Ultimate Motor Oil Thread or Why we hate CJ4/SM oils

[rickdm]

What I find interesting is that a lot of people's reactions (including my own) to these new oil findings is based on the impact of advertising. We have all had 20 or 30 years of Mobil 1 advertising itself as a superior product, and to believe that a tiny company with dino oil and no advertising (Brad Penn) could actually make a better product just goes against our consumer mindset. It even costs less! How can it be better?

Fortunately there are people who care about our old cars, whose opinions I trust, and who have enough time and experience to help us through this issue. I am still running the Mobil 1 V-Twin, but I have my two cases of Brad Penn waiting.

[dshepp806]

Originally Posted by RWebb

unless they own a radiology clinic....

I think old Pete Stark has that one already nailed down (at least stand alone rad clinics). We now fight the upcoming Anti-Markup rule.

As to oil,...yes: quite complicated. I tend to lean more towards the Porsche-experienced "oil-o-philes". Am running RP Max Cycle, 20W50 and am awaiting my analysis from Staveley. In my continued reading (to include the BITOG forum(, it's clear that I should be watching the copper,..looking for shearing, possibly related to Moly levels...My case (from Charlie) of BP is standing by.

Over at BITOG, many have reported elevated Copper levels with RP,..levels that were NOT previously detected on MANY samples (previously analysed by these P-car owners) of OTHER oils. Somehow, I don't think this is coincidental............

THEN: to hear a few P-wrenches (with LOTS of experience, too) speak somewhat negatively of Moly,..well,......what's a (mildy educated) layman P-owner to deduce?

Proof's in the pudding...........when the UOA hits, I'll post it....

...I see BP in my future,.....and I long for a predictable, steady, repeated use of a SAME oil!!!!!!!!

Best,..and Happy Holidays to all!

[cnavarro]

I've been doing more reading into moly based anti-wear/friction modifier additives, and there are quite a few different species, some that provide better wear than others and some that even interfere with the Zn and P. It's a very complicated subject, and delving into areas of proprietary formulation that VOAs can't even begin to answer. We will have to assume that the moly, if used, is optimal for wear reduction even at the tradeoff of not giving the best friction reduction (HP gains). So just because an oil makes more horsepower over another of the same viscosity because of reduced friction, that doesn't necessary translate to better wear. I think that's one of the many hurdles you have to get over when trying to make heads or tails of this whole oil mess.

[RWebb]

'84? what year did P AG issue the TSB on synthetic oils? maybe it was '84?

[dshepp806]

I know that LM77 did comment about the different Molys...."dark Molys"=nogo......

...hurdles? That's an understatement, at least, for me.

Thanks for the reply, Charles.

Best,

[cnavarro]

Let me add something new not directly related to brand of oil... I just read another interesting study that was able to correlate the viscosity of oil at 100C to its HTHS viscosit.

Both KV100 loss and HTHS loss after shear are related to one another, with an average 32.2% of the KV100 viscosity value being equal to the after shear HTHS viscosity. The R^2=0.941 for % HTHS vis loss vs. KV 100C loss regardless of viscosity.

That would mean that if the viscosity at 100C is less than 10.85 cSt, then the HTHS viscosity would be less than the min. 3.5 cSt set forth in Porsche's requirements, with a 94% confidence.

EDIT: Here is an example. Using M1 0w40, Mobil 1 0w40 is 3.7 cP (3.7cP * 1/.85 specific density = 4.35 actual HTHS in cSt; using the estimate of 14 * .322 yields an estimated 4.50 HTHS, which is off by only 3.4%). If there is a ~ in front of the HTHS, then it's estimated by taking the viscosity at 100C * .322 (this conversion has an R^2 value of 94%). Pretty good for an estimate of HTHS.

I am not trying to go through all the approved oils, especially the API SJ and SL ones, and find the viscosities at 100C, since most do not list HTHS, to try to give an estimate. So far, Fuchs Silkolene Pro S 5w40 has the highest estimated HTHS value of all the "approved" oils.

That might be another good indicator of when it's time to change the oil, along with the TBN, and other considerations such as fuel dilution, etc.

[movin]

Looks like Mobil got the message. Check this latest VOA of Mobil1 15W 50, gray cap. Looks pretty good. From BITOG site:

This is from "Lost1" in the MC oil thread. Silver cap M1 15w-50.
Quote:
Here's a VOA provided by CTC Analytical Services of Phoenix, AZ and reported in a recent issue of Full Throttle magazine:

Silicon: M1 15W-50: 9ppm
Boron: M1 15W-50: 228ppm
Sodium: M1 15W-50: 13ppm
Magnesium: M1 15W-50: 43ppm
Calcium: M1 15W-50: 2464ppm
Phosphorus: M1 15W-50: 1193ppm
Zinc: M1 15W-50: 1315ppm
Molybdenum: M1 15W-50: 90ppm

[cnavarro]

Most definately looks like they've improved it, but we know we can do better now :-) There is a trend towards using co-detergents to improve the anti-wear response in oils. Nice to see though that they put in a healthy dose of boron too. I would like to see the Ca reduced and Mg increased. Then you'd have a winner.

[teenerted1]

Originally Posted by movin

Looks like Mobil got the message. Check this latest VOA of Mobil1 15W 50, gray cap. Looks pretty good. From BITOG site:

This is from "Lost1" in the MC oil thread. Silver cap M1 15w-50.
Quote:
Here's a VOA provided by CTC Analytical Services of Phoenix, AZ and reported in a recent issue of Full Throttle magazine:

Silicon: M1 15W-50: 9ppm
Boron: M1 15W-50: 228ppm
Sodium: M1 15W-50: 13ppm
Magnesium: M1 15W-50: 43ppm
Calcium: M1 15W-50: 2464ppm
Phosphorus: M1 15W-50: 1193ppm
Zinc: M1 15W-50: 1315ppm
Molybdenum: M1 15W-50: 90ppm

whew
glad they have updated it. was concerned since i found this thread shortly after my last oil change using M1 15-50 with the silver cap, and a Mahle filter.

bought a bottle of EOS from a friend for the next oil change anyway.

[HarryD]

Originally Posted by movin

Looks like Mobil got the message. Check this latest VOA of Mobil1 15W 50, gray cap. Looks pretty good. From BITOG site:

This is from "Lost1" in the MC oil thread. Silver cap M1 15w-50.
Quote:
Here's a VOA provided by CTC Analytical Services of Phoenix, AZ and reported in a recent issue of Full Throttle magazine:

Silicon: M1 15W-50: 9ppm
Boron: M1 15W-50: 228ppm
Sodium: M1 15W-50: 13ppm
Magnesium: M1 15W-50: 43ppm
Calcium: M1 15W-50: 2464ppm
Phosphorus: M1 15W-50: 1193ppm
Zinc: M1 15W-50: 1315ppm
Molybdenum: M1 15W-50: 90ppm

You know, that is all well and good that Mobil has tweaked their formulation. But, if a company keeps screwing with the formulation and does not tell the customer, this is a bad thing. Personally, I do not want to give them my business since I will have no idea what is in the bottle that I bought!

[storymode] When I was an engineer for a Silicon compnay, we used a liquid wax to polish our product. The wax compound worked great for many years and suddenly we started to have quality problems. We were able to trace it back to the wax. On discussion with the vendor, we found out that at the time our problem started, the vendor changed one of the solvents in the wax. They did not notify us, they did not re-label the product, they did not change the part number. It cost us about 3 weeks of lost production to get the problem identified. You need to be careful about folks who act this way. Their excuse was that they didn't think anyone would care if they "improved" the product. Once they knew of our issue, they reissued the old formulation under a new label.[/storymode]

Will Mobil do the same? Based on the information on their web site and reported correspondence, I do not think so....

Cavat Emptor

[movin]

I agree, you will never know what you have in that bottle as the big oil companies are notorious for fiddling with their formulas without prior notification.

[cnavarro]

Hey guys, I was researching factory approved oils and found a very interesting Porsche AG approved oil list, which is completely different from the ones I have:

http://www.peter-widmayer.de/Porsche/2000_Motoroelfreigaben_Porsche.pdf

What I find interesting that the VW 505.01 spec 5w40 Mobil 1 is on the approved list, as well as the Truck and Diesel 5w40. Additionally, this list (in German), calls out the GT2 and GT3 specifically, where the previous approval lists I have don't.

[Steve@Rennsport]

Originally Posted by cnavarro

Hey guys, I was researching factory approved oils and found a very interesting Porsche AG approved oil list, which is completely different from the ones I have:

http://www.peter-widmayer.de/Porsche/2000_Motoroelfreigaben_Porsche.pdf

What I find interesting that the VW 505.01 spec 5w40 Mobil 1 is on the approved list, as well as the Truck and Diesel 5w40. Additionally, this list (in German), calls out the GT2 and GT3 specifically, where the previous approval lists I have don't.

I'd love to see a translated version of that document. My German isn't so great as my English is barely passable,..

[movin]

Great, 5w40 Mobil 1 is readily available most everywhere. A few folks on BITOG said the HM 10W 40 was worth a look too based on the VOA. Saw Castrol 10W-60 at a BMW dealer, $9.95 per quart, standard issue at all BMW dealers. If the Brad Penn doesn't burn less in my Carrera than the Mobil1 did maybe I'll try Castrol 10W-60.

[paulgtr]

ok
did the oil change today and put in the brad penn 20w50 using a napa gold filter.
idles a bit quieter, but i also put in freshly cleaned injectors today so I am not sure which is responsible.
any way
thanks Charles for all this info. it really is up to us to find out as much as possible to take care of these cars
and your work is a great help

[cnavarro]

Hey, I enjoy doing the research. I've spent the last about 6 hours digging through google trying to gather HTHS viscosities and flash points for approved oils in vain to try to take a stab at finding one that will protect the newer water cooled engines better than M1 0w40. I do have to say there are alot of crappier oils too. And that my eyes hurt after reading pdfs and sites in no less than a dozen different languages, most without translation.

[paulgtr]

if you ever need help field testing anything on a 3.2l engine let me know
I will be more than willing to help you out

[benzyne]

Up in the Great White North (AKA Canada), Mobile 1 has a "Performance Driving Formulation" 5W50. According to Imperial Oil this formulation has a HTHS 4.22 I realize this isn't the 6 offered by BP, but am wondering if this formulation with the addition of EOS is adequate for a daily driver (including winter) with the occasional AutoX and DE?

[cnavarro]

Sure, Mobil 1 5w50 would be an excellent alternative to Mobil 1 0w40 for the newer water cooled cars, but I think a better oil in a 5w40 to the 0w40 would be IMHO to the Mobil 1 Truck and Diesel 5w40, which is highly recommend by Doug H on Rennlist. I can't find much fault in that oil, other than it's not approved, but that is not the say all end all.

I've updated my table on the Approved Oils to list some of the fairly easy to get oils with HTHS viscosities and flashpoints, as well as a few alternative oils in a 5w40 that aren't Porsche approved, for comparison as well.

http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html#Z12

[cnavarro]

Also, I don't know if anyone looked at the german Porsche AG bulletin I posted a link to above, but it sure looks like there are lots of 10w40 and even a 10w60 oil listed as approved for the 996? My question is, I had heard of problems running thicker oils - it was is important is the low end of the spectrum, with thinner oils cold, that is the requirement here not to throw a CEL in a new water-pumper?

EDIT: I talked to Steve W. about this. Basically, anything without Variocam isn't sensitive to the viscosities - you basically have to run a 0w40 or preferrably a 5w40 in a new Porsche with variocam or it will throw a CEL.