Hi all, would really appreciate your advice and observations regarding the relative merits of these 2 oils. My application is a BMW 335d, thus I have to have an LL-04 oil. MB 229.51 is a good reference point, as that spec is slightly more robust than the BMW spec (according to Lubrizol).

Anyway, here are the published specs for the oils:

Mobil/Lubro Moly:

Viscosity:
@40c 72.8/67

@100c 12.1/12
VI 164/178

Pour Point -45/-36
Flash Point 254/234

The Mobil 1 is quoted to have SA of .6, whereas the Lubro Moly has .8. Both are within the BMW and Mercedes spec.

Any thoughts regarding the relative merits of these 2 oils? This oil will be for my 'between factory covered' oil change.

The one number that jumped out at me is the Lubro Moly VI; their value seems to be significantly higher than other LL-04 oils (which usually seem to be in the mid 160's up to maybe 170).

I'm also wondering if the lower flash point of the Lubro might prove helpful for the DPF regen cycle (maybe minimizing fuel dilution in the crank case?).

Thanks for your thoughts.

The most important spec for a 229.51/LL04 oil is TBN. Please check on those. these oils become depleted of TBN way too fast, and I'd go for the one with the highest TBN.
Or do what I'm doing, use a 228.51 oil with double the TBN and 1.0% ash instead of 0.8%.
Mercedes at least approves the use of 228.51 oils in lieu of 229.51 for car type diesels:
http://bevo.mercedes-benz.com/bevolistenmain.php?session_id=&navigation_path=&language_id=1
Sheet 223.2, p.3
http://www.mobil.com/Lithuania-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENCVLMOMobil_Delvac_1_LE_5W-30.aspx

Charlie

Thanks Charlie. It doesn't appear that most of the oil companies publish TBN on their oils - at least not the ones that make the LL-04 oils. I'll go back and dig some more to make sure, because I know I've seen TBN published on occasion (Amsoil comes to mind), but I don't recall seeing it on any of the LL-04 oils I've found.

Edit: Mobil does not publish a TBN value on the spec sheet for 5W-30 ESP. Ditto for Lubro Moly.

Both oils meet ACEA C3 but the ESP also meets C2 which IIRC is why you have a difference in SA.

All Low-SAPs oils for light trucks and cars have a low starting TBN but they don't drop as quickly as some higher TBN oils. Even the Low-SAPs AMSOIL oils are like that.

Since you're doing an intermediate oil change the issues that M37Charlie speaks of really isn't applicable to you (I don't even know if TAN readings are applicable in mortor oils, but that's another discussion).

Personally if I had to choose between the two I would take the M1 ESP because unlike the Lubro it meets the latest VW spec of 507.00 in addition the LL04/229.51.

Now that being said I could not source the ESP at the Pepboys near me (see my rant about hording mortor oil), but I know it's available in Sandy Springs for ~8.15/quart.


I just changed the oil on my 335d and decided to pick up SLX for $6.15/qt (BMWCCA discount of 10%) at Global.

If you're not dead set for either the M1, or Lubro, then save some cash and run over to United for some Castrol SLX (it's spec'd the same as the Lubro Moly).

Good Luck!

Are you saying this wrt diesel or gas engine use? I would agree with gasoline engine applications - we tried running a 504/507 oil in a 2.5L gas VW, and while wear protection was good, TBN was more or less depleted by 5k miles.

However, remember that a diesel should get near 20% higher fuel economy, and at the same time, diesel fuel is capped at 15 ppm sulfur as opposed to 50 for gasoline. These play into the TBN retention performance, and make it less of an issue. Running a UOA is always a good idea, IMO.

So just to be sure, youre not basing TBN retention in a diesel off gasser UOAs, are you?

To the OP, Ive run a VOA on the M1 5w-30 ESP, you should be able to find it between there and my 2008 VW rabbit UOA posts.

Also, which would I run? I like lubromoly products, but would not want to run anything which wasn't on an approved list for warranty reasons...

Here's the list of approvals on the Lubro Moly data sheet:

Specifications / Approvals:
API SM/CF
ACEA A3-04/B4-04/C3-04
MB-Approval 229.51
BMW Longlife-04
Ford WSS M2C 917-A
VW 502 00/505 00/505 01

Is this one of those situations in which the oil "meets the spec" but isn't on the manufacturer's approved list?

The TBN will be low on both those oils, 6-7. Both are good but the M1 is the superior oil in that lineup. It also has all the specs behind it. The LM is a fine oil too but M1 is superior. You said the VI jumps out at you but I say look at the PP and FP. The M1 has a high quality PAO as a VI. I can't say the same for LM.

GO M1 It IS THE SAFE ROUTE ON THIS ONE PERIOD

I've had very poor TBN retention in two UOAs on a diesel BMW X5 35d, with a 9qt sump and standard OCI. On both TBN dropped to 1.5, and the one that gave me TAN it was 4.83.
2 virtually identical bad UOAs convinced me to switch to a 228.51 oil with TBN 12.6 instead of 6.4.
They probably don't print TBN because they are embarrassed!
XOM prouldly prints 12.6 on the D1 LE PDS!
The acid comes not just from sulfur but from nitrogen oxides formed in combustion.

Charlie

For LM, if you are comparing to M1 ESP, you should compare LM Top Tec 4200 as that is their VW 507 / MB 229.51 offering.

I am with Charlie in concern about overall protection with this particular oil specification, but I am also of the camp that would not want to even consider the notion of fouling the DPF.

The Low SAP spec. if requried is required for a reason.

I have a 2011 JSW TDI and I too am doing the 'in between' changes.
I am not going to run out this type of oil to 10K, even if TBN stays within reason.

Mercedes feels that 1.0% ash is low enough, viz. their approval of the 228.51 spec.

Charlie

Thanks HondaMan, I found the specs for the Top Tec 4200, and it does indeed have the lower ash figure of .6. Here's the updated comparison of the oils, with Top Tec 4200 in the final position in the comparison:

Viscosity:
@40c 72.8/67/72

@100c 12.1/12/11.8
VI 164/178/160

Pour Point -45/-36/-45
Flash Point 254/234/?

I agree with your concern regarding the DPF and ash content, but since .8 is the actual spec, would other factors come into play in comparing the 2 LM oils? I'm still stuck on the 178 VI value, but I say that in ignorance of what shoudl be the determining factor in my choice. Thus this thread...

P.S. The Top Tec does not claim LL-04 approval, so at least during the warranty period it would be off the table.

It doesn' t matter because the OP is only running 6-7k miles on the oil. T.B.N. will be fine at that interval.

Bevo shows all three oils as MB 229.51 ... M1 ESP, LongTime High Tec and Top Tec 4200

I no longer have my BMW TIS software installed on this particular laptop or I would look up LL04 specifically.

I would not know why Top Tec 4200 would not be on the list given its relation to the other two noted above.

I'm not saying LL04 = MB 229.51, but I would assume Top Tec 4200 to be LL04.

I agree, I wonder if perhaps it was just an oversight on the part of LM.