JFP in PA

Used oil analysis..................

would you mind sharing some analysis results? ;) Anything specific you would like to know (e.g.: TBN, ability to stay in grade, etc.)? Maybe ZDDP, Moly, Calc levels, TBN, and grade stability? :D OK, here we go with a couple of caveats: Our database has a lot more Syntec 10W-40 data than 5W-40 as the 10W product is used by most of our clients. That said, we do have a fair number of 5W analysis. The data was screened to limit the analysis to cars that see mainly street driving, and were not suffering issues (high fuel dilution, coolant infiltration, etc.). Oil analysis was all done in a local lab that handles both oil and fuel analysis. Virgin oil comparison – Other than the obvious viscosity differences, for the most part the 5W-40 and 10W-40 looked similar with a couple of exceptions: The TBN value was notably higher in the 5W product (~12.5 vs. 10.8), as was the calcium levels (1585 PPM vs. 1205). Moly levels were similar between both grades, with the 10W product being a bit higher (38 PPM), as were its phosphorus levels (943 PPM), which would be expected as Castrol promotes the 10W product as their premium full synthetic for “higher mileage” vehicles. 3,000 mile interval – Small but subtly different changes between the two grades, slightly higher drop off in TBN values for the 5W (both grades had the similar TBN values even though the 5W started higher, indicating higher degradation in the additive package), along with a drop in 100C viscosity for the 5W. Both products are staying “in grade”, but changes are larger for the 5W product. 6,000 mile interval – Differences between the grades are more noticeable. The 5W product TBN has lost over 60% of its starting value (it is beyond the point at which it should be changed), and the 100C viscosity drop in much higher in the 5W product. The 5W product is on its way out of “grade”. The 10W product still maintains a reasonably high TBN, better high temp viscosity; and remains “in grade”. 7,500 mile interval – The 5w product is well out of grade, TBN values are very low, as is the high temp viscosity. The 10W product has also suffered a bit, but is still “in grade, with a TBN value of 4.8. 100C viscosity is showing signs of dropping, but nowhere near that of the 5W product. A couple of observations: Obviously, the Syntec 10W-40 appears to be a better choice than the 5W-40. While not intended to do so, this comparison also seems to add credence to the old adage about not depending upon a multi-weight oil with more than a thirty point viscosity spread…………. very good analysis! i assume the wear rates should be similar in the same engine using either syntec 5w-40 or 10w-40. however porsche only recommends 0w-xx, 5w-xx grades. don you know of any particular reasons not to use 10w-xx? how about syntec 5w-50 which seems to be widely available as well and more stable than 5w-40? Porsche (like many OEM’s) “recommend” oils based upon multiple parameters including things like gas mileage and the life of the catalytic converters. While one would like to believe that engine wear and life are taken into account as well, it is impossible to determine what weighting they were given in the OEM determination of what to recommend, which is why we do not place a lot of faith in what Porsche “recommends”. Add into the mix the fact that oils constantly come and go from their preferred list, and you are left scratching your head. We base our oil selection on collected data and performance history. From what we have seen, the M96 does well on Syntec 10W-40 in terms of engine wear and longevity. Gas mileage and cat life can fall where it may, but the engines have to survive. My shop is in a cold winter climate area (currently about 20F), and we see triple digit heat in the summer; and we have a lot of cars running 10W-40 year round without issues, mine included. At the end of the day, the greater the spread between the oils rated weights places a greater load on the additive packages in synthetic oils. While the base stocks are important, wide viscosity spreads typically are totally dependent upon the additives, and the additive packages are susceptible to break down from a variety of sources. This is why you see postings about wide viscosity (e.g.: 5W-50) spread oils not living very long lives or standing up well under high loads.

RP does not have any ACEA ratings, one of their marketing people admitted as much on another website, saying that they have never submitted the product for testing as "ACEA applications are too small a market for us..." Yet they continue to imply they do............ And, by-the-by, in response to RP’s marketing hype, ACEA has stated “there are no ACEA warranty requirements”. UoA's for the grades of RP we have seen did not fare well; the products tend to shear down quickly, show high levels of TBN fall off and go out of grade in as little as 2,000 street miles. Not what I would be looking for in a premium priced synthetic....

would you mind sharing some analysis results? ;) Anything specific you would like to know (e.g.: TBN, ability to stay in grade, etc.)? Maybe ZDDP, Moly, Calc levels, TBN, and grade stability? :D OK, here we go with a couple of caveats: Our database has a lot more Syntec 10W-40 data than 5W-40 as the 10W product is used by most of our clients. That said, we do have a fair number of 5W analysis. The data was screened to limit the analysis to cars that see mainly street driving, and were not suffering issues (high fuel dilution, coolant infiltration, etc.). Oil analysis was all done in a local lab that handles both oil and fuel analysis. Virgin oil comparison – Other than the obvious viscosity differences, for the most part the 5W-40 and 10W-40 looked similar with a couple of exceptions: The TBN value was notably higher in the 5W product (~12.5 vs. 10.8), as was the calcium levels (1585 PPM vs. 1205). Moly levels were similar between both grades, with the 10W product being a bit higher (38 PPM), as were its phosphorus levels (943 PPM), which would be expected as Castrol promotes the 10W product as their premium full synthetic for “higher mileage” vehicles. 3,000 mile interval – Small but subtly different changes between the two grades, slightly higher drop off in TBN values for the 5W (both grades had the similar TBN values even though the 5W started higher, indicating higher degradation in the additive package), along with a drop in 100C viscosity for the 5W. Both products are staying “in grade”, but changes are larger for the 5W product. 6,000 mile interval – Differences between the grades are more noticeable. The 5W product TBN has lost over 60% of its starting value (it is beyond the point at which it should be changed), and the 100C viscosity drop in much higher in the 5W product. The 5W product is on its way out of “grade”. The 10W product still maintains a reasonably high TBN, better high temp viscosity; and remains “in grade”. 7,500 mile interval – The 5w product is well out of grade, TBN values are very low, as is the high temp viscosity. The 10W product has also suffered a bit, but is still “in grade, with a TBN value of 4.8. 100C viscosity is showing signs of dropping, but nowhere near that of the 5W product. A couple of observations: Obviously, the Syntec 10W-40 appears to be a better choice than the 5W-40. While not intended to do so, this comparison also seems to add credence to the old adage about not depending upon a multi-weight oil with more than a thirty point viscosity spread………….

would you mind sharing some analysis results? ;) Anything specific you would like to know (e.g.: TBN, ability to stay in grade, etc.)? Maybe ZDDP, Moly, Calc levels, TBN, and grade stability? :D OK, give me the evening to pull together some comparable data from our files and I try to supply a detailed synopsis in the AM...................

would you mind sharing some analysis results? ;) Anything specific you would like to know (e.g.: TBN, ability to stay in grade, etc.)?

Castrol Syntec 5W-40 is pretty good, but not as good as their 10W-40 from what we have seen.

We have been using (and constantly testing) Castrol Syntec 10W-40; it seems to hold up well, so you might want to give it some consideration...............

As we do not see much Motul oil, I really do not know what ACEA ratings it does or does not hold; my reference to deceptive marketing was directed at another brand............

Someone recently posted that their shop stopped using M1 when the formula was changed recently. To me, M1 feels like dishwater. I use Redline, but that's a touchy subject with at least one person around here; so I'll leave it at that. It was not recent, Mobil 1 started reformulating their products just after they were acquired by Exxon in 1989; shortly after they lost a legal action over the exclusive rights to use the term “full synthetic”. Products that were believed to be true Group IV (PAO base stocks) were reformulated downwards, becoming Group III+, and eventually Group III oils. Along the way, some grades lost all ACEA ratings, most notably the 15W-50 grade that once was the mainstay of the air-cooled 911 crowd. The products that retained their ACEA ratings, like the 0W-40, also showed a marked decline in several critical performance criteria such as film strength, ability to stay in grade, TBN values, etc.; demonstrating that they were no longer the products they once were. As for other small compounder brands, we don’t like or dislike them; we simply refuse to use products that employ deceptive marketing tactics to imply they have ratings credentials that they actually do not have…………….And I am not “alone” in that opinion……………..

Which is exactly why we put a dab of antiseize on the treads, along with a new washer, before we put them back in......

Good luck...................

You triggered an "EVAP system massive leak" CEL by not turning the engine off while refilling. These cars have a closed loop vapor control system on the fuel tank, running the car with out the gas cap makes it look like a vacuum leak. It should eventually clear itself after several running cycles if you do not repeat the mistake.............. Im not so sure that it dissaperas after a couple of driving cycles. IF the car has "EVAP system massive leak" the car has to light the warning up beacuse the ristriction of exhaust laws. Not sure about the US cars but they have more laws about that so I think it is worse with US cars. I hate to say "trust me", but you need to on this one. Leaving the car running while refueling gives you the same code (usually P0455) as leaving the gas cap off; “EVAP large leak”, which will clear itself in about 4-5 run cycles………….. woooow JFP your the winner :P i did exactlly what you said the sign was still on, but when i reached home turn off after an hour going out again start the engine sign OFF thanks allloot B) Glad I could be of help...............

Which turned out to be nothing useful or of value. There was a time when 0W-40 Mobil 1 (and their other grades) were world class products; unfortunately, they no longer are………………….regardless of what their customer service people say.

"Becasue we told you so............." Now there is a sound argument with a lot of technical facts to back it up.............

You triggered an "EVAP system massive leak" CEL by not turning the engine off while refilling. These cars have a closed loop vapor control system on the fuel tank, running the car with out the gas cap makes it look like a vacuum leak. It should eventually clear itself after several running cycles if you do not repeat the mistake.............. Im not so sure that it dissaperas after a couple of driving cycles. IF the car has "EVAP system massive leak" the car has to light the warning up beacuse the ristriction of exhaust laws. Not sure about the US cars but they have more laws about that so I think it is worse with US cars. I hate to say "trust me", but you need to on this one. Leaving the car running while refueling gives you the same code (usually P0455) as leaving the gas cap off; “EVAP large leak”, which will clear itself in about 4-5 run cycles…………..

You triggered an "EVAP system massive leak" CEL by not turning the engine off while refilling. These cars have a closed loop vapor control system on the fuel tank, running the car with out the gas cap makes it look like a vacuum leak. It should eventually clear itself after several running cycles if you do not repeat the mistake..............

No, the Porsche coolant is concentrated and must be mixed 50/50 with distilled water before use.............

You didn't say which model you have, but in general you should be fine with two gallons; also buy two gallons of distilled water (about a buck at any supermarket) and pre-mix with the Porsche antifreeze before adding to the car. You will have a small quantity of the mix left over, which is fine for "top ups". If you are interested, you can also obtain the vacuum fill tool that Porsche sells for over $500 for about $100 online, just google "Uview" (they make the tool for Porsche, but also sell it under their name; come with adaptors to fit just about anything with a cooling system). The the vacuum fill tool, you can recharge the cooling system with no fear of air pockets in about 5 min..................

I'm satisfied that is meets the standard. I could care less whether they paid ACEA to rate it. The important fact is that it does meet it. PS - The same goes for the Porsche "rated" tires. Who cares, except those selling the Porsche rated tires. PPS - We're obviously not going to change each other's mind. I'm done with the discussion. :beer: I just thought you'd like to know you are being lied to, but I guess I was wrong................

II still see no definitive statement that it actually holds any ACEA ratings, only that he "recommends" a product that "would satisfy ACEA".........more marketing verbiage. You should ask him if it actually holds ACEA ratings, and when it received them..........because I already know what the answer will be................ They have been playing this “legally acceptable terminology” game for years………..

I have read a lot about IMS, but I don't really know what it actually does. Can someone explain it. Thanks, The IMS essentially takes the timing from the crank and send it out to the cams. The IMS sits below the crank in the engine. There is a chain that goes from the crank to the IMS. The IMS has two other chains that transfer the timing to the cams. The back one (by the bearing, flywheel side) that goes to the exhaust cam on cylinders 1-3. The other end of the IMS has a chain that goes to the exhaust cam on cylinders 4-6 (this end also runs the oil pump). If the bearing fails, the IMS has no support in the rear and the chains can/will jump timing. This timing jump causes the pistons to strike the valves and mayhem ensues, causing a total engine failure. Rick 99 996C4 87 944S What have they changed in the 987/997 engine design that eliminates this problem? They eliminated the IMS shaft entirely in 2010............

That's good enough for me. :clapping: That being the case, I’m sure you will get the outcome you so richly deserve………….

Really? The following are quotes from the Redline website: For 0W40: "Recommended for water-cooled Porsche and Mercedes-Benz 229.5/229.51 applications" "Recommended for API SM/SL/SJ/SH/SG/CF and ACEA A3/B4" For 5W40: "As specified for Audi, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Porsche and VW applications" "Recommended for API SM/CJ-4/CI-4/CI-4 PLUS Also recommended for ACEA A3/B4/E9" I don't think they'd mention those ratings without being pretty sure they meet them. Wanna bet they their oils do meet the spec, but they've just never spent the money to formally get them listed? PS - I am biased, as I use Redline 5W40 in my Transsybera (GTS) V8. Reread what you quoted from Redline, you will note the "recommended", which is the verbiage that their marketing department came up with after ACEA called them on making ACEA rated claims that simply are not true. According to ACEA, Redline had never submitted products for independent verification of passing ACEA ratings. So, no, they do not have ACEA ratings, never did; and the “recommendations” are those of Redline marketing………………

No, because it has no ACEA ratings (never submitted)................... I'd use Castrol Syntec 10W-40 which has ACEA A3, B3, B4 ratings.