API "Doughnut" back on M1

Messages
553
Location
USA
Hi I noticed after a trip to walmart tonight that 5qt jugs of 5w-30 M1 now sport the Doughnut on front panel again although the Katrina "Suitable" is still on the back. Also, jugs of 5 & 10w-30 Havoline are back after a long hiatus, although still nada as far as quarts are concerned.
 
Messages
26
Location
Iowa
I see the API 'starburst' on the front of the M1 jugs, but the 'doughnut' is still missing on the back label. It is replaced by the words "suitable for". Also on the back label previous phrase "exceeds", is replaced by "suitable for".
 
Messages
254
Location
richmond va
Guys DONT use these Mobil products that dont have either the ILSAC starburst symbol or the API service donut. I have looked very carefully at all the leading brands of motor oil , and MOBIL is the only one that lacks these approvals. Has anyone seen others?
 

lght1

Thread starter
Messages
553
Location
USA
Hi I stand corrected... starburst. However, for a time, it also was missing. Yes, $7.00 plus. I would be using it still save for the extreme cold weather we get the next few months.
 
Messages
142
Location
Atlanta
quote:
Also on the back label previous phrase "exceeds", is replaced by "suitable for".
That must mean M1 is now as good as AMSoil.
 

lght1

Thread starter
Messages
553
Location
USA
Hi I thought I read in another thread that Mobil was asked about post Katrina, and the response was that it was just a matter of testing/evaluation which took time and thus no starburst/donuts. As I understood it, the new blend was everybit as capable as the pre september stuff.
 

X72

Messages
85
Location
Atlanta area, USA
I responded to a poster on an MB board asking about M1 0W-40 and use in his 2000 E 320. He posted a picture of the bottle. http://www.mbnz.org/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1238236&posts=6&fid=17 In a nutshell, I told him it was a fine oil for his car. But something bothered me. I then looked at my stash and saw the difference. The "Suitable for" language and API doughnut changes. It also makes no mention of GF-3 or GF-4 on either the pre-Sept or post-Sept oil M1 0W-40. It does say it meets MB 229.5, so I am using it. lght1, I wonder why Mobil is releasing the oil without the API dougnut, unless they have to do the testing as they go since they had to make a formula change because of some supply constraint.
 
Messages
6,786
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
Response from Mobil....Hurricane formulations? tenderloin Member # 722 posted November 08, 2005 10:38 PMNovember 09, 2005 12:38 PM The hurricanes did affect the supply of one of the additives used in the Mobil1 motor oil formulation thus, we had to reformulate using different additive technology. Mobil has tested the new formulation on many different platforms and is extremely confident that the new formulation will offer at least the same protection and performance you have come to expect from Mobil1 motor oils. The reason the API verbage is not used is because anytime a petroleum marketer changes the chemistry of a product you must retest with the API to have this language on the bottle which is a long process and we should have it completed in 2-3 months. Mobil stands behind our product 100% just like we always have and we do not believe it is inferior in anyway compared to the older formulation. -Matt
 
Messages
2,233
Location
Wisconsin
quote:
It also makes no mention of GF-3 or GF-4 on either the pre-Sept or post-Sept oil M1 0W-40.
It never carried the ILSAC GF-3 or GF-4 certification. Typically, an ACEA A3 rated oil will not list GF-4 or the API starburst since both require a passing score in the Sequence VIB fuel economy test. Which is pretty tough, as an A3 oil with 3.5+ HTHS, running anywhere from 12-15 cSt, would have to beat a 10 cSt PAO reference oil by a 1-2% margin in fuel economy.
 
Messages
2,233
Location
Wisconsin
I can't see any problems with what ExxonMobil is doing with the "suitable for" language on the label. The API regulations for substituting base oils and additives are complex and XOM is playing this one out "by the book". API didn't take a way the license, this was all done voluntarily by XOM. The lack of the API donut on the label does not indicate that the formulation fails to meet the API SL/SM service grade. It just indicates that the oil has not completed the full testing sequence. It may take weeks to get all the licensing tests completed - the above mentioned Sequence VIB runs for a total of 96 hours, the sequence VG sludge test is 216 hrs! As far as the other major brands, substitutions do to the widespread additive shortages may be going on, we just aren't aware of it. This is a one-of-a-kind situation & I'm sure 98% of loyal M1 users are going to continue to use the products.
 

X72

Messages
85
Location
Atlanta area, USA
Thank you tenderloin, Blue99 and lght1. I always learn so much from the incredible (at least to me) depth of knowledge on this board. I still have a lot to learn, but reading the BITOG boards is a great help to me. Thanks again!!
 
Top