Mazda 0w20 moly version VOA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
923
Location
California
I recently got 14 Mzda3 and I wanted to see how good is their moly oil
It was same price as regular at dealer and the parts guy assured me there is no difference except for moly.

Nice boron and moly in there. Going to stick with factory oil after my free oil changes are used.




jimkqc.jpg
 
Last edited:
This oil made the engine a bit loud towards the end of the OCI. The Mobil 1 0w20 EP I replaced it with kept the engine quieter over the entire interval. Just an observation. Could be due to the very high VI of the Mazda 0w20. Not a big fan of an oil with that much viscosity modifier.
 
Originally Posted By: buster
This oil made the engine a bit loud towards the end of the OCI. The Mobil 1 0w20 EP I replaced it with kept the engine quieter over the entire interval. Just an observation. Could be due to the very high VI of the Mazda 0w20. Not a big fan of an oil with that much viscosity modifier.


Care to explain whats wrong with high moly?
Both Honda and Mazda love their molly, there has to be reason for it.

Im probably going to mix half and half.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Voltmaster
Originally Posted By: buster
This oil made the engine a bit loud towards the end of the OCI. The Mobil 1 0w20 EP I replaced it with kept the engine quieter over the entire interval. Just an observation. Could be due to the very high VI of the Mazda 0w20. Not a big fan of an oil with that much viscosity modifier.


Care to explain whats wrong with high moly?
Both Honda and Mazda love their molly, there has to be reason for it.

Im probably going to mix half and half.


Moly isn't a viscosity modifier, it is a friction modifier. Moly is great, the more the better.

Buster was referring to vii; viscosity index improvers, which are polymer based additives that can break down and shear inside the engine. Apparently this oil has a lot of vii additives.
 
I somehow thought that the TBN for this oil was much higher than that.
21.gif


My guess on the VIIs in this oil are that it must be the newer, better ones which do NOT break down/shear as readily as the old(er) types which everyone on here loathes to no extent, and thinks there is no difference between them and the latest VIIs.
31.gif


I don't think that they could even get the VI of this oil up to ~221 using the old, shear prone VIIs.
wink.gif
 
Right, the VI's used here are most likely the better/newer type.

Regarding moly, there are different types. The trinuclear moly is the kind found in M1/PU/PP/Amsoil and can be used a much lower doses - usually 75 ppm to 150ppm max.
 
Moly is good, I'm still a little undecided about using large amounts because I don't like the deposit build-up in turbochargers and other high temperature areas like the ring-pack.
See http://www.ocsoil.fi/upload/News on Lubes/ILSAC-GF-5.pdf
for the statement:
"The TEOST 33C bench test evaluates an engine oil’s tendency to form high-temperature
deposits. This test was originally developed and included in GF-2 to evaluate turbocharger
deposits. It was not part of GF-3 or GF-4, but is back in GF-5 in anticipation of greater use of
turbochargers. Turbochargers allow the automakers to use smaller displacement, more fuelefficient
engines while still maintaining high power output. Deposit buildup in the turbocharger
bearing areas can lead to loss of engine performance, turbocharger failure and possibly engine
failure. In GF-2, the maximum limit for deposits was 60 mg. For GF-5, the maximum limit is 30
mg (except there is no limit for SAE 0W-20 oils because some Japanese OEMs recommend
SAE 0W-20 oils with high molybdenum content which will not pass this test)
. "
 
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
The real question is if the moly deposits are harmful or beneficial.


I don't think that it is the moly causing deposits, but the moly is interfering with detergents/dispersants. Basically, long OCIs and high moly oils usually make a bad combination.

Here are some screenshots from a Lubrizol presentation.
GF5spiderdeploy%20Detergents%20vs.%20Friction%20Modifiers_zpspprysx34.png


GF5spiderdeploy%20Dispersants%20vs.%20Friction%20Modifiers_zpsadig24nw.png
 
Redline did not do well in the TEOST test per Amsoil white paper. They are not using the higher quality trinuclear moly that Mobil and others use. I believe the trinuclear moly was developed by XOM or Infineum. Fwiw
 
Originally Posted By: Skid
Basically, long OCIs and high moly oils usually make a bad combination.


Now we have to determine/define what is considered a "long" OCI.

But I wonder if that could be one reason for this oil's relatively low starting TBN (not sure about it's TBN retention though).
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ExMachina
"The TEOST 33C bench test evaluates an engine oil’s tendency to form high-temperature
deposits. This test was originally developed and included in GF-2 to evaluate turbocharger
deposits. It was not part of GF-3 or GF-4, but is back in GF-5 in anticipation of greater use of
turbochargers. Turbochargers allow the automakers to use smaller displacement, more fuelefficient
engines while still maintaining high power output. Deposit buildup in the turbocharger
bearing areas can lead to loss of engine performance, turbocharger failure and possibly engine
failure. In GF-2, the maximum limit for deposits was 60 mg. For GF-5, the maximum limit is 30
mg (except there is no limit for SAE 0W-20 oils because some Japanese OEMs recommend
SAE 0W-20 oils with high molybdenum content which will not pass this test)
. "



Yeah, I just noticed that the TEOST 33 limit isn't for 0W20, and 0W20 alone, was going to research and found your link.

Amazing really
 
I hate to bump an old thread, but given the high Calcium in this, it looks like Mazda has no worries about LSPI in it's N/A Skyactiv engines.I just got a 15 Mazda3 and I was worried about LSPI being a potential issue, but if Mazda specs this oil specifically for Skyactivs it looks like it's not.

This oil looks nice, but I have to wonder if the (cheaper) Toyota oil wouldn't work just as well.
 
During the 3.5 years since this thread started I'm sure the oil has been reformulated to meet the newer certifications of SN+ and d1G2.

Another option would be Idemitsu Zepro which has the above certifications. Idemitsu makes the Mazda oil.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
During the 3.5 years since this thread started I'm sure the oil has been reformulated to meet the newer certifications of SN+ and d1G2.

Another option would be Idemitsu Zepro which has the above certifications. Idemitsu makes the Mazda oil.


It's not currently labeled as such, and Mazda does not reccomend SN+ for their N/A vehicles AFAIK.

It shows me that LSPI is not an issue on these engines. It seems to only be a real issue in turbocharged engines.
 
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by PimTac
During the 3.5 years since this thread started I'm sure the oil has been reformulated to meet the newer certifications of SN+ and d1G2.

Another option would be Idemitsu Zepro which has the above certifications. Idemitsu makes the Mazda oil.


It's not currently labeled as such, and Mazda does not reccomend SN+ for their N/A vehicles AFAIK.

It shows me that LSPI is not an issue on these engines. It seems to only be a real issue in turbocharged engines.




Mazda is a little slow in updating their recommendations. Another benefit of the new certifications is better timing chain protection. I think any owner of a Mazda cannot go wrong using the newer oils and now with the latest model of the CX5 getting the turbo SkyActiv engine it's important as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top