# Red Line UOA - 2.0T FSI



## rhouse181 (Apr 13, 2008)

4 qt Red Line 5w40, 1 qt Red Line w50 race... 2.0T FSI


----------



## dbrowne1 (Oct 31, 2000)

Wait, you used an "unapproved" oil and got a good UOA? 

Impossible!


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)




----------



## TechMeister (Jan 7, 2008)

A UOA tells you if the engine oil is still servicable, i.e when you need to change the oil because it has deteriorated or is contaminated. 

A UOA does not tell you if the oil provides the proper lubrication that the engine requires. To determine how well an oil lubricates in your engine you need to conduct the extensive engine oil sequence for your engine model such as VW 502, VW 505.01, etc. 

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/i...catid=40:past-articles-of-the-month&Itemid=78


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

`lol, you don't know the first thing about specs, test sequences or lubrication. Here's an ideally lubed engine, with factual data to prove it, but you think otherwise. Hilarious.


----------



## TechMeister (Jan 7, 2008)

Different engine families have different lubrication requirements based on design, materials, operating loads, etc. Thankfully VW actually conducts engine oil lubrication testing to determine which oils provide the proper lubrication specifically for VW engine families. VW doesn't guess nor talk B.S., they actually test the oils and only approve those that provide the proper lubrication.

There is a long list of tested and approved VW oils available to consumers. If any of the boutique oils can pass the VW oil test sequences, then they should be submitted for testing to VW Ag. Until these boutique oils are tested and approved it's all ad hype without any VW oil test data to support that the use of these boutique oils is safe or appropriate let alone advantageous for use in VW engines.

It's important to understand that UOA is to determine the useful life of an oil. It's a $25 test that checks to see if the oil additive package is depleted, is the oil viscosity still in spec and what contaminants are present in the oil. A UOA does not tell you if one oil lubricates better than another. It is not designed for this nor is it capable of determining this. 

Car makers like VW and others use oil sequence and durability testing to determine the true lubrication performance of the oil in an engine. These tests cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and can last 6-12 months or more. A $25 UOA test tells you when to change your oil and if you have some mechanical issue with the engine, not how well the oil lubricates.

See the ACEA A3/B4 test outline that serves as a basis for many Euro car maker oil speifications.

http://www.acea.be/images/uploads/files/20090105_081211_ACEA_Oil_Sequences_Final.pdf


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

Right, because good oils have high wear and bad oils have low wear...











There's just too many mistaken notions and false assertions and bad assumptions in TM's posts to address them all individually.

Let's just say we're all really glad he's thinking about oil and figuring this stuff out for us. :thumbup:


----------



## rhouse181 (Apr 13, 2008)

Quit pissing in my thread... 

The absence of "Boutique" oils from the vw502 approved list are for financial, not performance, reasons... 

*Email 1:*

"Randall,

Thank you for contacting Red Line Oil, I am not aware of the specifics regarding the VW oil approval process. Products are typically selected by the manufacturer from widely available products and independently tested, rather than being solicited. 

Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil"

*
Email 2:*

"Randall,

I would expect a testing, licensing and royalty fees would be assessed. It would be nice to have the 502.00 but not likely in the cards.

Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil"

I've done my own research through means that are available to the average consumer. No i don't have access to fancy testing equipment, and no I don't have a bunch of spare motors that I can stress test and rip apart to check wear. Everyone here understands that a UOA only proves a sliver of information, but its far more informative than blindly following VW recommendations and chewing through cam followers and caking up intake valves. 

My research contradicts what VW has recommended through their "service" regiment. The other 100 UOA's floating around the forums are also consistent with my findings. You read some VW patent information, it clearly states that these are common issues based upon the design of the motor. Throw in the fact that we don't run lean stratified charge here in the US... all that VW bench testing is irrelevant for the US market.


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

AudiSportA4 said:


> Right, because good oils have high wear and bad oils have low wear...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here's a serious question for you! If a VR6 engine with 138,000 miles in Seattle and a VR6 engine with 138,000 miles in Texas get a UOA and both used the same oil, will their UOA be the same and comparable? 
Why or why not? :sly:
No graphs or links please!


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

If you use a bad oil in both, you get a bad UOA, if you use a good oil, you get a good UOA. 

Pretty easy.

This notion would be the whole basis for spec oil and all other oil certification, so it's kind of hard to argue against it. Right, VW 502, everyplace on the planet in every instance is the best and only oil for VW engines, right.....?


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

rhouse181 said:


> Quit pissing in my thread...
> 
> The absence of "Boutique" oils from the vw502 approved list are for financial, not performance, reasons...
> 
> ...


Dave can blow smoke up your ass all day, it doesn't change the fact VW does not go around testing oils for certification to make themselves happy. They do it for profit and charge money for the privilege. Redline isn't approved because they couldn't make the meager standards of VW 502. If you read what the spec entails, you would tend to agree. It's just not cost-effective, same as all the other high quality boutique oils.


VW recommends spec oils for this reason, they were paid to do so.


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

AudiSportA4 said:


> If you use a bad oil in both, you get a bad UOA, if you use a good oil, you get a good UOA.
> 
> Pretty easy.
> 
> This notion would be the whole basis for spec oil and all other oil certification, so it's kind of hard to argue against it. Right, VW 502, everyplace on the planet in every instance is the best and only oil for VW engines, right.....?


Okay, that's not really what I was looking for but somewhat expected! 

Let's say same as above but they are both using your favourite oil (approved or not doesn't matter, nor does weight), will they be comparable?


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

Of course, what do you think experts like Terry Dyson rely on as a database? Look at the universal averages column in a Blackstone report. They represent a wear profile that a suitable fluid would mirror.


We have factory fill and 2nd run UOAs w/ >100ppm of iron, and other UOAs from unspeced oils like Redline w/ Fe under 20ppm. Which do you think is a better lube? 


So of course, the same engine and same oil will produce similar results. I don't intend to dig out UOAs from comparable oil/engine combos, but yeah. Consider too, I have sequential UOAs that wear is within 1 or 2 ppm consistently over years of duty. Hardly a random event. I know you are posting a leading question to get me to say all UOAs are relevant to the same type engine in different settings. You want to then quote vague sources that say that UOAs cannot be compared to another persons engine, and "zing" me. They are in fact comparable. That is, a good oil in my engine is a good oil in your engine, despite any anomalies that arise during the UOA process, like a loose air filter, excess blowby, open or clogged PCV, interraction withthe scavenged anti-wear layer from the previous oil's additive package, driving style with warm-up etc. Consider the ideal setting of a static bench engine like for a stationary generator. Of course the same oil will preform the same in two different engines that have identical operating profiles.


So, take a step back from the keyboard, reset your plan about what you want to gain or add to the forum and we can start over.


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

Wasn't trying to zing you on it but most all your posts about UOAs made me think maybe you felt a UOA was valid in all cases and directly comparable to one another. 

Honestly dude, its not so much your information, it's the way you present it! You come across as very arrogant and close minded! Instead of jumping on others with links and quotes and graphs, explain in a short precise way why they maybe mislead in your opinion. 

The whole reason I've been riding you is, I think oil is important but not worth getting all heated up about (pun intended!) 

I'll also ask, you seemed to have newer cars, why so concerned about wear if you get new vehicles every few years? 
I've only ever owned 3 cars in the last 25 years and still own 2 of them and had the first one until 5 years ago (although the engine and transmission are still alive and kicking from that one!)


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

Aside from turbos, most any can can run on any oil. 20w-50 should not be used in winter, 5w-20 should not be used in the desert, but they can be used. So, all we are doing is optimizing for mpg, consumption, trip length and seasons, etc. 5w-30 simply is optimal for most driving in USA. 

Take the spec oils, they are one size fits all. If noone want to optimize beyond that, fine, they are good oils. Now if someone mods the car, wants a better bargain or better performance the VW 502, that's what's available and that's what we should be dong here. 

Back to UOA and places that say not to believe other people UOA are irrelevant, they are in effect saying, "don't believe the lab work or your own eyes, use our product not the one that did great in the same engine elsewhere. Applying your new skill set, what does that tell you? 

I'm going w/Edge 5w-30 based on it's performance in other VAGs and doing my own UOA, isn't that ideal?


----------



## GTI010H20 (Jan 23, 2010)

It actually says what VW specs it passes right on the Redline bottle. Its good oil and I've been running it for almost 4k with basically no burn off or having to add more and I changed to it at 1,000 miles.

My car is stage 2 and I run it hard and always let it warm up and this oil has been great....really I wouldn't worry about using redline because its actually better than a lot of those so-called approved oils on the list. pc


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

What's the language on the bottle? Doesn't it say "recommended for"? It def not listed by VW...I guess everyone knows that.

The RL 40s are great for modded cars, it avoids the need for 50 weights...that's what Redline does. It's overkill for stock and chipped cars, where the 5w-30 is ideal. 


The UOAs show RL to be excellent in the FSIs.


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

gehr said:


> ......
> 
> I'll also ask, you seemed to have newer cars, why so concerned about wear if you get new vehicles every few years?


bump


? So.........?


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

:what: I asked him a reasonable question, if you read my post I was trying to "start over" as he put it! I'm trying to figure him out, that's where all this goes awry, he'll make a point and either ignore the response or jump all over it calling others derogatory names telling them how little they know! 

And I'm not the one getting threads locked (well, not the only one!) :laugh:


----------



## GTI010H20 (Jan 23, 2010)

AudiSportA4 said:


> What's the language on the bottle? Doesn't it say "recommended for"? It def not listed by VW...I guess everyone knows that.
> 
> The RL 40s are great for modded cars, it avoids the need for 50 weights...that's what Redline does. It's overkill for stock and chipped cars, where the 5w-30 is ideal.
> 
> ...


yes it say recommended for.......and then lists a bunch of specs....and at the end VW 505.00 505.01 and 500.00

good enough for me.....


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

Those are all old specs...I mean OLD. 

No big deal. Redline is very good, and you pay for that. 

I'd rather pay for quality ingredients and R&D than for a formal approval. There are a lot of random VW 502 products that I have no interest in. It's just a matter of a blender ordering the VW 502-approved additive package from Lubrizol or another additive supplier and mixing the specified base oil. Pretty mundane stuff compared to Redline.


----------



## skier45 (Jul 27, 2009)

*vw spec oil*

correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't vag have a 5 year 60 k power train waranty? would they advise useing an oil that did not perform? most 502/505 oils are also bmw and mercedes certfied. they are fairly respected manufactures. uoa's do not tell the whole story, sorry. if i was concerned enough to spend 25 bucks on a uoa, i'd just put a couple of bucks with it and go for an oil change. don't get me wrong, if you feel like doing a uoa, do it. you probably won't do any harm by useing high quality oil that is not vw spec either. it's more important that you care enough to change it.


----------



## skier45 (Jul 27, 2009)

AudiSportA4 said:


> Of course, what do you think experts like Terry Dyson rely on as a database? Look at the universal averages column in a Blackstone report. They represent a wear profile that a suitable fluid would mirror.
> 
> 
> We have factory fill and 2nd run UOAs w/ >100ppm of iron, and other UOAs from unspeced oils like Redline w/ Fe under 20ppm. Which do you think is a better lube?
> ...


 first and second run uoa's with high iron only show that the rings haven't fully seated yet. with modern low tension rings it can take a while to seat, after that their should very little iron. i've taken engines apart with 100k that still have the original cross hatch honing on the cyl bore. to compare an early factory fill with a later redline is not an accurate comparison imo.


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

The question was if two engines with similar mileage generally would have the same UOA with the same lubricant, not if UOA were comparable from old and new engines. 

The comparison you cited was in reference to changing out the factory-fill early, driving around with 108ppm iron verses switching to an oil that should be producing wear metals 20% of it (and all the associated larger particles bigger than a UOA can detect). 

I agree changing oil is better and cheaper than UOA to see if you can run the oil longer or not. My UOA is intended to verify thin 5w-30 as a suitable lube for my TSI. From there I can "economize" by buying jug oil and using the light 30s I already have stashed. 

If UOAs don't "tell the whole story" as you assert, what does tell the story, the VW spec? I would say no. Compare to ACEA A3 or other mfg specs, VW 502 isn't anything special. If VW 502 didn't exist, I'd still be able to lube my engine fine. So, let's say the oem Euro oils simply represent a group of engines (customers) that demand a premium lube product, that's it. Suitable oils would be made, sold and used with or without VW 502, so it initself means little. It means even less when you see 5w-30 jug synthetics like PP, Edge or PU working very well in the "spec" engines. So, even the most basic parameter of VW 502 (A3) the >3.5cP HT/HS is actually pointless when a 2.9cP 30 weight shows very low wear. Think about it.


----------



## skier45 (Jul 27, 2009)

*comparing vw502 to acea a3*

do you know of a 502 oil that is not a3? none that i've seen.


----------



## skier45 (Jul 27, 2009)

:thumbup:


TechMeister said:


> Different engine families have different lubrication requirements based on design, materials, operating loads, etc. Thankfully VW actually conducts engine oil lubrication testing to determine which oils provide the proper lubrication specifically for VW engine families. VW doesn't guess nor talk B.S., they actually test the oils and only approve those that provide the proper lubrication.
> 
> There is a long list of tested and approved VW oils available to consumers. If any of the boutique oils can pass the VW oil test sequences, then they should be submitted for testing to VW Ag. Until these boutique oils are tested and approved it's all ad hype without any VW oil test data to support that the use of these boutique oils is safe or appropriate let alone advantageous for use in VW engines.
> 
> ...


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

jmj said:


> In other words, *until I see a VW sequencing test under the same conditions as those facing my particular automobile over the same period of time I have no reason to put blind faith in their list*, especially when weighed against my particular observations and experiences.


 By that logic any oil you choose is blind faith, no?!? To absolutely KNOW what is the best oil for your engine you'd have to have thousands of miles with an oil analysis to go by to really know what is good or what isn't good, not very practical or real world.


----------



## jmj (Feb 6, 2001)

gehr said:


> By that logic any oil you choose is blind faith, no?!? To absolutely KNOW what is the best oil for your engine you'd have to have thousands of miles with an oil analysis to go by to really know what is good or what isn't good, not very practical or real world.


I'm currently at 113k +/- miles. I discovered my cam follower was punched through at 81k, and stopped using approved oils at that time. I've also done several UOAs since the cam shaft/fuel pump replacement, so while I do not profess to have scientific certainty I think it's something more than "blind faith" at this point, especially since my main focus is the health of my cam follower, and I pull it for a visual check at every oil change. So far it is wearing far more slowly than it did with approved oils. I suppose it's possible that the rest of my engine is grenading, but I don't think it's likely.

I will admit that when I first "went rogue" and disregarded the approved oil list I was going on blind faith. So far it's working out better than when I relied on the approved oil list. 

Again, my experiences are, in a technical sense, wholly anecdotal, but I think that they are significant nonetheless.


----------



## gehr (Jan 28, 2004)

Very good! 

My experience with an approved oil (M1 0W40) has been much better, at 180,000 miles. Due to a problem unrelated to oil, I rebuilt the engine when it had 173,000 and the pistons, cams and bottom end were spectacular, I was even a bit surprised given the harshness that I've treated her over the years. So for me I see no reason to use anything but the M1 0W40. eace:


----------



## saaber2 (Jul 15, 2008)

Thanks to jmj and gehr for a civil discussion. Nice for a change!

In regards to M1 0w40 and other similar 502 PAO-based oils, I think we need to look at the specific application. We have good data for the 2.0 FSI which beats oils to death in a very short time (unless 95% highway use). For that engine, M1 0w40 has performed poorly IMO as have other 502 oils. 23 of the 24 M1 0w40 UOAs for this engine have sheared out of grade and the iron levels are elevated compared to other oils (for what that is worth). So for a 2.0 FSI with mixed use (city, sport, highway, etc.) there may be much better oils for this engine. The amount of permanent shear, shown in UOAs with only 3000 miles or so, may indicate the presence of larger quantities (or poorer quality) viscosity modifiers. 

In the presence of fuel dilution and the punishment the 2.0 FSI makes (possibly from turbo and/or fuel pump cam follower) these broken viscosity modifiers may contribute to valve deposits such as this one which used M1 0w40 at 10k intervals as recommended by VW. 










In contrast, the ester-based oils, which are much more shear stable have stayed in grade, even at 5000+ miles in this engine. No definitive proof yet that this is having a positive effect on valve deposits but logically it should. To prove something we'd have to have tons of examples of cam followers and valve pics at various miles which we don't have. Like jmj, my cam follower wear has been almost non-existent but one car does not prove a point. 

at 11k (note that for this 11k pic, lighting accentuates silver color. Looking straight on this looks black. Compare inner "silver" circle to 36k one. Very minimal, almost non-existent wear using, highly additized ester-based oil. This initial wear was likely due to miles on factory fill because since changing to ester-based, wear is almost imperceptable.










at 36k










Logically though, an oil that stays close to it's starting viscosity, retains it's flashpoint and TBN, has high anti-wear additives, should control wear better than an oil that shears, loses flashpoint, etc. In other words, an oil that is worn out quickly will not do as well as an oil that holds up to fuel dilution and the punishment of the 2.0 FSI.

Now if we are talking about a different engine than the FSI,M1 0w40 may do stellar. There have been excellent UOAs posted on different engines for M1 0w40 but no way would I run that for my FSI when we have seen 96% of M1 0w40 UOAs shear out of grade and 0% or so on the ester-based oils. Also we have Dyson's recommendation not to use M1 0w40 in fuel diluting BMW DI engines due to insufficient wear control. The real-world data speaks for itself and Dyson is an expert at reading these things and knows much more than we do. For an engine known to destroy oils, to me it is worth it to spend a bit more for better protection and use ester-based oils. Rhouse's UOAs show back-to back good 502 oils (Motul) vs. Ester-based and the ester based performed far better. This holds true throughout the database of UOAs although we need more ester-based UOAs for a more complete picture.


----------



## jmj (Feb 6, 2001)

gehr said:


> Very good!
> 
> My experience with an approved oil (M1 0W40) has been much better, at 180,000 miles. Due to a problem unrelated to oil, I rebuilt the engine when it had 173,000 and the pistons, cams and bottom end were spectacular, I was even a bit surprised given the harshness that I've treated her over the years. So for me I see no reason to use anything but the M1 0W40. eace:


180k? I though I drove a lot!

I would love to be able to tear down my engine and see what it looks like inside, but that's not in the cards in the near future.


----------



## BassNotes (Mar 16, 2005)

saaber2 said:


> In the presence of fuel dilution


I think maybe you mean _absence_ of fuel dilution?


----------



## AudiSportA4 (Mar 3, 2002)

saaber2 said:


> This holds true throughout the database of UOAs although we need more ester-based UOAs for a more complete picture.


That's all nice and everything, but "ester-based" is a vague term, where reported ester content is in the 30-40% range, or less. Also, failing cam followers in the USA don't seem to be correlated with....anything, afaik. FSI durability testing surely centered on VW 502 and 504 lubricants, where base oil is not specified. What is the failure mode that you are asserting, simply the fuel dilution from low-NOx tuning? Is it the nature of the fuel itself? In other engines, there isn't catastrophic wear from a bit of fuel. 

How/why durability testing failed to catch these issues is a head-scratcher, esp since the OCIs are longer in Europe.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

it is a problem on the other side of the pond, with all their belt-driven 2.0T engines, AXX & BWA. They got the same camshaft/follower combo as the BPY engine. Luckily the 'tex alerted them to the issue. Keep in mind, they were probably using 503.01, which was still an issue.

Technically 502.00 is considered to be "severe-service" specification by VW.

The Europeans may see it less than us because their engines can operate on the Stratisfied Mode (ultra-lean mode).

In Europe, since diesels are more popular, they have a similar issue with the Pumpe-Duse engines, as each Pumpe-Duse has a tappet style follower, driven by the intake camshaft (sound familar). This is even using oil that is designed for the extended service & Pumpe-Duse system, 506.01


----------



## sbachmeier (Mar 2, 1999)

saaber2 said:


> Rhouse's UOAs show back-to back good 502 oils (Motul) vs. Ester-based and the ester based performed far better.


Which of his UOAs was using Motul? I couldn't quite guess looking at *my Motul UOA,* since I have such low miles so far.


----------



## rhouse181 (Apr 13, 2008)

sbachmeier said:


> Which of his UOAs was using Motul? I couldn't quite guess looking at *my Motul UOA,* since I have such low miles so far.


MI/HR on Unit 20,350 = Motul Specific
MI/HR on Unit 24,200 = Motul 8100 X-Cess

Boron levels are the best way to tell the difference between Specific and X-Cess...


----------



## sbachmeier (Mar 2, 1999)

So how does one choose whether to select Boron or Molybdenum as their primary anti-wear additive of choice? 

So the Boron levels in your Motul VW Specific are fairly close to the 55 that was in the factory fill oil that I drained at 1400 miles. So what are the chances that VW uses Motul VW Specific as the factory fill oil at the 2.0T plant in Hungary? I wish they'd just tell us...


----------



## harmankardon35 (Sep 16, 2009)

molybdenum disulphide it an excellent anti-wear additive. At 0.5 microns it passes through the oil filter without issue. It makes a raspy, raw 2.0l VW run as smooth as butter.


----------



## AudiJunkie (Jun 19, 2009)

55mg/kg is not a big shot of boron, most dino oils have as much.

For instance, Kendall dino has an impressive 169 boron and 54 titanium. Similarly robust additives can be found in Motorcraft too. That is, Euro oils are overrated.

Borate esters are a cheaper alternative to high moly, but is also better because it acts as a detergent and anti-oxydant.


----------



## x_GTI_x (Apr 23, 2008)

TechMeister said:


> Different engine families have different lubrication requirements based on design, materials, operating loads, etc. Thankfully VW actually conducts engine oil lubrication testing to determine which oils provide the proper lubrication specifically for VW engine families. VW doesn't guess nor talk B.S., they actually test the oils and only approve those that provide the proper lubrication.
> 
> There is a long list of tested and approved VW oils available to consumers. If any of the boutique oils can pass the VW oil test sequences, then they should be submitted for testing to VW Ag. Until these boutique oils are tested and approved it's all ad hype without any VW oil test data to support that the use of these boutique oils is safe or appropriate let alone advantageous for use in VW engines.
> 
> ...


congrats on learning how to copy/paste. now just get a grip on life and you will be all set.


----------

