66 replies to this topic

[Guy182]

stu.. what oil are you using?? if its too thin it could have been going between the turbo seals..

Edited by Guy182, 14 November 2008 - 01:14 PM.

[subseamac]

Hi everyone,
Just a quick note on progress.
I am hoping that there is light - a small chink of light - at the end of the tunnel

This morning, I had the engine Compression tested.

Some of you reading this post may not know what this is (I didn’t!)…… it’s a relatively straight-forward test, to see if there is any pressure escaping past the piston or piston ring.
If any of the cylinders are significantly lower on compression than the others (when the engine is running) it can indicate a knackered ring or piston.
Subsequently, a leak-down test will then diagnose the exact extent of the issue.

You can imagine there was some sense of relief on my part – surprised relief – when all x4 of the cylinders returned readings well within the range expected for a peachy engine; 161-167 PSI. This is great news – no cause for concern Equally; if it was something piston/piston-ring related, not only would the compression test pick it up, but there would also be tell-tale signs on the plugs – which are as clean as a whistle - as well as oil smoke coming out of the oil filler cap hole or oil dipstick hole – which is definitely NOT happening.

Next step after that this morning was to do a leak-down test on each cylinder, and again, there was ZERO leakage. So – great news

So….we are getting closer to diagnosing the problem. The general feeling now is that it must be something in the turbo – either seals or bearings.
So, later on we are stripping thr turbo front pipe off and checking that, as well as the impeller and inlet pipe into the chargecooler.

So – I’ll take it all back - I must confess at being a little hasty in assuming that oil consumption = “engine rebuild”
This type of thing hasn’t happened to a car I’ve owned before and, given the fact I’ve spent over £ 14k on modifying this thing in the last 2 years, it was natural to assume the worst. This only goes to prove I am a complete nincompoop when it comes to all things teknikalogikul

That said – I doff my cap to Courtenay who felt right away that it was *most likely* a turbo issue, given that they’ve been tuning these engines for a significant amount of time and not seen this before – a sentiment also reflected by Thorney in his earlier post.
So….here’s hoping it IS. I’ll post up later / at the weekend on what happens next….

Stu

That is massively useful. You measured (or had a similar car running at the same time at) 135deg sump oil temps and yet your compression tests show no leaks. That's fantastic news all round for our cars and supports the general view that the engines are bomb proof. Let us know how you get on with the Turbo diagnostics!

[Stu-7]

stu.. what oil are you using??
if its too thin it could have been going between the turbo seals..

Hi Guy,

I’ve been using Valvoline Fully Synthetic 5w-40 as recommended by Courtenay.
It has an API classification of “SM” (many oils are API classified “SL”) so this is slightly higher spec.

If that’s not available, there’s a Motul 5w-40 with the same API classification which Guglielmi use for my car on oil changes.

That is massively useful. You measured (or had a similar car running at the same time at) 135deg sump oil temps and yet your compression tests show no leaks. That's fantastic news all round for our cars and supports the general view that the engines are bomb proof. Let us know how you get on with the Turbo diagnostics!

Yup; which backs up the sentiment of Courtenay and TMS. These engines are very resilient. Prior to the turbo issue, I've never used a drop of oil on a track day.

Re: this afternoon, we didn't have time to get the car on the ramps, so it's going up tomorrow am to check the turbo front pipe and chargecooler inlet pipe. Will post up then!

Stu

[slindborg]

I think in this case the API can go fcuk itself lol I'd atleast go upto a 50 if not 60 (without extra cooling) oil... and lets face it SM oils are rare as fook in "abuse taking" oil flavours anyway.

[burnerblowout]

Good news for your wallet Stu. I think the oil issue was an initial red herring. You were looking for the problem not the cause and the compression/leak down tests can isolate some potential big bucks problems very quickly. I also still think the minor differences in oil spec is still a side issue and is still not proven to be a significant problem.

[slindborg]

I dunno, a thicker better heat capable oil wouldnt nessecaraly have broken down with uber heat to cause the turbo to wear its bearings and subsequently muller the seals..... all speculation of course.

[Stu-7]

I dunno, a thicker better heat capable oil wouldnt nessecaraly have broken down with uber heat to cause the turbo to wear its bearings and subsequently muller the seals..... all speculation of course.

It's a valid point.

However, I've been using the car on trackdays for 2 years and it's never drank a drop of oil up to this point
"Mr M" (Mark) and I have largely attended the same trackday calendar, and have the same modifications on our cars.
I/we have both become habitually learned to checking the oil level at lunchtime on a trackday, and seeing zero oil consumption, it's comedy. The car just does not use oil.

Also, the turbo unit on my car is still very new - it was fitted to the car in only September last year, and has covered less than 5k miles since (albeit driving to and driving on; trackdays). When the previous turbo unit was removed, there was absolutely zero no sign of any seals having been affected by the oil thinning under extreme heat. Notably, that was before I had a chargecooler fitted aka; the inlet temps were HIGHER back then.

As always in this situation; it's fair to say that the tuners - Courtenay and TMS don't choose their oil on a whim. Years of experience with these engines will tell them what the best one is.

Valid point nevertheless

[burnerblowout]

I dunno, a thicker better heat capable oil wouldnt nessecaraly have broken down with uber heat to cause the turbo to wear its bearings and subsequently muller the seals..... all speculation of course.

Without real evidence or previous history of oil temp related failures I think that is what you say - just pure speculation. He is using a high quality fully synthetic 5-40 with frequent changes.

Would shifting to higher end viscosity such as a 50W or 60W and at the expense of cold start wear protection and higher cold start pumping pressures be worth it? Cold start lubrication and protection is just as critical as high temp. What about winter running, warm up cycles and track days in a colder ambient? It’s not just a case of banging in a higher viscosity oil just because you think temps are high, particularly when there is no evidence of engine or turbo failure based on using a 40W oil.

[slindborg]

I guess my non shagged 2.2 thats been run on 10/60 for nearly 18 months of nearly 30K is a freak lol. I appreciate a sample of 1 isnt the best a GOOD oil will offer good cold start/cold cranking and then hot protection (FWIW at ambient temps the 10/60 pours at pretty much the same rate as a 5/30 and 10/40, meh fcuk it) I doubt the "tuners" chose their oil based on PROPER reasoning other than the marketing speil handed out by the likes of Oilman (aka opieoils). Mind you most of the bullshit on the interwebs about oils is fcuking annoying as there dosent seem to be a good source of reliable un-tainted info

[burnerblowout]

No disrespect Slind but I wouldn’t buy oil just based on based on your 2.2 experience. I run 0-40W with no problems so should we split the difference and go for a 5-40W? Not very scientific. You also can’t say a 10-60 pours at the same rate as say a 0-40. It would be just like saying a 5-40W operates at the upper end in the same way as a 10-50W. Why would you recommend increasing to a 50W but ignore the trade off at the lower viscosity levels?

[slindborg]

No disrespect Slind but I wouldn’t buy oil just based on based on your 2.2 experience.

exactly.... hence why on EXACTLY the same grounds, nearly all oil bumpf on the net about oil is utter sh*t


so two oils of differing hot visco, with the same lower end (eg10) wont behave the same/very similar at lower temps? Surely that then defeats the point of having multigrade oils...?

[burnerblowout]

No disrespect Slind but I wouldn’t buy oil just based on based on your 2.2 experience.

exactly.... hence why on EXACTLY the same grounds, nearly all oil bumpf on the net about oil is utter sh*t


so two oils of differing hot visco, with the same lower end (eg10) wont behave the same/very similar at lower temps? Surely that then defeats the point of having multigrade oils...?

Yes, but a lot of oil bumf is also based on experience a bit of knowledge. You are recommending a 50 or 60 based on what? I wouldnt go for it because the need has not been defined. There is a lot of "I'm going racing - so I need a racing oil"

Like for like, 2 oils with the same lower end visco will perform in a similar manner at the lower end but you cant get a 50 or 60W without losing out at the lower end. Its a viscosity and benefeit trade off. The perfect visco range does not exist. Find a fully synthetic 0-60W oil.

[siztenboots]

somebody should invent an oil that does both , cold and hot , a sort of 2 in 1 oil ( except a rival might come out with a 3 in 1, which sounds racier ), so we would have to call it multi-grade or something but to really make it sell, you need a gimmick, I know put some non stick teflon in the formula, there you go an engine that will never wear out, last forever I'll share the invention with the whole of .org

Edited by siztenboots, 16 November 2008 - 09:51 PM.

[slindborg]

I think a mineral 0W0 would fare best then..

[burnerblowout]

Mineral oils. Like it. It does make you wonder how race engines survived in the good old days when all this synthetic, ester, shear stable techno stuff wasnt around. Reckon most the stuff today is the product of marketing depts not chemists.

[Guy182]

No disrespect Slind but I wouldn’t buy oil just based on based on your 2.2 experience.

exactly.... hence why on EXACTLY the same grounds, nearly all oil bumpf on the net about oil is utter sh*t


so two oils of differing hot visco, with the same lower end (eg10) wont behave the same/very similar at lower temps? Surely that then defeats the point of having multigrade oils...?

Yes, but a lot of oil bumf is also based on experience a bit of knowledge. You are recommending a 50 or 60 based on what? I wouldnt go for it because the need has not been defined. There is a lot of "I'm going racing - so I need a racing oil"

Like for like, 2 oils with the same lower end visco will perform in a similar manner at the lower end but you cant get a 50 or 60W without losing out at the lower end. Its a viscosity and benefeit trade off. The perfect visco range does not exist. Find a fully synthetic 0-60W oil.

Silkolene pro 10w50 on a stage 4 (320lbft) vxt for over 8k miles, and a few trackdays.

[slindborg]

Mineral oils. Like it. It does make you wonder how race engines survived in the good old days when all this synthetic, ester, shear stable techno stuff wasnt around. Reckon most the stuff today is the product of marketing depts not chemists.

with luck you spotted the 0w0 was a p*ss take



Guy, you cant POSSIBLY suggest using an oil with no other info than"well the engine hasnt died yet".... apprently thats not good enough lmao

[Guy182]

Mineral oils. Like it. It does make you wonder how race engines survived in the good old days when all this synthetic, ester, shear stable techno stuff wasnt around. Reckon most the stuff today is the product of marketing depts not chemists.

with luck you spotted the 0w0 was a p*ss take



Guy, you cant POSSIBLY suggest using an oil with no other info than"well the engine hasnt died yet".... apprently thats not good enough lmao

tested on MK roundabouts and in a windtunnel i'll have you know. so it is therefore FACT

[slindborg]

Mineral oils. Like it. It does make you wonder how race engines survived in the good old days when all this synthetic, ester, shear stable techno stuff wasnt around. Reckon most the stuff today is the product of marketing depts not chemists.

with luck you spotted the 0w0 was a p*ss take



Guy, you cant POSSIBLY suggest using an oil with no other info than"well the engine hasnt died yet".... apprently thats not good enough lmao

tested on MK roundabouts and in a windtunnel i'll have you know. so it is therefore FACT

right you are then.... off to buy whatever products you recomend... infact can you source them "exclusively" and fist me for the costs

[burnerblowout]

Mineral oils. Like it. It does make you wonder how race engines survived in the good old days when all this synthetic, ester, shear stable techno stuff wasnt around. Reckon most the stuff today is the product of marketing depts not chemists.

with luck you spotted the 0w0 was a p*ss take



Guy, you cant POSSIBLY suggest using an oil with no other info than"well the engine hasnt died yet".... apprently thats not good enough lmao

Well done Slind. 2 users of 50W. Have you any more mates out there. I reckon if you can get to about 5 you should have enough ammo to start yourself up your new oil technology advisory service based on ‘pure speculation’.

Still looking forward to your more reasoned response to oil choice.....