ppm Al on a engine that's built from Al to a large extent?

*On many European forums there does still some popular believe exist that
VW LL oils (supposedly) are crap. They just don't realize that's the extended
interval of up to two years and up to 30,000 km is what causes issues in some
cases, not the oil. Actually both VW 504 00 and VW 511 00 are tough specs.
Going boutique stuff rarely results in better UOA numbers, even though it
didn't harm in this case but it probably didn't help either.
.

I would have said the same concerning wear numbers but recently here I keep reading how UOAs say nothing about wear numbers unless the numbers are triple digits in the negative direction. Hence, indicating a problem.

Example:
 
Top