Seems Red Line 5w40 is pretty good for the VW 2.0T TSI, but what about Red Line 10w40? I'm thinking the latter would better suit me in central Texas with its crazy hot Summers. However, is Red Line 10w40 too thick in this application? Thanks!
Red Line 10w40 for VW 2.0T TSI?
- Thread starter austai
- Start date
- Status
You'll want to stick with the 5-40 and yes it's awesome
Too thick? Is this car D.I. Turbo? And in the Texas heat of summer. It'll be fine. I would prefer it in fact. The 10w40 has a -54f pour point so it's not like it would be a problem anyhow. I think saaber was going to use it as well. Though he has a few runs on the Redline 5w40 that were excellent.
One thing to note between the two is the 10w40 is high in moly and the 5w40 isn't. I don't know if this is good/bad/indifferent though.
One thing to note between the two is the 10w40 is high in moly and the 5w40 isn't. I don't know if this is good/bad/indifferent though.
Last edited:
I second shpankey. I would guess the 10w40 would be slightly more shear stable than the 5w40 -although the 5w40 is the second most shear stable recorded for the 2.0FSI so far, after 1 UOA of Brad Penn 10w30.
Also, I noticed on Pennzoils replys to our questions, they mentioned the amount of viscosity index improvers as one of the biggest factors in the buildup of valve deposits. If that is true, any increase in shear stability would be good. Not saying it is true, i don't know if that is accurate or not, (especially since the question was about PU's relatively higher volatility and it's effect on valve deposits in a DI engine).
Also some oils that fall into the "we don't know how it will do yet but could be good" for the 2.0 FSI include Amsoil DEO, Brad Penn 10w40 10w30 (need more UOAS we only have one, renewable lubricants Biosyn (need more UOAs), and Rotella Synthetic.
-almost forgot, I only know of one UOA on the TSI, and we should keep open the possibility that it may not destroy oils as fast as the FSI. I would guess that fuel dilution and valve deposit issues that are common to many DI engines would still be there though.
Also, I noticed on Pennzoils replys to our questions, they mentioned the amount of viscosity index improvers as one of the biggest factors in the buildup of valve deposits. If that is true, any increase in shear stability would be good. Not saying it is true, i don't know if that is accurate or not, (especially since the question was about PU's relatively higher volatility and it's effect on valve deposits in a DI engine).
Also some oils that fall into the "we don't know how it will do yet but could be good" for the 2.0 FSI include Amsoil DEO, Brad Penn 10w40 10w30 (need more UOAS we only have one, renewable lubricants Biosyn (need more UOAs), and Rotella Synthetic.
-almost forgot, I only know of one UOA on the TSI, and we should keep open the possibility that it may not destroy oils as fast as the FSI. I would guess that fuel dilution and valve deposit issues that are common to many DI engines would still be there though.
Last edited:
Volatility AND viscosity modifier type and concentration have a significant negative effect on DI intake valve deposits. Some ashless friction modifiers have a negative effect. Some esters have a positive effect. I've been searching for research on the effect of sulfated ash content but have not found any yet. The latter is important for deciding whether the moly in Red Line 10W-40 could be a negative in terms of IVDs. The polymeric VIIs in their 5W-40 is likely a negative but whether it is significant is hard to determine. Unfortunately we don't own a research lab that we BITOG members could use.
I don't have the answer to this question yet which I too am searching for. Currently running RL 5W-40 in my BMW 135i but may try RL 5W-30 next.
Originally Posted By: JAG
Volatility AND viscosity modifier type and concentration have a significant negative effect on DI intake valve deposits. Some ashless friction modifiers have a negative effect. Some esters have a positive effect. I've been searching for research on the effect of sulfated ash content but have not found any yet. The latter is important for deciding whether the moly in Red Line 10W-40 could be a negative in terms of IVDs. The polymeric VIIs in their 5W-40 is likely a negative but whether it is significant is hard to determine. Unfortunately we don't own a research lab that we BITOG members could use.
I don't have the answer to this question yet which I too am searching for. Currently running RL 5W-40 in my BMW 135i but may try RL 5W-30 next.
+1 to all of the above. I agree that volatility can be a factor in what substances and how much actually reach the valves.
I wonder whether moly would be one of the components that would be present in the volatilized oil exiting the crankcase through the pcv system. I assume it would be. I think TomNJ or Molakaule or Bruce381 might know.
Also I reposted this CRODA slide the other day showing coking deposits. In addition to what substances and how much of them reaches the valves, I think the type of oil also has an effect in how much depositing is done by that oil (see slide below). I think this is the main thrust of Renewable lubricants claims about how they help valve deposits (that it has reduced volatility and forms less deposits). I haven't researched those claims in depth though, just what I remember.
Volatility AND viscosity modifier type and concentration have a significant negative effect on DI intake valve deposits. Some ashless friction modifiers have a negative effect. Some esters have a positive effect. I've been searching for research on the effect of sulfated ash content but have not found any yet. The latter is important for deciding whether the moly in Red Line 10W-40 could be a negative in terms of IVDs. The polymeric VIIs in their 5W-40 is likely a negative but whether it is significant is hard to determine. Unfortunately we don't own a research lab that we BITOG members could use.
+1 to all of the above. I agree that volatility can be a factor in what substances and how much actually reach the valves.
I wonder whether moly would be one of the components that would be present in the volatilized oil exiting the crankcase through the pcv system. I assume it would be. I think TomNJ or Molakaule or Bruce381 might know.
Also I reposted this CRODA slide the other day showing coking deposits. In addition to what substances and how much of them reaches the valves, I think the type of oil also has an effect in how much depositing is done by that oil (see slide below). I think this is the main thrust of Renewable lubricants claims about how they help valve deposits (that it has reduced volatility and forms less deposits). I haven't researched those claims in depth though, just what I remember.
FYI this thread shows the effect of regular BG induction service on the valve deposits. Looks like it helps a little but not much. Seafoaming is probably as effective IMO.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1840778
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1840778
Wow, that is pathetic. The guy used BG like 4 times and I can't tell at all.
Oh and Seafoam's on sale right now too at AAP.
Oh and Seafoam's on sale right now too at AAP.
Originally Posted By: saaber1
Also I reposted this CRODA slide the other day showing coking deposits. In addition to what substances and how much of them reaches the valves, I think the type of oil also has an effect in how much depositing is done by that oil (see slide below). I think this is the main thrust of Renewable lubricants claims about how they help valve deposits (that it has reduced volatility and forms less deposits). I haven't researched those claims in depth though, just what I remember.
I love that image you posted. Anyhow I'm writing in reference to some people's claim that RLI has low volatility. I tested the volatility of the original 5W-40 RLI made for the member from RI who had the RS4. It was more volatile than Mobil 1 0W-40. I think I posted the quantitative results a while back. RLI's website lists the volatility of the current 5W-40 as 10% which is neither low nor high compared to all other oils. I also posted about the globules that formed in the RLI oil and posted a picture of them.
Also I reposted this CRODA slide the other day showing coking deposits. In addition to what substances and how much of them reaches the valves, I think the type of oil also has an effect in how much depositing is done by that oil (see slide below). I think this is the main thrust of Renewable lubricants claims about how they help valve deposits (that it has reduced volatility and forms less deposits). I haven't researched those claims in depth though, just what I remember.
I love that image you posted. Anyhow I'm writing in reference to some people's claim that RLI has low volatility. I tested the volatility of the original 5W-40 RLI made for the member from RI who had the RS4. It was more volatile than Mobil 1 0W-40. I think I posted the quantitative results a while back. RLI's website lists the volatility of the current 5W-40 as 10% which is neither low nor high compared to all other oils. I also posted about the globules that formed in the RLI oil and posted a picture of them.
Originally Posted By: JAG
I love that image you posted. Anyhow I'm writing in reference to some people's claim that RLI has low volatility. I tested the volatility of the original 5W-40 RLI made for the member from RI who had the RS4. It was more volatile than Mobil 1 0W-40. I think I posted the quantitative results a while back. RLI's website lists the volatility of the current 5W-40 as 10% which is neither low nor high compared to all other oils. I also posted about the globules that formed in the RLI oil and posted a picture of them.
RLI = Red Line ???
Does that mean Red Line 5w40 is more volatile than M1 0w40? If yes, any idea why the latter apparently doesn't do as well as the latter in the 2.0T FSI?
I love that image you posted. Anyhow I'm writing in reference to some people's claim that RLI has low volatility. I tested the volatility of the original 5W-40 RLI made for the member from RI who had the RS4. It was more volatile than Mobil 1 0W-40. I think I posted the quantitative results a while back. RLI's website lists the volatility of the current 5W-40 as 10% which is neither low nor high compared to all other oils. I also posted about the globules that formed in the RLI oil and posted a picture of them.
RLI = Red Line ???
Does that mean Red Line 5w40 is more volatile than M1 0w40? If yes, any idea why the latter apparently doesn't do as well as the latter in the 2.0T FSI?
RL is Redline and RLI is Renewable Lubricants Inc.
I doubt the moly compound would volatilize enough to be a factor in the pcv system and valve deposits. The element molybdenum is a metal with a very high melting point and a molecular weight much higher than that of calcium, nickel, or iron.
The Croda slide, which appears to be a knock-off of one I used for many years in my industry presentations, reflects the tendency of the base oils to form deposits in thin film, high temperature environments, but the complex chemistry in the crankcase adds other factors. That said, getting some ester into the pcv system may be beneficial in dissolving or preventing intake valve deposits. Problem is esters are much less volatile than other base oils of equal viscosity. One would need a special low viscosity low coking ester, perhaps introduced as an oil additive. They do exist and could be an interesting experiment.
Vegetable oils have low volatility, but that type of chemistry will likely give high deposits in the panel coking test due to the long acids they contain.
Tom NJ
The Croda slide, which appears to be a knock-off of one I used for many years in my industry presentations, reflects the tendency of the base oils to form deposits in thin film, high temperature environments, but the complex chemistry in the crankcase adds other factors. That said, getting some ester into the pcv system may be beneficial in dissolving or preventing intake valve deposits. Problem is esters are much less volatile than other base oils of equal viscosity. One would need a special low viscosity low coking ester, perhaps introduced as an oil additive. They do exist and could be an interesting experiment.
Vegetable oils have low volatility, but that type of chemistry will likely give high deposits in the panel coking test due to the long acids they contain.
Tom NJ
note we do not use elemental Moly in oil.
Most is some kind of sulfide.
Most is some kind of sulfide.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
note we do not use elemental Moly in oil.
Most is some kind of sulfide.
I understand, which is why i referred to a "moly compound". My mention of the weight of elemental molybdenum was simply to note that compounds of molybdenum will have low volatility.
Tom NJ
note we do not use elemental Moly in oil.
Most is some kind of sulfide.
I understand, which is why i referred to a "moly compound". My mention of the weight of elemental molybdenum was simply to note that compounds of molybdenum will have low volatility.
Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
The Croda slide, which appears to be a knock-off of one I used for many years in my industry presentations, reflects the tendency of the base oils to form deposits in thin film, high temperature environments, but the complex chemistry in the crankcase adds other factors. That said, getting some ester into the pcv system may be beneficial in dissolving or preventing intake valve deposits. Problem is esters are much less volatile than other base oils of equal viscosity. One would need a special low viscosity low coking ester, perhaps introduced as an oil additive. They do exist and could be an interesting experiment.
Tom NJ
Tom, thanks for the info. Where can I buy such an ester?
The Croda slide, which appears to be a knock-off of one I used for many years in my industry presentations, reflects the tendency of the base oils to form deposits in thin film, high temperature environments, but the complex chemistry in the crankcase adds other factors. That said, getting some ester into the pcv system may be beneficial in dissolving or preventing intake valve deposits. Problem is esters are much less volatile than other base oils of equal viscosity. One would need a special low viscosity low coking ester, perhaps introduced as an oil additive. They do exist and could be an interesting experiment.
Tom NJ
Tom, thanks for the info. Where can I buy such an ester?
Hi Jag,
I discussed a formulation yesterday with a friend who has a specialty lubricants business, and he was interested in mixing some up. I'll be seeing him next weekend to discuss further.
Tom
I discussed a formulation yesterday with a friend who has a specialty lubricants business, and he was interested in mixing some up. I'll be seeing him next weekend to discuss further.
Tom
- Status