Liqui Moly/Redline instead of Castrol

[G80indy]

I switched to Redline after break in and have never looked back.

[thekurgan]

Originally Posted by kennyfrc

I have also read/heard that some race teams running S54 powered M3 swear by Redline. Funny thing is that some BMW owners seem to hate Redline products. I have had nothing short of stellar results with them in cars that have seen track/street use.

MTL makes a great difference in the ZF tranny, at least in my climate anyway. Interesting points on the additive; I now have something to occupy my research time.

[JeffchaPz]

Yeap Yeap.... I've been using Red Line in my Trans and Diff... for close to 4000 mile.

Made shifting a bit smoother... I might feed the S54 some Red Line as well on my next oil change.

[skim]

Originally Posted by JeffchaPz

Yeap Yeap.... I've been using Red Line in my Trans and Diff... for close to 4000 mile.

Made shifting a bit smoother... I might feed the S54 some Red Line as well on my next oil change.

how about RP (royal purple)? i've been using royal purple on LSD and tranny

[JeffchaPz]

Originally Posted by skim

how about RP (royal purple)? i've been using royal purple on LSD and tranny

Some members here said that it is a little too thin and it brakes down faster.

Unless you are planning to change those fluid every 20k or so, then you MIGHT be ok.

[TheSt|G]

The basic summary is that if you drive your car for the looks, other oils are good. If you drive your car hard, you need Castrol TWS 10W60.

Read the E46 section oil thread. Lots of very good information from Castrol engineers who were present for the development and other BMW insiders:

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=295656

[mfanatic325]

^ snap...that just brought me back to square one
And I was so ready to switch over too. I'm so confused now! There is no God!

[G80indy]

EC fluids upgrades and dyno tests
This makes me feel better about Redline in the M-R
I use the 0W-40 LubroMoly in my 330i and it runs flawlessly.
The TWS dynasty is over.

[TheSt|G]

Originally Posted by mfanatic325

^ snap...that just brought me back to square one
And I was so ready to switch over too. I'm so confused now! There is no God!

I just can't imagine why on a $50,000 car one would want to risk skimping on a few bucks.

[kennyfrc]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

I just can't imagine why on a $50,000 car one would want to risk skimping on a few bucks.

It's not about saving a few bucks.

It's about evaluating all options to find one that reduces rod bearing wear. I could care less whether or not I save a few bucks or even pay more. I want the lowest wear numbers on UOA so I'm not swapping rod bearings at 60K.

If TWS is the holy grail of 10W-60 oil it should return the lowest wear numbers and I plan to let UOA be the judge. In my mind the biggest risk in just assuming TWS is best.

[mfanatic325]

This is true.....if there's a superior blend, I'd want to spring for it. If it happens to be cheaper than TWS, then BOOYA!

I don't discount Castrol/BMW M's partnership on creating the TWS blend, but I have a tough time believing that they update the blend throughout the years to keep up-to-date with available improvements. Whereas on the other hand, these other 10w60 options/blends came out just recently, so I'd think the R&D is recent and could benefit our motors?

[TheSt|G]

Originally Posted by mfanatic325

I don't discount Castrol/BMW M's partnership on creating the TWS blend, but I have a tough time believing that they update the blend throughout the years to keep up-to-date with available improvements. Whereas on the other hand, these other 10w60 options/blends came out just recently, so I'd think the R&D is recent and could benefit our motors?

If you read through the thread I linked, you would see that TWS 10W60 has actually been a continual project with constant updates from Castrol for BMW. It wasn't a fire and forget project for the S54, it has evolved into a bespoke project for high revving M engines.

Especially relavent post:

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showp...40&postcount=2

[Finnegan]

Newer specs and upgraded formulas--"improvements"--are not always improvements. Example: as oil specs have changed, the amount of zinc and phosphorus have been reduced due to their impact on the cats, and due to the EPA requirements on cat lifespan. (These are important anti-wear additives that may be of concern for an engine that uses solid lifters like the S54.)

As the levels of anti-wear metals have been reduced, engines have gone the route of hydraulic, not solid, lifter design due to wear concerns. (The S54 uses solid, not hydraulic, lifters.) Other changes have been made as well, but the point is that engines have been designed to account for these "improved" oil specs.

The S65 is a high-revving engine like the S54, but piston speed is lower than that of the S54, and of course the S65 uses hydraulic lifters. They share high-revving characteristics, but I would not conclude that they have the same lubrication needs.

My point is that an oil that was originally designed for one type of engine may not have "improved" relative to that older engine when reformulated or modified to meet the needs of newer cars and emission regulations. Is that the case here? I do not know. However, it's something I'm reading more about, and it may be something others want to consider as well.

[TexasZed4MC]

heck I can furnish you with detailed documentation tha make Royal Purple shound like the greatest oil ever made, strange like the Castrol part above, the Royal Purple info was furnished by,.......... come on ........ wait for it.......... ROYAL PURPLE!

[TheSt|G]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

The S65 is a high-revving engine like the S54, but piston speed is lower than that of the S54, and of course the S65 uses hydraulic lifters. They share high-revving characteristics, but I would not conclude that they have the same lubrication needs.

IIRC, the S65 uses a hybrid solid/hydraulic lifter?

[thekurgan]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

IIRC, the S65 uses a hybrid solid/hydraulic lifter?

Agree, spherical bucket type is what I remember reading back in '08

[G80indy]

Originally Posted by Shipkiller

I have made an excel spreadsheet that has all the major 10W60 brands and their parameters. I did a lot of internet researching trying to get his data so I could put it in one place. Some of the numbers were very hard to find and I had to search through many documents. But some of the numbers I was looking for just don't exist in the public domain. Hence the empty blocks.

See the attachment.

Edit: This is now an old file. Updated versions are on the website: http://www.shipkiller.com/Z4M_Specific_Oil_Page.html

Thanks and great data by the way!
Wow!
I do recall doing a numbers comparo some time ago between RL and TWS.
As I recall and seen here again the RL numbers look really good!

[G80indy]

Originally Posted by thekurgan

Agree, spherical bucket type is what I remember reading back in '08[/QUOTE]



You mean cylindrical or bucket type?
Is it similar to what's in the M54?

[thekurgan]

Originally Posted by 330indy

Agree, spherical bucket type is what I remember reading back in '08

You mean cylindrical or bucket type?
Is it similar to what's in the M54?[/QUOTE]

Let me hunt the article, I believe they were bucket.

m3forum.net quoted this from a tech article:

'Hydraulic BucketTappet
The weight-optimized valves with a 5 mm shaft diameter and the spherical bucket tappets with hydraulic valve clearance adjustment are also used.
These bucket tappets with a cylindrical camshaft contact surface and rotational lock allow a high level of convexity. This results in effective valve lift characteristics with the smallest possible tappet diameter and hence tappet mass (ideal for high engine speeds).'