Divorcing Mobil 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
My next oil change is Mobil 1 5w30, and I love it. Period.

How can you get such a drastic noise level change from different oil? this is getting ridiculous.

And for leaks, well you have a a leak somewhere, its obvious.
 
Originally Posted By: lukejo
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Royal Purple has recently won me over in all of my vehicles over Mobil-1. Since Walmart is now carrying it. I tried it & immediately noticed a much smoother & quieter running motor in all my vehicles. Yes it a bit more expensive but the $10.00 more for a 5-quart container over Mobil-1 at wally world is not going to kill me! Luv Royal Purple!


Why is it so disliked on here? Is there a particular aspect to it that they think is bad, or is it simply that it is more expensive for no real benefit over M1 or PU/PP?

No real Benefit? I advised that immediately I noticed a quieter running & smoother running engine over Mobil-1! That to me is a real benefit! Royal Purple is made from group 4 & 5 base stocks unlike Mobil-1 which is a group 3. Hence you get what you pay for in this world & I can afford it! Throw in the fact that I can easily pick it up at Wally World as easily as Mobil-1 is a no brainer!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Originally Posted By: lukejo
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Royal Purple has recently won me over in all of my vehicles over Mobil-1. Since Walmart is now carrying it. I tried it & immediately noticed a much smoother & quieter running motor in all my vehicles. Yes it a bit more expensive but the $10.00 more for a 5-quart container over Mobil-1 at wally world is not going to kill me! Luv Royal Purple!


Why is it so disliked on here? Is there a particular aspect to it that they think is bad, or is it simply that it is more expensive for no real benefit over M1 or PU/PP?

No real Benefit? I advised that immediately I noticed a quieter running & smoother running engine over Mobil-1! That to me is a real benefit! Royal Purple is made from group 4 & 5 base stocks unlike Mobil-1 which is a group 3. Hence you get what you pay for in this world & I can afford it! Throw in the fact that I can easily pick it up at Wally World as easily as Mobil-1 is a no brainer!


"Royal Purple API-licensed Motor Oil combines premium base oils with proprietary additive technologies to create high performance motor oils"

Where does Royal Purple state that it uses group IV and V base stocks?
 
Originally Posted By: Overkill
Yeah, like we should all be listening to the guy who doesn't know what a connecting rod is right?

Do we really have to answer that? LOL This should get him.
troll-ex.png
 
Well after reading through the 13 pages it seems there is no reason for me to divorce Mobil 1 and I just went to Walmart and picked up a 5qt jug and a extra quart. Got oil and new Toyota oil filter ready to go.
 
Originally Posted By: -SyN-
I'm not throwing any Stones at anyone here!
This was taken from the 2013 GT-R Owners Manual!

M1 has the Confidence and Trust of Nissan Engineers for there VR38 Engine that they spent 5 years developing!

I {Myself} need no other evidence!

Mobil 1 (0W-40) (100% synthetic) is
the factory fill oil. The VR38 engine
with its plasma-sprayed bores was
developed using this oil. NISSAN
cannot ensure proper engine opera-
tion and durability if other 0W-40
synthetic oil is used. If Mobil 1 (0W-
40) is not available, Mobil 1 (10W-
40) (100% synthetic) may be used;
however, some performance loss
may be noticed.

The 2015 Owners Manual States the Exact Same Info!


This and to a lesser extent the statements by other manufacturers that they recommend brand x, suggests different oils do behave differently.

The question is what that difference is. On the one hand, many tell us that the difference doesn't matter, on the other hand, you have a statement from Nissan warning you that you might not get "proper operation and durability".

Again these statements are vague and one wonders what is the motivation for making them. Is it joint marketing or is there more to it? In the case of Nissan, the wording suggests there is more to it but the vagueness is very wrong.
 
All I've seen from DustyBones in this thread is subjective drivel. Opinion-driven bashing of one particular product.

For Doug Hillary, Overkill, and others - thanks for your herculean efforts in changing the mind of a troll....some might call the task Sisyphean...

I've got an expensive engine in the S600 (with over 500HP, by the way, which might qualify it in some of the discussed categories). That engine has had several outstanding UOAs on Mobil 1 0W40.

I'll be sticking with what has been proven to work: Mobil 1.
 
Originally Posted By: Apollo14
Again these statements are vague and one wonders what is the motivation for making them. Is it joint marketing or is there more to it? In the case of Nissan, the wording suggests there is more to it but the vagueness is very wrong.

My guess is they are vague because of sales volumes of the GT-R. Given that every other Nissan and Infiniti can use ordinary SN/GF-5 type oils and that the GT-R sells few copies, I can't see it being worth writing an actual oil specification for companies other than Mobil to seek an entry on an approval list.
 
Hi,
Apollo14 - There is a lot of behind the publicity work that results in OEMs Approving or endorsing lubricant. In earlier decades for instance MB had a book of approved lubricants by Brand and Type against Vehicle Model. So did CAT in past times.

The API lost the plot in the 1970s and did not keep up with the needs of US Diesel engine Manufacturers. This resulted in serious engine issues and the formation of Consultative Committees. The results of the Committee work resulted in specifications more aligned to emerging technical developments and-end user applications!. Euro Manufacturers by and large were on top of this some years earlier!

This article - thanks to LUBE REPORT, Volume 12, Issue 14 from 12/4/2012 gives some insights into the needs of continuing lubricant development. (recent issues in China has exacerbated their issue own issues on the same front)

STARTS

Mercedes Tightens Oil Specs

By Tim Sullivan

STUTTGART, Germany – Mercedes-Benz has adopted a wide-ranging upgrade of service-fill engine oil specifications for its passenger cars and heavy-duty trucks. The standards, which were unveiled here at the Uniti Mineral Oil Technology Conference on March 21, feature new or tougher requirements for fuel economy, compatibility with biofuels, cold and high temperature performance and protection from wear.

The automaker acknowledged that the addition of several new tests will increase costs for formulators attempting to qualify engine oils.

“I think we have never before had so many new tests,” Michael Schenk, manager, automotive lubricants here with Mercedes-Benz parent company Daimler AG, told the conference. “But we are facing a number of challenges both now and in the future, and we need to address them.”

The upgrade, named V2012.1, is actually an update of a collection of specifications for standard, medium and top quality oils with standard and low ash levels for passenger cars and heavy-duty trucks.

Schenk said Mercedes-Benz’s biggest priority in upgrading the specifications was to demand that engine oils help its vehicles meet aggressive European Union targets for improving fuel economy in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. European automakers face large cash penalties in coming years if they do not meet mandates capping CO2 emissions.

To move toward those goals, the company introduced four new chassis dynamometer tests for passenger cars, each with a different engine that corresponds to different Mercedes-Benz vehicles and all adhering to the New European Driving Cycle. For heavy-duty engine oils, the company modified a test run on its existing OM 501 LA engine so that it now completes the World Harmonized Transient Cycle, a driving conditions simulation developed by the United Nations.

“Fuel economy will be the most important for us,” Schenk said. “The emissions targets set by the EU are going to be very challenging for us, so we need to continue working toward them.”

Biofuels was another major focus of the upgrade. Unlike conventional petroleum fuels, the industry has found that fuels made from plant oils tend to accumulate in engine sumps, thus diluting engine oils. Automakers are concerned that lubricant performance could be compromised in a variety of ways, especially in light of calls to increase the use of biofuels.

V2012.1 includes one new 168-hour bench test developed by Daimler to measure an oil’s ability to fight oxidation and maintain viscosity in the face of higher dilution by biofuels. Conducted in a 500 milliliter three-necked flask, this test is conducted on samples consisting of 95 percent candidate lubricant and 5 percent B100 biofuel.

“If you add 5 percent fatty acid methyl ester biofuel (to an oil sump), you will have a dramatic increase in the oxidation of that oil,” Schenk said.

Daimler also modified an existing test for corrosion inhibition at high temperatures to account for biofuel dilution. According to Schenk, corrosion of lead, copper and tin can all increase significantly when engine oils are diluted with biofuels. Daimler modified the existing High Temperature Corrosion Bench Test (ASTM D6594) to require candidate oils be diluted with 10 percent biofuel.

Perhaps the most important biofuel test is not yet completed. Mercedes-Benz, other automakers and representatives of oil and lubricant additive companies are working together through the Coordinating European Council for the Development of Performance Tests for Fuels, Lubricants and Other Fluids (CEC) to develop a single new test of the effects that biodiesel has on four oil performance parameters: piston cleanliness; ring sticking; formation of oil sludge; and oil degradation. The test will be run on a Mercedes-Benz OM 646 DE22 LA four-cylinder 2.2-liter diesel engine, but work continues and may go on for some time.

“The biodiesel effects test is one of the most important tests for the whole industry,” he said. “Unfortunately, it is not ready. It is difficult to predict when it will be ready. I think the test development group needs more time and more money.” Whenever it is completed, this test will be incorporated into V2012.1, he added.

The upgrade is also awaiting completion of a CEC bench test for low-temperature pumpability of aged oils. Such a test became a priority for European automakers after a rash of engine failures suffered in Europe during an extreme cold spate in the winter of 2008-2009. The failures were attributed to engine oils that turned to gel.

Schenk said the CEC has nearly completed its test, currently dubbed CEC TDG-L 105, and that Mercedes-Benz will incorporate it into its new specification once it is finished. This two-part test begins with ageing the oil in the presence of biodiesel, and then using a mini-rotary viscometer to evaluate its low-temperature pumping performance.

The new specifications also include a new bench test for protection of aluminum-silicon cylinder liners; and stricter requirements for cam wear, creation of engine sludge and piston cleanliness.

Schenk acknowledged that the new tests will increase qualification costs but maintained that Daimler had reduced the impact by developing some as lab and bench tests, rather than relying on costlier engine sequence tests.

The impact of the V2012.1 will be blunted by Daimler’s schedule for phasing it in. Oil marketers will still be able to qualify oils to the previous specification for one year. Those obtaining such approval will have permission to label their products as meeting Mercedes-Benz requirements for five years after approval.

Schenk said specification writers – and the lubricants industry – will have more work to do in the future. Daimler has already begun work on the next Mercedes-Benz upgrade. One of the priorities for that update will be to require that oils be thinner in order to further improve fuel economy.

“It’s clear, with the next specification we will have to go to lower viscosity,” he said.

ENDS
 
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Originally Posted By: lukejo
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Royal Purple has recently won me over in all of my vehicles over Mobil-1. Since Walmart is now carrying it. I tried it & immediately noticed a much smoother & quieter running motor in all my vehicles. Yes it a bit more expensive but the $10.00 more for a 5-quart container over Mobil-1 at wally world is not going to kill me! Luv Royal Purple!


Why is it so disliked on here? Is there a particular aspect to it that they think is bad, or is it simply that it is more expensive for no real benefit over M1 or PU/PP?

No real Benefit? I advised that immediately I noticed a quieter running & smoother running engine over Mobil-1! That to me is a real benefit! Royal Purple is made from group 4 & 5 base stocks unlike Mobil-1 which is a group 3. Hence you get what you pay for in this world & I can afford it! Throw in the fact that I can easily pick it up at Wally World as easily as Mobil-1 is a no brainer!


"Royal Purple API-licensed Motor Oil combines premium base oils with proprietary additive technologies to create high performance motor oils"

Where does Royal Purple state that it uses group IV and V base stocks?


What ever is in it it's a whole lot quieter & smoother than Mobil-1 in both my Hemi 5.7 & 4.6 Modular V8! That's proof enough for me! Lol
 
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Originally Posted By: lukejo
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Royal Purple has recently won me over in all of my vehicles over Mobil-1. Since Walmart is now carrying it. I tried it & immediately noticed a much smoother & quieter running motor in all my vehicles. Yes it a bit more expensive but the $10.00 more for a 5-quart container over Mobil-1 at wally world is not going to kill me! Luv Royal Purple!


Why is it so disliked on here? Is there a particular aspect to it that they think is bad, or is it simply that it is more expensive for no real benefit over M1 or PU/PP?

No real Benefit? I advised that immediately I noticed a quieter running & smoother running engine over Mobil-1! That to me is a real benefit! Royal Purple is made from group 4 & 5 base stocks unlike Mobil-1 which is a group 3. Hence you get what you pay for in this world & I can afford it! Throw in the fact that I can easily pick it up at Wally World as easily as Mobil-1 is a no brainer!


You are wrong about M1 being grp 3. M1 oils, all of them, are a blend of 3+, 4, and 5 which many believe is a better base stock than 4 or 5 alone.
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Apollo14 - There is a lot of behind the publicity work that results in OEMs Approving or endorsing lubricant.

.....

This article - thanks to LUBE REPORT, Volume 12, Issue 14 from 12/4/2012 gives some insights into the needs of continuing lubricant development. (recent issues in China has exacerbated their issue own issues on the same front)

.....

Schenk said specification writers – and the lubricants industry – will have more work to do in the future. Daimler has already begun work on the next Mercedes-Benz upgrade. One of the priorities for that update will be to require that oils be thinner in order to further improve fuel economy.

“It’s clear, with the next specification we will have to go to lower viscosity,” he said.

ENDS


Thanks Doug. I've edited my quote of your post just to zero in on a few things.

Firstly, thanks for sharing such an informative article. I have no doubt that there's a lot of work that goes into formulating lubricants but once the tests are established, many lubricants go on to meet those standards. One just has to go to some of the Mercedes sheets to see the oil choices available worldwide.

However, are you saying that when the manufacturer endorses / recommends a particular lubricant, that on average, across all the tests required to meet the standard, that lubricant actually performed the best and by a meaningful margin?

In the case of Nissan, do you think they strongly recommend M1 0w40 because the engineers are being cautious and just haven't tested other lubricants that have similar endorsements to M1 0w40 or is it that there is something particularly special about M1 0w40 that they don't expect to find in other competing oils?

It's also interesting to hear that the European manufacturers are planning to go to lower viscosities in future. What is revealing in that article is that along with going thinner, they are going to have to improve performance to meet other criteria. Thus I can see how in the years ahead we'll have longer term Euro owners complaining that the move to thinner oil was for CAFE and that "thicker oil protects better" without having the insight you've shared with us that these newer oils also improve performance in other areas.

Lastly, if you get a chance, it would be great to have your thoughts on my Euro oil UOA:

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3464773/PU_Euro_5w40._5209_miles._4375

I understand one data point is not the best but any recommendations would be most welcome.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1


You are wrong about M1 being grp 3. M1 oils, all of them, are a blend of 3+, 4, and 5 which many believe is a better base stock than 4 or 5 alone.


Of which group constitutes the largest percentage of M1 5w30?
 
Originally Posted By: jrustles
Originally Posted By: tig1


You are wrong about M1 being grp 3. M1 oils, all of them, are a blend of 3+, 4, and 5 which many believe is a better base stock than 4 or 5 alone.


Of which group constitutes the largest percentage of M1 5w30?


Since XM is one of the largest suppliers of PAO to oil blenders, well you get the drift.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1

Since XM is one of the largest suppliers of PAO to oil blenders, well you get the drift.


I appreciate the reply tig, but that tells me nothing unfortunately.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Since XM is one of the largest suppliers of PAO to oil blenders, well you get the drift.

Since PAO is one of the most expensive oil bases to make, well you get the drift.
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I found this by searching "Mobil 1 base stocks" on Google"

http://www.exxonmobil.com/UK-English/Basestocks/PDS/GLXXENBSKEMVisom.aspx

http://boardreader.com/thread/Mobil_1_PAO_Visom_Bob_Is_The_Oil_Guy_ld4wX16o0l.html


Yeah, this makes more sense. The ILSAC M1 grades are mostly Visom, that's been mentioned before. In fact, it's been mentioned that M1 0w40 is also primarily Visom, but with a higher percentage PAO than the run of the mill M1. Nothing official though, just the latest speculation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Tundra oil
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
tired
B
AC Delco Syn Blend 0w20 Dexos?
Replies
7
Views
341
Plawan
S
Lexus RX350 - Oil recommendation to add to Mobil 1 0W-40 "euro".
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
OVERKILL
P
Mobil 1 AFE 0w20 vs Valvoline Advanced 0w20
Replies
12
Views
2K
penz08
S
Thoughts on Mobil oil?
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
Shannonwilkerson
Back
Top Bottom