2007 audi s4, mobil 1 0w40, First OCI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
81
Location
Virginia
So this is my first analysis, and my first OCI with M1 0w40. I did notice a minor amount of burning in 3500 miles, refilled some, and changed it out at 4,000 miles total. I did not notice consumption with LM 5w40 but Ive been told it can happen when you change brands/grades. I sent them a note asking about the consumption and if there were any indicators why... Numbers look good but time will tell with a baseline. Thoughts?

Also, are the "coolant in oil" and "gasoline in oil" figures essentially "backdoor" compression/leakdown tests because its a way of showing if things are sealing right?

 
Last edited:
About 12 years ago I tried M1 0w-40 in my 850 Turbo Volvo wagon for one interval. I used to travel between San Diego and Phoenix frequently and during the summer the temps would often be 110 or more with speeds across the desert at 80+ miles per hour. The M1 sheared down to 20 weight during the 5K interval and I saw higher coolant temps. I also had to add 1 quart of make up oil during that interval. So, I switched back to the RLI 5w-30 that I was previously using and the oil consumption stopped. Different oils can make a difference and I can't really say that one oil is better than another because "better" is difficult to establish.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
About 12 years ago I tried M1 0w-40 in my 850 Turbo Volvo wagon for one interval. I used to travel between San Diego and Phoenix frequently and during the summer the temps would often be 110 or more with speeds across the desert at 80+ miles per hour. The M1 sheared down to 20 weight during the 5K interval and I saw higher coolant temps. I also had to add 1 quart of make up oil during that interval. So, I switched back to the RLI 5w-30 that I was previously using and the oil consumption stopped. Different oils can make a difference and I can't really say that one oil is better than another because "better" is difficult to establish.


So can you explain what numbers I should be comparing to/from on my sheet (vs another oil) that I could say "it sheared down to xx weight"? Does my UOA show that?

Do the viscosities at the bottom of the report, that show on the low end of their given spectrum, indicate that 4,000 miles is what it took to shear down? Is that what a VOA is used to help determine? (can anyone point me towards one for this m1 0w40 European formula?)
 
Last edited:
Your oil was at the minimum for it's viscosity. It might have sheared down if you were driving in desert condition at higher speeds, who knows. I was just describing my situation, high ambient temperatures and high sustained speeds in a black wagon with the a/c on. I never stated that M1 0w-40 was a bad oil because there's no way for me to qualify a statement like that. I decided that it was not the best oil/viscosity combination for my situation and I switched back to my previous oil, the RLI. I tried the M1 because it's cheaper and easier to purchase. I purchased the RLI in 5 gallon tubs and had it shipped to my home which is a lot more effort than going to Wally World.

RLI see the very bottom of the page.
 
I suppose I will take another sample at exactly 4,000 miles and see if the winter makes it act differently? Looks like 4,000 miles is about the time limit for this time of year.
 
Just for information you might call the people at RLI. They formulated a special oil for your engine a few years ago and have kept it updated. One of their customers spent a lot of time, money and effort on the project along with the help of Terry Dyson of Dyson Analysis in Texas. You might find it interesting to learn what they did with the project. Some of the information might still be on their website.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Just for information you might call the people at RLI. They formulated a special oil for your engine a few years ago and have kept it updated. One of their customers spent a lot of time, money and effort on the project along with the help of Terry Dyson of Dyson Analysis in Texas. You might find it interesting to learn what they did with the project. Some of the information might still be on their website.
The Omani's has an S4, not an RS4.
 
Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Just for information you might call the people at RLI. They formulated a special oil for your engine a few years ago and have kept it updated. One of their customers spent a lot of time, money and effort on the project along with the help of Terry Dyson of Dyson Analysis in Texas. You might find it interesting to learn what they did with the project. Some of the information might still be on their website.
The Omani's has an S4, not an RS4.


True...the rs4 is an FSI motor with forged internals, different from the s4 motor I have. That's very interesting though.

So would you say 4,000 miles is my max?
 
Originally Posted By: Guitarmageddon


So would you say 4,000 miles is my max?

Moe than than should be fine, but you should have gotten a TBN.

-Dennis
 
Originally Posted By: bluesubie
Originally Posted By: Guitarmageddon


So would you say 4,000 miles is my max?

Moe than than should be fine, but you should have gotten a TBN.

-Dennis


Hmmm....being the first OCI I definitely should have and dropped the ball on that one. I think Ill take a sample again at 3,000 miles to be overly-cautious and check it out.
 
Well, 9.5 qts of M1 0w40, for 4k miles OCI , I'd call it undecent amount ... It should go a least 9 to 10k miles.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
About 12 years ago I tried M1 0w-40 in my 850 Turbo Volvo wagon for one interval. I used to travel between San Diego and Phoenix frequently and during the summer the temps would often be 110 or more with speeds across the desert at 80+ miles per hour. The M1 sheared down to 20 weight during the 5K interval and I saw higher coolant temps. I also had to add 1 quart of make up oil during that interval. So, I switched back to the RLI 5w-30 that I was previously using and the oil consumption stopped. Different oils can make a difference and I can't really say that one oil is better than another because "better" is difficult to establish.


Would your 850 happen to be a T5-R? One of my all-time favorites.
 
No, just a regular turbo 850. It did have the chip modified for more boost, IPD brake rotors and SS braided brake lines, strut upgrades and tower brace with adjustable brackets and a few other little modifications. It was a great car until an illegal ran my wife through a guard rail on the freeway. The Volvo did stand up to its safety reputation. The car was a mess but she was safe and sound inside.
 
Wait, can someone correct me here? The SuS viscosity at the bottom shows 65.1.(low end of that range is shown at 65) That would imply that very minimal shearing has occurred, meaning I can still run it much longer, theoretically? I think Ive been reading my results wrong.... I think I was under the impression that higher was better, but it means its become MORE viscous, correct?
 
Last edited:
I think the more I read the more I confuse myself. It has sheared down to the low end of acceptable range for a 40 weight, right? Since those measurments are measurements of time for oil to flow through a given test container, lower number means its not as thick, right?

My SUS number was 65.1, with the range being 65-78.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
About 12 years ago I tried M1 0w-40 in my 850 Turbo Volvo wagon for one interval. I used to travel between San Diego and Phoenix frequently and during the summer the temps would often be 110 or more with speeds across the desert at 80+ miles per hour. The M1 sheared down to 20 weight during the 5K interval and I saw higher coolant temps. I also had to add 1 quart of make up oil during that interval. So, I switched back to the RLI 5w-30 that I was previously using and the oil consumption stopped. Different oils can make a difference and I can't really say that one oil is better than another because "better" is difficult to establish.


How did you determine it sheared to a 20? Do you have a UOA of that? I recall it shearing to a heavy 30, particularly the old formula, in some applications, but this one is a new one for me.
 
Originally Posted By: Guitarmageddon
I think the more I read the more I confuse myself. It has sheared down to the low end of acceptable range for a 40 weight, right? Since those measurments are measurements of time for oil to flow through a given test container, lower number means its not as thick, right?

My SUS number was 65.1, with the range being 65-78.


Disregard SUS, you have nothing to compare it to. The number you are interested in is the 100C visc, which is 11.64, which is down from the 13.5cSt it was virgin. So it has sheared a bit, down into a heavy 30 (the 40 range starts at 12.5cSt) but nothing that should be concerning. It would probably have thickened up a bit had you put some more miles on it.

You also have to keep in mind we've had a lot of viscosity discrepancy on here with Blackstone lately, so I wouldn't take the viscosity number on your UOA as gospel either, FWIW.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Guitarmageddon
I think the more I read the more I confuse myself. It has sheared down to the low end of acceptable range for a 40 weight, right? Since those measurments are measurements of time for oil to flow through a given test container, lower number means its not as thick, right?

My SUS number was 65.1, with the range being 65-78.


Disregard SUS, you have nothing to compare it to. The number you are interested in is the 100C visc, which is 11.64, which is down from the 13.5cSt it was virgin. So it has sheared a bit, down into a heavy 30 (the 40 range starts at 12.5cSt) but nothing that should be concerning. It would probably have thickened up a bit had you put some more miles on it.

You also have to keep in mind we've had a lot of viscosity discrepancy on here with Blackstone lately, so I wouldn't take the viscosity number on your UOA as gospel either, FWIW.


Ok thanks. So can you clarify then? The SUS is a measurment of time, so shorter time means MORE viscous? And the cst is a measurement of how freely a liquid flows, so higher number means shearing occurs to a lower weight? Sorry we have to break it down barney-style, Im TOO analytical for my own good sometimes.

You said started at around 13.5, it had sheared to a 30 weight at 11.64, but would have gone back the other way again after driving more? How does that work? Thanks for the responses
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top