[ANMVQ]

So this past Saturday I got the yellow oil level low " please add 1 quart" i have never seen this light since I bough the car (6 months now) and just had an oil change at BMW about a month ago. So I called them they told me just get any 5-30 full synthetic oil( which I knew) just wanted to let someone on know and see if I should bring the car to them since it was so soon after the oil change. I added the 1 quart Castrol Full synthetic 5-30. rechecked the oil and said it was full.

So this morning I checked the oil level when I got to work and its about a half a quart down? So I called BMW again and waiting for my advisor's call back. I see no leaks anywhere but the tips were extremely black on Sunday when I cleaned them. Thank you

[bahn]

Originally Posted by ANMVQ

So this past Saturday I got the yellow oil level low " please add 1 quart" i have never seen this light since I bough the car (6 months now) and just had an oil change at BMW about a month ago. So I called them they told me just get any 5-30 full synthetic oil( which I knew) just wanted to let someone on know and see if I should bring the car to them since it was so soon after the oil change. I added the 1 quart Castrol Full synthetic 5-30. rechecked the oil and said it was full.

So this morning I checked the oil level when I got to work and its about a half a quart down? So I called BMW again and waiting for my advisor's call back. I see no leaks anywhere but the tips were extremely black on Sunday when I cleaned them. Thank you

Funny you mention this, I'm in the same boat. My oil filter housing was seeping ever so lightly so I changed that last weekend. I inspected for leaks everywhere else and couldn't find any. I bought a borescope camera to check my turbo seals & cylinders for possible ring land issues (although I seriously dont believe there's a problem with either). This was more of an excuse to buy the camera . No smoking at all for me under WOT, idle and decel. I just did an oil change to Liqui Moly 5W-40 on Sunday and have been watching the oil level everytime I drive. No change yet. With the higher levels of boost we are running I do expect more blow-by and therefor oil consumption, but mines been extremely high in the neighborhood of a quart every ~200 miles, hopefully the 5W-40 helps as I was also on the BMW 5W-30 prior.

[ANMVQ]

Agree'd about "At the boost levels" we should see some consumption, but at under 200 miles is :O. I've had boosted cars before and always had to add oil between oil changes just not a quart after 1,000 miles. I also do not drive that hard most of my driving is in traffic, Monday- Friday if I hit 65 on my commute I'm happy and it takes like 15 mins too get to 65 LOL,

[bbnks2]

Doing a lot of 4th gear pulls (130+mph) seems to eat oil for me (1qt every 1,200mi or so). So, I've been looking into the turbo seals and the PCV system myself. Increased blow-by would be seen with a catch can. A leaking turbo seal wouldn't be caught by the can.

I would be more concerned about the valve seals leaking with the increased boost levels. Worn valves are more likely than cylinder wear...

You could get an oil analysis done and check for fuel dilution of the oil. That might help pinpoint it to blowby at the piston.

Running thicker oil is NOT the answer to ANY of this. It will only cause more issues. Thicker oil is a myth that needs to be dispelled.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by bbnks2

Doing a lot of 4th gear pulls (130+mph) seems to eat oil for me (1qt every 1,200mi or so). So, I've been looking into the turbo seals and the PCV system myself. Increased blow-by would be seen with a catch can. A leaking turbo seal wouldn't be caught by the can.

I would be more concerned about the valve seals leaking with the increased boost levels.

Running thicker oil is NOT the answer to ANY of this. It will only cause more issues. Thicker oil is a myth that needs to be dispelled.

here bbnks2 comes again putting words in peoples mouths only to back-track a couple posts later. No one said it was the answer, I just changed both of our BMW's over to 5W-40 as we're both approaching 100,000 miles. Liqui Moly UOA's seem to always have a very strong TBN and has some very powerful cleaning additives. 40W oils are obviously more viscous than a 30W at the same temperature and have a higher shear resistance. There's benefits to running a 40W oil over a 30W, there's also a negative which is fuel efficiency. You could cause bearing damage technically by running a really high viscosity on an engine with very very tight bearing clearances. 40W however is not a very high viscosity oil.

[bbnks2]

Originally Posted by bahn

here bbnks2 comes again putting words in peoples mouths only to back-track a couple posts later. No one said it was the answer, I just changed both of our BMW's over to 5W-40 as we're both approaching 100,000 miles. Liqui Moly UOA's seem to always have a very strong TBN and has some very powerful cleaning additives. 40W oils are obviously more viscous than a 30W at the same temperature and have a higher shear resistance. There's benefits to running a 40W oil over a 30W, there's also a negative which is fuel efficiency. You could cause bearing damage technically by running a really high viscosity on an engine with very very tight bearing clearances. 40W however is not a very high viscosity oil.

Says the guy with 100psi oil pressure... I am not backtracking on anything? what are you talking about?

I was simply stating that your idea of running thicker oil has nothing to do with the issue at hand and shouldn't be misinterpreted by people... You want to run thicker oil? GREAT. Don't suggest it's an answer to blow-by. That's stupid.

AND YES it could 100% be inferred from your post that you suggest running thicker oil to cure a blow-by issue...

"With the higher levels of boost we are running I do expect more blow-by and therefor oil consumption, but mines been extremely high in the neighborhood of a quart every ~200 miles, hopefully the 5W-40 helps as I was also on the BMW 5W-30 prior."

You do you though! 1qt per 200 miles of liquid moly is going to get expensive quick.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by bbnks2

says the guy with 100psi oil pressure... I am not backtracking on anything? what are you talking about?

I was simply stating that your idea of running thicker oil has nothing to do with the issue at hand and shouldn't be misinterpreted by people... You want to run thicker oil? GREAT. Don't suggest it's any answer to blow-by, that's stupid.

lol, the 100 psi was on BMW's 5W-30 which my UOA's showed as being closer to a 35W oil. No change seen with oil pressure on the Liqui Moly 5W-40. We've also only seen oil pressure on the N55's stated by two members of the E90Post community and that's yours and mine. A sample size of 2 isn't something you can draw conclusions from so leave that out of it. I also never said a 40W oil was better for blow by (which it is btw). See the below study.

See https://books.google.com/books?id=X_...page&q&f=false

Another impact is the volatile nature of the oil. My UOA of BMW's 5W-30 with 0.5% fuel diluting it showed a 375F-395F flashpoint. UOA's of Liqui Moly with the same 0.5% fuel dilution shows consistently higher flashpoints from 400+.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by bbnks2

Says the guy with 100psi oil pressure... I am not backtracking on anything? what are you talking about?

I was simply stating that your idea of running thicker oil has nothing to do with the issue at hand and shouldn't be misinterpreted by people... You want to run thicker oil? GREAT. Don't suggest it's an answer to blow-by. That's stupid.

AND YES it could 100% be inferred from your post that you suggest running thicker oil to cure a blow-by issue...

"With the higher levels of boost we are running I do expect more blow-by and therefor oil consumption, but mines been extremely high in the neighborhood of a quart every ~200 miles, hopefully the 5W-40 helps as I was also on the BMW 5W-30 prior."

You do you though! 1qt per 200 miles of liquid moly is going to get expensive quick.

Liqui Moly is actually cheaper than BMW's 5W-30 for $7.27/liter on Amazon . Your constant post editing makes it difficult to reply to you btw. Our opinions can differ, I've gave my opinion and posted some facts to back it up. I'll leave it at that to keep this thread from becoming an interwebz keyboard warrior flame war.

[ANMVQ]

ok so the above confused me with flash points etc, LOL,

So basically saying it may be better to not run BMW oil at the boost levels we have? I always used Redline and really like it and saw more constant oil pressure with it on my old car.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by ANMVQ

ok so the above confused me with flash points etc, LOL,

So basically saying it may be better to not run BMW oil at the boost levels we have? I always used Redline and really like it and saw more constant oil pressure with it on my old car.

I'm not saying that, I'm experimenting based on facts. Engines are not created equally and do not wear equally. I'd recommend sending your used oil in for an analysis to Blackstone to see how your engine is wearing and how your oil is holding up with your oil change interval. I'll keep this thread updated with my oil consumption and some cylinder/turbo seal pictures when I get my bore scope in there. I should have time to do that Sunday hopefully. Below is a 4,000 mile run of mine on BMW 5W-30.

[Chappers 71]

The harder you drive a car the more oil it'll use
Although 1 litre every 200 miles does seem a bit excessive.

My 335i has done nearly 103000 miles now & uses 1 litre every 3000 miles or so.
It's had castrol edge 5w30 from new but I have now switched to castrol edge 0w30 as the mileage is getting on a bit. The 0w gives better protection as everything's getting up to temperature.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by Chappers 71

The harder you drive a car the more oil it'll use
Although 1 litre every 200 miles does seem a bit excessive.

My 335i has done nearly 103000 miles now & uses 1 litre every 3000 miles or so.
It's had castrol edge 5w30 from new but I have now switched to castrol edge 0w30 as the mileage is getting on a bit. The 0w gives better protection as everything's getting up to temperature.

Yeah, the 200 mile change was while the oil filter housing was seeping. I've since replaced that and flushed the coolant. I didn't see any oil in the coolant but there could have been a little in it as well from the OFH. I run 0-40W on my wifes N52 as they have a common oil leak down issue that causes a tap on cold start due to the head almost completely emptying of oil. The 0-40W greatly reduced the tapping on cold starts as it can get up top quicker when cold.

[ANMVQ]

Ok cool, I'll get some next oil change, The whole thing on my end is I do not drive the car hard, I MAYBE get 2 WOT a week, The only days I "drive" is Saturday and Sundays and those are hard days, very little HW action. Mostly off HW RT's anyone fimilar with MA I'm mostly on RT9 most of the time as its right next to the house, other than that its all inner city diving. And I change my oil every 3k :/

[bahn]

My car gets border line abused . WOT is seen at least once a day as it's my primary daily. I don't really drive it on the weekends though and in bad weather I opt for the truck. Just to give you an idea I have over 300 log files in my MHD data logging folder from this car since flashing MHD on the day it was released 5 months ago. That's only 150 days

[Rob_BMW_PNW]

Ive had my PS2 on my N55 for 2,500 of very hard miles. Just about all of it is logging and hitting boost (after warmed up of course)
I checked a week ago and it was 3/4 on the dash, checked two days ago it was full, and then today, it was 1/2

So worst case, I burned through half a liter in 2,500 hard miles.
5-40 Liquid Moly is what I used

I might check my catch can later to see what is in there.

[bbnks2]

Originally Posted by bahn

lol, the 100 psi was on BMW's 5W-30 which my UOA's showed as being closer to a 35W oil. No change seen with oil pressure on the Liqui Moly 5W-40. We've also only seen oil pressure on the N55's stated by two members of the E90Post community and that's yours and mine. A sample size of 2 isn't something you can draw conclusions from so leave that out of it. I also never said a 40W oil was better for blow by (which it is btw). See the below study.

See https://books.google.com/books?id=X_...page&q&f=false

Another impact is the volatile nature of the oil. My UOA of BMW's 5W-30 with 0.5% fuel diluting it showed a 375F-395F flashpoint. UOA's of Liqui Moly with the same 0.5% fuel dilution shows consistently higher flashpoints from 400+.

Did you even read that study, or did you just post the first link you found on google that you thought supported your case? Maybe you should go back and re-read it... it doesn't say what you seem to think it does. FYI, it's a 1977 test of diesel engines and wouldn't apply in any way, shape, or form to us anyway.

The only saving grace to your argument is that you linked your thesis of running thicker oil to oil volatility. However, you are still wrong in regard to your thesis on its effect on blow-by.

I am not looking to argue with you. Let's take this as an opportunity to try to address excessive oil loss and debate what might be causing it...

Look at your own data. Since fuel dilution was the same across both oils, you have proven that moving to the 5-40 did not result in less blow-by. If it did, wouldn't you expect fuel dilution to have gone DOWN? The only thing you have supported is that BMW 5-30 has a lower FLASHPOINT than Liquid Moly 5-40 (in an uncontrolled comparison).

Yes, a lower flashpoint might lead to oil vaporizing and burning off prematurely under greater boost and oil temps, but that has nothing to do with increased blow-by. Hence, why I stated a few ways in my above post how the OP can determine HOW oil loss is occurring before going any further.

If you care to keep reading:

The thesis should be to run a properly weighted HIGHER QUALITY (better base stock) oil and not necessarily a THICKER oil. Volatility may be WORSE with a thicker oil which is something the study you linked actually supports in its data (Appendix A-2). As an example, your typical 0-30 will generally have a LOWER NOACK % than the same exact HTHS/cP 0-40 oil. Castrol Edge Euro 0-30 and 0-40 are two ll-01 approved oils that have the same exact cP/HTHS rating (3.5) but the 0-40 is more volatile. Why? because more modifiers are added to the 0-40 oil to create the greater viscosity spread.... more modifiers = worse performing oil under load/heat. All logic points to 0-30 being the better oil to run if you see frequent high load conditions (bearing oil temp gets to flashpoint).

FYI, there is a reason why the liqui-moly 5-40 isn't ll-01 certified. It has a high NOACK value (12%). Despite it's higher flashpoint you quoted, it is still a more volatile oil that will result in greater viscosity loss over time. Wile this will result in less oil being burned off from high oil temps (flashpoint), it will also result in greater viscosity breakdown over the same usage and therefore greater cylinder wear over time.

I agree with the study you linked (review the flow chart) that higher cylinder temps (caused by more boost) = more viscosity breakdown (hence why NOACK is important) = more cylinder wear = more blow-by due to wear.

My recommendation would be running an oil with a better base stock. Running a thicker oil has nothing to do with it. I'd look into running a 10w-30 oil and maintaining BMW's LL-01 target of cP/HTHS 3.5 (dynamic viscosity). 10-30 is typically much less volatile than 5-30 or 0-30.

In the winter when you don't beat on the car move back to the 0-30 for the startup protection in the cold.

Just throwing it out there, but I remember seeing a chart that showed modern 5-30 synthetic oil is good for cold starts of less than -30f. That tells me we could probably even get away with even 10-30 for mild winters.

[bahn]

Originally Posted by bbnks2

Did you even read that study, or did you just post the first link you found on google that you thought supported your case? Maybe you should go back and re-read it... it doesn't say what you seem to think it does. FYI, it's a 1977 test of diesel engines and wouldn't apply in any way, shape, or form to us.

The only saving grace to your argument is that you linked your thesis of running thicker oil to oil volatility. However, you are still wrong in regard to your thesis on its effect on blow-by.

I am not looking to argue with you. Let's take this as an opportunity to try to address excessive oil loss and debate what might be causing it...

Look at your own data. Since fuel dilution was the same across both oils, you have proven that moving to the 5-40 did not result in less blow-by. If it did, wouldn't you expect fuel dilution to have gone DOWN? The only thing you have supported is that BMW 5-30 has a lower FLASHPOINT than Liquid Moly 5-40 (in an uncontrolled comparison).

Yes, a lower flashpoint might lead to oil vaporizing and burning off prematurely under greater boost and oil temps, but that has nothing to do with increased blow-by. Hence, why I stated a few ways in my above post how the OP can determine HOW oil loss is occurring before going any further.

If you care to keep reading:

The thesis should be to run a properly weighted HIGHER QUALITY (better base stock) oil and not necessarily a THICKER oil. Volatility may be WORSE with a thicker oil which is something the study you linked actually supports in its data (Appendix A-2). As an example, your typical 0-30 will generally have a LOWER NOACK % than the same exact HTHS/cP 0-40 oil. Castrol Edge Euro 0-30 and 0-40 are two ll-01 approved oils that have the same exact cP/HTHS rating (3.5) but the 0-40 is more volatile. Why? because more modifiers are added to the 0-40 oil to create the greater viscosity spread.... more modifiers = worse performing oil under load/heat.

FYI, there is a reason why the liqui-moly 5-40 isn't ll-01 certified. It has a high NOACK value (12%). Despite it's higher flashpoint you quoted, it is still a more volatile oil that will result in greater viscosity loss over time. This will result in less oil being burned off from high temps, but also greater viscosity breakdown over the same usage and therefore greater cylinder wear over time.

I agree with the study you linked (review the flow chart) that higher cylinder temps (caused by more boost) = more viscosity breakdown (hence why NOACK is important) = more cylinder wear = more blow-by due to wear.

My recommendation would be running an oil with a better base stock. Running a thicker oil has nothing to do with it. I'd look into running a 10w-30 oil and maintaining BMW's LL-01 target of cP/HTHS 3.5 (dynamic viscosity).

In the winter when you don't beat on the car move back to the 0-30 for the startup protecting in the cold.

For not trying to argue you sure are arguing a bunch. "Not trying to argue" is something someone with a passive aggressive personality says when they dont want to look like an asshole. I did read the study, did you not read it? "The viscosity of a lubricant is among its most important characteristics as this contributes to control the oil consumption."

"Multigrade oils of SAE 10W50 grades show quite different abilities to control blowby depending on the VI improver used. These multigrades are generally superior to a monograde SAE 50. Both viscosity-temperature characteristics and temporary shear may be significant parameters. Viscosity at temperatures well above 210F appears to be controlling."

Table A3 clearly shows an improvement from lower viscosity to higher viscosity except for BB40.

Your statement about this being a diesel proves to me you did not read the article:

"In an attempt to confirm the above trends in an unmodified multicylinder gasoline engine, a test program was established using a 350 CID engine operated on a test stand under road load conditions of 30 MPH (1500 RPM) and 50 MPH (2500 RPM)." - This is table A-3

While it is an old study, that doesn't mean it should be ignored.

On to your fuel dilution comment:
Did I post a UOA of my engine running Liqui Moly? I didn't. You're trying to compare fuel dilution from another persons UOA.

1) Mileage is different
2) Tune is different
3) Engine is different
4) Climate is different
5) Mileage driven one-way is different. Checkout the fuel dilution on a UOA of an engine that doesn't get up to temp before its shut off.

This comparison you tried to make is laughable, especially for a self-proclaimed lawyer.

FYI, there is a reason why the liqui-moly 5-40 isn't ll-01 certified.

You obviously didn't research Liqui Moly 5W-40 as it is BMW LL-01 approved. https://products.liqui-moly.us/leich...e-5w-40-2.html

NOACK is 10% not 12%.

Life of oil is of little importance to me as oil is changed every 4000 miles due to track time (drag & autocross) and abuse this car sees.

[bahn]

bbnks2 If you want to discuss oil more, lets make a thread about oil and not pollute this thread. As previously stated, I'll keep this thread updated with pictures and results of my bore scoping of the cylinders & turbo seal and I'll also keep this thread updated with oil consumption.

[bbnks2]

Originally Posted by bahn

For not trying to argue you sure are arguing a bunch. "Not trying to argue" is something someone with a passive aggressive personality says when they dont want to look like an asshole. I did read the study, did you not read it?

You are the one who replied with a snarky remark about me in your initial reply which turns it into an argument instead of a debate with counterpoints. I am simply countering what you said, not arguing. This is a forum for discussion.

Don't try to deflect from someone contradicting your statements by asking to take the discussion elsewhere...

Originally Posted by bahn

"The viscosity of a lubricant is among its most important characteristics as this contributes to control the oil consumption."

Yes, absolutely, which is why it’s so important to stick to the oil weight spec’d for the given engine tolerances (LL-01 approval). It is also why the study you keep quoting ran 5 different straight weight oils through the engine to determine the engines tolerance to different oil viscosity! That is how they chose the reference oil (BB3).

Originally Posted by bahn

"Multigrade oils of SAE 10W50 grades show quite different abilities to control blowby depending on the VI improver used. These multigrades are generally superior to a monograde SAE 50.”

THIS IS THE RESULT OF THE TEST: "oils of SAE 10W50 grades show quite different abilities to control blowby depending on the VI improver used." Read that again as many times as it takes to sink in.

Every oil tested BB6-BB40 all had just about the same damn cSt at 210f ~17.00-18.00 (SAE 50), see "Table 2 - oils for blow-by tests." The only difference between them was formulation used to achieve the 10w-50 viscosity spread (modifiers).

Are you getting why I said that this test doesn't show what you think it does yet?

Also, do you realize what you’re quoting? You are quoting a study from 1977. They were using conventional oil stock. They were not using group IV synthetics that BMW LL-01 calls for. There is a big difference to what adding modifiers to a conventional oil stock is going to do vs adding modifiers to a synthetic stock.

Originally Posted by bahn

"Both viscosity-temperature characteristics and temporary shear may be significant parameters. Viscosity at temperatures well above 210F appears to be controlling."

Do you realize what they are saying here? The study is referencing the conventional oils degradation from an average of cSt 17.xx at 210f down to an effective cSt of as little as 3.xx to 5.xx at 350f. The speculation is that high heat, and the resulting viscosity loss, would fail to properly lubricate the engine (in the case of this test, it was SAE 50 used as reference) and result in contributing to blow-by. A VALID CONCERN! However, this was not what was tested. The test was performed at a controlled 230f.

The kind of viscosity loss seen in this study DOES NOT OCCUR with modern synthetics especially not the ones qualified as BMW LL-01.

Originally Posted by bahn

Table A3 clearly shows an improvement from lower viscosity to higher viscosity except for BB40.

Your statement about this being a diesel proves to me you did not read the article:

"In an attempt to confirm the above trends in an unmodified multicylinder gasoline engine, a test program was established using a 350 CID engine operated on a test stand under road load conditions of 30 MPH (1500 RPM) and 50 MPH (2500 RPM)." - This is table A-3

Please go back and review "Table 2" which shows all oils tested were graded as SAE 10w50 (cSt of 17.xx @ 210f). Tests were performed at a sump temperature of 230f.

Originally Posted by bahn

While it is an old study, that doesn't mean it should be ignored.

Yes, it should be ignored as it offers no data relevant to our platform. The only thing it tested was the effect of various modifiers on conventional oils stability as measured by resulting blow-by. Useless.

The only takeaway from that study is that you should choose the oil that maintains its properties the best (modifiers clearly play a key role in this) and stick with the oil weight spec'd for the engine (which is what I suggested).

Originally Posted by bahn

On to your fuel dilution comment:
Did I post a UOA of my engine running Liqui Moly? I didn't. You're trying to compare fuel dilution from another persons UOA.

If the comparison is so erroneous, then why did YOU compare your BMW UOA to the LiquiMoly UOA in the first place? I was just following YOUR logic and using the data YOU posted to counter what YOU said (discrediting you).

Originally Posted by bahn

This comparison you tried to make is laughable, especially for a self-proclaimed lawyer.

You're quoting a study from 1977, while also misinterpreting it, and what I am saying is laughable?

Self-proclaimed lawyer? Where did you get that from? I’ve never proclaimed to be a lawyer. Being logical doesn’t make me a lawyer. Or, are you referencing my post in the DIY tuning thread where I said I would want PROOF that Justin was laying eggs in the public xdf before I jumped to any conclusions? SMH

The only thing that is laughable is that I took my time to actually rebut all this. Let the OP run thicker oil! That's what you've convinced him will help!

Originally Posted by bahn

FYI, there is a reason why the liqui-moly 5-40 isn't ll-01 certified.

You obviously didn't research Liqui Moly 5W-40 as it is BMW LL-01 approved. https://products.liqui-moly.us/leich...e-5w-40-2.html

NOACK is 10% not 12%.

Life of oil is of little importance to me as oil is changed every 4000 miles due to track time (drag & autocross) and abuse this car sees.

Maybe you were informed enough to order the EU liquiMoly. If not, here is the data sheet for the LiquiMoly we get here in the states: https://pim.liqui-moly.de/pidoc/P000...40-13.0-us.pdf

I don't care what oil you run, and I don't care about oil longevity either.
We are discussing excessive oil loss here and oil type has been suggested as a possible contributing factor. My disclaimer was that moving to a THICKER oil may be counter productive IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE. Thicker oils aren't necessarily any less volatile, as I've already shared an example of...

So what properties of an oil would contribute to excessive oil loss? Well, its evaporative properties (NOACK) and its formulation. Some oils have been proven to be better formulated (higher quality) and resist viscosity loss better. Neither of those have to do with the oils WEIGHT.

To add to my comment that thicker oil isn't the answer, there is research out there that shows that a 20wt oil actually REDUCES oil consumption past piston rings (blow-by) vs a similar 40wt oil. Something to do with better film formation at the seal due to better flow rate? I don't know the details and I don't really care to research it lol!

[bahn]

I've already said my bit guy, if you want to ignore it then do so.

f the comparison is so erroneous, then why did YOU compare your BMW UOA to the LiquiMoly UOA in the first place? I was just following YOUR logic and using the data YOU posted to counter what YOU said (discrediting you).

I can compare them because the fuel dilution is identical.

Go ahead and get the last word you man you.

[flexinator]

Some oil consumption is normal for the n55. It seems leaking oil filter gaskets are common too. Remember to use only bmw LL01 oils. I can't believe the dealer said use any synthetic 5w-30! Oil loss is from burn off, blow by, or leaky seals. A quart in 200mi is way too much but a quart every few thousand miles, especially in a modified n55, is par for the course.

The N55 Engine: http://www.1addicts.com/forums/attac...8&d=1317333814

[bbnks2]

Originally Posted by bahn

I've already said my bit guy, if you want to ignore it then do so.



I can compare them because the fuel dilution is identical.

Go ahead and get the last word you man you.

Are you upset I proved you completely wrong?

What's the point of participating in a forum if you can't handle someone rebutting your comments? How is this forum supposed to add any value to the community if wrong information or bad advice is being shared and no one's allowed to say otherwise?