BMW e36 fluids

DanDurusky · **Joined:** Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:31 pm **Posts:** 686

well i just got the e36 M3 and i want to get intimate w/ it this weekend and change her fluids :wink:

ive been searching about engine oil today and i cant believe the variety of answers i've found. everything from 0w40 to 20w50 synth to some who swear the e36 motors were designed for dino only. what in the world? What do you guys think?

Also whats your favorite tranny and rear diff fluid? I hear the power steering pump like ATF fluid. any particular kind?

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Engine: Mobil 1 15-50
Tranny: Redline MTL
Diff: Redline 75-90

DanDurusky · **Joined:** Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:31 pm **Posts:** 686

wow, well thats exactly whats in it now. i guess the prev owner knew whats up

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:06 pm

MikeWhitney wrote:

Engine: Mobil 1 15-50

I thought that the OE weight recommended was 5w-30? :whoknows:

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Rich Anderson wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Engine: Mobil 1 15-50

I thought that the OE weight recommended was 5w-30? :whoknows:

Tickticktickticktickticktickticktickticktickticktick

Adam Ligon · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:25 pm

Rich Anderson wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Engine: Mobil 1 15-50

I thought that the OE weight recommended was 5w-30? :whoknows:

I thought he asked for;

DanDurusky wrote:

What do you guys think?

Also whats your favorite tranny and rear diff fluid?

Not what the OE was :roll:

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:37 pm

Adam Ligon wrote:

Rich Anderson wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Engine: Mobil 1 15-50

I thought that the OE weight recommended was 5w-30? :whoknows:

I thought he asked for;

DanDurusky wrote:

What do you guys think?

Also whats your favorite tranny and rear diff fluid?

Not what the OE was :roll:

Right, but why would one know better than the people who made the engine? I assume that they are pretty smart and since these same engineers figured out how to make the engine, I figure that they can also work out what the best weight oil for it is. Going from a 5w-30 to a 15w-50 is a big change. Why do that? Does the engine not have an oil cooler and would thus benefit from a the higher HTHS of a heavy weight oil since it will be operating at higher oil temperatures? Is that worth trade offs inherent in a higher viscosity oil?

I am curious as to why a suggestion to skip up two weights is one that is given. A single weight change can often be used to optimize engines under known conditions. I honestly was not sure what the OE weight was, which is why I asked.

Adam Ligon · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:41 pm

Recomendations or OE spec nowadays often has far more to do with either emmsions or lower maintenance intervals, than with any type of engineering.

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:52 pm

Adam Ligon wrote:

Recomendations or OE spec nowadays often has far more to do with either emmsions or lower maintenance intervals, than with any type of engineering.

Really? Care to back that up? I can point to ACEA, API and SAE specs that show that today's lower viscosity oil is capable of providing protection greater than higher viscosity of just 20 years ago. I believe (and I could be wrong) that the move to lower viscosities may have been in part driven by emissions and economy concerns did not sacrifice any level of oil functionality due to advances in lubricant technology.

And most people here will tell you I am no fan of big oil.

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Ooooh, let's fight about oil. That will be fun.

BMW recommends 5w-30 all around and 15w-40 for temps higher than 50 degrees. For a track car that sees very high oil temps I have always figured one notch higher than recommended is about right. Thus 15w-50. I guess if I was anal I would use 5-30 in the winter and 15-50 the rest of the year...

That and my M3 ticks like a MoFo with 5w-30 and a good bit less with 15w-50. Am I trading cam wear for bearing wear? I guess it's possible, a little bit. But at least I can't hear bearing wear. And in the end I'll probably crash the car into some guardrail or sell it long before the engine expires, no matter what the oil.

Oh and as for the "tech" on Adam's point -- I don't have any either, but doesn't every bottle of thin oil and recent car's oil cap gush with pride over the "energy conserving" attributes of very thin oil? And don't you think that auto manufacturers consider CAFE standards and fuel economy right along with warranty periods when deciding on an oil weight?

Auto manufacturers will specify the oil which will maximize corporate profit. They have to. Track use and long engine life are minimal, at best, considerations, I am sure.

Rich Anderson · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:29 pm

MikeWhitney wrote:

Oh and as for the "tech" on Adam's point -- I don't have any either, but doesn't every bottle of thin oil and recent car's oil cap gush with pride over the "energy conserving" attributes of very thin oil? And don't you think that auto manufacturers consider CAFE standards and fuel economy right along with warranty periods when deciding on an oil weight?

I already said

Quote:

the move to lower viscosities may have been in part driven by emissions and economy.

Why do you assume that this is at the expense of engine wear? Thicker is not automatically going to provide better protection. Film strength is not the be-all and end-all of lubrication. Bearing science has come a long way as well. Things change and the idea that a thicker oil is always needed for better protection is one that needs to.

DanDurusky · **Joined:** Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:31 pm **Posts:** 686

i dont think think is a problem as far as lubrication w/ modern synths but i think its a problem as far as getting past rings and seals, etc. a lot of ppl report burning a lot of oil w/ light weights.

thinner is probably better unless you burn it. i might try amsoil 10w-40 next and see if i get any ticks or if it burns

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Rich Anderson wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Oh and as for the "tech" on Adam's point -- I don't have any either, but doesn't every bottle of thin oil and recent car's oil cap gush with pride over the "energy conserving" attributes of very thin oil? And don't you think that auto manufacturers consider CAFE standards and fuel economy right along with warranty periods when deciding on an oil weight?

I already said

Quote:

the move to lower viscosities may have been in part driven by emissions and economy.

Why do you assume that this is at the expense of engine wear? Thicker is not automatically going to provide better protection. Film strength is not the be-all and end-all of lubrication. Bearing science has come a long way as well. Things change and the idea that a thicker oil is always needed for better protection is one that needs to.

Do you recommend I follow BMW's recommended 15,000 mile oil change interval too?

When can we second-guess manufacturers and apply our own knowledge and experience, and when should we just assume that "bearing science" will save our motors?

Adam Ligon · **Posted:** Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:30 pm

Rich Anderson wrote:

Why do you assume

Maybe because you began the assumptions

Rich Anderson wrote:

I assume

Much like your jump to to assumption that anyone here said anything about the wieght oils they recomended being better at wear or protection than the BMW recomended oil.

Not to mention how you call me out on my comments about oil spec having to do with emmisions and per mile costs. Yet go on to same the exact same thing a few sentances later. Once again implying that I, or anyone else, ever said anything about the protection of the oil.

But you did say it best;

Rich Anderson wrote:

(and I could be wrong)

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

Quote:

adam - the sky is blue

rich - no it's not, it's navy blue

adam - yea, like i said, it's blue

rich - wait, wait, wait..."IS" it blue or does it just appear blue to you?

whitney - there is scientific proof that it is blue

rich - no there isn't

whitney - yes there is..check www.theskyisblue.com

rich - i did and those figures can't be correct

kevin - i think it's blue, (like my subaru that's gonna kick all ya'lls buts)

tom - true-dat

adam - let's get back to the topic, the sky is blue and i'll put $$ on it

kevin - i'm out (i can't afford it now that i have 3 subies that are gonna kick all ya'lls buts)

tom - i'm in...wait, what am i in on???? oh yea, the sky is blue, bring it on

adam - how can you say those figures aren't correct...they were measured with a 4000k Color Spectrometer-o-scope.

rich - the 4000k Color Spectrometer-o-scope sucks

adam- wait, back on 1/2/2002 at 3:45am, 2/5/2002 at 5:34pm, 5/18/2003 at 7:34am, 9/8/2003 at 9:12pm, 12/5/2003 at 1:23am and 2/2/2004 at 6:45am that you liked the 4000k Color Spectrometer-o-scope

rich - no i didn't

adam- yes you did

rich - no i didn't

whitney - yes you did

meant in fun guys, please don't kick me in the shins on sunday
_________________
95 miata r
89 vw gti 16v

quoted (but edited) from the man himself... Chris Brown!!! Give it up!!! Whoooo!!!

THSCC Forums

BMW e36 fluids

Who is online