XOM may have an uncertain future, but I think they can still beat up Valvoline with man-power and dollars like a school-yard bully beats up a little nerd. Notice the claw-sharpening meaning behind: "We will respond to Valvoline in due time."
Anyone see this?
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
JAG,
I believe this Nissan engine has flat tappets and a fairly aggressive cam lobe profile, hence the ASTM D-4172 test IS relevant to some degree. Amsoils' recent data for their SS 0w-30 shows poor results for the M1, 5w-30 in the four ball wear test. So the Valv. Data makes sense....
Glad to see you're still cooking lube oil samples on the grill! Remind me to never eat your barbecue...
I believe this Nissan engine has flat tappets and a fairly aggressive cam lobe profile, hence the ASTM D-4172 test IS relevant to some degree. Amsoils' recent data for their SS 0w-30 shows poor results for the M1, 5w-30 in the four ball wear test. So the Valv. Data makes sense....
Glad to see you're still cooking lube oil samples on the grill! Remind me to never eat your barbecue...
TeeDub, I'm glad to see you posting again. I can't imagine what would possess you to move from Dixie-land to New York! Just kidding. I'm sure there was justifiable cause.
I am a harsh critic of Mobil 1 5W-30. I am not surprised by any poor result it shows in any area other than high temperature deposit control and fuel economy. They did a very good job of making a compromised oil. Their 10W-30 looks much better.
About the Nissan engine...are you talking about the VQ35 in my Infiniti G35? I recently had a look at one of its cam lobes and saw more signs of wear on it than I'd like. It has only ~55K miles on it.
You are welcome to a barbecue anytime at my house. I promise it wouldn't be tainted with motor oil!
I am a harsh critic of Mobil 1 5W-30. I am not surprised by any poor result it shows in any area other than high temperature deposit control and fuel economy. They did a very good job of making a compromised oil. Their 10W-30 looks much better.
About the Nissan engine...are you talking about the VQ35 in my Infiniti G35? I recently had a look at one of its cam lobes and saw more signs of wear on it than I'd like. It has only ~55K miles on it.
You are welcome to a barbecue anytime at my house. I promise it wouldn't be tainted with motor oil!
maybe this is where some of the 'reason' the valvoline is being pushed more.
pretty impressive and royal purple is too.
big file.
http://www.animegame.com/cars/Oil Tests.pdf
copy and paste if needed, and read the results, i may be changing to valvoline blend. i have used castrol, mobil, dino and synthetic.
but is is hard to not believe the test above.
i was impressed. to say the least.
they said the royal purple polished the tiny spot. (could you imageine the cylinder walls using r purple.
hiik.
yarddog
pretty impressive and royal purple is too.
big file.
http://www.animegame.com/cars/Oil Tests.pdf
copy and paste if needed, and read the results, i may be changing to valvoline blend. i have used castrol, mobil, dino and synthetic.
but is is hard to not believe the test above.
i was impressed. to say the least.
they said the royal purple polished the tiny spot. (could you imageine the cylinder walls using r purple.
hiik.
yarddog
The problem with a test like this, or the somewhat similar 4-ball test, is that it only tests one very small aspect of an oil's performance. There are so many variables that go into the overall performance of an oil, or even the subset of wear performance, that a single test is very unlikely to give you good information.
As for XOM's response to Valvoline, it has all the marks of the classic "offense-as-defense." Lots of bluster, threats, and feigned incredulity but even less substance than the actual claim from Valvoline, which did at least have a graph and was presumably (and it would be foolish if it weren't) based on a very comprehensive and well accepted test of engine wear.
yeh load wear was good, but There are so many variables like you stated.
yd
yd
The engineer I've spoken with that does endurance testing for GM said Mobil 1 has no wear issues at all and would be his choice if he needed a synthetic. He assured me Mobil 1 has no wear control issues fwiw. So I don't know what to make of Valvoline's results but with Mobil 1 filled in so many high performance engines, and rarely do I hear of any oil related engine failures, I fail to see what the problem is with M1. I think because Mobil 1 is the #1 synthetic, people are always gunning for them to knock them off the top spot. Tear downs are the gold standard and that is what GM uses to evaluate engine wear with lubricants.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: buster
The engineer I've spoken with that does endurance testing for GM said Mobil 1 has no wear issues at all and would be his choice if he needed a synthetic. He assured me Mobil 1 has no wear control issues fwiw. So I don't know what to make of Valvoline's results but with Mobil 1 filled in so many high performance engines, and rarely do I hear of any oil related engine failures, I fail to see what the problem is with M1. I think because Mobil 1 is the #1 synthetic, people are always gunning for them to knock them off the top spot. Tear downs are the gold standard and that is what GM uses to evaluate engine wear with lubricants.
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
The engineer I've spoken with that does endurance testing for GM said Mobil 1 has no wear issues at all and would be his choice if he needed a synthetic. He assured me Mobil 1 has no wear control issues fwiw. So I don't know what to make of Valvoline's results but with Mobil 1 filled in so many high performance engines, and rarely do I hear of any oil related engine failures, I fail to see what the problem is with M1. I think because Mobil 1 is the #1 synthetic, people are always gunning for them to knock them off the top spot. Tear downs are the gold standard and that is what GM uses to evaluate engine wear with lubricants.
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
A ferrography would be nice to see.
I remember reading awhile back on one of the VW forums where someone ran Amsoil S2000 and the ferragraphy showed that despite the lower wear #'s, the Fe particles were much more severe than the other oil being used, which I believe was Delvac 1 at the time.
I remember reading awhile back on one of the VW forums where someone ran Amsoil S2000 and the ferragraphy showed that despite the lower wear #'s, the Fe particles were much more severe than the other oil being used, which I believe was Delvac 1 at the time.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: buster
A ferrography would be nice to see.
I remember reading awhile back on one of the VW forums where someone ran Amsoil S2000 and the ferragraphy showed that despite the lower wear #'s, the Fe particles were much more severe than the other oil being used, which I believe was Delvac 1 at the time.
BUSTER! You cannot be inferring that people should actually quantify the "high iron" judgements by using means other than data obtained from UOA's are you????
After all, if they cannot be picked on for cleanliness problems (pretty hard to attack that one), they have to have SOMETHING to bash Mobil 1 with!!!!
A ferrography would be nice to see.
I remember reading awhile back on one of the VW forums where someone ran Amsoil S2000 and the ferragraphy showed that despite the lower wear #'s, the Fe particles were much more severe than the other oil being used, which I believe was Delvac 1 at the time.
BUSTER! You cannot be inferring that people should actually quantify the "high iron" judgements by using means other than data obtained from UOA's are you????
After all, if they cannot be picked on for cleanliness problems (pretty hard to attack that one), they have to have SOMETHING to bash Mobil 1 with!!!!
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: glennc
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
Maybe it has something to do with a heat-activated additive? I honestly don't know. I'm not an oil expert, I'm a Network Engineer. But in the (admittedly limited) experience I have with the results of using M1, I have never observed WEAR as being an issue. So despite the high-iron claims, what I have actually seen has been NOTHING. And these are high mileage engines.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
Maybe it has something to do with a heat-activated additive? I honestly don't know. I'm not an oil expert, I'm a Network Engineer. But in the (admittedly limited) experience I have with the results of using M1, I have never observed WEAR as being an issue. So despite the high-iron claims, what I have actually seen has been NOTHING. And these are high mileage engines.
It would be nice to have more ferrography and other data. I have to assume that in general, if UOA shows a higher count, the likelihood is that the wear is higher. Clearly it is possible that it does not correlate, but not likely as far as I can tell.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: glennc
It would be nice to have more ferrography and other data. I have to assume that in general, if UOA shows a higher count, the likelihood is that the wear is higher. Clearly it is possible that it does not correlate, but not likely as far as I can tell.
Which is why I assume, as per what buster said, and what you seem to be echoing, that a ferrograph would be quite helpful. Who does these things?
It would be nice to have more ferrography and other data. I have to assume that in general, if UOA shows a higher count, the likelihood is that the wear is higher. Clearly it is possible that it does not correlate, but not likely as far as I can tell.
Which is why I assume, as per what buster said, and what you seem to be echoing, that a ferrograph would be quite helpful. Who does these things?
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: glennc
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
Maybe it has something to do with a heat-activated additive? I honestly don't know. I'm not an oil expert, I'm a Network Engineer. But in the (admittedly limited) experience I have with the results of using M1, I have never observed WEAR as being an issue. So despite the high-iron claims, what I have actually seen has been NOTHING. And these are high mileage engines.
I used M1 for years. It was my standard choice before finding BITOG and I always felt I was doing the best for my engines. Obviously I never had a problem either, but when would you expect to find one? I just figure that half the PPMs probably equals half the wear, more or less, and half the wear probably equals twice the remaining life, more or less.
Not saying M1 has double the PPMs, of course.
Originally Posted By: glennc
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Yup. For all we know, the "high" iron in the 5w30 grade may actually be an additive!
Well, none of the VOAs show any significant Fe. An example:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1041540
Maybe it has something to do with a heat-activated additive? I honestly don't know. I'm not an oil expert, I'm a Network Engineer. But in the (admittedly limited) experience I have with the results of using M1, I have never observed WEAR as being an issue. So despite the high-iron claims, what I have actually seen has been NOTHING. And these are high mileage engines.
I used M1 for years. It was my standard choice before finding BITOG and I always felt I was doing the best for my engines. Obviously I never had a problem either, but when would you expect to find one? I just figure that half the PPMs probably equals half the wear, more or less, and half the wear probably equals twice the remaining life, more or less.
Not saying M1 has double the PPMs, of course.
I just want to know where all the engine failures are? Every time I turn around, Joe Schmoe is on some forum claiming he put over 150,000 miles on his Corvette or Mercedes. I'm not arguing that Mobil 1 is the best oil either, but if it's so bad, where are the engines prematurely wearing out?
I actually commend Valvoline for using the Seq IVA test.
I actually commend Valvoline for using the Seq IVA test.
Originally Posted By: buster
From what I was told today, XOM lawyers are talking to Valvoline Lawyers. XOM is trying to get them to substantiate their claims.
Well of course they are. 30 seconds has passed... thats enough
E-M profit to pay for that lawsuit.
From what I was told today, XOM lawyers are talking to Valvoline Lawyers. XOM is trying to get them to substantiate their claims.
Well of course they are. 30 seconds has passed... thats enough
E-M profit to pay for that lawsuit.
Buster, you could not possibly find any engine failures attributed to excess wear with any oil, let alone M1. When an engine fails or wears out it is either premature, in which case the oil is not usually to blame, or at an appropriate mileage, in which case it is normal and nobody would think to question the oil. But maybe an engine that is ready for a rebuild at 230k would have gone to 270k on another oil or been worn at 200k with a third. One would just never have any way of quantifying it.
Oh, and don't mistake my posts, at least, for implying that anything about M1 is "bad." The question is only about which oils are best and even then it is for specific applications or in terms of specific characteristics.
Oh, and don't mistake my posts, at least, for implying that anything about M1 is "bad." The question is only about which oils are best and even then it is for specific applications or in terms of specific characteristics.
Last edited:
That was a [censored] good answer from Mobil!! I'm actually impressed....and it takes a lot to impress me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
