What Oil for older air cooled Porches?
10-31-2007, 12:05 PM
#61
Addict
bad news guys, the Tofu-eating, ricecake-wielding, tree-hugging vegan Druids have purchased all remaining suplies to lube the edit-edit, edit-edit, edit-edit baby killing, that they do when the lights are out.
10-31-2007, 02:20 PM
#62
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve W.,
Are you still using Mobil 1 0-40 in the variocams? If not what do you suggest.
Fortuantely, I live close enough to a Brad-Penn dealer that will drop of cases 20 mins from my home for my 84. Just trying to use up a lot of Castrol that I have used and stocked up on overtime.
regards,
Steve
10-31-2007, 04:10 PM
#63
RL Technical Advisor
Steve W.,
Are you still using Mobil 1 0-40 in the variocams? If not what do you suggest.
Fortuantely, I live close enough to a Brad-Penn dealer that will drop of cases 20 mins from my home for my 84. Just trying to use up a lot of Castrol that I have used and stocked up on overtime.
regards,
Steve
Are you still using Mobil 1 0-40 in the variocams? If not what do you suggest.
Fortuantely, I live close enough to a Brad-Penn dealer that will drop of cases 20 mins from my home for my 84. Just trying to use up a lot of Castrol that I have used and stocked up on overtime.
regards,
Steve
Currently, we are supplementing M1 0w-40 with EOS and looking at other 0w-40 or 5w-40 oils that have sufficient ZDDP to protect the innards of these engines.
10-31-2007, 05:55 PM
#64
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M1 0w-40 - supplementary additives
Hello,
IMHO M1 0w-40 should not be diluted by ANY supplementary additives. This lubricant has an excellent formulation that meets the most stringent of the engine Manufacturer's tests. It has a field (in use) reputation probably unequalled by ANY other "off the shelf" engine lubricant earned over many years, some millions of engines and over many millions of miles!
Diluting it with the likes of EOS may in fact be counterproductive to the point of causing long term engine durability issues
As we know the lubricant's manufacturer and all Euro engine manufacturers advise against the use of ANY supplementary additives!
As for wear - Porsche's 100 or so Approved and Listed lubricants for all engines (except Cayenne V6) made from MY84 to the present exceed the ACEA's wear test protocols by a fair margin. These protocols have been the same for almost 12 years and transcend formulation changes
Steve (rbcsaver) - use your Castrol lubricant with great confidence - they must meet the viscosity requirements and should be A3/B3 (and or B4) rated of course if used in a Porsche engine. Castrol make an excellent range of engine and gear/transmission lubricants - they perform very well indeed in their intended applications. Castrol have twelve (12) engine lubricants on Porsche's Approved List - four are 0w-40 viscosity and eight are 5w-40 viscosity
Many "semi synthetic" (Group 3) lubricants now exceed the wear and durability performance of more expensive "boutique" full synthetic (Group 4) products
Subjective single pass UOA wear metal appraisals when used as a form of judging engine lubricant performance is at best "interesting" at the worst it is totally misleading! Such things can only be done in controlled circumstances and under prescribed conditions. The same applies to judging an engine lubricant solely by the level of Zinc or any other single component. It is the additive package and base lubricant and it's performance/quality Approvals that tell the true story
Regards
IMHO M1 0w-40 should not be diluted by ANY supplementary additives. This lubricant has an excellent formulation that meets the most stringent of the engine Manufacturer's tests. It has a field (in use) reputation probably unequalled by ANY other "off the shelf" engine lubricant earned over many years, some millions of engines and over many millions of miles!
Diluting it with the likes of EOS may in fact be counterproductive to the point of causing long term engine durability issues
As we know the lubricant's manufacturer and all Euro engine manufacturers advise against the use of ANY supplementary additives!
As for wear - Porsche's 100 or so Approved and Listed lubricants for all engines (except Cayenne V6) made from MY84 to the present exceed the ACEA's wear test protocols by a fair margin. These protocols have been the same for almost 12 years and transcend formulation changes
Steve (rbcsaver) - use your Castrol lubricant with great confidence - they must meet the viscosity requirements and should be A3/B3 (and or B4) rated of course if used in a Porsche engine. Castrol make an excellent range of engine and gear/transmission lubricants - they perform very well indeed in their intended applications. Castrol have twelve (12) engine lubricants on Porsche's Approved List - four are 0w-40 viscosity and eight are 5w-40 viscosity
Many "semi synthetic" (Group 3) lubricants now exceed the wear and durability performance of more expensive "boutique" full synthetic (Group 4) products
Subjective single pass UOA wear metal appraisals when used as a form of judging engine lubricant performance is at best "interesting" at the worst it is totally misleading! Such things can only be done in controlled circumstances and under prescribed conditions. The same applies to judging an engine lubricant solely by the level of Zinc or any other single component. It is the additive package and base lubricant and it's performance/quality Approvals that tell the true story
Regards
10-31-2007, 06:29 PM
#65
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Valvoline 20/50 all year round here in Florida. I change it every six months, or every 1,000 miles. Matter of fact, I am changing oil Friday before heading over to Daytona.
10-31-2007, 09:22 PM
#66
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Hello,
IMHO M1 0w-40 should not be diluted by ANY supplementary additives. This lubricant has an excellent formulation that meets the most stringent of the engine Manufacturer's tests. It has a field (in use) reputation probably unequalled by ANY other "off the shelf" engine lubricant earned over many years, some millions of engines and over many millions of miles!
Diluting it with the likes of EOS may in fact be counterproductive to the point of causing long term engine durability issues
As we know the lubricant's manufacturer and all Euro engine manufacturers advise against the use of ANY supplementary additives!
As for wear - Porsche's 100 or so Approved and Listed lubricants for all engines (except Cayenne V6) made from MY84 to the present exceed the ACEA's wear test protocols by a fair margin. These protocols have been the same for almost 12 years and transcend formulation changes
Steve (rbcsaver) - use your Castrol lubricant with great confidence - they must meet the viscosity requirements and should be A3/B3 (and or B4) rated of course if used in a Porsche engine. Castrol make an excellent range of engine and gear/transmission lubricants - they perform very well indeed in their intended applications. Castrol have twelve (12) engine lubricants on Porsche's Approved List - four are 0w-40 viscosity and eight are 5w-40 viscosity
Many "semi synthetic" (Group 3) lubricants now exceed the wear and durability performance of more expensive "boutique" full synthetic (Group 4) products
Subjective single pass UOA wear metal appraisals when used as a form of judging engine lubricant performance is at best "interesting" at the worst it is totally misleading! Such things can only be done in controlled circumstances and under prescribed conditions. The same applies to judging an engine lubricant solely by the level of Zinc or any other single component. It is the additive package and base lubricant and it's performance/quality Approvals that tell the true story
Regards
IMHO M1 0w-40 should not be diluted by ANY supplementary additives. This lubricant has an excellent formulation that meets the most stringent of the engine Manufacturer's tests. It has a field (in use) reputation probably unequalled by ANY other "off the shelf" engine lubricant earned over many years, some millions of engines and over many millions of miles!
Diluting it with the likes of EOS may in fact be counterproductive to the point of causing long term engine durability issues
As we know the lubricant's manufacturer and all Euro engine manufacturers advise against the use of ANY supplementary additives!
As for wear - Porsche's 100 or so Approved and Listed lubricants for all engines (except Cayenne V6) made from MY84 to the present exceed the ACEA's wear test protocols by a fair margin. These protocols have been the same for almost 12 years and transcend formulation changes
Steve (rbcsaver) - use your Castrol lubricant with great confidence - they must meet the viscosity requirements and should be A3/B3 (and or B4) rated of course if used in a Porsche engine. Castrol make an excellent range of engine and gear/transmission lubricants - they perform very well indeed in their intended applications. Castrol have twelve (12) engine lubricants on Porsche's Approved List - four are 0w-40 viscosity and eight are 5w-40 viscosity
Many "semi synthetic" (Group 3) lubricants now exceed the wear and durability performance of more expensive "boutique" full synthetic (Group 4) products
Subjective single pass UOA wear metal appraisals when used as a form of judging engine lubricant performance is at best "interesting" at the worst it is totally misleading! Such things can only be done in controlled circumstances and under prescribed conditions. The same applies to judging an engine lubricant solely by the level of Zinc or any other single component. It is the additive package and base lubricant and it's performance/quality Approvals that tell the true story
Regards
I hear you but I am skeptical. Over at Pelican and here, this has been a hot topic. Steve Weiner has posted his observations on the recent changes.
It appears that something has recently changed, if not down under, at least here in the states.
Over at Pelican (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=367300), Dennis Kalama asked:
Originally Posted by Dennis Kalma
Ok, I am curious. We are not the only car owners with this sort of problem...my Datsun 240Z had similar lifter arrangements as the 911, plus pretty well every muscle car, sports car and toy car that is older than 10 years will have the same issue.
What I am wrestling with is:
1. Is it really a problem? How good is the documented proof that our engines will wear excessively?
2. Are the solutions raised here the best ones that align to practices in marques with similar problems?
3. Why are the oil manufacturers (who are always looking to make a buck), not offering a solution for the older vehicle? Who do I have to yell at?
Dennis
What I am wrestling with is:
1. Is it really a problem? How good is the documented proof that our engines will wear excessively?
2. Are the solutions raised here the best ones that align to practices in marques with similar problems?
3. Why are the oil manufacturers (who are always looking to make a buck), not offering a solution for the older vehicle? Who do I have to yell at?
Dennis
Originally Posted by Steve@Rennsport
Hi Dennis:
Let me offer some input on your questions.
1) Yessir, it sure is. We began noticing unusual wear in certain engine parts about 3 years ago; certain parts that NEVER wore out unless there were extenuating circumstances showed major distress. Extended oil change intervals and the use of some oils exacerbated the problems.
2) I read a lot of trade journals and speak with some compatriots who work on Porsche, Mercedes, BMW, and Chevrolet automobiles report the same issues with cams, rocker arms, cam followers, bearings and in some cases, piston rings. Their comments mirror my own observations over this time frame that has seen drastic reductions in the ZDDP content of today's oils.
3) There is nobody to yell at. The car makers have discovered two things: selling parts is VERY profitable since car margins are quite slim in most instances, and fuel economy both sells cars and keeps the EPA "boogyman" off their back with CAFE penalities. They do not care what happens to your car after the warranty has expired and if you think the auto manufacturers harbor altruistic thoughts about service intervals and recommendations, you are now living a fantasy,...
As they used to say in those Dodge commercials; "The rules have changed".
Let me offer some input on your questions.
1) Yessir, it sure is. We began noticing unusual wear in certain engine parts about 3 years ago; certain parts that NEVER wore out unless there were extenuating circumstances showed major distress. Extended oil change intervals and the use of some oils exacerbated the problems.
2) I read a lot of trade journals and speak with some compatriots who work on Porsche, Mercedes, BMW, and Chevrolet automobiles report the same issues with cams, rocker arms, cam followers, bearings and in some cases, piston rings. Their comments mirror my own observations over this time frame that has seen drastic reductions in the ZDDP content of today's oils.
3) There is nobody to yell at. The car makers have discovered two things: selling parts is VERY profitable since car margins are quite slim in most instances, and fuel economy both sells cars and keeps the EPA "boogyman" off their back with CAFE penalities. They do not care what happens to your car after the warranty has expired and if you think the auto manufacturers harbor altruistic thoughts about service intervals and recommendations, you are now living a fantasy,...
As they used to say in those Dodge commercials; "The rules have changed".
Yes, this is a big problem, and between many shop owners, we think it will only get worse before it gets better. I get calls from shop managers maintaining new Porsche Cup cars having cam & bearing failures running the factory recommended Mobil 1 0w40. This is also further spread than just with Porsches. This has been a big problem with pushrod flat tappet VW type 1, type 4, and Porsche 356/912 engines for the better part of the last decade and outside our world for decades, going back to the 70s. Lots of SAE papers on the topic if you want to pay to read them. I have copies of every document oil related out of the SAE in my library. Very well documented.
As far as the reformulation and who is to blame, there are many different culprits. The most obvious, is emissions controls and goverment mandated warranties on these devices going longer and longer. The ZDDP kills catalytic converters. OEMs want to make sure they don't have to spend extra $$$ on warranty replacement of expensive emissions controls.
You have CAFE and federally mandated fuel economy legislation. Oils get thinner and more friction modifiers are put in, trading off fuel economy for protection. In most cases, the new oils do supply adequate protection for most new cars.
Another problem are long drain intervals. To get very long drain intervals, oils have to be low SAPS, so less ZDDP or even Zinc Free anti-wear additives have to be used. The ZDDP reacts with combustion byproducts, forming acids, reducing the TBN of oil faster than if alternative AW additives are used. To combat the acid formation, there are other solutions, like organic moly, etc. Low SAPS oils are used with BMW, Mercedes, etc to get 20-30k mile flexible drain intervals versus fixed drain intervals of 5-10k with mid or high SAPS oils. Long drain intervals deplete already low Zn and P, exposing engines to un-necessary wear. Hint- Porsche cut back their drain intervals this year greatly, as they were advocating 20k drain intervals last year.
Another point - documented in the journals with the development of the SL and SM oils that since the older two valve SOHC or pushrod engines are no longer being manufactured, that they see no need to test new formulations in the older engines. This is in print! Really, the newest API standards should be listed as 2004 or later, or something to that affect. The engines they test the new oils with are totally different in design and loads that components see.
This is all on my website. I've tried to be as thorough as humanly possible in researching the problem and suggesting solutions.
So here we go, another possible solution for cars that are low mileage, not daily drivers. Valvoline VR-1 NSL (not-street-legal) 20w50, both the non-syn and syn versions. It goes for about $6/qt not including shipping on Amazon, but is available from Napa for a bit more. The used oil analysis from my 911 with about 1500 mi over six months came back very good. I posted it on my site for everyone to see:
http://www.lnengineering.com/vr1_nsl20w50uoa.pdf
The starting TBN was about 7. So in 1500 mi, it was down to 4.6. It should be changed at about 3.5, if you go by the rule of thumb to drain at 50% of the starting TBN, which means about 700-1000 more miles.
It takes time to do real world testing. It's more than just doing VOAs and choosing an oil with lots of Zn and P. We have lots of feedback to show that Brad Penn and Swepco both work very satisfactorily.
As far as the reformulation and who is to blame, there are many different culprits. The most obvious, is emissions controls and goverment mandated warranties on these devices going longer and longer. The ZDDP kills catalytic converters. OEMs want to make sure they don't have to spend extra $$$ on warranty replacement of expensive emissions controls.
You have CAFE and federally mandated fuel economy legislation. Oils get thinner and more friction modifiers are put in, trading off fuel economy for protection. In most cases, the new oils do supply adequate protection for most new cars.
Another problem are long drain intervals. To get very long drain intervals, oils have to be low SAPS, so less ZDDP or even Zinc Free anti-wear additives have to be used. The ZDDP reacts with combustion byproducts, forming acids, reducing the TBN of oil faster than if alternative AW additives are used. To combat the acid formation, there are other solutions, like organic moly, etc. Low SAPS oils are used with BMW, Mercedes, etc to get 20-30k mile flexible drain intervals versus fixed drain intervals of 5-10k with mid or high SAPS oils. Long drain intervals deplete already low Zn and P, exposing engines to un-necessary wear. Hint- Porsche cut back their drain intervals this year greatly, as they were advocating 20k drain intervals last year.
Another point - documented in the journals with the development of the SL and SM oils that since the older two valve SOHC or pushrod engines are no longer being manufactured, that they see no need to test new formulations in the older engines. This is in print! Really, the newest API standards should be listed as 2004 or later, or something to that affect. The engines they test the new oils with are totally different in design and loads that components see.
This is all on my website. I've tried to be as thorough as humanly possible in researching the problem and suggesting solutions.
So here we go, another possible solution for cars that are low mileage, not daily drivers. Valvoline VR-1 NSL (not-street-legal) 20w50, both the non-syn and syn versions. It goes for about $6/qt not including shipping on Amazon, but is available from Napa for a bit more. The used oil analysis from my 911 with about 1500 mi over six months came back very good. I posted it on my site for everyone to see:
http://www.lnengineering.com/vr1_nsl20w50uoa.pdf
The starting TBN was about 7. So in 1500 mi, it was down to 4.6. It should be changed at about 3.5, if you go by the rule of thumb to drain at 50% of the starting TBN, which means about 700-1000 more miles.
It takes time to do real world testing. It's more than just doing VOAs and choosing an oil with lots of Zn and P. We have lots of feedback to show that Brad Penn and Swepco both work very satisfactorily.
Last edited by HarryD; 10-31-2007 at 11:06 PM.
10-31-2007, 09:43 PM
#67
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Steeler Country!!
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charles Navarro of LN Engineering, http://www.LNengineering.com, Aircooled Precision Performance, has contributed greatly to the information regarding the reformulation of oil products.
10-31-2007, 11:11 PM
#68
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Airlie Beach, Australia
Posts: 870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Harry,
not enough attention was/is paid to the Euro oil specificatins that have been embraced by Porsche since around 1994 and promulgated by the ACEA in 1996
I don't believe that Steve was using the ACEA A3/B3 (also B4) specifications as a parameter in his lubricant application
Charles was also unaware of the ACEA wear limits until I provided them to him some three months or so ago
I can assure you that the ACEA specifications mentioned will NOT cause excessive valve train or other wear when used in the appropriate viscosity for the application
Too much of "ZDDP" in any of its multitude of forms can and will lead to excessive deposits
Regards
not enough attention was/is paid to the Euro oil specificatins that have been embraced by Porsche since around 1994 and promulgated by the ACEA in 1996
I don't believe that Steve was using the ACEA A3/B3 (also B4) specifications as a parameter in his lubricant application
Charles was also unaware of the ACEA wear limits until I provided them to him some three months or so ago
I can assure you that the ACEA specifications mentioned will NOT cause excessive valve train or other wear when used in the appropriate viscosity for the application
Too much of "ZDDP" in any of its multitude of forms can and will lead to excessive deposits
Regards
10-31-2007, 11:53 PM
#69
Rennlist Member
Doug, I was aware of the ACEA limits which I am very aware of, since I follow VW specifications very closely, like the 505.01 which both my new VW's take, because of the many problems associated with the use of non-approved oils in VW engines. Interesting that Mobil 1 0w40 and 5w40 truck and diesel (I thought it was the Mobil 1 5w40 you were using which is an API SL, not SM) do not meet the VW 505.01 spec, as it is more demanding than even the ACEA A3/B3/A5/B5 standards. The 5w40 and 0w40 oils themselves are very different in both VOAs and HTHS viscosities. That said, I'd love to see what makes the VW 505.01 specific Mobil 1 5w40 so special; it's not sold or marketed in the United States.
I'd be willing to say that there are more robust standards than even the ACEA, and the valvetrain of a new water cooled Porsche is very different than that of an aircooled one. An ACEA oil with API SJ levels of Zn and P would be nice. That's what the Motul 505.01 specific 5w40 I use in my VW's is. From best I can tell, the VW 505.01 spec calls for a mid SAPS oil with fixed drain intervals (not long drain) with higher Zn levels. There are oils on the Porsche list that are API SH or SJ, which is what the owner's manuals up to even an '04 GT2 or Turbo call for (in addition to the ACEA approvals). There are very few Porsche approved oils that actually meet the 505.01 standard.
Also, I'd be willing to say that a Honda has more in common with the oiling requirements of a new Porsche versus an aircooled one when it comes to valve weights, spring pressures, ramp rates on cams, etc. That's why I don't agree with Porsche's blanket approved list going back to '84. I'd also like to see Porsche show they have actually tried their water-cooled test regimens on an aircooled engine, to see how they hold up with a Porsche approved oil like Mobil 1. I'm willing to bet they haven't and won't.
I also agree that too much ZDDP can cause problems, especially if not formulated with the appropriate detergency for those levels. I now realize that is why EOS came with an equal dose of Calcium to match the Zn and P, whereas some of the other products on the market do not. That's another reason why I say to choose an oil that has sufficient Zn and P and not to add anything else.
We've been looking at lubrication related problems going back to the API SL standards with the flat tappet four cylinder VWs, which led us to take extraordinary steps to have solve cam/lifter failures with the use of exotic composite materials for followers to additional steps in the preparation of conventional lifters by ion nitriding, resurfacing, and REM microfinishing to keep parts from failing. One shop that I worked with to try to come up with various solutions came across Brad Penn as his solution, as the Castrol GTX he was using previously was leaving him with high wear rates but no outright failures after all the steps we had taken. This isn't a new problem, it just reared its ugly face again when there was a switch from the SL to the SM specification.
Funny that Porsche's approval of M1 0w40 goes back to an SJ and SL version, not the newest SM formulation. Secondly, Porsche cut back their drain intervals this year. Coincidence, I dare say not.
I'd be willing to say that there are more robust standards than even the ACEA, and the valvetrain of a new water cooled Porsche is very different than that of an aircooled one. An ACEA oil with API SJ levels of Zn and P would be nice. That's what the Motul 505.01 specific 5w40 I use in my VW's is. From best I can tell, the VW 505.01 spec calls for a mid SAPS oil with fixed drain intervals (not long drain) with higher Zn levels. There are oils on the Porsche list that are API SH or SJ, which is what the owner's manuals up to even an '04 GT2 or Turbo call for (in addition to the ACEA approvals). There are very few Porsche approved oils that actually meet the 505.01 standard.
Also, I'd be willing to say that a Honda has more in common with the oiling requirements of a new Porsche versus an aircooled one when it comes to valve weights, spring pressures, ramp rates on cams, etc. That's why I don't agree with Porsche's blanket approved list going back to '84. I'd also like to see Porsche show they have actually tried their water-cooled test regimens on an aircooled engine, to see how they hold up with a Porsche approved oil like Mobil 1. I'm willing to bet they haven't and won't.
I also agree that too much ZDDP can cause problems, especially if not formulated with the appropriate detergency for those levels. I now realize that is why EOS came with an equal dose of Calcium to match the Zn and P, whereas some of the other products on the market do not. That's another reason why I say to choose an oil that has sufficient Zn and P and not to add anything else.
We've been looking at lubrication related problems going back to the API SL standards with the flat tappet four cylinder VWs, which led us to take extraordinary steps to have solve cam/lifter failures with the use of exotic composite materials for followers to additional steps in the preparation of conventional lifters by ion nitriding, resurfacing, and REM microfinishing to keep parts from failing. One shop that I worked with to try to come up with various solutions came across Brad Penn as his solution, as the Castrol GTX he was using previously was leaving him with high wear rates but no outright failures after all the steps we had taken. This isn't a new problem, it just reared its ugly face again when there was a switch from the SL to the SM specification.
Funny that Porsche's approval of M1 0w40 goes back to an SJ and SL version, not the newest SM formulation. Secondly, Porsche cut back their drain intervals this year. Coincidence, I dare say not.
10-31-2007, 11:55 PM
#70
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Hi Harry,
not enough attention was/is paid to the Euro oil specificatins that have been embraced by Porsche since around 1994 and promulgated by the ACEA in 1996
I don't believe that Steve was using the ACEA A3/B3 (also B4) specifications as a parameter in his lubricant application
Charles was also unaware of the ACEA wear limits until I provided them to him some three months or so ago
I can assure you that the ACEA specifications mentioned will NOT cause excessive valve train or other wear when used in the appropriate viscosity for the application
Too much of "ZDDP" in any of its multitude of forms can and will lead to excessive deposits
Regards
not enough attention was/is paid to the Euro oil specificatins that have been embraced by Porsche since around 1994 and promulgated by the ACEA in 1996
I don't believe that Steve was using the ACEA A3/B3 (also B4) specifications as a parameter in his lubricant application
Charles was also unaware of the ACEA wear limits until I provided them to him some three months or so ago
I can assure you that the ACEA specifications mentioned will NOT cause excessive valve train or other wear when used in the appropriate viscosity for the application
Too much of "ZDDP" in any of its multitude of forms can and will lead to excessive deposits
Regards
Thanks for the bit of extra information. There is so much noise, confusion and nonsense with oils it is plain scary to make a choice.
Since I have only one car, my sample size is extremely limited and I look to others who have seen/repaired many engines to help guide me. Steve and Charles both seem to be one of the "good guys" and their advice seems to be spot on.
Both quotes above were posted in the last few days and, hopefully, include the considerations you mention.
Best,
11-01-2007, 07:44 AM
#71
Drifting
Charles,
Thansk for all your info on this subject.
I use VW 505.01 for my TDI and Mobil 1 0W-40 formy Turbo VW since it meets the VW 502 Spec.
Now VW is replacing 505.01 spec with 506.01 & 507.0
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=188918
Ahh my head
John
Thansk for all your info on this subject.
I use VW 505.01 for my TDI and Mobil 1 0W-40 formy Turbo VW since it meets the VW 502 Spec.
Now VW is replacing 505.01 spec with 506.01 & 507.0
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=188918
Ahh my head
John
11-01-2007, 02:27 PM
#74
RL Technical Advisor
Subjective single pass UOA wear metal appraisals when used as a form of judging engine lubricant performance is at best "interesting" at the worst it is totally misleading! Such things can only be done in controlled circumstances and under prescribed conditions. The same applies to judging an engine lubricant solely by the level of Zinc or any other single component. It is the additive package and base lubricant and it's performance/quality Approvals that tell the true story
Regards
Regards
One could not possibly disagree with your comments about single pass oil analysis,....
I would offer that engine disassembly and inspection tells experienced personnel a great deal about how a lubricant is working and we rely a great deal on that. IMHO, thats what ultimately "tells the tale" about engine wear.
Regarding the M1 0w-40 product, we've observed an inordinate number of wear issues with the newer water-cooled engines on similiar parts to their air-cooled cousins that gave almost indefinite service using pre API-SM motor oils. Based on those issues, we look for a lubrication solution to assist since we have no control over a manufacturer's production tolerances and standards. Restoring the EP additive package and balance to pre SM levels is a big step in that direction based on very long-term experience with these particular powertrains.
Its possible that the like-branded products found in Europe, Oz, and other locales do not have the same chemistry as what we get in the USA.
11-01-2007, 04:44 PM
#75
Drifting
Steve,
Are you saying tha just Porsche water-cooled cars are having premature wear or all vehicles and that we should be concerned with the oil formulation changes with Mobil One?
John
Are you saying tha just Porsche water-cooled cars are having premature wear or all vehicles and that we should be concerned with the oil formulation changes with Mobil One?
John