Old AMSOIL 5W40 formula via the NEW

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SLevesque

Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
10
Location
Quebec, QC
Hi!

I don't now if you have compare the new properties of the new AMSOIL AFL 5W40 via the old. But I think the quality drop...

Old :

Vis. @ 100deg.: 14.5
Vis. @ 40deg : 83.6
Viscosity index : 182
Viscosity CCS : 5241 (-30)
Flash point : 232 (449)
Fire point : 246 (474)
Pour point : -51 (-59)
Noack volatility : 5.5
Four-Ball test : 0.35
TBN : 12.2
HTHS : 4.2

New :

Vis. @ 100deg.: 13.7
Vis. @ 40deg : 80.8
Viscosity index : 174
Viscosity CCS : 5204 (-30)
Flash point : 230 (446)
Fire point : 246 (474)
Pour point : -42 (-44)
Noack volatility : 8.9
Four-Ball test : 0.44
TBN : 8.0
HTHS : 3.7

I think it's a very bad move from amsoil. Why do you think??
 
I agree with you in stating Amsoil did a quality drop with this "European car" oil. This new oil *barely* passes Ferrari/Maserati/Porsche strict standards for 40 weight oil in their engine's. They require a minimum hths of 3.6 in order to be approved.

On thing that interests me is that the 18,000rpm machines being used on the Formula 1 circuit are group III synthetics for the most part. For example: Ferrari is using the same Shell Rotella T synthetic group III base stock for their Formula 1 engines. Considering Ferrari manufactures the most successful and technologically mind-numbing engines ever concieved, I would think they know what they are doing by not going with a PAO. Ferrari's road car engines are all using Shell Helix ultra which is also a group III. hths for Helix 40 weight is 4.5. pretty good stuff.

Amsoil better get their act together with this one. I do believe they went bass ackwards.
 
Well, it truly does look like a Volkswagen 505.01 oil now. I feel that was their target.

I would have absolutely no problems using this oil for any of the applications listed in the product data sheet.
 
I was trying to decide between the Amsoil 5W-40 and the Redline 5W-40, but since Amsoil downgraded the specs it just made my decision a lot easier. Gonna go with RL.
 
Wait a minute.

First of all tell me why this is a "downgrade"?

By all accounts using the paper logic of BiTOG this oil might be better. But let me say something first. Everyone wants Amsoil specs to conform, meet industry specifications. So they do. People still gripe! There is no way to satisfy both sides of this discussion. Either you want a super additized oil or you want an oil that meets specs - this applies to API and it applies to many new car specs.

Now as for the oil itself.

Thinner (a bit) - yes indeed. Is this bad? I was thinking it's a good thing. Prove me wrong.
Visc. Index = a bit less - see above - this one bugs me a bit, but at 174, I'm not to worried.
No one pays much attention to 4-ball.
Starting TBN: Everyone tells me starting TBN doesn't matter. What gives? This is a direct reflection of lower Ca.
HTHS: Indeed. Lower. I want to see how this proves out in wear metals, etc. No one has precisely shown an oil in application is automagically more crappy because it has a 3.7 vs 4.2 HTHS.

I still think AFL is an exceptional oil for the price. I certainly won't recommend the new formulation for diesels any more.
 
This was a reformulation with a specific goal, not a cost-engineered downgrade. It is certainly recommended for light duty diesels, particularly European. It is not recommended for your over-the-road hauler.
 
I not said that this oil is not good!! I think is a very good oil for the price, I used since 1 year and i'm very happy.

But, I don't understand the decision of amsoil. Why he don't make an other product with this specific like motul?? I think is for money reason but...
 
The old formula AFL 5w-40 seemed like a world beater. Outstanding oil at a reasonable price. Amsoil did me a favor by down grading this oil. Sooner or later I would have purchased some for by 90+ quart oil collection. Down grading this oil makes it less attractive to me and it has helped me to realize that I have too much oil.

Thank Amsoil. I may finally be cured.
 
As you may remember, I have been one of the biggest proponents of the old 5W-40 version.
I think what bothers me most is the significant increase in volatility. Not that the new volatility is bad (it's still among the best of 5W-40 oils), but it's that the old was so amazing in that regard and I simply hate to see it go! But I'll try to show some wisdom and wait for a couple UOAs before I go cry in a corner over this change.
 
Thanks JAG.

I somehow did forget to mention volatility. This is a large change - and always was a bragging point for Amsoil. I, too, wonder how much different this makes in the real world. It seems clear the base oil is a bit lighter.
 
When Amsoil first came out with their 5w40 I thought it would be a good thing for them if it met 505.1 so that they could compete with castrol for the vw dealerships buisiness. When it didn't, I took a look at the oils that met 505.1 and noticed a pattern. They all were robust but had low tbn. I figured that this was just another of Castrol's tricks to get a manufacturer to endors a product that only they an the manufacturer could benefit from and make the maximum money from it. Like their Transynd atf and Allison deal. This way they could formulate a shorter drain quality oil which needs replacement sooner than most quality oil with higher tbn. Now that I have seen Amsoil's formulation I am satisfied that this was the case. If Amsoil doesn't recommend 25k mile oil changes with this new formula then I would say that Amsoil needs to price this oil at the lower cost point of motul's vw oil which I believe is lower than the xl line of oils. Otherwise bring back the old 5w40 european because the new one is really a vw 505.1 spec oil.

Of course I could be wrong. My gut feeling is I am not.
 
What I would like to know is which specific properties had to be changed to make the AFL VW 505.01-compliant. Of course, there are perfomance minimum requirements and limits that must not be exceeded.

Being primarily the PD oil spec, VW 505.01 should be indeed very "special" oil. Yet I remember Too Slick saying the VW 505.01 spec oils (Castrol?) he had seen were not so special. What exactly is so critical about VW 505.01 spec oil? It must result in low cam and PD unit wear, and extremely low deposit limits are probably mandated to keep the PD unit working properly.

Why go for a VW 505.01 spec oil, if apart from very few exceptions, VW 504/507 may be used? Elf Solaris LLX 5w30 hat meets those specs is already available, even if it's not required -- going by US manuals.
wink.gif
 
quote:
I, too, wonder how much different this makes in the real world.
Click to expand...
From what I was told/read, it's doesn't make any difference in most real world cases unless racing. Anything below 10% is very good. NOt to fond of the TBN though.
 
A birdie tipped me off that VW 505.01 requires sulphur not to exceed 0.3%, and sulphated ash not to exceed 0.8%. This explains why the new formula contains less calcium and magnesium, and why phosphorus is between 700 ppm and 900 ppm. Looks like VW505.01 is a lower SAPS oil spec than the medium SAPS VW 504/507 spec.

Those who are mourning the demise of the old AMSOIL 5W-40 should consider AMSOIL 10W-40, which is very similar and also has a very nice TBN.
 
Correction to my above post: VW 504/507 reportedly specifies a sulphated ash limit of 0.5% and not 0.9% as I claimed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Torco SR-1 5W-30, old Red Line 5W-30 Volatility Results - Jan 2025
Replies
7
Views
1K
facility1
Falcon_LS
Ravenol RCS 5W-40
Replies
17
Views
3K
Four Rings
D
Anyone ever run Lubrication Engineers 5w30 Synthetic? Monolec® Syn Engine Oil 8531
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
Olds394
A
  • Locked
Upcoming 0W5 Grade Red Line Oil Experiment- 2019 Lincoln Navigator 4WD 3.5L V6 Twin Turbo
8 9 10
Replies
198
Views
17K
M56959
D
New Castrol Edge Professional 0W-20 Formula
Replies
5
Views
11K
apollo18
Back
Top Bottom