Oil recommendations: 335d - DPF, EGR, SCR, Urea delete.

[slipstream444]

Any oil with a higher Ester content and flashpoint, usually > 250c will resist coking better than most other synthetics.

I assume you want a 40wt diesel oil. You never answered my question regarding 30 or 40 wt in a previous post. A 40 wt will resist shear and heat better in extreme conditions, however it may not be necessary if your oil temps stay under control.

High Ester base oils typically have a density of ~ 0.9 and higher HTHS than other bases. Some Ester based 30 wts will actually have the HTHS of a 40 wt.

Redline 5w40, 15w40, and 5w30
Renewable lubricants CJ-4 HD SAE 30, 5w40 or 15w40
Rowe 0w40
Amsoil 0w40
[/quote]

I apologize that I didn't answer your previous question.

I would honestly prefer to avoid moving to a 40 weight oil if I can avoid it. I plan on moving to a Redline, Motul or Amsoil product as my next oil - but wanted to make that an educated choice. I'm very familiar with Amsoil's offerings, but their new "simplified" diesel selection matrix really dumbs down the process more for OEM applications than for modified engines - and their tech services is more a legal caveat department than a technical service department. They won't help you if you're running an aftermarket setup - unless you're actually racing... then they want their stickers on your car... if it's winning, of course.

The issue with Amsoil diesel oils is they have so many oils - and it's hard to tell which oil will be suitable for a given aftermarket application. I looked at their Series 3000 5W30, but it specs out more for older Diesel engines, and I don't know if it's appropriate for a higher revving modern Diesel engine. I'm considering their LL01 specified Euro oil ("classic") which is s 0W40. I believe all the Amsoil oils are Group IV. Are Redline oils still Group V? Additionally, what do you think of Motul oils? Thank you.

 

[CleverUserName]

Originally Posted by slipstream444


I apologize that I didn't answer your previous question.

I would honestly prefer to avoid moving to a 40 weight oil if I can avoid it. I plan on moving to a Redline, Motul or Amsoil product as my next oil - but wanted to make that an educated choice. I'm very familiar with Amsoil's offerings, but their new "simplified" diesel selection matrix really dumbs down the process more for OEM applications than for modified engines - and their tech services is more a legal caveat department than a technical service department. They won't help you if you're running an aftermarket setup - unless you're actually racing... then they want their stickers on your car... if it's winning, of course.

The issue with Amsoil diesel oils is they have so many oils - and it's hard to tell which oil will be suitable for a given aftermarket application. I looked at their Series 3000 5W30, but it specs out more for older Diesel engines, and I don't know if it's appropriate for a higher revving modern Diesel engine. I'm considering their LL01 specified Euro oil ("classic") which is s 0W40. I believe all the Amsoil oils are Group IV. Are Redline oils still Group V? Additionally, what do you think of Motul oils? Thank you.


Yes you're correct, the 300v line by Motul also claims to use an Ester base oil blend as well. I forgot about that product.

I don't think there are any pure Ester oils available off the shelf. They are all blends of varying %, I think Renewable Lubricants is the highest at ~ 40%.

Amsoil did make some oils which use a premium base stock that used to contain Grp V/IV oils. I believe their SS line all use it. As well as the series 3000 5w30 you mentioned. If it's a CK-4/CI-4+ rated diesel oil, the additive package should be identical throughout the line, with the more expensive and SS options using more exotic base oils. That's the only difference between the amsoil products with the same API spec.

Redline is a Grp V/IV blend still I believe. The TAN number still reads high whenever I see a VOA on here. There may also be some III in the mix now as well.

 

[JAG]

In my opinion, with the huge amount of torque the engine is now producing, it is very important that the HTHS viscosity of the oil is also significantly increased over a typical LL04 oil. That extra torque and cylinder pressure decreases the film thickness of many parts of the engine, including many bearings, piston rings, cylinders, and turbo. The film thickness is a function of the square root of the HTHS in many parts of an engine. So, viscosity must increase by a factor of 4 to increase film thickness by a factor of 2. What was the factory torque? The percent increase should be calculated which will affect the reduction in minimum film thicknesses.

Let's start by first focusing on engine torque and and oil viscosity. Oil chemistry and actual product choices can be discussed next, since the suitable choices are a function of the viscosity requirement.

 

[1JZ_E46]

OEM approvals are essentially the only thing we have to objectively gauge the "better"ness of an oil (and LL-04, along with its sister euro approvals are as good as it gets). If you want proof that a certain oil is "better" than an another (outside of OEM approvals), you best be willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to have objective, scientific tests performed, or at the least go with an oil that is used in the racing industry with success by many race teams with a similar power plant. Everything else is just marketing, posturing, and opinion. Again, you're on a quest that has no, or a very murky, end.

 

[slipstream444]

Originally Posted by JAG
In my opinion, with the huge amount of torque the engine is now producing, it is very important that the HTHS viscosity of the oil is also significantly increased over a typical LL04 oil. That extra torque and cylinder pressure decreases the film thickness of many parts of the engine, including many bearings, piston rings, cylinders, and turbo. The film thickness is a function of the square root of the HTHS in many parts of an engine. So, viscosity must increase by a factor of 4 to increase film thickness by a factor of 2. What was the factory torque? The percent increase should be calculated which will affect the reduction in minimum film thicknesses.

Let's start by first focusing on engine torque and and oil viscosity. Oil chemistry and actual product choices can be discussed next, since the suitable choices are a function of the viscosity requirement.


The factory rated torque is 420 lb ft (~270bhp). The stage 2.8 tune with the same modifications I had done to my car reportedly bring the torque to approximately 600-610 lb ft, and approximately 390-400bhp. There is also a lot more torque available at lower RPMs as well when compared to stock. I have not had my car benchmarked on a dyno as of yet - but have a free session with the company who completed the mods scheduled when I return from deployment. Their new dyno was recently installed.

The Redline HTHS rating for their 0W40 is listed at 4.0, which is higher than what Amsoil is advertising for their Euro 0W40 (3.7).

 

[slipstream444]

I believe the typical HTHS for the OEM "Twin Power" BMW LL04 5W30 (that is currently produced by Shell for BMW) is around 3.6 cP. The previous oil was produced by Castrol and was about the same, if I remember correctly.

 

[CleverUserName]

Originally Posted by slipstream444


The factory rated torque is 420 lb ft (~270bhp). The stage 2.8 tune with the same modifications I had done to my car reportedly bring the torque to approximately 600-610 lb ft, and approximately 390-400bhp. There is also a lot more torque available at lower RPMs as well when compared to stock. I have not had my car benchmarked on a dyno as of yet - but have a free session with the company who completed the mods scheduled when I return from deployment. Their new dyno was recently installed.

The Redline HTHS rating for their 0W40 is listed at 4.0, which is higher than what Amsoil is advertising for their Euro 0W40 (3.7).


I think what JAG said is good advice. You should try running a 40wt oil initially until you can see what your oil temps will be under spirited driving sessions. 3.5 HTHS is the minimum for diesels, it's always better to be above that if operating in extreme conditions or in a modified vehicle.

You don't need a 0w40 in Florida weather. The redline 5w40 and diesel 15w40 oils will work fine in your warm ambient temperatures and have higher HTHS. They will also be formulated with thicker base oils and have a higher flashpoint than any 0w40.

Does this engine have a water cooled turbo? I assume it would but need clarification.

 

[JAG]

Yeah, a 0W-x is not a priority in this application in Florida. That limits the HTHS viscosity too much. From torque of 420 to 600 is a 43% increase, so to keep minimum oil film thicknesses in some engine parts roughly the same as they would be with 420 torque using oil with 3.5 cP viscosity would require an oil with a HTHS of roughly 5.0 cP. Few suitable oils with a HTHS viscosity that high exist. In this case, being suitable means:
1. Tolerating very high localized oil temperatures, that will exist in the turbo bearings and ring packs during high boost.
2. Good soot dispersancy, to avoid soot-induced wear. This comes from additive packages intended for heavy duty diesel engines.

To a considable extent, a shorter OCI can compensate for an oil's weakness in either of the above two areas, particularly for the soot-handling area. That's just an FYI.

I think Amsoil makes better Diesel engine oils than Red Line does. Amsoil's 15W-40 has a HTHS of 4.5 cP.
https://www.amsoil.com/lit/databulletins/g3467.pdf
Not quite 5.0 cP that I calculated above, but you could blend in some 20W-50 Amsoil Competition diesel oil that has a HTHS of 5.5 cP. I'd probably make the latter 25% of the blend, giving a blend HTHS of roughly 4.75 cP.
https://www.amsoil.com/lit/databulletins/g3557.pdf

 

[slipstream444]

I understand the reason why you are wanting to apply the formula you presented, but the fact remains that the torque increase noted is a peak number, and will only be achieved for short periods - not in steady state conditions. The engine of course operates at a much lower average torque, and the oiling system is not designed to pass significantly higher viscosity oil - which will ultimately defeat the intended purpose, as it will potentially starve the engine of sufficient oil at critical times. This is not a dedicated race car. This is one of the compromises that I was discussing.

Your points are very important, and I will need to more heavily bias my decision on your input toward finding an HTHS oil that will better mitigate the increased loads more effectively. I think a 15W40 or higher viscosity is not workable based on the fact this engine was designed to run a 5W30 oil, and it's internal passages (especially the turbo's passages) support and are specifically designed for low viscosity. While it is impossible to determine what the specific stresses and point work/load values are at every bearing and friction point in the engine, you can be certain that only a handful of points see the overall increase in torque - and those are in the lower end of the engine - perhaps a few of the crank bearings. The turbos are running higher boost (max of 30 psi), which is an increase of about 8 psi. The higher rpms required to support that boost increase would not be supported by an oil of significantly increased viscosity, which is a concern.

I need to do a bit more research here, because your points are very important to consider. I need to determine where the greatest increase in wear is being seen in these motors that have been similarly modified

 

[CleverUserName]

Renewable Lubricants 15w40 has an HTHS of > 5.0. I think it's 5.2 if memory serves me correct.

All RLI offerings have high HTHS values for each given viscosity.

 

[CleverUserName]

Originally Posted by slipstream444
I understand the reason why you are wanting to apply the formula you presented, but the fact remains that the torque increase noted is a peak number, and will only be achieved for short periods - not in steady state conditions. The engine of course operates at a much lower average torque, and the oiling system is not designed to pass significantly higher viscosity oil - which will ultimately defeat the intended purpose, as it will potentially starve the engine of sufficient oil at critical times. This is not a dedicated race car. This is one of the compromises that I was discussing.

Your points are very important, and I will need to more heavily bias my decision on your input toward finding an HTHS oil that will better mitigate the increased loads more effectively. I think a 15W40 or higher viscosity is not workable based on the fact this engine was designed to run a 5W30 oil, and it's internal passages (especially the turbo's passages) support and are specifically designed for low viscosity. While it is impossible to determine what the specific stresses and point work/load values are at every bearing and friction point in the engine, you can be certain that only a handful of points see the overall increase in torque - and those are in the lower end of the engine - perhaps a few of the crank bearings. The turbos are running higher boost (max of 30 psi), which is an increase of about 8 psi. The higher rpms required to support that boost increase would not be supported by an oil of significantly increased viscosity, which is a concern.

I need to do a bit more research here, because your points are very important to consider. I need to determine where the greatest increase in wear is being seen in these motors that have been similarly modified


A 5w30 oil at 40c is 4x thicker than a typical 15w40 at operating temp (100c).

A 5w30 at 0c is significantly thicker than a 15w40 at 40c. With that said, if a 5w30 will flow in you engine at 0c then you should have no problem with a 15w40 in the high ambient temps seen in Florida (40c)

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Well I thought my original post was detailed enough to highlight what I was asking for. By �better� I am asking for application specific recommendations. I believe I covered the application in detail as well. Clearly I am looking for an oil with chemistry unencumbered by emission control considerations, that will provide �better� wear protection, primary cooling, extended turbo life, deposit control, temp stability, etc. over the LL04 oil BMW dictates.
The car already suffered a premature failure of the large turbo (bearing) in part due to oil coking. I took the car to the dealership and always had the oil changed well before it was due (5,000-6,000 miles max) while it was under the CPO extended warranty - and let the car idle for 30-60 seconds before shutting it down. The turbo failure happened after the CPO warranty expired.

Now that the car produces approximately 400bhp and 600 lb ft of torque - it needs a �better� oil.

What is other part? If it is "in part" than what is other reason?
As far as I know failure of large turbo on M57 is due to actuator that is sealed with turbo and whole assembly has to be replaced. If it is sludge etc. in your M57, trust me dealership did not use LL04, especially 5W30 TPT as that oil is really, really good.


I dont know why you bothered to post, other than to read your own words. It's one of the things I find annoying about many forums: people who feel the need to chime in for no functional purpose other than to try to make themselves feel superior. It's the same with those who feel the need to correct grammar and/or spelling. Very annoying. This inevitably is accompanied by a total lack of anything that might contribute to the discussion or question posed. Congrats on that.

To answer your hollow inquiry: if I felt I needed to include the "other part", or if the "other part" added to or amplified my original question - I would have included it. As for your "really, really good" professional critique of the oil I wish to replace - perhaps you can expand with a little more specificity as to why you believe this to be true (actually support your argument)... or do we just "trust you" on that too?
Lastly - your claim that the dealership used the wrong oil is just as empty as the rest of your post. I personally know the mechanics/techs who worked on my car and watched them source and install the oil in person. It was the specified LL04 oil, every time - "trust me".

I would greatly appreciate it if you would refrain from posting unless you have something to legitimately contribute. That would be great. Thanks

Basically you have no idea why turbo failed.
You said in part, so since that is pretty important part of the engine, I would say that other part of equation is very important. If it is in part, that means other part is also responsible for failure.
BMW TPT 5W30 has NOACK of 6.2% and as far as I know only one approved oil has lower NOACK, and that is Mobil1 5W30 ESP. HTHS is 3.6 (for example Motul X-Clean 5W40 is 3.64), kinematic viscosity is 12.2. And that oil did not cook, created sludge etc. If it did, congratulations, you are the first one.
Oil like BMW TPT 5W30 or Mobil1 5W30 ESP ill do more than good in tuned up BMW diesel. Trust me, i tested similar oils for oil company in 1.2 three cylinder diesels and 2.0 lts tuned up diesels, among others (since you already asking about trust).

 

[slipstream444]

Actually, I think I explained the failure - and the fact BMW published an acknowledgement of the issue relating to premature turbo failure and oil supply line coking. The NOACK rating is not the most important factor at play here as I'm less concerned with an extended drain interval and oil consumption as I am with wear protection and deposit control. The OEM BMW LL04 5W30 oil does not have a 6.2 NOACK either. There are few oils that have a NOACK that low, and most of them are 10W30 weight oils (like Amsoil ATM). Everything I have read of the OEM BMW LL04 oil points to an oil that barely meets the minimum NOACK for its specs as well. But again - NOACK is not the prime consideration.

As for you belaboring my "in part" comment that you can't seem to let go...: you cannot attribute a failure - or any other consequential point to a single causal factor. Furthermore, as I clearly explained in my last retort to you - if I felt I needed to attach a concrete piece of information that would contribute to my original post - I would have. The other part of the "in part" comment is irrelevant conjecture at best. Let it go, because to try to argue irrelevant issues at this point boils down to you having nothing better to do than troll others at this point.

 

[slipstream444]

Originally Posted by CleverUserName
Renewable Lubricants 15w40 has an HTHS of > 5.0. I think it's 5.2 if memory serves me correct.

All RLI offerings have high HTHS values for each given viscosity.

I plan on researching their oils further. To be honest - I have not heard of this company until you mentioned them.

Given the fact I drive this car daily, I think choosing a 5W40 weight in the summer/hottest months is a good compromise between added HTHS and the increased oil related loads associated with increased viscosity. I live in the Western pan-handle area of Florida and we see about 3 -4 weeks of near to freezing weather every year (think lower AL or GA). It's not uncommon to have the temps dip down to 15F three to four nights a week during mid January through mid February. I plan on running a 0W40 during the late December through February to help with the colder temps during that time of the year.

I compared all of the Amsoil, Motul, Mobil 1, Shell and Redline offerings and Redline's 5W40 and 0W40 on paper seem to have the highest HTHS numbers for those weights, and without the other viscosity specs creeping into what is more characteristic for a higher viscosity oil (basically their 0W and 5W40 oils aren't 15W40 oils passed off as lower viscosity oils like what some other manufacturers have done). The 0w40! has an advertised HTHS of 4.0 and their 5W40 advertises 4.4 cP. I still need to research RLI though, and see what they have to offer.

 

[slipstream444]

Well, I researched RLI's products - and while I like the idea behind their product line and I am a huge supporter of the development of alternatively sourced hydrocarbon-based products (as long as my tax dollars don't subsidize their production and marketing) - their 5W40 weight oils have an HTHS only fractionally higher than the 5W30 I'm currently using.- and their products are more expensive than the Redline oils that I have been considering - so therefore I'll be switching to Redline 0W40 initially when I return from this deployment in November (beginning of the cool down along the Northern Gulf Coast), and then on to 5W40 in March of ‘19, when things warm up.

I'll run my first fill of 0W40 for about 500 miles, and then drain and fill again. The second fill I will run for about 3000 miles and then I'll start a UOA baseline. By then it will be time to switch to 5W40, which I will run for about 3000 miles, and start the baseline for that weight. After that I move to a 7500 mile drain interval to determine how well the oil holds up, and then determine if I want to move to a longer or shorter drain interval after that - or if I need to switch to another oil.

 

[slipstream444]

And FTR - I've been an Amsoil dealer since 1998, well before they had their Preferred Customer Program. I never sold oil for profit, only for my own use (I got tired of being ripped off by the local Amsoil dealer where I lived at the time - and it was a lot cheaper than full- retail through mail order) - and for friends and family. It was no more expensive to renew my dealership than it was to join the PCP when that came out.

Unfortunately, I personally think they have cheapened their product over the years in order to become more price competitive with lesser oils instead of remaining a premium low-volume production oil. When you cheapen your product to become more price competitive with mass-produced oils from petroleum giants like Mobil - you're product will eventually become no better than the mass-produced products, you will lose your primary customer for the premium product to the less-expensive mass-produced product that is essentially good enough to replace the once-better premium oil... and you eventually go out of business or get bought out by the petroleum giant you were once a premium alternative to. Redline was bought out, but I think their focus on producing an almost pure Group V base oil (when there wasn't a real need for it in a car) drove their costs too high and people (like me) gravitated toward brands like Amsoil, which were still a premium oil, but were notably less expensive than Redline. Now while they still run a blend of Group V oils - it's lower than before and their associated costs are also lower - and the retail cost of their product is also much lower than before.

 

[Bailes1992]

I've missed this thread somehow.

LL04 is a very good specification. Don't be fooled otherwise. Our 320d has done 140k in 6 years, had it's oil changed at 18k intervals and runs like the day it came out of the factory. It looks clean under the covers too!

LL04 oils have to pass the same wear tests an LL01 does. It has limited SAPS to minimise deposits and filling the DPF with ash. However, an LL04 oil will use other additives that aren't picked up on a conventional UOA to ensure they pass the necessary tests. Up until recently BMW in the UK has used LL04 in every car for the last 10 years or so. Even the petrol models.

The ultimate non-manufacturer oil specification for performance engines is A3/B4, followed by C3.

LL01 is a specification that builds on A3/B4 offering more stringent tests to make a better oil.

LL04 is a specification that builds on C3 offering more stringent tests to make a better oil.

If I had your engine I personally would run Castrol Edge 0w40. It will have a higher HTHS over a 30 weight and is an all round great oil. It also meets LL01.

If I wanted something with a Group 4 base or something a little more stout I would look at Amsoil SS Diesel 15w40.

However, I'm sure any *w30 or *w40 that meets ACEA A3/B4 or E6/E7/E9 would be more than man enough for your engine on 5k intervals.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by slipstream444
Actually, I think I explained the failure - and the fact BMW published an acknowledgement of the issue relating to premature turbo failure and oil supply line coking. The NOACK rating is not the most important factor at play here as I'm less concerned with an extended drain interval and oil consumption as I am with wear protection and deposit control. The OEM BMW LL04 5W30 oil does not have a 6.2 NOACK either. There are few oils that have a NOACK that low, and most of them are 10W30 weight oils (like Amsoil ATM). Everything I have read of the OEM BMW LL04 oil points to an oil that barely meets the minimum NOACK for its specs as well. But again - NOACK is not the prime consideration.

As for you belaboring my "in part" comment that you can't seem to let go...: you cannot attribute a failure - or any other consequential point to a single causal factor. Furthermore, as I clearly explained in my last retort to you - if I felt I needed to attach a concrete piece of information that would contribute to my original post - I would have. The other part of the "in part" comment is irrelevant conjecture at best. Let it go, because to try to argue irrelevant issues at this point boils down to you having nothing better to do than troll others at this point.

You can go on that Russian web site and they have NOACK listed.
I know M1 5W30 ESP had NOACK 5.6%.
Of course NOACK is not a prime factor. There are Ravenol oils that hav NOACK around 6%, and it is listed among their specifications. Actually someone mentioned some Ravenol with HTHS of 3.9 5W40 with NOACK of 6%, it is I think $12 for liter. You can use that if it makes you feel better.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by slipstream444
Well, I researched RLI's products - and while I like the idea behind their product line and I am a huge supporter of the development of alternatively sourced hydrocarbon-based products (as long as my tax dollars don't subsidize their production and marketing) - their 5W40 weight oils have an HTHS only fractionally higher than the 5W30 I'm currently using.- and their products are more expensive than the Redline oils that I have been considering - so therefore I'll be switching to Redline 0W40 initially when I return from this deployment in November (beginning of the cool down along the Northern Gulf Coast), and then on to 5W40 in March of ‘19, when things warm up.

I'll run my first fill of 0W40 for about 500 miles, and then drain and fill again. The second fill I will run for about 3000 miles and then I'll start a UOA baseline. By then it will be time to switch to 5W40, which I will run for about 3000 miles, and start the baseline for that weight. After that I move to a 7500 mile drain interval to determine how well the oil holds up, and then determine if I want to move to a longer or shorter drain interval after that - or if I need to switch to another oil.

Which RL you talking about, approved ones or their non-approved? Approved ones are mediocre at best.

 

[1JZ_E46]

Edy, I think he was referring to Renewal Lubricants.