Who's going to change to the Mobil 1, 0W-40
02-24-2018, 08:24 AM
#21
Le Mans Master
02-24-2018, 10:38 AM
#24
Just wait and it won't be long before the oil "experts" show up with some of their contributions and rocket science calculations to show all of us up......
02-24-2018, 10:49 AM
#25
Burning Brakes
this is so inaccurate it’s comical. Idle pressure on the non dry sump engines is rarely over or at 30 psi when oil is over around 200 deg for most LS engines....and that is normal. The high weight is the same as what is spec so the high temp viscosity is the same as spec. The low weight mumber means better viscosity flow when colder than 5 weight. You want the oil moving around with ease when cold. 0-30w is actually a better oil for northern cars in the cold months.
02-24-2018, 10:52 AM
#26
Race Director
02-24-2018, 10:53 AM
#27
Not an oil expert, just know what the numbers mean. 0 vs 5 only makes a difference in an extremely cold climate. 30 vs 40 makes a difference every second the engine is running once it reaches operating temp, and especially if it's being run hard. I'm in a hot climate so the bottom number really doesn't matter. But I won't run 40 in my engine spec'd for 30.
The following users liked this post:
BigMonkey73 (02-26-2018)
02-24-2018, 10:57 AM
#28
Instructor
02-24-2018, 10:59 AM
#29
Le Mans Master
02-24-2018, 11:02 AM
#30
Le Mans Master
Last edited by ls1121; 02-24-2018 at 11:02 AM.
02-24-2018, 01:50 PM
#31
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2016
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 10,679
Received 4,713 Likes
on
2,998 Posts
2023 C6 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2022 C6 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2021 C6 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Nope, not changing... Mobil 1 5W-30 is good stuff
02-24-2018, 06:28 PM
#33
Drifting
Not sure who you’re zinging here, but I suppose I’m one of the candidates. While I certainly have made some technical posts, I don’t think many, if any of them have been out of the clear blue sky. Mostly, they have been responses to direct questions. As to the issue in this thread, 0W40 should be a teeny bit better for essentially all engines, and considerably better for engines that are either started very cold or are occasionally run very hard under track or near-track conditions. On the cold end, all oil is too thick at startup for all engines, even 0W30 on a car started in mid-day Las Vegas summer heat. So the 0W rating will give all engines a bit less cold start wear. The viscosity difference at normal oil temp in the low to lower-mid 200’s isn’t enough to bicker about. But as you go above 250, the 0W40 will thin out less and thus be better for all engines that are pushed hard enough to get the oil that hot. But there is a risk. The risk is that to get to that wide a spread between W and normal number, the oil needs VI improver additive, and those additives have not historically been very stable. If the additive fails, the 0W40 will degrade to about 0W25. It’s of course possible that they have come up with a more stable VI improver additive, and if so, 0W40 should be better as outlined above. But before I’d use it in my car, I’d want to see some reports from used oil analysis fans to see if it maintains viscosity at long intervals.
The following users liked this post:
ddame2 (02-26-2018)
02-24-2018, 07:38 PM
#35
Race Director
Not sure who you’re zinging here, but I suppose I’m one of the candidates. While I certainly have made some technical posts, I don’t think many, if any of them have been out of the clear blue sky. Mostly, they have been responses to direct questions. As to the issue in this thread, 0W40 should be a teeny bit better for essentially all engines, and considerably better for engines that are either started very cold or are occasionally run very hard under track or near-track conditions. On the cold end, all oil is too thick at startup for all engines, even 0W30 on a car started in mid-day Las Vegas summer heat. So the 0W rating will give all engines a bit less cold start wear. The viscosity difference at normal oil temp in the low to lower-mid 200’s isn’t enough to bicker about. But as you go above 250, the 0W40 will thin out less and thus be better for all engines that are pushed hard enough to get the oil that hot. But there is a risk. The risk is that to get to that wide a spread between W and normal number, the oil needs VI improver additive, and those additives have not historically been very stable. If the additive fails, the 0W40 will degrade to about 0W25. It’s of course possible that they have come up with a more stable VI improver additive, and if so, 0W40 should be better as outlined above. But before I’d use it in my car, I’d want to see some reports from used oil analysis fans to see if it maintains viscosity at long intervals.
02-24-2018, 10:26 PM
#38
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Nov 2010
Location: On the east coast we drive until we die
Posts: 2,567
Likes: 0
Received 189 Likes
on
147 Posts
Not sure who you’re zinging here, but I suppose I’m one of the candidates. While I certainly have made some technical posts, I don’t think many, if any of them have been out of the clear blue sky. Mostly, they have been responses to direct questions. As to the issue in this thread, 0W40 should be a teeny bit better for essentially all engines, and considerably better for engines that are either started very cold or are occasionally run very hard under track or near-track conditions. On the cold end, all oil is too thick at startup for all engines, even 0W30 on a car started in mid-day Las Vegas summer heat. So the 0W rating will give all engines a bit less cold start wear. The viscosity difference at normal oil temp in the low to lower-mid 200’s isn’t enough to bicker about. But as you go above 250, the 0W40 will thin out less and thus be better for all engines that are pushed hard enough to get the oil that hot. But there is a risk. The risk is that to get to that wide a spread between W and normal number, the oil needs VI improver additive, and those additives have not historically been very stable. If the additive fails, the 0W40 will degrade to about 0W25. It’s of course possible that they have come up with a more stable VI improver additive, and if so, 0W40 should be better as outlined above. But before I’d use it in my car, I’d want to see some reports from used oil analysis fans to see if it maintains viscosity at long intervals.
02-25-2018, 01:44 AM
#40
Drifting
Not sure who you’re zinging here, but I suppose I’m one of the candidates. While I certainly have made some technical posts, I don’t think many, if any of them have been out of the clear blue sky. Mostly, they have been responses to direct questions. As to the issue in this thread, 0W40 should be a teeny bit better for essentially all engines, and considerably better for engines that are either started very cold or are occasionally run very hard under track or near-track conditions. On the cold end, all oil is too thick at startup for all engines, even 0W30 on a car started in mid-day Las Vegas summer heat. So the 0W rating will give all engines a bit less cold start wear. The viscosity difference at normal oil temp in the low to lower-mid 200’s isn’t enough to bicker about. But as you go above 250, the 0W40 will thin out less and thus be better for all engines that are pushed hard enough to get the oil that hot. But there is a risk. The risk is that to get to that wide a spread between W and normal number, the oil needs VI improver additive, and those additives have not historically been very stable. If the additive fails, the 0W40 will degrade to about 0W25. It’s of course possible that they have come up with a more stable VI improver additive, and if so, 0W40 should be better as outlined above. But before I’d use it in my car, I’d want to see some reports from used oil analysis fans to see if it maintains viscosity at long intervals.