[chris719]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

You don't need to explain anything to me, it's already been quite clear, explain to the freaky of bitog and youtube.

I’ve appreciated a lot of your posts in other threads. I find it disappointing that you would be so dismissive of this. Clearly the vaporized oil contacts the back of the valve and carbonizes. It is quite obvious that the composition of that vapor will have SOME effect on the deposits left.

Yeah, nothing is going to work on a VW FSI motor, and there is no problem with most diesels because the vapors aren’t burning there. However, it can easily be conceived that there is a middle ground where a small difference can be made with oil formulation.

I happen to agree with you that the oil’s influence on this is minimal compared to the engine design. However, if you look at the tests manufacturers have added to their newer standards, it’s clear they believe it has a role in helping control deposits.

I’d run M1 0w-40 FS without hesitation in S55 also, but let’s be more civil about it. Can’t believe it’s me saying that but yeah.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by chris719

I’ve appreciated a lot of your posts in other threads. I find it disappointing that you would be so dismissive of this. Clearly the vaporized oil contacts the back of the valve and carbonizes. It is quite obvious that the composition of that vapor will have SOME effect on the deposits left.

Yeah, nothing is going to work on a VW FSI motor, and there is no problem with most diesels because the vapors aren’t burning there. However, it can easily be conceived that there is a middle ground where a small difference can be made with oil formulation.

I happen to agree with you that the oil’s influence on this is minimal compared to the engine design. However, if you look at the tests manufacturers have added to their newer standards, it’s clear they believe it has a role in helping control deposits.

I’d run M1 0w-40 FS without hesitation in S55 also, but let’s be more civil about it. Can’t believe it’s me saying that but yeah.

In gasoline engines it carbonizes because it comes into contact with gasoline vapors, in diesel engines it carbonizes by coming into contact with exhaust gases, in diesel engines if we eliminate the egr the oil vapor does not carbonize in the ducts or valves , this is verified in real life when the f87_source had not yet been born, and instead he is here trying to be right with the stupidity he said about the m1 fs oil.


I just remembered a customer who had sent me the turbos of the n54 to improve them, he is a guy who used the car hard, the oil change intervals were every 4000km (motul xclean oil), and the turbine shaft were the same as the left one in the picture, in all the years that I work with turbos I have never seen anything like it, the shaft on the right is typical in almost all the turbos (oil intervals 20/30k km) that come to me for repair, then a brat tries to explain to me that the oil intervals do not matter....

[F87source]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

In gasoline engines it carbonizes because it comes into contact with gasoline vapors, in diesel engines it carbonizes by coming into contact with exhaust gases, in diesel engines if we eliminate the egr the oil vapor does not carbonize in the ducts or valves , this is verified in real life when the f87_source had not yet been born, and instead he is here trying to be right with the stupidity he said about the m1 fs oil.

That is not even remotely the case, and here is the logical proof:

1) if carbonization occurs due to fuel vapor contact then your entire oil supply would be carbonized due to fuel dilution... The fact that the oil supply isn't completely soldified is proof this isn't the mechanism for carbon formation.

2) Why do we not see any carbon deposits in the pcv hoses and turbo inlet? There is a rich oil and gasoline vapor mixture there - hint: it isn't hot enough.

3) Diesel engines even without the EGR will still have diesel vapors mixing with the fuel and reciruclated by the pcv system, because the pcv system recycles crank case vapors which consists of oil and combustion by products........

4) Oil is designed to tolerate fuel dilution, which is espeically prevelant on direct injection engines, if the oil carbonizes due to fuel then clearly that would defeat the entire purpose of tolerating fuel dilution.


So again you are completely wrong, and now you exposed yourself for not even understanding how the pcv system works, I asked you to detail it before and you failed to do so. Now I know why. Again you have zero evidence to prove that there are no deposits in an EGR deleted diesel engine, and you have no proof gasoline vapors cause carbonization - I literally just logically debunked that.


Now the reality of the situation is the oil "cooks" or "bakes" onto the valves, because the valves are fricken insanely hot when the engine is operating. So when the pcv vapors hit the valves the oil and gasoline vapors instantly evaporates off and leaves behind deposits. This is why OEMS keep saying to use high quality fuel - because there will be less crap in the fuel to leave behind deposits, and this is also why they say to use low SAPS oils because it leave deposits behind.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

In gasoline engines it carbonizes because it comes into contact with gasoline vapors, in diesel engines it carbonizes by coming into contact with exhaust gases, in diesel engines if we eliminate the egr the oil vapor does not carbonize in the ducts or valves , this is verified in real life when the f87_source had not yet been born, and instead he is here trying to be right with the stupidity he said about the m1 fs oil.

And more proof that you are completely wrong, a research study funded by Toyota on why carbon build up on valves occur: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44580368

"The results indicate that the deposits mainly originate from engine oil, and suggest that the main reaction route of the deposit formation is the carbonization of oxidized engine oil. Namely, low boiling point (light) fractions in the engine oil easily evaporate from the valve surface. On the other hand, the remaining heavy fractions are subjected to deposit forming reactions. These final states are amorphous and carbonaceous aggregates. The deposit has a tendency to form in the temperature range of about 230 to 350 °C. The location of accumulating deposit depends on the valve surface temperature. "


So now that is 2 research studies done by 2 independent multi-billion dollar companies absolutely refuting everything that you have said.

Literally you are refuting 2 major pieces of laboratory grade research, with zero backing (still waiting for any form of legitimate proof). Yeah, you are out of your depth on this one.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by F87source

That is not even remotely the case, and here is the logical proof:

1) if carbonization occurs due to fuel vapor contact then your entire oil supply would be carbonized due to fuel dilution... The fact that the oil supply isn't completely soldified is proof this isn't the mechanism for carbon formation.

2) Why do we not see any carbon deposits in the pcv hoses and turbo inlet? There is a rich oil and gasoline vapor mixture there - hint: it isn't hot enough.

3) Diesel engines even without the EGR will still have diesel vapors mixing with the fuel and reciruclated by the pcv system, because the pcv system recycles crank case vapors which consists of oil and combustion by products........

4) Oil is designed to tolerate fuel dilution, which is espeically prevelant on direct injection engines, if the oil carbonizes due to fuel then clearly that would defeat the entire purpose of tolerating fuel dilution.


So again you are completely wrong, and now you exposed yourself for not even understanding how the pcv system works, I asked you to detail it before and you failed to do so. Now I know why. Again you have zero evidence to prove that there are no deposits in an EGR deleted diesel engine, and you have no proof gasoline vapors cause carbonization - I literally just logically debunked that.


Now the reality of the situation is the oil "cooks" or "bakes" onto the valves, because the valves are fricken insanely hot when the engine is operating. So when the pcv vapors hit the valves the oil and gasoline vapors instantly evaporates off and leaves behind deposits. This is why OEMS keep saying to use high quality fuel - because there will be less crap in the fuel to leave behind deposits, and this is also why they say to use low SAPS oils because it leave deposits behind.

There are no carbon deposits in the turbo no, ahahah....




but today you are going to learn that gasoline vapors go to the intake manifold and oil vapors to the turbo inlet.

[chris719]

That’s all correct, but none of what you posted refutes the fact that what is burned on the valve surface has some impact on the deposits left behind.

If you ran olive oil in your engine you don’t think the deposits on the intake valves would look different? Oil is clearly a component of what is burned on the valves.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by chris719

That’s all correct, but none of what you posted refutes the fact that what is burned on the valve surface has some impact on the deposits left behind.

If you ran olive oil in your engine you don’t think the deposits on the intake valves would look different? Oil is clearly a component of what is burned on the valves.

Well, at this point it is easier, if the intake of the gasoline engines did not absorb gasoline vapors we would not have the carbonization of the photo in the ducts or in the valves and that is all, for that reason a diesel without egr does not accumulate that carbon, because it does not absorb sticky vapors.




Easier still, gasoline vapors cause this:

[F87source]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

There are no carbon deposits in the turbo no, ahahah....




but today you are going to learn that gasoline vapors go to the intake manifold and oil vapors to the turbo inlet.

I question your knowledge about cars at this point.

1) compressor temps get to at most 250F maybe 300F, and that's the max upper limit of air temps that should ever go through the turbo (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.det...fhs_amp=true): Oil has a flash point of 400F and up, so it's no where hot enough in the turbo or intake tract to evaporate the oil and cause carbon build up.

The valves on the other hand operate at around 230c (446F) and up. This is hotter than most flash points of oil, explaining exactly why it instantly evaporates and carbonizes on the valves.

This correlates exactly to what Toyota found in their research, again disproving what you said... It's crazy how little you actually know about cars in general and can still nake these claims with confidence. Literally every single reply you post makes you look like an idiot.

2) you should Google what the pcv system does, because it takes combustion gases which includes both oil and gasoline vapors and ducts it into the turbo inlet. There's no special separation on the n55 or s55 for gas and oil vapors, there is only a single pcv system for both oil and gasoline (combustion vapors) gases, and it goes either directly to the turbo inlet or right into the valves via the head ports. This your turbo example is meaningless.

Again the fact you don't know this further shows how little you know as a whole, like I said before you're out of your depth not only with oil but it seems with how engines work as well...

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

Well, at this point it is easier, if the intake of the gasoline engines did not absorb gasoline vapors we would not have the carbonization of the photo in the ducts or in the valves and that is all, for that reason a diesel without egr does not accumulate that carbon, because it does not absorb sticky vapors.




Easier still, gasoline vapors cause this:

Refer to the above posts...

But it makes me laugh when idiots think they know more than research scientists who actually have reliable and proven results that say otherwise.



Btw please post the chemical reaction between gasoline and oil that causes carbonization and prove your claims. Guess what oil is designed to tolerate gasoline to avoid fuel dilution. It's not gasoline that causes carbonization it's the extreme valve temps that exceeds the flash point of oil that does it.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by F87source

Btw please post the chemical reaction between gasoline and oil that causes carbonization and prove your claims. Guess what oil is designed to tolerate gasoline to avoid fuel dilution. It's not gasoline that causes carbonization it's the extreme valve temps that exceeds the flash point of oil that does it.

Of course, the valves of diesel & s55 engines are made of ice...

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

Of course, the valves of diesel & s55 engines are made of ice...

https://docplayer.net/38978662-Consi...on-engine.html

“TGA results showed that, in GDI engines, lubricants might be an important source of IVD”

[edycol]

Originally Posted by F87source

I encounter this all the time when debating scientific results (either at confrences or presentations etc), especially with people not versed in the subject. Oh man does it get annoying, and the one thing that never ends is whataboutism and denialism. "What about this" "what about that". And there never seems to be any form of understanding about causation and correlation, so 99% of the time the responses make no sense.




Oh yeah and another really interesting thing for anyone that has done mathematical proofs (induction), is when someone tries to prove a universal claim (infinite subset) with a limited subset. That is always a hilarious statement.

People in my field invented "whataboutism." I am actually contemplating to write peer reviewed article on that subject.

[edycol]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

You don't need to explain anything to me, it's already been quite clear, explain to the freaky of bitog and youtube.

BITOG has people who worked all their life in industry and while working published 100+ peer reviewed articles on this subject.
Just bcs. you don't like what you reading, doesn't mean it is not correct.

[medphysdave]

There was a good point about heavyweight oils a few pages ago. Today's tighter tolerances require us being more careful with the oil weight that gets used. I know most know this, but wanted to make sure that point didn't get glossed over. An old miata engine from the mid 90s is different than a modern BMW engine.

[edycol]

Originally Posted by medphysdave

There was a good point about heavyweight oils a few pages ago. Today's tighter tolerances require us being more careful with the oil weight that gets used. I know most know this, but wanted to make sure that point didn't get glossed over. An old miata engine from the mid 90s is different than a modern BMW engine.

Actually in engine you can always safely go thicker. Of course, there is loss in performance (not noticeable in street driving). Going thinner than advised is big problem, unless specific oil for specific purpose.
Track/racing is that situation where rules can be bend bcs. specific products, more knowledgeable crowd etc.
But, you are absolutely right. Miata from 90's can almost run on olive oil, as long as it is extra virgin.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by edycol

BITOG has people who worked all their life in industry and while working published 100+ peer reviewed articles on this subject.
Just bcs. you don't like what you reading, doesn't mean it is not correct.

There's 2 types of people, those who are willing to learn and those who aren't. When you aren't willing to learn it doesn't matter how wrong you are, you'll always make excuses to cover it up.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by chris719

https://docplayer.net/38978662-Consi...on-engine.html

“TGA results showed that, in GDI engines, lubricants might be an important source of IVD”

Chris when tfsi was affected gdi did not yet exist, therefore this is not from now and not much bible is needed to understand why this happens. Just this afternoon I remembered and we were laughing together with my worker about the hot valves, these caps get so hot that they accumulated more carbon than the valves LOL

[edycol]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

Chris when tfsi was affected gdi did not yet exist, therefore this is not from now and not much bible is needed to understand why this happens. Just this afternoon I remembered and we were laughing together with my worker about the hot valves, these caps get so hot that they accumulated more carbon than the valves LOL

GDI did not exist? TFSI is GDI. The importance of low SAPS oils was known as CW introduced VW504.00/507.00 oils before first FSI and then TFSI hit the market in EU in 2003. I worked on development of oil that was later approved for VW504.00/507.00. VW knew from the beginning about shortcomings of EA113 and other FSI and TFSI engines. CBU and fuel dilution, as well as NOx issues. These oils allow prolonged cleaning of CBU. Companies don't release engines bcs. they are not perfect. They have to compromise solutions and release engines acknowledging that there are issues.
Also, we are talking about engines that were tested for the first time some 21 years ago.
Industry is using these oils for some 25 years now. I would say, discussion part about their effectiveness is long over.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by edycol

GDI did not exist? TFSI is GDI. The importance of low SAPS oils was known as CW introduced VW504.00/507.00 oils before first FSI and then TFSI hit the market in EU in 2003. I worked on development of oil that was later approved for VW504.00/507.00. VW knew from the beginning about shortcomings of EA113 and other FSI and TFSI engines. CBU and fuel dilution, as well as NOx issues. These oils allow prolonged cleaning of CBU. Companies don't release engines bcs. they are not perfect. They have to compromise solutions and release engines acknowledging that there are issues.
Also, we are talking about engines that were tested for the first time some 21 years ago.
Industry is using these oils for some 25 years now. I would say, discussion part about their effectiveness is long over.

It's crazy how one can think that one knows more than top end researchers and engineers just because one works on cars and owns a shop.... Not to mention can straight up refute 2 research articles funded by billion dollar companies. I suppose this is the definition of having a god complex.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by edycol

GDI did not exist? TFSI is GDI. The importance of low SAPS oils was known as CW introduced VW504.00/507.00 oils before first FSI and then TFSI hit the market in EU in 2003. I worked on development of oil that was later approved for VW504.00/507.00. VW knew from the beginning about shortcomings of EA113 and other FSI and TFSI engines. CBU and fuel dilution, as well as NOx issues. These oils allow prolonged cleaning of CBU. Companies don't release engines bcs. they are not perfect. They have to compromise solutions and release engines acknowledging that there are issues.
Also, we are talking about engines that were tested for the first time some 21 years ago.
Industry is using these oils for some 25 years now. I would say, discussion part about their effectiveness is long over.

It is clear that the companies did not know that this problem was going to occur, but when it happens many times we are the users who look for the solution, and when a user after a thousand tests sees the results then he knows where the problem is, without having to get into the oil industry.

With GDI i thought it refers to the new hyundai engines.

Originally Posted by F87source

It's crazy how one can think that one knows more than top end researchers and engineers just because one works on cars and owns a shop.... Not to mention can straight up refute 2 research articles funded by billion dollar companies. I suppose this is the definition of having a god complex.

If i were god i wouldn't be here wasting time with a freaky who watches youtube videos of colored catch can in subaru.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

It is clear that the companies did not know that this problem was going to occur, but when it happens many times we are the users who look for the solution, and when a user after a thousand tests sees the results then he knows where the problem is, without having to get into the oil industry.

With GDI i thought it refers to the new hyundai engines.





If i were god i wouldn't be here wasting time with a freaky who watches youtube videos of colored catch can in subaru.

Your reply further establishes my point.

Don't be so quick to judge a video based on the color of a "catch can" (again you're wrong it's an air oil separator - which is further proof that gasoline isn't the root cause of carbonization because it recycles the oil with fuel contamination back to the sump and sludging isn't an issue because the can is heated), OC turbo joe is an air craft technician and the quality of work he is able to do rivals that and even exceeds many shops. The parts he uses is also top of the line and incredibly well engineered, and the setup he has is the most elaborate air oil separator setup I've ever seen.

[edycol]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

It is clear that the companies did not know that this problem was going to occur, but when it happens many times we are the users who look for the solution, and when a user after a thousand tests sees the results then he knows where the problem is, without having to get into the oil industry.

With GDI i thought it refers to the new hyundai engines.

If i were god i wouldn't be here wasting time with a freaky who watches youtube videos of colored catch can in subaru.

EA113 was tested for 3 years prior to release, as well as its non-turbo version that saw the light of the day before it. I will bet my yearly income they put more than 50,000 miles on it.
When we were developing VW504.00/507.00 oils we put more on engines just to develop oils. And we knew the problem as specification from VW required less IVD deposits. And for our internal purposes we measured difference between VW502.00 (Full SAPS), VW 505.01 (Mid-SAPS) and VW504.00/507.00 oil.

[edycol]

Originally Posted by Prodrive_X

In gasoline engines it carbonizes because it comes into contact with gasoline vapors, in diesel engines it carbonizes by coming into contact with exhaust gases, in diesel engines if we eliminate the egr the oil vapor does not carbonize in the ducts or valves , this is verified in real life when the f87_source had not yet been born, and instead he is here trying to be right with the stupidity he said about the m1 fs oil.


I just remembered a customer who had sent me the turbos of the n54 to improve them, he is a guy who used the car hard, the oil change intervals were every 4000km (motul xclean oil), and the turbine shaft were the same as the left one in the picture, in all the years that I work with turbos I have never seen anything like it, the shaft on the right is typical in almost all the turbos (oil intervals 20/30k km) that come to me for repair, then a brat tries to explain to me that the oil intervals do not matter....

He is right about M1 0W40FS.
Sulfated Ash in that oil is 1.32%, which is some of the highest level. It is consequence of extremely stout additive package that is also designed for track use. M1 in previous 0W40 version (blended until 11/2015) using so called VISOM base stocks, had issues with TBN retention. This version resolved that issue, but at price of increased Sulfated Ash.
What is difference? Pennzoil Platinum Euro 5W40 has SA level at 1.13%. Castrol Edge 0W40 at 1.15%. So difference between Edge 0W40 and M1 is .17%. That is difference between Edge and Mid-SAPS requirements that are up to 1%.
Obviously Mercedes, Porsche or VW think that it is ok to run this oil in GDI, but there is difference. I have VW also in garage, with EA888 engine, and regardless that I do have 15qt of M1 0W40FS on the shelf, I run M1 ESP 0W30 with VW504.00/507.00 approval.