Sorry, I got the dates mixed up. The first test was in 1993. The second test was in 2004.
Castrol EDGE 8 X better Wear Protection than Mobil
- Thread starter Art_Vandelay
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Hope that they all challenge Mobil.
Mobil had the heads up, but elected to leave it be.
i'm not sold much on mobil any more. too dear, and for what many now believe is an inferior product.
Amsoil is looking more and more attractive.
Hope that they all challenge Mobil.
Mobil had the heads up, but elected to leave it be.
i'm not sold much on mobil any more. too dear, and for what many now believe is an inferior product.
Amsoil is looking more and more attractive.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
reformulating the cheapest possible base concoction they can get away with semantically...
The same can now be said of Exxonmobil and Mobil 1. They're way down in the weeds now with their wording. They used to state exclusively that Mobil 1 was PAO. Not anymore!
Well, someone stated that they did say M1 is primarily PAO on the phone. And more than a few here "in the know" believe that M1 is still PAO, for better or worse.
And it's pretty clear that they want us to pay $8 a quart for something that is clearly very different from its Euro counterpart...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
reformulating the cheapest possible base concoction they can get away with semantically...
The same can now be said of Exxonmobil and Mobil 1. They're way down in the weeds now with their wording. They used to state exclusively that Mobil 1 was PAO. Not anymore!
Well, someone stated that they did say M1 is primarily PAO on the phone. And more than a few here "in the know" believe that M1 is still PAO, for better or worse.
And it's pretty clear that they want us to pay $8 a quart for something that is clearly very different from its Euro counterpart...
Originally Posted By: OMCWankel
I agree crinkles, Amsoil is looking more attractive.
I may pull the trigger on Amsoil soon :boom:
Yeah, at $8 a bottle it is sure is...I almost grabbed some the other day...
I agree crinkles, Amsoil is looking more attractive.
I may pull the trigger on Amsoil soon :boom:
Yeah, at $8 a bottle it is sure is...I almost grabbed some the other day...
I'm waiting and watching for the 5 gallon pails to show up at Sam's Club. No, what I want to know is the TBN of these oils since they claim the 15K mile thing. So does M1 EP which does not have enough TBN to go that distance most of the time. Wonder if it will be better with Edge. I doubt it but we'll see.
Originally Posted By: JAG
No, what I want to know is the TBN of these oils since they claim the 15K mile thing. So does M1 EP which does not have enough TBN to go that distance most of the time. Wonder if it will be better with Edge. I doubt it but we'll see.
I was thinking the same thing. I'd want at least a min Tbn of 11-12.
No, what I want to know is the TBN of these oils since they claim the 15K mile thing. So does M1 EP which does not have enough TBN to go that distance most of the time. Wonder if it will be better with Edge. I doubt it but we'll see.
I was thinking the same thing. I'd want at least a min Tbn of 11-12.
How is a high TBN achieved? Is it a function of the amount of additives? If so, is it possible that todays oil standards (such as API SM) limit the amount of TBN an oil can have by limiting the amount of additives?
Also, is it possible that some oil bases and add packs can be formulated in a way that despite having a a rather low starting TBN, they will not allow this TBN to drop as quickly?
Also, is it possible that some oil bases and add packs can be formulated in a way that despite having a a rather low starting TBN, they will not allow this TBN to drop as quickly?
I picked this up while searching Q&A on one of the web sites. I can't remember which oil manufacturer site it came from but you could search if you really wanted to.
"Total Base Number does not measure the accumulation of oxidation products or antioxidants, rather, it measures the depletion of a detergents present in an engine oil for the purposes of neutralizing acidic blow-by gases which occurs due to low levels of antioxidants with in the oil. As the detergent is consumed in its role of neutralizing sludge and varnish, the base number decreases from its original new oil value. Monitoring this consumption allows one to proactively replenish the oil through change out before the protection afforded by that additive is lost.
This is one reason why higher levels of TBN's can mislead you into thinking it is better when in fact all it is stating is that it has higher levels of detergents to keep the engine clean but the base oil can oxidize(or breakdown) faster than one with higher levels of antioxidants which prevents the acids by neutralizing the attacking acids as oppose to cleaning up the by products of the oxidized oil."
"Total Base Number does not measure the accumulation of oxidation products or antioxidants, rather, it measures the depletion of a detergents present in an engine oil for the purposes of neutralizing acidic blow-by gases which occurs due to low levels of antioxidants with in the oil. As the detergent is consumed in its role of neutralizing sludge and varnish, the base number decreases from its original new oil value. Monitoring this consumption allows one to proactively replenish the oil through change out before the protection afforded by that additive is lost.
This is one reason why higher levels of TBN's can mislead you into thinking it is better when in fact all it is stating is that it has higher levels of detergents to keep the engine clean but the base oil can oxidize(or breakdown) faster than one with higher levels of antioxidants which prevents the acids by neutralizing the attacking acids as oppose to cleaning up the by products of the oxidized oil."
Gold GC was G-III according to Carpy from XOM. To meet the Euro specs w/G-III must be more of a trick than to make a SM "synth" product. If Castrol just dyed Gold GC, nobody would have known, excepting the higher Mg in VOA and it never regained Porsche Approval. Funny, we saw GC running wear rates 1/8 of Mobil 1 right on the UOA Forum!
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
How is a high TBN achieved? Is it a function of the amount of additives? If so, is it possible that todays oil standards (such as API SM) limit the amount of TBN an oil can have by limiting the amount of additives?
Also, is it possible that some oil bases and add packs can be formulated in a way that despite having a a rather low starting TBN, they will not allow this TBN to drop as quickly?
TBN is mostly achieved through the type and quantity of the detergents. Yes, API SM and other specs do indirectly limit the TBN by the sulphated ash limit since the detergents contain metals (Ca, Mg, Na). Sometimes there are sulfur limits imposed and many but not all detergents contain sulfur.
If the motor oil has awesome everything in it but low starting TBN, that will help it not waste TBN by neutralizing acids that would not otherwise have formed as quickly. But still, it puts the oil at a disadvantage for long drains relative to what it could do with more starting TBN, within reason.
How is a high TBN achieved? Is it a function of the amount of additives? If so, is it possible that todays oil standards (such as API SM) limit the amount of TBN an oil can have by limiting the amount of additives?
Also, is it possible that some oil bases and add packs can be formulated in a way that despite having a a rather low starting TBN, they will not allow this TBN to drop as quickly?
TBN is mostly achieved through the type and quantity of the detergents. Yes, API SM and other specs do indirectly limit the TBN by the sulphated ash limit since the detergents contain metals (Ca, Mg, Na). Sometimes there are sulfur limits imposed and many but not all detergents contain sulfur.
If the motor oil has awesome everything in it but low starting TBN, that will help it not waste TBN by neutralizing acids that would not otherwise have formed as quickly. But still, it puts the oil at a disadvantage for long drains relative to what it could do with more starting TBN, within reason.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Gold GC was G-III according to Carpy from XOM. To meet the Euro specs w/G-III must be more of a trick than to make a SM "synth" product. If Castrol just dyed Gold GC, nobody would have known, excepting the higher Mg in VOA and it never regained Porsche Approval. Funny, we saw GC running wear rates 1/8 of Mobil 1 right on the UOA Forum!
Who is Carpy? I think that he is wrong because Green GC had equal, within measurement error, volatility when I tested them both. If the Gold used Group III in place of the PAO that was in the Green, the volatility would have changed. The thread with those results is in the Euro oil forum. Also a oil manufacturer made a presentation stating that it is not readily possible to make a 0W-X oil that meets the MB 229.5 spec. http://www.lubricantsuniversity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=128
Gold GC was G-III according to Carpy from XOM. To meet the Euro specs w/G-III must be more of a trick than to make a SM "synth" product. If Castrol just dyed Gold GC, nobody would have known, excepting the higher Mg in VOA and it never regained Porsche Approval. Funny, we saw GC running wear rates 1/8 of Mobil 1 right on the UOA Forum!
Who is Carpy? I think that he is wrong because Green GC had equal, within measurement error, volatility when I tested them both. If the Gold used Group III in place of the PAO that was in the Green, the volatility would have changed. The thread with those results is in the Euro oil forum. Also a oil manufacturer made a presentation stating that it is not readily possible to make a 0W-X oil that meets the MB 229.5 spec. http://www.lubricantsuniversity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=128
Originally Posted By: JAG
Who is Carpy?
I believe this is what AJ was referring to:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/composite-analysis-of-gc.56340/
Who is Carpy?
I believe this is what AJ was referring to:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/composite-analysis-of-gc.56340/
Notice, they have not attacked mobil 1 extended performance. Just the regular M1. My guess is extended performance far surpasses either castrol or synpower. However. Its oil. This is like arguing bout who's underwear is i better. Mines polyester and lasts longer. Yours is cotton and softer. Its preferance as to which underwear you like better.
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: rangerfan24
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
BAH HAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAH
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
BAH HAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAH
Have any OEM manufacturers terminated supply contracts with Mobil because of the claims by Castrol & Valvoline ??
I infer now all OEMs with 4x and 8x better protection available now can offer new cars with a:
12 year with 400000km or
24 year with 800000km warranties pending the oil used.
All of this just by chanaging oil brands, instead of the usual mundane 3 year with 100000km warranty.
I infer now all OEMs with 4x and 8x better protection available now can offer new cars with a:
12 year with 400000km or
24 year with 800000km warranties pending the oil used.
All of this just by chanaging oil brands, instead of the usual mundane 3 year with 100000km warranty.
Last edited:
Does that mean if you mix Castrol and Valvoline you get an oil with 12X better protection? 8+4=12?
Originally Posted By: rangerfan24
Notice, they have not attacked mobil 1 extended performance. Just the regular M1. My guess is extended performance far surpasses either castrol or synpower. However. Its oil. This is like arguing bout who's underwear is i better. Mines polyester and lasts longer. Yours is cotton and softer. Its preferance as to which underwear you like better.
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
Rangerfan24,
I hope your prediction concerning M1 calling out other company's products doesn't come to pass, That would cheapen their professionalism in my view. I use M1 oils because they have worked well for me, not because of any childish add campaign directed to the public at large.
Notice, they have not attacked mobil 1 extended performance. Just the regular M1. My guess is extended performance far surpasses either castrol or synpower. However. Its oil. This is like arguing bout who's underwear is i better. Mines polyester and lasts longer. Yours is cotton and softer. Its preferance as to which underwear you like better.
Prediction: In a month there will be a sticker on Mobil bottles saying it cleans 300X better than castrol and syntec or some b/s.
Rangerfan24,
I hope your prediction concerning M1 calling out other company's products doesn't come to pass, That would cheapen their professionalism in my view. I use M1 oils because they have worked well for me, not because of any childish add campaign directed to the public at large.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky