When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I would have wanted someone to tell me: Review this thread and see that there are a lot of things going against M1 0W-40 but two of the biggest are: (1) it's already on the cusp of a 30 grade right out of the bottle and (2) on top of that it tends to shear down quickly; as opposed to an oil like Driven DI40 that you can run for 5K mile OCIs, idle the engine, run it hard, and it literally doesn't shear. Blackstone's fuel dilution measure isn't worth paying attention to and neither is their commentary (always written to make the customer feel overly good about their car).
This looks like Liqui-Moly 5w40 to me. Zinc is too high to be Mobil 1 0w40 Euro Formula and it also has some Moly in it which M1 doesn't, but not enough Phosphorous or Moly to be Driven DT40. Combined with the higher iron and Copper wear I see in the Liqui-Moly reports that's my guess. You could respond to Blackstone's email where they sent you the report and ask them to compare Liqui-Moly 5w40nsamples from 997.1 gen engines to see if the results align with that.
I’d say it looks like M1 0W-40 because it’s similar to mine, and M1 has Moly. I’ll post my UOA with it.
Both samples were M1 0W-40. I switched to M1 5W-40 this time around and interested to see the results.
Anything of concern here?
Could very well be. Don't love 5 ppm of iron and copper in only 2k miles on that sample either, so another blemish mark against using Porsche recommended M1. For comparison, look at this high mileage 997.1 C2S of mine with the DT40. Even at 7,800 miles (missed the normal change interval - wife's car) and 14 months, all the metals are still single digits, and look how good they are in the previous sample at a normal 5k mile and 6 month interval.
Also, note the earlier Driven samples had less Moly as it was their previous DT40 formulation and you can see what difference the increase in Moly anti-wear additive makes to the metal wear.
True, these oils are all in the same low wear arena. Only in the mind of the customer is there some great advantage to $18 / quart pushrod oil. The only standout is the apparent poor showing by Mobil 1. M1 often shows high iron, partly due to the alkalated napthelenes which dissolves metals trapped in built up. sludge back into the crankcase oil.
I will also say that cheap UOAs are a fertile ground for Dunning-Kruger Experts. It takes a strong belief in marketing, and misguided OA to convince yourself that an unspeced oil for pushrod engines is superior to Porsche spec VW 504 oil....yet alone try to convince others of the same.
I'd like to see some UOAs from $2 15w-40 HD Mobil 1300S as a baseline, before someone goes off the rails for an oil that costs 9x more.
True, these oils are all in the same low wear arena. Only in the mind of the customer is there some great advantage to $18 / quart pushrod oil. The only standout is the apparent poor showing by Mobil 1. M1 often shows high iron, partly due to the alkalated napthelenes which dissolves metals trapped in built up. sludge back into the crankcase oil.
I will also say that cheap UOAs are a fertile ground for Dunning-Kruger Experts. It takes a strong belief in marketing, and misguided OA to convince yourself that an unspeced oil for pushrod engines is superior to Porsche spec VW 504 oil....yet alone try to convince others of the same.
I'd like to see some UOAs from $2 15w-40 HD Mobil 1300S as a baseline, before someone goes off the rails for an oil that costs 9x more.
Well, you won't see those comparisons here because these motors spec a 0w or 5w cold viscosity number as these aren't 70s and 80s air cooled Porsche motors. The DI30 you posted isn't what we use here either. It's DI40 or DT40 in the Driven family and the DI40 is specificity for DFI engines that are susceptible to LSPI
Choice-supportive bias or post-purchase rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to an option one has selected and/or to demote the forgone options.[1] It is part of cognitive science, and is a distinct cognitive bias that occurs once a decision is made. For example, if a person chooses option A instead of option B, they are likely to ignore or downplay the faults of option A while amplifying or ascribing new negative faults to option B. Conversely, they are also likely to notice and amplify the advantages of option A and not notice or de-emphasize those of option B.
My advice is, fix your leaky injectors and quit breaking the pills in half.
High moly at 600ppm is considered a crutch for a poor lube product. Here, with DT, it's even more of a joke because modern formulas use 1/10th of that, or less, because the newest form of TriNuclear moly requires much less to do the job.
Tribology questions are best directed to a real tribologist.
Trinuclear molybdenum multifunctional additive for lubricating oils
AbstractA lubricating oil composition is provided comprising a major amount of an oil of lubricating viscosity and a minor amount of at least one trinuclear molybdenum compound. Preferably, the trinuclear molybdenum compound is selected from those compounds having the formula Mo3SkL4Qz and mixtures thereof in which L is a ligand having organo groups with a sufficient number of carbon atoms to render the compound soluble in the oil, k varies from 4 through 7, Q is selected from the group of compounds having lone pair electrons including water, amines, alcohols, phosphines, and ethers, and z ranges from 0 to 5. In general, the organo groups of the mono-anionic ligands will be the same although they may be different, and they preferably are selected from alkyl, aryl, substituted aryl, and ether groups. For example, when L is a dialkyldithiocarbamate or a dialkyldithiophosphate, the alkyl groups will have from about 1 to 30 carbon atoms.
02-08-2023, 02:19 PM
