M1 0W-40

Status
Not open for further replies.

CT8

Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
15,365
Location
Idaho
M1 0W-40 seems good for DI engines????
"Thanks to extensive cooperative development work with major manufacturers and the application of the latest lubrication technology, Mobil 1 0W-40 is recommended for many types of modern vehicles where it will help provide unsurpassed performance even under very demanding driving conditions.

Latest engine technologies including Turbo-chargers, Direct Injection, Diesels (without DPF) and Hybrids
High performance engines
Most operating conditions, from mild to extreme
Always consult your owner's manual to check recommended viscosity grade and specifications for your particular vehicle.



Specifications and Approvals
Mobil 1 0W-40 meets or exceeds the requirements of:"
https://www.mobil.com/english-au/passenger-vehicle-lube/pds/glxxmobil-1-0w40. just when you think all is good.
 
Last edited:
It's really a thick 30wt oil from what I have read. M1 has always been a good stout oil and the 0w40 is one of their best products.

As long as the manual says a 30wt can be used I see no problem using it. (Not suggested use, but acceptable for use.)
 
Last edited:
When our Cruze hit 90k (5w30 engine) the M1 0w40 went in … just sounds better and that's what goes in them in other countries …

Of course I now have two 350+ HP V8's on 0w20 … LoL … well, they made a number of engine changes in line with the move to 20's …
 
Exxon added a couple of new and exciting certifications to it: AVTOVAZ, FIAT.. I guess, Geely and Kalashnikov are next in line
 
Originally Posted by Y_K
Exxon added a couple of new and exciting certifications to it: AVTOVAZ, FIAT.. I guess, Geely and Kalashnikov are next in line

Kalashnikov sounds good to me.
 
This is the next oil I am planning to try when I run out of oil. The HTHS of 3.6 should go nicely with soot loading.
 
Been using M1 in my 4.0L and it's good (anything is good in a 4.0L) but the 1.5T gets 0/40 Edge on the Ca/Mg balance just in case the industry is correct on LSPI.
 
Originally Posted by JAG
It has a boat load of calcium, so I wouldn't use it in an engine that is at risk of LSPI.


European OEM's have been spec'ing high calcium A3/B4 oils in their DI engines for over a decade without worry of its supposed impact on LSPI. If calcium was a real concern they'd amend their oil recommendation/spec.

LSPI is mainly a result of CAFE engine tunes (low speed lugging under boost).
 
Originally Posted by 1JZ_E46
Originally Posted by JAG
It has a boat load of calcium, so I wouldn't use it in an engine that is at risk of LSPI.
European OEM's have been spec'ing high calcium A3/B4 oils in their DI engines for over a decade without worry of its supposed impact on LSPI. If calcium was a real concern they'd amend their oil recommendation/spec. LSPI is mainly a result of CAFE engine tunes (low speed lugging under boost).
I fully agree. I saw something similar posted a while back and made the same comment. BMW and Mercedes have this type of oil specified for nearly every one of their engines and there have been no widespread issues reported with it.
 
ACEA is going to address LSPI in the future, if I recall correctly. Higher viscosity was found to very slightly increase LSPI, so I don't see how it has anything to do with CAFE / thinner oils.
 
From what I see, I think that the reason why Calcium in an oil can have such an effect on LSPI is due to poor engineering on the OE's part to begin with and the Oil formulators have had to reformulate to help curb the problem. Reducing calcium was the quick fix until OE's straighten out their own mess. It's why the Euro engines don't seem to have a problem with LSPI with higher calcium formulations.

Now reducing calcium and still having a very good oil like oil blenders have done is great but it doesn't really fix the engineering issues and who knows if reducing Calcium in place of other additives is good long term as keeping the calcium would have been. It's too early to tell.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by StevieC
It's really a thick 30wt oil from what I have read.


That phrasing (not directed at you specifically) drives me nuts. The oil is in the xW-40 range, ergo, it is a 40. Yes, it is on the lower end of the range assigned to the grade, just like Castrol Euro 0w-30 is on the upper end of the xW-30 range. However, just like GC isn't "really a thin 40", M1 0w-40 and GC 0w-40 aren't "really a thick 30".

It's like saying my GC and your Highlander are "really a CUV" because they are closer to the size of an Escape than they are to a Suburban or Expedition.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by StevieC
It's really a thick 30wt oil from what I have read.


That phrasing (not directed at you specifically) drives me nuts. The oil is in the xW-40 range, ergo, it is a 40. Yes, it is on the lower end of the range assigned to the grade, just like Castrol Euro 0w-30 is on the upper end of the xW-30 range. However, just like GC isn't "really a thin 40", M1 0w-40 and GC 0w-40 aren't "really a thick 30".

It's like saying my GC and your Highlander are "really a CUV" because they are closer to the size of an Escape than they are to a Suburban or Expedition.


I thought that it sheared down to a thicker end 30 relatively soon that's why I said it.
 
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by StevieC
It's really a thick 30wt oil from what I have read.


That phrasing (not directed at you specifically) drives me nuts. The oil is in the xW-40 range, ergo, it is a 40. Yes, it is on the lower end of the range assigned to the grade, just like Castrol Euro 0w-30 is on the upper end of the xW-30 range. However, just like GC isn't "really a thin 40", M1 0w-40 and GC 0w-40 aren't "really a thick 30".

It's like saying my GC and your Highlander are "really a CUV" because they are closer to the size of an Escape than they are to a Suburban or Expedition.


I thought that it sheared down to a thicker end 30 relatively soon that's why I said it.


There have been some cases of shear, other cases of fuel dilution, but that happens with 5w-40's too and people on here don't call them "really 5w-30's"
wink.gif


It's a BITOG-ism that, for whatever reason, gained popularity, despite being complete nonsense. The product is branded and sold as the grade on the bottle indicates, calling it something else is fallacious.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by StevieC
It's really a thick 30wt oil from what I have read.


That phrasing (not directed at you specifically) drives me nuts. The oil is in the xW-40 range, ergo, it is a 40. Yes, it is on the lower end of the range assigned to the grade, just like Castrol Euro 0w-30 is on the upper end of the xW-30 range. However, just like GC isn't "really a thin 40", M1 0w-40 and GC 0w-40 aren't "really a thick 30".

It's like saying my GC and your Highlander are "really a CUV" because they are closer to the size of an Escape than they are to a Suburban or Expedition.


I thought that it sheared down to a thicker end 30 relatively soon that's why I said it.


There have been some cases of shear, other cases of fuel dilution, but that happens with 5w-40's too and people on here don't call them "really 5w-30's"
wink.gif


It's a BITOG-ism that, for whatever reason, gained popularity, despite being complete nonsense. The product is branded and sold as the grade on the bottle indicates, calling it something else is fallacious.


Thanks...
thumbsup2.gif
 
It's a great oil. My 06 with almost 110k miles has had it for virtually every oil change at 3k mile intervals as specified by mfgr. Runs better than ever, nil consumption, no leaks. Flawless performance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top