The last question I will answer is: in order to determine if the oil is providing "better" protection I will need to conduct a UOA of the OEM BMW LL04 5W30 post modification (the oil in the engine right now - installed after the large turbo was replaced) and then compare it to the Redline oil after two oil changes. I will have a stable baseline for the OEM oil changed at shorter intervals than specified. The second Redline fill will be kept in the engine for the same service interval.
Oil recommendations: 335d - DPF, EGR, SCR, Urea delete.
- Thread starter slipstream444
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted by slipstream444
The last question I will answer is: in order to determine if the oil is providing "better" protection I will need to conduct a UOA of the OEM BMW LL04 5W30 post modification (the oil in the engine right now - installed after the large turbo was replaced) and then compare it to the Redline oil after two oil changes. I will have a stable baseline for the OEM oil changed at shorter intervals than specified. The second Redline fill will be kept in the engine for the same service interval.
Unless there's a massive difference, the UOA's aren't going to tell you much. They are not precise enough for the purpose you are intending to use them for and aren't designed for it either.
An anecdote which you may or may not choose to consider:
A good friend of mine purchased a 2005 Ford F-250 with the 6.0L Powerstroke diesel back in around 2008. It calls for a 15w-40 or 5w-40 synthetic IIRC, though there are folks that have run a 10w-30 in them as well. He ran Delvac 1 5w-40 in it as per the recommendation on here by Doug Hillary. This guy is a diesel mechanic by trade and wrenches on them every day.
He had a 3-stage tuner on the truck which bumped the output from the stock 300HP/600lb-ft to 400HP/800lb-ft on stage 3. He generally drove around in stage 2, which was 375HP/750lb-ft IIRC.
He had the EGR cooler fail several times so he eventually deleted it. Had the IDM fail, replaced, put all new injectors in it, and would regularly pull 10K+ lbs with it; I recall us passing with it (stage 3) on the way to the scrap metal yard with 13,500lbs behind it.
Point being, he drove the living tar out of that truck, but it was well maintained and he just used Delvac 1 5w-40 in it the entire time. Engine had over 200,000km on it when he bought it, would have had around 450,000km on it when he traded it. So it ran for something like 250,000km with that tuner on it and survived just fine.
Now, I'm not asking you to draw any parallels between your BMW engine and his International one. They are obviously different. But you'd be pretty hard pressed to duplicate the duty cycle he put that engine through and it didn't just survive, it thrived on a readily available commercial diesel lubricant, despite him making significantly more power than stock.
Same guy had a Jetta TDI (PD) with a tuner on it too, same oil, same luck, FWIW.
The last question I will answer is: in order to determine if the oil is providing "better" protection I will need to conduct a UOA of the OEM BMW LL04 5W30 post modification (the oil in the engine right now - installed after the large turbo was replaced) and then compare it to the Redline oil after two oil changes. I will have a stable baseline for the OEM oil changed at shorter intervals than specified. The second Redline fill will be kept in the engine for the same service interval.
Unless there's a massive difference, the UOA's aren't going to tell you much. They are not precise enough for the purpose you are intending to use them for and aren't designed for it either.
An anecdote which you may or may not choose to consider:
A good friend of mine purchased a 2005 Ford F-250 with the 6.0L Powerstroke diesel back in around 2008. It calls for a 15w-40 or 5w-40 synthetic IIRC, though there are folks that have run a 10w-30 in them as well. He ran Delvac 1 5w-40 in it as per the recommendation on here by Doug Hillary. This guy is a diesel mechanic by trade and wrenches on them every day.
He had a 3-stage tuner on the truck which bumped the output from the stock 300HP/600lb-ft to 400HP/800lb-ft on stage 3. He generally drove around in stage 2, which was 375HP/750lb-ft IIRC.
He had the EGR cooler fail several times so he eventually deleted it. Had the IDM fail, replaced, put all new injectors in it, and would regularly pull 10K+ lbs with it; I recall us passing with it (stage 3) on the way to the scrap metal yard with 13,500lbs behind it.
Point being, he drove the living tar out of that truck, but it was well maintained and he just used Delvac 1 5w-40 in it the entire time. Engine had over 200,000km on it when he bought it, would have had around 450,000km on it when he traded it. So it ran for something like 250,000km with that tuner on it and survived just fine.
Now, I'm not asking you to draw any parallels between your BMW engine and his International one. They are obviously different. But you'd be pretty hard pressed to duplicate the duty cycle he put that engine through and it didn't just survive, it thrived on a readily available commercial diesel lubricant, despite him making significantly more power than stock.
Same guy had a Jetta TDI (PD) with a tuner on it too, same oil, same luck, FWIW.
I think you're stuck in the notion that your engine needs higher HTHS viscosity than an LL-04/01 oil, which isn't really based on anything other than your opinion.
There are so many variables that go into a UOA result. To have any sort of confidence in the results, you would probably need to run 1 year of LL-04, sampled say 2 times throughout, and 1 year of your "better" oil to ensure similar conditions. 2 observations taken under different conditions is far from conclusive, but 4 may be slightly more conclusive.
There are so many variables that go into a UOA result. To have any sort of confidence in the results, you would probably need to run 1 year of LL-04, sampled say 2 times throughout, and 1 year of your "better" oil to ensure similar conditions. 2 observations taken under different conditions is far from conclusive, but 4 may be slightly more conclusive.
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by 1JZ_E46
Slipstream, HTHS IS viscosity. And it's really the only one that matters. Kinematic 100C viscosity is irrelevant inside an engine, as it is not a measure of an oil's lubrication ability under load (bearings, rings, etc.).
Regarding your "bottom line" note, you still have not explained how you plan on determine how an oil is better than another. Redline is good stuff, but you can't objectively say it's better than an oil that's been tested rigorously to obtain LL-0x approval. LL-04/01 will not have a HTHS over 3.9 because incorporated in the testing suite is a fuel economy test. However, more HTHS does not always equal more protection.
The bottom line is that approvals are important and there for a reason: they take the guess work and marketing out of the equation.
HTHS is one function of viscosity and is probably the most important indicator of an oil's ability to keep rotating assemblies (under load) from making metal to metal contact with their associated bearings. All of the other measured parameters are also important - including Kinematic viscosity, as it demonstrates the oil's resistance to flow at a given temperature. As you know, oil not only provides a lubricating layer that separates moving parts under dynamic loads, it also provides primary cooling, and resistance to flow slows the cooling ability of oil. Obviously the trick is to find an oil that provides the best balance of flow, thermal conductivity characteristics, lubricity and film strength to keep things separated. All of the thermal characteristics of an oil are important factors to consider.
Approvals beyond LL01 are essentially useless in my application, unless those approvals improved the oil characteristics I was specifically targeting for my application - and there is nothing in the LL04 spec that does that. Again, it doesn't make a LL04 a bad oil in any way - there is simply no LL04 oil that provides a sufficient increase in HTHS that I am looking for in my application. JAG proposed that based on the increase in torque output that I would need a HTHS over 5.0 cP. while the formula is correct, I'm fairly certain the formula's application is intended on point torque values (at individual crank bearings for instance), not for overall torque output levels of the engine as a whole. Nevertheless, it highlights the fact that even though point torque values will not increase by over 40%, they will increase by a fraction of that amount. So then came the fundamental purpose of my query: which oil on the market provides the highest percentage increase in HTHS, while keeping the flow characteristics as close to a 5W30 as possible - unencumbered by any limitations set in the LL04 specification. I also continued my research while sifting through the responses, and adjusted my search based on some of the information provided. I also searched other forums for answers. I found that oils in the Amsoil, Mobil 1, Motul, Castrol, Shell lines only provided any a marginal increase in HTHS for 0w40 and 5W40 over their 30 weight contemporaries. I was surprised to find that Redline's 0W40 and 5W40 LL01 oils advertised significantly higher HTHS numbers while the other flow related numbers still indicated in viscosity range values. I contacted their tech services specifically about my application and they provided further information that convinced me my initial search was at an end. Again - I'm an Amsoil dealer, and have begun to lose faith in the brand as their offerings are really no better on paper than other more readily available oils. Their tech services have become even more of a disappointment as they will only abide by the specification listed by the manufacturer - and will not entertain any questions about modified engines.
Please note that Redline you are referring to are NOT approved LL01 oils!
Originally Posted by 1JZ_E46
Slipstream, HTHS IS viscosity. And it's really the only one that matters. Kinematic 100C viscosity is irrelevant inside an engine, as it is not a measure of an oil's lubrication ability under load (bearings, rings, etc.).
Regarding your "bottom line" note, you still have not explained how you plan on determine how an oil is better than another. Redline is good stuff, but you can't objectively say it's better than an oil that's been tested rigorously to obtain LL-0x approval. LL-04/01 will not have a HTHS over 3.9 because incorporated in the testing suite is a fuel economy test. However, more HTHS does not always equal more protection.
The bottom line is that approvals are important and there for a reason: they take the guess work and marketing out of the equation.
HTHS is one function of viscosity and is probably the most important indicator of an oil's ability to keep rotating assemblies (under load) from making metal to metal contact with their associated bearings. All of the other measured parameters are also important - including Kinematic viscosity, as it demonstrates the oil's resistance to flow at a given temperature. As you know, oil not only provides a lubricating layer that separates moving parts under dynamic loads, it also provides primary cooling, and resistance to flow slows the cooling ability of oil. Obviously the trick is to find an oil that provides the best balance of flow, thermal conductivity characteristics, lubricity and film strength to keep things separated. All of the thermal characteristics of an oil are important factors to consider.
Approvals beyond LL01 are essentially useless in my application, unless those approvals improved the oil characteristics I was specifically targeting for my application - and there is nothing in the LL04 spec that does that. Again, it doesn't make a LL04 a bad oil in any way - there is simply no LL04 oil that provides a sufficient increase in HTHS that I am looking for in my application. JAG proposed that based on the increase in torque output that I would need a HTHS over 5.0 cP. while the formula is correct, I'm fairly certain the formula's application is intended on point torque values (at individual crank bearings for instance), not for overall torque output levels of the engine as a whole. Nevertheless, it highlights the fact that even though point torque values will not increase by over 40%, they will increase by a fraction of that amount. So then came the fundamental purpose of my query: which oil on the market provides the highest percentage increase in HTHS, while keeping the flow characteristics as close to a 5W30 as possible - unencumbered by any limitations set in the LL04 specification. I also continued my research while sifting through the responses, and adjusted my search based on some of the information provided. I also searched other forums for answers. I found that oils in the Amsoil, Mobil 1, Motul, Castrol, Shell lines only provided any a marginal increase in HTHS for 0w40 and 5W40 over their 30 weight contemporaries. I was surprised to find that Redline's 0W40 and 5W40 LL01 oils advertised significantly higher HTHS numbers while the other flow related numbers still indicated in viscosity range values. I contacted their tech services specifically about my application and they provided further information that convinced me my initial search was at an end. Again - I'm an Amsoil dealer, and have begun to lose faith in the brand as their offerings are really no better on paper than other more readily available oils. Their tech services have become even more of a disappointment as they will only abide by the specification listed by the manufacturer - and will not entertain any questions about modified engines.
Please note that Redline you are referring to are NOT approved LL01 oils!
Please quit the obvious sales pitches, you are doing these all over this forum.
Last edited:
Here is some science and engineering behind viscosity and engine lubrication. It states the equations that I based my recommendation about HTHS on...film thickness proportional to square root of ratio of viscosity to load: https://www.ltu.se/cms_fs/1.82748!/file/IanTaylor.pdf
I absolutely agree that the formula you presented is scientifically based. I just believe the application is more appropriately applied at point values in an engine design, not for the engine as a whole. For example, when designing an engine the torque values at every crank journal are one of the determining values for oil weight - not necessarily the overall output of the engine. While the overall output st the flex plate has been increased by over 40%, that is not what every individual crank journal is seeing. The point torque value increase is a fraction of the overall increase. IOW, the front crank journal (or any individual support internal structure) is not being subjected to 600+ lb ft of torque. How much is it being exposed to? I would have to talk to the engine design engineer to determine that, but it's a fraction of the overall torque.
Nevertheless, the points where there is the highest increase in torque do in fact ‘see' a notable increase, which does require an increase in HTHS to offset the increased wear. A 0.8 increase (3.6 to 4.4) in cP equates to about a 22% increase in HTHS using the Redline 5W40. A 0.4 increase is just a touch over 11% increase using their 0W40.
The oil I'm looking at is their high performance line of oils And the product page states it meets the LL01 requirements. Whether or not the oil is accepted or listed as an "approved" oil is frankly as irrelevant as if it was an approved LL04 oil. The formulation is appropriate for use in diesels requiring LL01, and meets all the other benchmarks that my emissions control free engine would need.
Nevertheless, the points where there is the highest increase in torque do in fact ‘see' a notable increase, which does require an increase in HTHS to offset the increased wear. A 0.8 increase (3.6 to 4.4) in cP equates to about a 22% increase in HTHS using the Redline 5W40. A 0.4 increase is just a touch over 11% increase using their 0W40.
The oil I'm looking at is their high performance line of oils And the product page states it meets the LL01 requirements. Whether or not the oil is accepted or listed as an "approved" oil is frankly as irrelevant as if it was an approved LL04 oil. The formulation is appropriate for use in diesels requiring LL01, and meets all the other benchmarks that my emissions control free engine would need.
https://www.redlineoil.com/5w40-motor-oil
Their tech services stated all the oils in this line have a TBN of 10.
Their tech services stated all the oils in this line have a TBN of 10.
Last edited:
Your engine takes about 2 gallons of oil. That's $100 in oil for the Redline for an indeterminable benefit. (I agree Redline is great oil, but rarely a necessity) By all means it's your money, but I know I'd have a though time pulling the trigger on that!
Last edited:
It's only your opinion that you think your engine needs a higher HTHS. You have no proof it actually requires it.
If it was my engine I would probably use a 10w30/15w40 HDEO and change it every 5k with OEM oil filters.
However, I have no doubt that an LL01 or LL04 oil would be more than adequate for your light duty diesel engine.
The oil I use in my little fleet is approved to LL04 and Porsche A40, it also carries some other niceties like Dexos 2, 502/505/505.01, Merc 229.31 and 226.5.
I don't know if you get Fuchs in the US but I'd be more than happy using a similar oil on your engine.
If it was my engine I would probably use a 10w30/15w40 HDEO and change it every 5k with OEM oil filters.
However, I have no doubt that an LL01 or LL04 oil would be more than adequate for your light duty diesel engine.
The oil I use in my little fleet is approved to LL04 and Porsche A40, it also carries some other niceties like Dexos 2, 502/505/505.01, Merc 229.31 and 226.5.
I don't know if you get Fuchs in the US but I'd be more than happy using a similar oil on your engine.
slipstream: I posted the link above for the people who don't think an oil with a higher HTHS is a wise choice. The engineers designed the engine to have a long life, assuming the output it would have and viscometrics typical of LL-04 oils. Now the output is much higher, reducing minimum oil film thicknesses when higher torque is actually used. Increasing HTHS viscosity from what typical LL-04 oils have bumps the minimum film thicknesses back up toward what BMW engineers had in mind.
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
The N57 is lighter than the M57. Off the top of my head that's really the only difference when it comes to the internals. Both power plants are sold at essentially the same power levels. (Ex In the U.S. the N57 makes a tad less hp/more torque than the M57 it replaced.
The crank, pistons, bearings, oil pump assemblies, block, head, oil pan, intake manifold, injectors... all down the line for every part number I could find are different for the two motors. Some of the part numbers are somewhat close indicating an evolution (BMW is pretty good about that), and some part numbers are completely different. They are different engines.
I assure you that the N57 variant in the M550d sold in Europe has many unique internal parts that are NOT common with the US low-power variant sharing the N57 engine code.
Comparing the two engines would be like comparing the 2016 M3 engine to its 335i contemporary. Same displacement, but entirely unique powerplants.
BOHICA !
Of course the parts aren't going to be identical. The newer block is lighter which obviously required design changes to the block itself (changes in mounting points) and other effected parts. Now what is interesting is that the part nos for the bearings, crankshaft, etc differ between the N57 and the N57S. I perused the parts myself and it appears that the the bearing tolerances between the N57 and N57S are almost identical.
In any case with all these differences the N57S still runs on the same oil (LL04) as the lower powered N57 and older M57. https://www.newtis.info/tisv2/a/en/f32-435i-cou/repair-manuals/11-engine/11-40-oil-supply/1PSryV8 Clearly BMW believes the LL04 spec is sufficient for a wide range of engines with differing levels of torque.
Btw... I'ts just silly to suggest my comparison was akin to comparing .the M3 to the 335i. S55 (although based on the N55) in the M3 is a completely different engine. You can tell by the naming convention: N55 vs S55 N57 vs N57S The M division just tweaked the N57 for the tri-turbo setup rather than spend the resources to design a M specific diesel (aka S57) powerplant.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
The N57 is lighter than the M57. Off the top of my head that's really the only difference when it comes to the internals. Both power plants are sold at essentially the same power levels. (Ex In the U.S. the N57 makes a tad less hp/more torque than the M57 it replaced.
The crank, pistons, bearings, oil pump assemblies, block, head, oil pan, intake manifold, injectors... all down the line for every part number I could find are different for the two motors. Some of the part numbers are somewhat close indicating an evolution (BMW is pretty good about that), and some part numbers are completely different. They are different engines.
I assure you that the N57 variant in the M550d sold in Europe has many unique internal parts that are NOT common with the US low-power variant sharing the N57 engine code.
Comparing the two engines would be like comparing the 2016 M3 engine to its 335i contemporary. Same displacement, but entirely unique powerplants.
BOHICA !
Of course the parts aren't going to be identical. The newer block is lighter which obviously required design changes to the block itself (changes in mounting points) and other effected parts. Now what is interesting is that the part nos for the bearings, crankshaft, etc differ between the N57 and the N57S. I perused the parts myself and it appears that the the bearing tolerances between the N57 and N57S are almost identical.
In any case with all these differences the N57S still runs on the same oil (LL04) as the lower powered N57 and older M57. https://www.newtis.info/tisv2/a/en/f32-435i-cou/repair-manuals/11-engine/11-40-oil-supply/1PSryV8 Clearly BMW believes the LL04 spec is sufficient for a wide range of engines with differing levels of torque.
Btw... I'ts just silly to suggest my comparison was akin to comparing .the M3 to the 335i. S55 (although based on the N55) in the M3 is a completely different engine. You can tell by the naming convention: N55 vs S55 N57 vs N57S The M division just tweaked the N57 for the tri-turbo setup rather than spend the resources to design a M specific diesel (aka S57) powerplant.
Last edited:
Only conclusion that I got from this is that our friend needs to apply for a job at BMW ASAP and explain them some stuff.
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by slipstream444
BMWTurboDzl said:
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
Only conclusion that I got from this is that our friend needs to apply for a job at BMW ASAP and explain them some stuff.
Last time I'm going to warn you and then I'll push this back to the moderator edyvw: if you are not contributing to the discussion then don't post. Take your smart-assed douchebaggery elsewhere.
Only conclusion that I got from this is that our friend needs to apply for a job at BMW ASAP and explain them some stuff.
Last time I'm going to warn you and then I'll push this back to the moderator edyvw: if you are not contributing to the discussion then don't post. Take your smart-assed douchebaggery elsewhere.
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by slipstream444
BMWTurboDzl said:
Last edited:
Originally Posted by slipstream444
Originally Posted by edyvw
Only conclusion that I got from this is that our friend needs to apply for a job at BMW ASAP and explain them some stuff.
Last time I'm going to warn you and then I'll push this back to the moderator edyvw: if you are not contributing to the discussion then don't post. Take your smart-assed douchebaggery elsewhere.
Reson for this is that I am still waiting fact based explanation why HTHS of 4.4 is sufficient and HTHS of 3.9 is not for your BMW?
Other then that, you are not contributing at all to this "discussion." There are quite few people here who would like to know that answer, including maybe some BMW engineers.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Only conclusion that I got from this is that our friend needs to apply for a job at BMW ASAP and explain them some stuff.
Last time I'm going to warn you and then I'll push this back to the moderator edyvw: if you are not contributing to the discussion then don't post. Take your smart-assed douchebaggery elsewhere.
Reson for this is that I am still waiting fact based explanation why HTHS of 4.4 is sufficient and HTHS of 3.9 is not for your BMW?
Other then that, you are not contributing at all to this "discussion." There are quite few people here who would like to know that answer, including maybe some BMW engineers.
Slipstream, I suggest you just move on to more important pursuits and ignore any future post notifications on this thread.
You have enough information from us to make an informed decision about which oil to use. Some members of the "Low-saps crowd" have devolved the discussion into an antagonistic debate. I've seen this happen before. Even if you did have UOAs proving the wear numbers with RL 5w40 were lower than LL04 they would still be dismissive of the results.
If you want another informed opinion on HTHS and oil selection for your application you can contact Mr. Lake Speed Jr. He works for Driven racing oils support. He has been helpful in the past with my questions.
[email protected]
You have enough information from us to make an informed decision about which oil to use. Some members of the "Low-saps crowd" have devolved the discussion into an antagonistic debate. I've seen this happen before. Even if you did have UOAs proving the wear numbers with RL 5w40 were lower than LL04 they would still be dismissive of the results.
If you want another informed opinion on HTHS and oil selection for your application you can contact Mr. Lake Speed Jr. He works for Driven racing oils support. He has been helpful in the past with my questions.
[email protected]
Originally Posted by CleverUserName
Slipstream, I suggest you just move on to more important pursuits and ignore any future post notifications on this thread.
You have enough information from us to make an informed decision about which oil to use. Some members of the "Low-saps crowd" have devolved the discussion into an antagonistic debate. I've seen this happen before. Even if you did have UOAs proving the wear numbers with RL 5w40 were lower than LL04 they would still be dismissive of the results.
If you want another informed opinion on HTHS and oil selection for your application you can contact Mr. Lake Speed Jr. He works for Driven racing oils support. He has been helpful in the past with my questions.
[email protected]
Same members told him to use LL01 oils not only LL04. He is stuck on HTHS of 4.4 from Redline. I mean as far as all of us are concern he can use extra virgin olive oil from Costco in that engine, it is his money.
However, what he wants is wide approval of his decision.
Or inseatd of e-mailing that guy, he can check how taxis in Europe run on C3 oils, or cars on autobahn since C3 oils are today in wider use there then A3/B3 B4.
Slipstream, I suggest you just move on to more important pursuits and ignore any future post notifications on this thread.
You have enough information from us to make an informed decision about which oil to use. Some members of the "Low-saps crowd" have devolved the discussion into an antagonistic debate. I've seen this happen before. Even if you did have UOAs proving the wear numbers with RL 5w40 were lower than LL04 they would still be dismissive of the results.
If you want another informed opinion on HTHS and oil selection for your application you can contact Mr. Lake Speed Jr. He works for Driven racing oils support. He has been helpful in the past with my questions.
[email protected]
Same members told him to use LL01 oils not only LL04. He is stuck on HTHS of 4.4 from Redline. I mean as far as all of us are concern he can use extra virgin olive oil from Costco in that engine, it is his money.
However, what he wants is wide approval of his decision.
Or inseatd of e-mailing that guy, he can check how taxis in Europe run on C3 oils, or cars on autobahn since C3 oils are today in wider use there then A3/B3 B4.
While I probably wouldn't opt for Redline in a BMW (too expensive), it's a great oil and will serve your engine well. Necessary? No, but a lot of what we do on bitog isn't necessary. Another Redline option to consider is their Euro 5W-40. HTHS of 4.3 but with a more normal add-pack that you'd find in an LL-04/C3 oil (plus moly).
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3877347/RedLine_5w40_Euro
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3877347/RedLine_5w40_Euro
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
