Oil wt for summer driven LS1?

[xtell]

Striker
I'm in the same position you are. I have a 1999 Trans Am with only 27,000+ miles on it, summer driver. I was running Mobil 1 5W-30 for the first 15,000+ miles and switched to PP 5W-30. Never had a used oil analysis, but the car runs the same on either oil. Does not burn any oil between changes, no leaking engine seals, no fouling of plugs, no difference in engine drivetrain sound. Either one would be a good choice.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ



You might want to double check your sources. LS1 Camaros and Firebirds did come with M1 5W-30 as the FF in the last couple of years, according to Scott Settlemire, one of the GM F-body leads. I'm not sure about the earlier years.



I had heard that as well, that they snuck in M1 as the factory fill, but I had heard it was only in the final year of production (2002 models). They never mentioned this in the owner's manuals though, and the f-body LS1 did not get the Mobil 1 oil cap.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Patman
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ



You might want to double check your sources. LS1 Camaros and Firebirds did come with M1 5W-30 as the FF in the last couple of years, according to Scott Settlemire, one of the GM F-body leads. I'm not sure about the earlier years.



I had heard that as well, that they snuck in M1 as the factory fill, but I had heard it was only in the final year of production (2002 models). They never mentioned this in the owner's manuals though, and the f-body LS1 did not get the Mobil 1 oil cap.


Yes, maybe GM had some excess M1 they wanted to get rid of at the engine plants that last year??

I wonder if the VERY few LT4 SS Camaros got M1 fills??

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver

I wonder if the VERY few LT4 SS Camaros got M1 fills??


No clue here.

I suspect GM didn't make a big deal out of the F-body M1 fills because:

1. They didn't make good ad copy like the Corvette
2. SLP had a "synthetic" package they charged an arm and a leg for to put M1 in the engine, tranny and rear end. They probably couldn't make the upsell if everyone knew the engine already had the oil.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Striker
I know that the LS1's enjoy the thicker oils.


Your LS1 would probably like MaxLife 10W-40.

 

[45ACP]

Why not make that a 0W-40? Or 0W-30?

Also not sure about this Corvette engine in F body scenario. Were they good cars and fast even faster than Vette, or strange track mutts?

 

[Clevy]

So why the 0w in a summer driven car. Wouldn't a 10w-30 or 10w-40 make more sense. Less viscosity improvers and more actual oil. Sometimes I wonder about

 

[45ACP]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
So why the 0w in a summer driven car. Wouldn't a 10w-30 or 10w-40 make more sense. Less viscosity improvers and more actual oil. Sometimes I wonder about


You must not be familiar with the board. 0W is better in ALL situations. Presence of VIIs isnt nearly as big a factor, particularly in today's motor oils. I also used to give adcive exactly like yours of "stick with the 10W it is the most stable."

RL 0W-30, RL 0W-40, and, dare i say it, RP or AMSOIL.


I summon CATERHAM. He gives the best advice on oils, IMHO. And yes, M1 0W-40 is hard to beat, and would do well in the described car. He s[eaks about oil sbased on their merits, and that is to be respected. I like his postings. (He even used a 20W-50 in his Lotus Europa so he can be objective about what would be the best to use where, and why. He also likes his 0W oils no matter the HOT temp, its all about the COLD and STARTUP and then hot doesnt matter as much if HTHS is appropriate.)

M1 AFE 0W-30 is a light 30 and probably would NOT be ideal for this app. Particularly when even M1 5W-30 coul dbe good.. though i like the 0W oils, if i can find them.

 

[A_Harman]

In the past we have advocated 50/50 M1 0w30 and M1 0w40. This will give viscosity characteristics similar to GC, but a higher VI, which will make the oil lighter at startup. This is on my list of oils to try in the Camaro, if I can ever bear to go away from Red Line.

 

[Unleashedbeast]

Originally Posted By: 45ACP
Originally Posted By: Clevy
So why the 0w in a summer driven car. Wouldn't a 10w-30 or 10w-40 make more sense. Less viscosity improvers and more actual oil. Sometimes I wonder about


You must not be familiar with the board. 0W is better in ALL situations. Presence of VIIs isnt nearly as big a factor, particularly in today's motor oils. I also used to give adcive exactly like yours of "stick with the 10W it is the most stable."

RL 0W-30, RL 0W-40, and, dare i say it, RP or AMSOIL.


I summon CATERHAM. He gives the best advice on oils, IMHO. And yes, M1 0W-40 is hard to beat, and would do well in the described car. He s[eaks about oil sbased on their merits, and that is to be respected. I like his postings. (He even used a 20W-50 in his Lotus Europa so he can be objective about what would be the best to use where, and why. He also likes his 0W oils no matter the HOT temp, its all about the COLD and STARTUP and then hot doesnt matter as much if HTHS is appropriate.)

M1 AFE 0W-30 is a light 30 and probably would NOT be ideal for this app. Particularly when even M1 5W-30 coul dbe good.. though i like the 0W oils, if i can find them.


I am VERY familiar with this board, you can verify by my join date, and I still refuse to jump on the "the higher the VII of the oil the better". That's not true for every situation and every climate. Up north, with harsh winters...I agree...the higher the VII the better. Not in the south.

In Florida's (southern) heat of summer, I will take a lubricant with no viscosity improver and degraded cold flow performance. Shear stability and lower NOACK volatility are far more important to me in the expensive engine under the hood of my GT500.

All of you touting "lighter at start up" are splitting hairs when the ambient temps are 90*F and the argument is nil.

In fact, charting the viscosity of a true synthetic 10W-30 compared to a petroleum based 5W-30 will yield very similar results down to 32*F. There isn't a large enough gap in viscosity to make a hill of beans difference. It's all in the choice of base stock.

Comparing 10W-30 petroleum to 5W-30 petroleum is another story.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
In the past we have advocated 50/50 M1 0w30 and M1 0w40. This will give viscosity characteristics similar to GC, but a higher VI, which will make the oil lighter at startup. This is on my list of oils to try in the Camaro, if I can ever bear to go away from Red Line.


Same here, if Red Line ever becomes unavailable to me, or exorbitantly priced (like >$15.00/qt., or more) I would use that same mix of M1 0W-xxes.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted By: dailydriver

I wonder if the VERY few LT4 SS Camaros got M1 fills??


No clue here.

I suspect GM didn't make a big deal out of the F-body M1 fills because:

1. They didn't make good ad copy like the Corvette
2. SLP had a "synthetic" package they charged an arm and a leg for to put M1 in the engine, tranny and rear end. They probably couldn't make the upsell if everyone knew the engine already had the oil.


^^^ABSOLUTELY TRUE!!!
SLP was only really good for their exhaust systems, cold air systems, lids, and lower cost than dealer OEM alloy wheels (when they still had them available

).

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Originally Posted By: 45ACP
Why not make that a 0W-40? Or 0W-30?

Also not sure about this Corvette engine in F body scenario. Were they good cars and fast even faster than Vette, or strange track mutts?


I've had what I consider good results with GC (0W-30), but have no burn samples to back that up. It makes less noise in the top end than the M1 I used to use, but that doesn't mean much, other than lowering my blood pressure (hey, I feel better about it).

The LS1 wasn't just a Corvette engine. It was a Corvette engine, F-body engine, GTO engine and even an SSR engine. The F-body application was rated less than the vette, supposedly due to intake and exhaust restriction, but large numbers of dyno results indicated it put the same or more hp to the rear wheels (probably due to the less loss in the straight axle vs. the Corvette's IRS, and the fact that GM underrated the output). Up until the Z06 Corvette, which got the LS6 in 2001, and the LS2 with the next generation 'vette, the LS1 F-bodys were very competitive with the Corvette at the drag strip.

 

[45ACP]

Sorry.. SLP?? Whats SLP?.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: 45ACP
Sorry.. SLP?? Whats SLP?.



SLP stands for Street Legal Performance, they are the company that made aftermarket F-body parts (and later branched into Corvettes and a few other makes) and they had the contract to build the Camaro SS and Firebird WS6 at one time.

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

An aftermarket company that worked closely with GM on the last generation F-body. In addition to making the mostly appearance mods that turned a Trans Am into a WS-6 (early years) and a Z-28 into an SS by adding a different hood with cold air induction, a bigger spoiler, and bigger wheels, they made some aftermarket performance mods like an intake lid, headers, cam, etc.
I think SLP stands for Street Legal Performance.

Opps, Patman beat me to the punch. That's what I get trying to Google the real words for SLP.

 

[45ACP]

Thanks, guys.

Now, opinions and engines of the WS6?

Im learning, from this thread, how mixing 50% of the same brand and type of an oil, but in different weights, can actually yield higher results than the grade of their same oil! Thats gold. I suppose one could even mix 0W-20 and 0W-30 as long as the name and make are the same, for optimal results? (The desired effect is thinnest at start but nice high VI to GET to operational KV?)

And for normal engines, would that be obsessiing or beneficial? (Non-Vette LTx engines)

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

The WS6 has exactly the same engine as the other F-bodies and Corvettes of the same year, except for '97. The LS1 engine had minor improvements made from introduction in the 'vette in '97 ('98 in the F-body) until 2001 when it got the block improvements from the LS6 design (mostly to do with oil flow), it got the LS6 intake manifold, delete EGR, a milder cam, and a few more horsepower. This makes the '01-'02 models slightly more desirable in stock form.

As to mixing oil, I'm highly skeptical the "witch doctors" that do it can improve on what the oil companies' chemical engineers come up with. I know they show some improvements, but I don't think they take into account other factors that aren't always measured. There may be a few extreme applications where it is warranted, but not many. I see no purpose in doing it with LTX or other normal engines. I have never heard of the pro racers doing it. My personal recommendation, based solely on fear, superstition and logic (not test results!) is not to try and improve on the pros.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
The LS1 engine had minor improvements made from introduction in the 'vette in '97 ('98 in the F-body) until 2001 when it got the block improvements from the LS6 design (mostly to do with oil flow), it got the LS6 intake manifold, delete EGR, a milder cam, and a few more horsepower. This makes the '01-'02 models slightly more desirable in stock form.



Heh-heh-heh! Over the years, I've been repeatedly surprised at how well my Camaro accelerates compared to other "more powerful" cars. People can't believe the base engine is still stock.

 

[Pablo]

Camaros are awesome and my all time favorite. I'm quite serious. There I said it.