Volatility Tests: Mobil 1 0W-40 vs Amsoil 5W-30

[JAG]

Previous data and background here:

Oils Tested:
Amsoil 5W-30 ASL (buster's generous donation)
Mobil 1 0W-40 (API SM; very recently purchased)

Results:
Cumulative Percentage Weight Loss (relative to initial 2.002 grams of oil):
Amsoil 5W-30: At 1, 2, 3 hours: 3.60% , 6.09% , 8.09%
Mobil 1 0W-40: At 1, 2, 3 hours: 3.10% , 5.09% , 6.09%

Put another way, in terms of grams of oil lost to evaporation:
Amsoil 5W-30: At 1, 2, 3 hours: 0.072 , 0.050 , 0.040
Mobil 1 0W-40: At 1, 2, 3 hours: 0.062 , 0.040 , 0.020

As you can see, Mobil 1 0W-40 is less volatile than Amsoil 5W-30 ASL. As always in these tests, the oils are most volatile when new since the more volatile components evaporate off leaving behind less volatile components. That is, they get less and less volatile as they are heated longer and longer.

 

[98LSC32V]

Interesting but not very good comparsion considering the Mobil 1 0w-40 is much thicker... compare to Amsoil 5w-40 European Formula would be a better match.

 

[JAG]

I tested this as a promise to buster. I'd love it if others spent the time and money to test and provide data here. I've tested so many oils in the past that I could spend days typing up the results. I like to give data but won't be made a slave to it for this forum. Few of my tests are typed up on BITOG. Read my linked post above if you want to see more oils' test results, albeit some of them for different lengths of time than this test. You have to know how to read into the data with knowledge of motor oil compositions, which won't happen for many people.

 

[buster]

JAG, thank you for doing this. M1 0w-40 is a better oil than most people think. Meets a lot of tough specs. and does seem to have excellent long drain capability along with the ability to keep an engine clean.

 

[JAG]

Your welcome buster and thanks for the oil. I put some Amsoil 5W-30 in my lawn mower already. It's a bit thin for my VW 1.8T and wife's G35 Coupe has finally found an oil it doesn't consume: M1 0W-40. UOAs of M1 0W-40 and M1 EP oils seems to indicate that the 0W-40 has even longer drain capability than the EP oils. It takes a lot to meet VW 503.01 and MB 229.5 specs and they added even more TBN retention than it takes just to meet those specs. That is, GC Gold meets those specs but M1 0W-40 seems to retain TBN better in really long drains.

 

[Lazerred1]

I also have a G35 Coupe. What else have you tried in it?

 

[JAG]

It was bought used with about 20k miles on it, so it was already broken in. I tried Gold GC 3 times. Worst consumption by far. Every few weeks I had to add oil. Then Syntec 10W-30. Less consumption. M1 0W-40: on 1st fill of it now and have a few thousand miles on it so far and no consumption yet.

 

[Lazerred1]

Thanks. My next try was GC. Won't be now.

 

[Tempest]

Does anyone have the Noack on the M1 0W40? It's not on the PDS. It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation.

 

[buster]

The Noack I believe is 8.5%.

Mobil 1 0W-40 meets key industry and car builder specifications for:

* Mercedes MB 229.5

* BMW Longlife 01

* Porsche Approval List 2002

* VW 502.00/505.00/503.01

* GM-LL-A-025 (gasoline)

* GM-LL-B-025 (diesel)

* ACEA A3, B3/B4

* API SM/CF

Exceeding industry standards and the major leading builder requirements is the cornerstone of the performance reserve that lets Mobil 1 0W-40 keep performing well after conventional oils cannot. Mobil 1 0W-40 provides the widest range of protection -- providing the extreme cold start protection of an 0W grade and the high temperature protection of an SAE 40 grade.

 

[BullyT]

Quote:

---

Thanks. My next try was GC. Won't be now.

---

I switched to German Castrol 0W-30 in my BMW 740 and I love it. Great cold weather starts (I'm north of Toronto) and I'm at 9,000 km since my last oil change--checked the oil today and it hasn't used a drop.

So far, GC is easy to find up here, but if it becomes a problem (and my stash runs out...) I will go with Mobil 1 0W-40 (meets BMW LL-01...long life standard).

 

[JohnBrowning]

This is one reason that I recomend M1 0W40 so much. It's only weak spot is that it shears back badlu in use. Most applications do not seem to mind that it shears back so much but some do. In any application that seems to be affected by true 40wt. oils like synthetic 5W40 I normaly recomend they try 0W40. One of our "Brothers from Down Under" did some testing on M1 0W40 amoung many other oils and found that it plated up nicely reduceing scar size on the Pin and V test.

I know I often demand an HTHS of 3.3 or higher but even I can not ignore the importance of an effective additive package! I think it is preety clear that effective additive packages and lack of VII's and shear stable base stock's in 5W20 is the reason they do so very well in applications recomending them in spite of their low HTHS!

 

[Pablo]

I would expect a XW-30 to be a tad more volatile than an XW-40. Great data, none the less, and does correspond within reason to Amsoil's published spec of 7.1% per ASTM D-5800 as stated in gms/100 gms. Both oils are significantly lower than most any XW-30, that's for sure.

 

[JAG]

Pablo, I was worried you'd be upset by the data but am glad you aren't.

Anyhow, I dug up some recent data from when I tested Mobil 1 0W-40 and Mobil 1 5W-40 TDT. The thread is below but it doesn't include the volatility data. http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/s...true#Post832464
TAKE NOTE: The cups holding the Amsoil 5W-30 and M1 0W-40 were anodized aluminum so they get the oil hotter (raises evaporation rate) while the cups used in the M1 0W-40 and M1 5W-40 TDT test were white ceramic (to show any varnish that may form). So you'll see lower evaporation rates in the below results (compare the M1 0W-40 in both tests to see that). But it shows the relative evaporation rate of 0W-40 and 5W-40. Was shocked to see that M1 5W-40 TDT is more volatile than M1 0W-40. I still think the 5W-40 must use a sizable, but still the minority, amount of alkylated napthalenes which could explain the results. I suspect mostly PAO (multiple types) and much lesser amount of esters in the 0W-40.

M1 5W-40 TDT and M1 0W-40 data below are grams evaporated in 1st hour, 2nd hour, and next 9 hours and 45 minutes.
Ceramic Cups used:
Mobil 1 0W-40: At 1, 2, 11.75 hours: 0.030 , 0.013 , 0.097
Mobil 1 5W-40: At 1, 2, 11.75 hours: 0.050 , 0.023 , 0.127

Metal Cup M1 0W-40 grams evaporated data from top of this thread for comparison to see the large effect of cup type:
Mobil 1 0W-40: At 1, 2 hours: 0.062 , 0.040

 

[INDYMAC]

Thanks for doing all this testing Jag (are you Navy JAG Corps?).
I know it's probably wrong to read too much into this data, but my take on it to this point would be that we're looking at how volatile the additive package carrier oil is, rather than the base stocks of the formulation. If that is a correct assumption, then all these oils will theoretically eventually get to zero (depleted) additives as the carrier oil evaporates, over different rates of time. Is this how TBN numbers are determined on each oil from the manufacturer?
Is this how manufacturers determine a short OCI(3K) from a long OCI(35K) range oil recommendation?
Does this help us determine or infer the magnitude of phosphorus ingestion through the intake to the catalytic converter based on evaportion rate of the carrier oil? And as a follow on, how much more phosphorus a manufacturer can get away with in their additive package?
Sorry for all the questions. I guess it's just a compliment to your work!

 

[mitchcoyote]

Afair test would be 5w-30 against 5w-30

 

[JAG]

INDYMAC, no I'm not in the Navy JAG Corps. JAG are my initials! Not as exciting as you thought, huh?

Any fluid in an oil will evaporate. Of the mixture that evaporates, the amount of any one fluid depends on the percentage that the fluid takes up of the whole and the volatility of that fluid. Basically, most of what evaporates is basestocks, not additive carrier, because basestocks comprise a vast majority of the oil.

So your conclusions on TBN and OCIs aren't true because the starting assumption isn't true. It was logical though!

Cat poisoning from phosporous is a very complicated thing because it depends on several aspects of the oil, not just volatility and phosporous concentration. API, etc know this and are working hard on a test for this for API SN (or whatever it will be). A google search can tell you all about it.

mitchcoyote, that's correct but I wasn't trying to be fair. M1 0W-40 was used as a reference oil since I'd tested it before with other oils. I'm still accepting oil donations. I'm not going to spend $6 for a quart of M1 5W-30 just to test against Amsoil 5W-30.

 

[INDYMAC]

Quote:

---

INDYMAC, no I'm not in the Navy JAG Corps. JAG are my initials! Not as exciting as you thought, huh?

Hey, I'm sure that court martial cases by day and flying F-14's off the carrier by night is not all it's cranked up to be. That must be why their show is cancelled and yours isn't yet!

 

[Turbodriven]

Thanks JAG, good to see that this M1 holds its head high. Im not surprised though since many manufacturers of high performance vehicles use it successfully.Porsche, AMG....
A few members of our Opel club have used this oil with great results, most are highly turbo charged applications.

 

[buster]

Quote:

---

Thanks JAG, good to see that this M1 holds its head high. Im not surprised though since many manufacturers of high performance vehicles use it successfully.Porsche, AMG....
A few members of our Opel club have used this oil with great results, most are highly turbo charged applications.

---

The Automakers that specify M1 put these oils thru rigorous testing.

I bet Redline would do extremely well in a volatility test.