BMW and the 10W60 thing???!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Clevy

And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.


No, as has already been mentioned, BMW specs/spec'd the TWS 10w-60 because it is a known quantity to them and is necessary in some engines for proper protection at Autobahn speeds and the oil temps that go along with them.

That said, there were two cars/engines that BMW "band-aided" with the TWS product, the first was the E46 M3 and the S54 engine, which was having rod bearing failure issues. The TWS was then spec'd for it as apparently it was thought it would reduce the failures. There was eventually a recall for this problem. The second was the E39 M5 prior to 03/00 to deal with the ultra low tension rings and excessive oil consumption. Post 03/00 cars spec'd LL-01 as they received revised rings that fixed the issue.


Certainly the Z4M required 10w-60. And it wasn't a band aid.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
The factory fill is only kept in for running in and 1000 miles.

A 2.9HTHS oil in a S54 is a bad idea. That's almost half the HTHS of the 10W-60. Give it a bit of fuel and water dilution and it's going to be too thin for the S54 bearings.

Amazes me people can just guess a A5/B5 will 'be ok' as its cold, I guess these are the same guys who think mixing two oils is done how a good idea.

The bearing local temps are still high once warmed up. The bulk sump temperatures might be lower but that's only going to make the fuel and water dilution worse as it won't evaporate as easily.

BMW spec 10W-60 for a reason...




Alright there bud.
You've toucjed on a few points there so time to back up your yip.
Exactly what data have you got that says mixing oils are bad,considering redline encourages doing so to fine tune the viscosity.
And don't even try to bring up that "additive clash" nonsense.
Every used oil analysis I've seen posted here using a frankenbrew of different brands and grades show no issues whatsoever with the oil nor were there any anomalies in the wear metal trended data,so please enlighten us with evidence to the contrary. And not some opinion,data from a lab please.
And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.
For a new guy you've got some pretty firm beliefs. I wonder what previously banned member you are.
Don't tell me. Me and my friends enjoy the chase.


I can assure you I may be new here. But I'm not new to oil. And I'm not previously banned.

I just can't see how people think you can fine tune the oil further than what the manufacturer has done. Mixing the oils will mean the 'final' oil no longer meets specifications either. ACC and ATEIL have no guidelines for mixing formulations.

Additive can interact and cause issues. Unfortunately I cannot share examples but low temperature performance can be compromised with witches brews of VM and PPDs
 
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
Additive can interact and cause issues. Unfortunately I cannot share examples but low temperature performance can be compromised with witches brews of VM and PPDs


Careful, some in this thread have called me names for suggesting exactly that.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
And don't even try to bring up that "additive clash" nonsense.


Sources please. And ad hoc, unscientifically-run user experience does not constitute a defence. Under most conditions most people will get away with it. Under rare but possible other conditions, guess what....? Nobody here has tested any and every possible combination of brews and running conditions. Additive clash is a real phenomenon, even if it is not common.

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Every used oil analysis I've seen posted here using a frankenbrew of different brands and grades show no issues whatsoever with the oil nor were there any anomalies in the wear metal trended data


What you have seen is a TINY proportion of data from the world of oils running in engines. Millions of engines have failed over the years, most with no analysis or diagnosis.

Originally Posted By: Clevy
And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.


Please enlighten us with evidence. And not some opinion, data from a lab please.
 
35.gif
 
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
BMW still insist on 10W-60s only, but if your happy to go for lower visc I would agree on not going below 3.5cP HTHS. The Castrol TWS formulation was updated about 4yrs ago. It seems many bitog people have noticed this too.

I found this link that shows the analysis for the original and updated versions. There are some fairly substantial changes.
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Clevy

And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.

No, as has already been mentioned, BMW specs/spec'd the TWS 10w-60 because it is a known quantity to them and is necessary in some engines for proper protection at Autobahn speeds and the oil temps that go along with them.

That said, there were two cars/engines that BMW "band-aided" with the TWS product, the first was the E46 M3 and the S54 engine, which was having rod bearing failure issues. The TWS was then spec'd for it as apparently it was thought it would reduce the failures. There was eventually a recall for this problem. The second was the E39 M5 prior to 03/00 to deal with the ultra low tension rings and excessive oil consumption. Post 03/00 cars spec'd LL-01 as they received revised rings that fixed the issue.

Certainly the Z4M required 10w-60. And it wasn't a band aid.

The Z4M engine is the same as the E46 M3. If it really was purely a Band-Aid, I can't help but wonder why they did not back away from it after the respective changes.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bimmerdriver
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Clevy

And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.

No, as has already been mentioned, BMW specs/spec'd the TWS 10w-60 because it is a known quantity to them and is necessary in some engines for proper protection at Autobahn speeds and the oil temps that go along with them.

That said, there were two cars/engines that BMW "band-aided" with the TWS product, the first was the E46 M3 and the S54 engine, which was having rod bearing failure issues. The TWS was then spec'd for it as apparently it was thought it would reduce the failures. There was eventually a recall for this problem. The second was the E39 M5 prior to 03/00 to deal with the ultra low tension rings and excessive oil consumption. Post 03/00 cars spec'd LL-01 as they received revised rings that fixed the issue.

Certainly the Z4M required 10w-60. And it wasn't a band aid.

The Z4M engine is the same as the E46 M3. If it really was purely a Band-Aid, I can't help but wonder why they did not back away from it after the respective changes.


Consistency perhaps as the MZ4 wasn't sold in significant volumes.
 
Originally Posted By: bimmerdriver
Originally Posted By: bobbydavro
BMW still insist on 10W-60s only, but if your happy to go for lower visc I would agree on not going below 3.5cP HTHS. The Castrol TWS formulation was updated about 4yrs ago. It seems many bitog people have noticed this too.

I found this link that shows the analysis for the original and updated versions. There are some fairly substantial changes.


Some wrong assumption in the latter part of thread but good to see that level of interest in formulation changes. Professional version has the UV dye and additional micro-filtration to the OEM factory fill specs

The current 10W-60 (aka TWS) is a very robust oil, loads of additive and a NOACK of 4%. Rumour has it that it is also the Bugatti veyron oil
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,

error;
This;

IMO it is unwise to suggest to Mr & Mrs Average that a reduction in viscosity based on OP and Temp gauges alone is unwise!

should have read;

IMO to suggest to Mr & Mrs Average that a reduction in viscosity based on OP and Temp gauges alone is unwise!


Sorry, it's the Tropical heat getting to me......or age............or both!!


Thanks for dropping by. Your comments are always of interest.

I would like to hear your comments on the differences between TWS Motorsport and TWS Edge Professional.

Also, since BMW recently selected Shell to replace Castrol for the factory lubricants, a lot of M owners for which TWS is specified by BMW are wondering what will happen to TWS Edge Professional and if it goes away, what to replace it with.
 
Hi,
bimmerdriver - The tweaks in the formulation appear to be driven by market forces and in disassociating with obsolete/out-dated ratings. This has been the history of this product from the original German ester based SE (no C? rating) 15W-50 version of the 1970s to the present.

It has come a long way from the original of the 1970s and during my testing and development over the next decade or so many formulation tweaks occurred. These included moving to 10W-60 and an API "C" rating. I used successfully it in a variety of high speed Japanese diesel engines - long before BMW came on board

In recent years, BMW (with its third party engine developers) and Castrol have worked very closely in continual development over many years, so, the final product's formulation will embrace all of the relevant issues. Some of its components appear to embrace Castrol's latest "marketing" rhetoric along with the need to increase the TBN

As for the future - Castrol will continue to sell their version and it will uphold its tradition which is Globally widespread

Shell have an excellent version - Shell Helix Ultra Racing 10W-60 (a "full" synthetic). This is the lubricant endorsed by Ferrari (for what that's worth).............

Shell's lubricant range is extensive and broad spread. Their diesel engine lubricants are at the top of the tree and their Helix synthetic engine lubricants are up their too. Their driveline synthetics are amongst the oldest around with an incomparable reputation and they have a great following in the Industrial World
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
bimmerdriver - The tweaks in the formulation appear to be driven by market forces and in disassociating with obsolete/out-dated ratings. This has been the history of this product from the original German ester based SE (no C? rating) 15W-50 version of the 1970s to the present.

It has come a long way from the original of the 1970s and during my testing and development over the next decade or so many formulation tweaks occurred. These included moving to 10W-60 and an API "C" rating. I used successfully it in a variety of high speed Japanese diesel engines - long before BMW came on board

In recent years, BMW (with its third party engine developers) and Castrol have worked very closely in continual development over many years, so, the final product's formulation will embrace all of the relevant issues. Some of its components appear to embrace Castrol's latest "marketing" rhetoric along with the need to increase the TBN

As for the future - Castrol will continue to sell their version and it will uphold its tradition which is Globally widespread

Shell have an excellent version - Shell Helix Ultra Racing 10W-60 (a "full" synthetic). This is the lubricant endorsed by Ferrari (for what that's worth).............

Shell's lubricant range is extensive and broad spread. Their diesel engine lubricants are at the top of the tree and their Helix synthetic engine lubricants are up their too. Their driveline synthetics are amongst the oldest around with an incomparable reputation and they have a great following in the Industrial World

Hi Doug,

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond to my questions. I really appreciate it, as do others over on M3F where I shared it.

Best regards.
 
I think it is unfair to suggest the new TWS is a tweak of the old. It is very different, different additive system, boosters, VM and base oil.

The latest formulation takes nothing from the previous formulation and is very much a clean sheet of paper.

Doug. Have you always been in Australia or have you spent time in the UK?
 
Hi,
bobbydavro - Please re-read my Post again, especially the third paragraph!

I'm originally from NZ and yes, I've spent some time in the UK. I did some of my Engineering training with BMC in 1962-1963 (London - Stewart & Ardern (Acton)), my last visit to Leyland was in 1975 when I spent some time with the Diesel engine Design and Development Engineers. I lived in Denmark for several years in the 1960s working for Chevron-Caltex.

I've been back to the UK on many occasions on business (I worked for the Swire Group here in OZ)and on vacation, mainly to Cornwall. Last time was to the Goodwood Revival in 2012 for the Mercedes Benz - Auto Union occasion
 
Originally Posted By: weasley
Originally Posted By: Clevy
And don't even try to bring up that "additive clash" nonsense.


Sources please. And ad hoc, unscientifically-run user experience does not constitute a defence. Under most conditions most people will get away with it. Under rare but possible other conditions, guess what....? Nobody here has tested any and every possible combination of brews and running conditions. Additive clash is a real phenomenon, even if it is not common.

Originally Posted By: Clevy
Every used oil analysis I've seen posted here using a frankenbrew of different brands and grades show no issues whatsoever with the oil nor were there any anomalies in the wear metal trended data


What you have seen is a TINY proportion of data from the world of oils running in engines. Millions of engines have failed over the years, most with no analysis or diagnosis.

Originally Posted By: Clevy
And BMW specifies a 10w-60 to cover their rears,period. It's a bandaid fix.


Please enlighten us with evidence. And not some opinion, data from a lab please.


Good luck getting it.
 
Originally Posted By: shDK
10-60 is not what you Can call normal here in Europe. I believe bmw is the only maker who specs it.

bmw m engines often rev higher then the American pushrod engines. Maybe it has something to do with it?

10-60 is however often used in tuning communities.

I think 5-30 and 5-40 is most used in Europe.



Back in the day, the default oil was a 10W40 semi-synth. 10W60 is a Group V PAO oil.

Alfa Romeo actually came up with using fully synthetic 10W60 in the early 90s. Made their street-legal racing cars hold up 185000+mi without blowing the engine when being driven in a not so street-legal manner.

On 12500mi OCIs.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary


Shell have an excellent version - Shell Helix Ultra Racing 10W-60 (a "full" synthetic). This is the lubricant endorsed by Ferrari (for what that's worth)..........


It will be interesting to see if BMW USA's relationship with Shell will bring more of their Helix products to BMW dealerships in North America.

Could Shell Helix 10W-60 be a possibility?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top