Comparing "old" to "new" Mobil 1
- Thread starter olefam
- Start date
- Status
I was really upset when I heard that Mobil 1 might be mostly a Group III oil now. Especially after Mobil made such a big deal when Castrol did the same thing a long time ago. And I still have questionas about the price of Mobil 1 if Group III oil is cheaper to make.
But the bottom line is Mobil 1 today may be as good or even better than it ever was, Group III or no Group III. There is apparently some evidence that Group III oil may reduce certain types of engine wear. And maybe Group III is more compatible with oil additives of various types. Maybe Exxon/Mobil HAD to go to Group III (if they did) because of hurricane caused shortages of PAO or very high costs of PAO.
As long as the Mobil 1 will still flow at very low temperatures (for wintertime protection) and will stay work as well as it ever did Mobil 1 is still worth consideration. However, assuming that Mobil 1 is today mostly Group III, I think a person should be willing to consider other motor oils that use Group III, such as Chevron Synthetic.
But the bottom line is Mobil 1 today may be as good or even better than it ever was, Group III or no Group III. There is apparently some evidence that Group III oil may reduce certain types of engine wear. And maybe Group III is more compatible with oil additives of various types. Maybe Exxon/Mobil HAD to go to Group III (if they did) because of hurricane caused shortages of PAO or very high costs of PAO.
As long as the Mobil 1 will still flow at very low temperatures (for wintertime protection) and will stay work as well as it ever did Mobil 1 is still worth consideration. However, assuming that Mobil 1 is today mostly Group III, I think a person should be willing to consider other motor oils that use Group III, such as Chevron Synthetic.
Is this recent? Isn't that a point blank denial to using group III?
edit: Sorry Greg, I should have kept reading. I obviously have the same question!
Last edited:
All this talk about Mobil 1 being group III "cracks" me up. People are basing this on very little proof. Once again, speculation has become accepted as fact here on the Net.
Ok, I'm a little slow. Isn't ex-Mobil saying they are PAO and not hydrocracked? I'm reading that, but the comments seem to indicate they are not saying that. If your response is, "I don't trust them" then I understand. But they are saying it is PAO.
Here are my final thoughts on the subject after speaking with someone that knows people in the oil industry. The guys at Mobil were never all that thrilled about the ExxonMobil merger. It has been said that Exxon became more interested in profit margins while Mobil wanted to keep it as the highest quality flagship product. My .02 fwiw.
Before they merged, Mobil clearly stated that Mobil 1 was a PAO and Ester based oil. It seems that as time went on, the wording became more evasive.
Before they merged, Mobil clearly stated that Mobil 1 was a PAO and Ester based oil. It seems that as time went on, the wording became more evasive.
Ha ha, what an UNDERSTATEMENT !!!!
I was an employee at Exxon (in IT dept) at the time of the merger (and leading up to the merger).
First, Exxon is a VERY secretative company... as in wanting to keep a low profile... as in staying out of the News... as in very private and descrete.
Second, the public outside of Exxon never heard the REAL story of the merger. Only the employees at EXXON knew the true inside story of the merger.
The story : Mobil got RAPED !!!!! It was a "fire sale". There were nearly zero Mobil employees that stayed on-board and made the transition to ExxonMobil. Exxon was ONLY interested in the overseas oil reserves that Mobil had. Exxon was very weak in offshore oil reserves. Mobil was rich in overseas reserves. Hence, the "fire sale". When Exxon aquired Mobil, Exxon only kept the overseas reserves. All other assests of Mobil (including Mobil employess) were "thrown to the wind".
MOBIL --->
I too know how it feels to get kicked to the curb. Shell did the kicking. I am done with Mobil 1.Quote:
Ha ha, what an UNDERSTATEMENT !!!!
I was an employee at Exxon (in IT dept) at the time of the merger (and leading up to the merger).
First, Exxon is a VERY secretative company... as in wanting to keep a low profile... as in staying out of the News... as in very private and descrete.
Second, the public outside of Exxon never heard the REAL story of the merger. Only the employees at EXXON knew the true inside story of the merger.
The story : Mobil got RAPED !!!!! It was a "fire sale". There were nearly zero Mobil employees that stayed on-board and made the transition to ExxonMobil. Exxon was ONLY interested in the overseas oil reserves that Mobil had. Exxon was very weak in offshore oil reserves. Mobil was rich in overseas reserves. Hence, the "fire sale". When Exxon aquired Mobil, Exxon only kept the overseas reserves. All other assests of Mobil (including Mobil employess) were "thrown to the wind".
MOBIL --->
"Mobil 1 uses high-performance synthetic fluids, including polyalphaolefins (PAO), along with a proprietary system of additives."
From this statement it is apparent that Mobil 1 includes other "high performance synthetic fluids" apart from PAO's in its formulation. It's certainly possible that this definition can allow for the use of Group III's.
From this statement it is apparent that Mobil 1 includes other "high performance synthetic fluids" apart from PAO's in its formulation. It's certainly possible that this definition can allow for the use of Group III's.
I found this doing a little google drifting. Looks like it's some M1 testing on the VW 502 standard. At the end, it discusses the amounts of PAO needed to avoid viscosity increase during the test:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6060437.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6060437.html
Buster,
It's open knowledge that many of the old time Mobil guys in their chemical engineering and lab departments bailed after the merger. **** in Falls Church can tell you a lot more than I can about the specifics of this. Ironically, I wouldn't be surprised if some of them ended up with Amsoil and other competitive companies....
TS
It's open knowledge that many of the old time Mobil guys in their chemical engineering and lab departments bailed after the merger. **** in Falls Church can tell you a lot more than I can about the specifics of this. Ironically, I wouldn't be surprised if some of them ended up with Amsoil and other competitive companies....
TS
I'm sure many of them left, but I'm sure XOM has their own that are very capable as well. They all do. The point I was trying to make was that when the merger took place, the mood was that it became more of push to make it a more profitable product rather then the best it could be. It's anyone's guess really and silly to even try to assume what they are thinking.
- Status
Similar threads
