Are there any other 0w-40's besides the M1 that are readily available? I mean over-the-counter, I know one can mail order stuff from Lubromoly and others.
0w-40 viscosity engine oils
- Thread starter Doug Hillary
- Start date
- Status
I've used Mobil 1 0w-40 in my VW 1.8T in the past. From memory, I believe the UOA's I did from 5k mile runs showed decent results as far as wear metals go. Heck, I believe lead showed a 0 ppm on 1 UOA. The only thing blackstone mentioned was the oil shearing to a thick 30wt. I did try a couple of runs of a 5w-40 oil. That oil showed lower iron numbers, but still sheared to a thick 30wt. Since then I've been running GC since it's already a thick 30wt and from the 1 UOA I've done, it appears to stay that way. So my logic was 0w-40, 5w-40 started out as a thin 40wt, became a thick 30wt. GC started out as a thick 30wt and stays that way. So, I've been sticking with the GC. As always, YMMV.
Hey showoff, you could've left out the big filter remover....it ain't for your VW.quote:
Originally posted by wavinwayne:
I love my M1 0w40. I just fed it to my VW today
Not that I have seen in my visits to WalMart, AutoZone & Pep Boys.
Actually, that big filter wrench was used during that oil change. I used it to remove the Mobil 1 M1-301 oversized filter that I was running on my VW.quote:
Originally posted by 99:
Hey showoff, you could've left out the big filter remover....it ain't for your VW.quote:
Originally posted by wavinwayne:
I love my M1 0w40. I just fed it to my VW today
I use the new recommended "big" filter on my 1.8T. I believe its an older VW diesel filter. It adds about .4 qt to my sump.
The 0W-40 Mobil 1 is specified for several high performance engines. I have examined the UOA on this and other web sites where high output engines have used this oil. The thinning of this oil is almost uniformly associated with fuel dilution. I do not think the oil breaks down at all.
The oil has the best start-up properties when 75 F or lower. It is easy to find and reasonably cheap. I see no reason to avoid this oil if the viscosity is appropriate at operating temperature for your needs.
aehaas
The oil has the best start-up properties when 75 F or lower. It is easy to find and reasonably cheap. I see no reason to avoid this oil if the viscosity is appropriate at operating temperature for your needs.
aehaas
Hi,
AEHaas - you said (re Mobil 1 0w-40);
"I do not think the oil breaks down at all."
Obviously Porsche, MB and AMG tend to agree too after factory/service filling for many years - even in engines with around 600hp and developing massive torque!
Its cold startup noise in some engines is caused by the very properties that make it a great product!
Myths or misinformation need to be dispelled
This thread was intended to cover all Approved and Listed 0w-40 lubricants from the many Oil Companies in the business! They are all great products when used all year round in the intended application and at the recommended OCIs!!
Doug
AEHaas - you said (re Mobil 1 0w-40);
"I do not think the oil breaks down at all."
Obviously Porsche, MB and AMG tend to agree too after factory/service filling for many years - even in engines with around 600hp and developing massive torque!
Its cold startup noise in some engines is caused by the very properties that make it a great product!
Myths or misinformation need to be dispelled
This thread was intended to cover all Approved and Listed 0w-40 lubricants from the many Oil Companies in the business! They are all great products when used all year round in the intended application and at the recommended OCIs!!
Doug
And turbos tend to run a little rich. I've recently been using FP60 and have noticed smoother operation and a better UOA on my last sample. Me thinks somethin's workin' here.
Doug,
Regarding the thinning of Mobil 1 0w-40, SAE technical paper 981444 (Advanced Synthetic Passenger Vehicle Engine Oils for Extended Oil Drain Performance) comes to mind. This paper was written by Mobil scientists. In the Sequence IIIE comparisons, M1 0w-40 faired thusly:
This isn't a knock of M1 0w-40. I think it's a fine oil, and all oils have their strengths and weaknesses. Shear stability doesn't seem to be a strength with this oil.
Regarding the thinning of Mobil 1 0w-40, SAE technical paper 981444 (Advanced Synthetic Passenger Vehicle Engine Oils for Extended Oil Drain Performance) comes to mind. This paper was written by Mobil scientists. In the Sequence IIIE comparisons, M1 0w-40 faired thusly:
Twenty percent viscosity loss seems like excessive thinning to me.
This isn't a knock of M1 0w-40. I think it's a fine oil, and all oils have their strengths and weaknesses. Shear stability doesn't seem to be a strength with this oil.
Hi Jay,
thank you for your comment - I think the SAE paper is outdated (1998) and probably refers to a very early version of this viscosity product. Even then, if you compare the others (a 7% & 9% increase) the nett end result of the single extract posted may be the same (in actual viscosity). Since about 1999 no XXw-30 oil has survived the Porsche test protocols to become Approved and Listed. About forty 0w-40 oils are Listed have been constantly added to. It is worthwhile noting too that the BITOG revered GC 0w-30 was Approved and Listed about 1996 and remained so until about 1999 - it has not been so for the last several years! Castrol's 0w-40 is!
The real deal (as most of us know who field test lubricants) is the actual field/in service performance of the oil. And these viscosity oils have a formidable in-service history over many years in the intended application
This thread was started because of these statements/comments and it was intended to be Brand "neutral";
"I may have misspoken...it seems wear was reduced by 50%-70% compared to the Mobil 1, 0w-40, rather than the mere 25%-40% I had predicted in the previous thread. LOL!"
As well the poster has made many references to "excessive shearing" and "excessive valve train wear" and etc but has never provided any such evidence!
I do not want to be seen as promoting a specific Brand of oil but rather to promote the stance that specific lubricants when used as intended do produce the intended outcomes with ease
After all there is no magic lubricant!
Doug
thank you for your comment - I think the SAE paper is outdated (1998) and probably refers to a very early version of this viscosity product. Even then, if you compare the others (a 7% & 9% increase) the nett end result of the single extract posted may be the same (in actual viscosity). Since about 1999 no XXw-30 oil has survived the Porsche test protocols to become Approved and Listed. About forty 0w-40 oils are Listed have been constantly added to. It is worthwhile noting too that the BITOG revered GC 0w-30 was Approved and Listed about 1996 and remained so until about 1999 - it has not been so for the last several years! Castrol's 0w-40 is!
The real deal (as most of us know who field test lubricants) is the actual field/in service performance of the oil. And these viscosity oils have a formidable in-service history over many years in the intended application
This thread was started because of these statements/comments and it was intended to be Brand "neutral";
"I may have misspoken...it seems wear was reduced by 50%-70% compared to the Mobil 1, 0w-40, rather than the mere 25%-40% I had predicted in the previous thread. LOL!"
As well the poster has made many references to "excessive shearing" and "excessive valve train wear" and etc but has never provided any such evidence!
I do not want to be seen as promoting a specific Brand of oil but rather to promote the stance that specific lubricants when used as intended do produce the intended outcomes with ease
After all there is no magic lubricant!
Doug
Doug,quote:
Originally posted by Doug Hillary:
....Since about 1999 no XXw-30 oil has survived the Porsche test protocols to become Approved and Listed....
Doug
Here is a picture I just took of the back of a bottle of M03 vintage GC. It says that is it Porsche approved. Is it not?
[ October 22, 2005, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: wavinwayne ]
In looking at Jays' viscosity chart. I see that the 0w30 & 5w30 increased in viscosity by 7% & 9% respectivly. I interpret this as these oils are being thickened by the burning off of the lighter fractions. I therefore conclude that the burning off is contributing to sludge byproducts . The 0w40 oil lost some Viscosity but, that does not make it worse or even bad. In fact I would probably pick the 0W40 as the best for my engine. People with oil chemistry will I'm sure correct me if my assumptions are incorrect. Ed
I agree with Pablo's first post on this thread. I think it is more about M1's 0W40 then 0W40 in general. I never took it as all 0W40's!
I say that people would be better off bleninding Delvac-1 and M1 0W40 then useing either one 100% even for most winter use. This way you get a better comprimise all the way around. THe additive package in M1 0W40 is beffier then Delvac-1 but the base stock and HTHS of Delvac-1 are better then M1 0W40.
I like M1's 0W40 better then their 0W30 product and I usualy recomend M1 0W40 were someone wants to use a 0W30 for fuel economy.
I think it is no secrete that I am a huge fan of 5W40's as the ideal comprimise for most people in North America or South America.Most senthitic 5W40's will do just fine even dureing winter conditions for 90% of the N.America and 100% of S. America no problem!
I say that people would be better off bleninding Delvac-1 and M1 0W40 then useing either one 100% even for most winter use. This way you get a better comprimise all the way around. THe additive package in M1 0W40 is beffier then Delvac-1 but the base stock and HTHS of Delvac-1 are better then M1 0W40.
I like M1's 0W40 better then their 0W30 product and I usualy recomend M1 0W40 were someone wants to use a 0W30 for fuel economy.
I think it is no secrete that I am a huge fan of 5W40's as the ideal comprimise for most people in North America or South America.Most senthitic 5W40's will do just fine even dureing winter conditions for 90% of the N.America and 100% of S. America no problem!
Doug,
I did a search on the gas engine UOA forum using "0w-40" as the search term, and viewed results over the last year. I've cataloged the results below starting from most recent to oldest sample. I skipped any UOA that had fuel present. The viscosity change is calculated from the advertised starting viscosity in the case of M1 and the measured VOA for Motul.
I did a search on the gas engine UOA forum using "0w-40" as the search term, and viewed results over the last year. I've cataloged the results below starting from most recent to oldest sample. I skipped any UOA that had fuel present. The viscosity change is calculated from the advertised starting viscosity in the case of M1 and the measured VOA for Motul.
Of course, what the UOA doesn't show is thickening, so we can assume that in most of these samples the shearing was greater than shown. I think the evidence on the board clearly shows that 0w-40 grades are shear prone, and I don't think thats a surprise to anybody.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Regarding evaporative loss, for example, VW allows somewhere around 13-15% in the case of 0W-x oil.
Found via a Google search:
http://www.landsharkoz.com/tt/tt_pao.htm
Another one here:
http://www.wrightune.co.uk/downloads/approved_oils.pdf
Doug if an SAE paper produced by Exxon/Mobil by their own staff about their own product is not good enough then what is? It is quickly looking like nothing is going to be good enough for you on this topic!
Well at least we can agree that Delvac-1 is a great product! CHeers!!!
Well at least we can agree that Delvac-1 is a great product! CHeers!!!
Also, consider the fact that most cars that come with M1 0w-40 contain 8 or more qts of it. That has a lot to do with it also as it might not shear as much bc of that. The oil clearly shears. Bigger the spread, the more shearing. It's hard to have the best cold and hot temp performance and that is what M1 0w-40 tries to do. BTW, where does one get these SAE papers from Mobil? SAE website?
- Status
