Amsoil & Mobil 1 test page- Has anyone seen this?
- Thread starter JGmazda
- Start date
- Status
Interesting to say the least...at first I thought it was one of those Amsoil tests like the ones on their site...to my surprise it wasn't...those copper levels were scary...I believe any oil will look like this after so many miles...of course I have never went over 3000 miles on an oil change...I've got Amsoil XL in my Prizm now...I hope I can hold out to 7500...
First of all the guy that ran the tests is/was a BITOG member. So those "tests" were fully watched and talked about, way back (2003) when they took place.
You need to read this:
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/oil-life.html
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Several members here even paid for some of the UOA's. (Look for my real name)
Anyhow - there are some issues with the test. The M1 got a filter change and top up, the car was not in perfect running order, his driving style changed radically, First M1 was during break in, he suddenly terminated the test on the second M1 run......
As for the Amsoil - it went 13-14 months. The wear wasn't out of control. Indeed the old formula did thicken to a light SAE 40 (13 cSt) in 2003. But that was at least 3 formula changes ago. No need to worry about the XL in your car now!
You need to read this:
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/oil-life.html
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
Several members here even paid for some of the UOA's. (Look for my real name)
Anyhow - there are some issues with the test. The M1 got a filter change and top up, the car was not in perfect running order, his driving style changed radically, First M1 was during break in, he suddenly terminated the test on the second M1 run......
As for the Amsoil - it went 13-14 months. The wear wasn't out of control. Indeed the old formula did thicken to a light SAE 40 (13 cSt) in 2003. But that was at least 3 formula changes ago. No need to worry about the XL in your car now!
I would say the tests on Mobil 1 did prove one thing. At least as late as when these tests were done Mobil 1 was a PAO oil. This was in 03 wasn't it? If it was group 3
it performed pretty incredible for hydrocracked dino.
Thanks Pablo for the links... The one thing that I found interesting was their comment about formulation. Seems Mobil 1 and Amsoil have their own ideas on what makes a good synth.
I haven't done the research yet... but am thinking about a future OCI with an Amsoil product. Going for a 7,500K OCI as a goal with a 4qt. sump. Average temps and driving.
What's the difference in your "XL" series VS. Regular Amsoil 5w30? Is it akin to Mobil 1's "EP" formulas?
Thanks
I haven't done the research yet... but am thinking about a future OCI with an Amsoil product. Going for a 7,500K OCI as a goal with a 4qt. sump. Average temps and driving.
What's the difference in your "XL" series VS. Regular Amsoil 5w30? Is it akin to Mobil 1's "EP" formulas?
Thanks
That test is kinda old, wish they did a new one.
Pablo I should have worded my post differently...I was not comparing the oil in my car to the tests...I trust the XL...the car runs great and makes less strange noises at startup and warmup...I do have the EAO filter also...this may be the reason startup is so much smoother...
I am slightly skeptical of extended drains in this car...if you saw my last UOA one would see a tbn of 1.something and worry to...this after 3000 miles...that UOA was not Amsoil...but the previous owners did not stick to recommend oci's and they did extended drains on conventional...I bought XL to get my tbn under control...a short interval of XL for insurance...maybe then Series 2000...
I am slightly skeptical of extended drains in this car...if you saw my last UOA one would see a tbn of 1.something and worry to...this after 3000 miles...that UOA was not Amsoil...but the previous owners did not stick to recommend oci's and they did extended drains on conventional...I bought XL to get my tbn under control...a short interval of XL for insurance...maybe then Series 2000...
It is hard for someone like me, who buys used cars to do extended drains...plus the world I grew up in (the Deep South in the eighties) brainwashed me into 3000 mile oci's...slowly I have been rehabilitated by BITOG...I do appreciate the link because it is always good to see UOA's of extended drains...I do believe these UOA's are not scientific method....fun to read but useless for conclusion...
Totally different "marketing goals" so to speak. Amsoil XL oils are Group III oils which are fully SM - API licensed. (Originally they weren't group III) They are designed for folks who want the API, don't do super long OCI's and not the full expense of PAO/Esters. The goal is to sell to quick oil change places. I sell a lot of and use the 5W-20 XLM. Dropping all the marketing speak, the oil performs great and people come back for more when they see it has zero problems doing the 7500 miles.
Aren't the XL oils aimed at quick lube shops?
FYI, the XL have always had group III as the primary base stock. And, yes, the XL oils were aimed at a niche market-- quick lubes and shops which wanted customers coming back at least every six months.
Yes - As I stated above.
**** - think back when they changed - they were at least a PAO blend originally in 2000 or so when they changed. I remember a small hub-bub about it.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Something interesting concerning Amsoil..........I was reading an article in the Houston newspaper about a hybrid car club and their quest for getting the best gas milage. They had a pic of this guy standing next to his hybrid car and another pic of various gadgets and tools he uses to help boost his mileage,and in the pic was a quart of Amsoil!
Any one know why he stopped his testing even though he stated that he had it all paid for for many many more oil changes?
I think it was mainly a hassle for him, he started to let the car sit a lot while he rode his motorcycle, he did some engine work, etc. You tell by his web pages he is quite an interesting fellow.
Hey Pablo, here's a test question for ya:
What set-up engine and car wise would you like to see just how far Amsoil could be pushed to the limits of it's ability to properly do the job AFTER a complete break-in AND flush with Amsoil for 1000 miles?
1) Easy on oil engine.
2) Moderate on oil engine.
3) Sludge monster with oil engine
4) That RS4 Audi engine.
I would have to admit, keeping the variables to a minimum would be very hard. You would have to set up a specific pattern of driving, and stick with it, period. You would have to hope that you could get the same specific fuel (if that would even be possible given all of the posts about fuel quality and tampering these days).
Sound like a plan Pab's?
What set-up engine and car wise would you like to see just how far Amsoil could be pushed to the limits of it's ability to properly do the job AFTER a complete break-in AND flush with Amsoil for 1000 miles?
1) Easy on oil engine.
2) Moderate on oil engine.
3) Sludge monster with oil engine
4) That RS4 Audi engine.
I would have to admit, keeping the variables to a minimum would be very hard. You would have to set up a specific pattern of driving, and stick with it, period. You would have to hope that you could get the same specific fuel (if that would even be possible given all of the posts about fuel quality and tampering these days).
Sound like a plan Pab's?
And folks wonder why there aren't more true comparisons.
Ideally I'd love a comparison in all those conditions - but immediately my ideals are dashed against the rocks - because mainly I could and certainly would recommend a different Amsoil for each of the 4 engines.
So if you chose just 1, I guess it would be 3) sludge engine performance if it was against conventional oils..... if you choose the others you would get just as much "not real world conditions", but with a sludge engine one could gain bragging rights vs. a real known phenomena.
No, you would need a whole lot of planning and time and money even if you set up a good DOE. If it was easy, it would have been done years ago and repeated many times.
Ideally I'd love a comparison in all those conditions - but immediately my ideals are dashed against the rocks - because mainly I could and certainly would recommend a different Amsoil for each of the 4 engines.
So if you chose just 1, I guess it would be 3) sludge engine performance if it was against conventional oils..... if you choose the others you would get just as much "not real world conditions", but with a sludge engine one could gain bragging rights vs. a real known phenomena.
No, you would need a whole lot of planning and time and money even if you set up a good DOE. If it was easy, it would have been done years ago and repeated many times.
True, I forgot about that approach, as each engine would require a different level of oil so to speak.
I NEVER wondered why there is more true comparisons. No company in their right mind (let alone the hit to the CO's pocketbooks) would conduct the tests required to do the actual ability. So for now, we can to sort through all of the bologna, jargon, and crapola in the advertisements, websites, and facts that they do give, and make an educated guess from there...
Wait a minute..we're right back to where we are now!!!
And Pablo...I like Amsoil.
I NEVER wondered why there is more true comparisons. No company in their right mind (let alone the hit to the CO's pocketbooks) would conduct the tests required to do the actual ability. So for now, we can to sort through all of the bologna, jargon, and crapola in the advertisements, websites, and facts that they do give, and make an educated guess from there...
Wait a minute..we're right back to where we are now!!!
And Pablo...I like Amsoil.
- Status
Similar threads
