LM is *okay*. Despite the name, no molybdenum unless you run their additives, which drive the price up. M1 0w40/5w40 still has some moly, and still contains more ZDDP too.Except in my experience each of the 4 MK7s we’ve owned burned that M1 0w40 while I haven’t experienced that with LM or AMS 5w40 at all. My 2017 sport ran M1 for ~27k of its 37k miles before losing an engine.
Just my empirical opinion but I won’t run it anymore, certs or not and I’m fairly certain you’ve seen me post the M1 rebate threads up when it would happen back in 2016-2019. I ran the shit out of that stuff in a lot of cars.
Stick to 5k changes using LMs excellent oil and am also using a fuel additive by Driven racing oils to help with uncontrolled ethanol amounts permitted by the govt in both summer and winter months.
This was an interesting, data and real world experience driven, watch.
That said, I'm biased too, having blown up a motor on LM (which it was on the entire time I owned it).
IMO 0w40 is perfectly fine, but the porsche/corvette "race car oil" thing always strikes me as a weird justification. Most of those are aluminum, running larger clearances than our iron-block economy motors. Just because it's factory fill for an entirely unrelated motor doesn't mean it's the ideal choice.A 0W40 will also be appropriate (502 00) even if you are in a warm climate. Keep in mind they use M1 0W40 in Porsche race cars. Both are 40w oils.
If anything, conventional engine-building rules would say the stock clearances on our motors (.015" or less) require a 5w20/5w30, but everyone tuning them suggests a lot more HTST (5w40). Obviously VW has decided that anything in the 502 standard is cool for warranty, so it's mostly moot. But I am really curious if people go a bit overboard on viscosity.