Like I asked - can you point me to the UOAs or a spreadsheet of them? I'm not trying to be facetious here, nor am I trying to represent myself as an expert on the m96. I don't have access to a bunch of m96 UOAs either (short of lots of google searching).
We have collected, at our customer's expense, a significant amount of UoA data in a SQL database spanning a very long time frame. During that time, we have been able to see the impact of product reformulations, and in some cases the degradation, of what were once top notch products. As such, the data represents the intellectual property of both my business and that of my customers, by prior agreement. While I have, from time to time, "published" some excerpts of the data in thread exchanges on this site and others, I am not about to provide free access to what has take years to acquire at considerable expense, primarily because of the potential legal issues involved (some companies just love to sue, even when they are wrong and you can prove it), and because history has repeatedly demonstrated that such disclosures simply start meaningless, and typically unsubstantiated arguments. If you have a specific question, I will attempt to provide an answer, with supporting data.
My short google search led me to other postings of yours with similar statements. Frankly, my exchanges with lubrication engineers (specifically, automotive oils for street use) have led me to argee with you that several Mobil oils are terrible....but their 0w40 and 15w50 synthetic blends are top notch. Their 0w40 DOES shear down to a 0w30, but from what I can tell it was always intended to be a 0w30 and had VIIs added to bring it to 0w40 for european spec requirements, not to make it a better lubricant.
A one point, Mobil 1 0W-40 was a pretty decent oil, but ever since Exxon acquired Mobil, it has been going down hill. When first introduced, is was suspected that this product was a true Group IV based oil, but as it has gone thru several reformulations, no one really knows what it is currently. It is known that the most recent version took multiple attempts to get it to pass the ACEA A3, B3, B4 specs, and then only barely. The 15W-50, once a mainstay of the air-cooled crowd, no longer carries any ACEA ratings, as backed up by its equally dismal UoA’s. Hardly what I would call stellar performance.
My understanding is that the m96 is, short of the early design problems and the IMS, a very well built and designed engine with very few problem areas within the lubricated & reciprocating masses. So your statements about oil passages clogging, chain tensioners, and dry bearings catch me somewhat by surprise. Are those common failure points in these engines? If so, ok, good to know.
Lifter and chain tensioner noise and collapsed lifter issues are a constantly reoccurring theme on technical sites such as RennTech and over at Jake Raby’s FlatSixInnovations sites. Oil starvation under hard cornering has also claimed more M96’s than most would believe, do a search for track related failures and I’m sure you find plenty of interesting reading. Short of an M96 with the factory X51 option (which added a deeper sump and a “North West Passage” oil return from an additional scavenging pump), hard track time requires an Accusump at a minimum….
Also, my statements regarding boxers being easy on oil was, as was stated and intended, a generalization. Boxer engines in general tend to REQUIRE less oil because of the shorter paths to return and the less time spent by oil getting heat and more time spent in cooler areas or in the general sump. That, combined with the very large sump in the m96, combined with my general understanding of the m96 being a very bulletproof engine and not having alot of lubricated-part failures...well, you can see my inferences.
I would truly love to dig through those UOAs if you can point me in the direction. Also, I'll reconsider what oil I choose to put in my boxster if your data indicates such consideration is warranted.
Heat is a far bigger issue than you give it credit for. Most M96’s typically run well over 210F in relatively cool conditions on the street (the dash display is notoriously inaccurate and non linear in its readings). Add to that the number of internal “hot spots” within the cooling system, and you have questionable oils running at excessively high average operating temps. You also have, as noted by others, a cooling system using an impeller design the often leads to debris plugged cooling passages, raising the engines internal heat levels to the point that head cracking is a common event. Not exactly what comes to mind when someone says “bullet proof”…………..