I can assure you that the Drive Clean formulation for GF-4 is a group III base stock, with the exception of the additive pack which is carried by group I. Please call 1-800-662-4525, select option 1, and they will give you the info. I believ that someone must have selected option 3, which takes you to our lab engineers. They have been tols explicitly to answer any formulation questions with the standard "proprietary information" response. Option 1, which is customer service will give you the stright answer. I diid write this to make one correction to my earlier post regarding the Drive Clean Plus: It contains 13-15% PAO instead of the 23% that I had reported earlier. I stand corrected on this point.
I believe the reason for the doubts on the Group III basestocks is because, when you hear group III, one automatically assumes a reported synthetic, with its' robust additive package. Mobil Drive Clean contains only the additives that enables it to meet or exceed GF-4 specs. There is a substantial cost savings on the additive pack when using a group III base stocks becaise it requires less in the way of polymers to bridge the viscosity gap, and less anti-oxidizers, as well as other organic additives. These components can be fairly expensive, so it makes sense for a comapny that has the capabilities to produce the largest quantities of group III basestocks, to use them, then to acquire additive components on the open market.
There is nothing magical about a group III base stocks, it is just that oil companies and the un-educated public believe that this is some magical formulation that you can run for some longer period of time and at extremes, when in fact it is only a small piece of the equation. The bottom line is: Does it meet spec? There is not an oil made that can make claims without meeting spec. And all we are claiming is that Mobil Drive Clean meets the latest GF-4 spec. Now if you want something that last a little longer, than look for an A-3 or A-5 ACEA spec. If you want something that runs a little cleaner, look for a Diesel CH-4/ CI-4 spec. The finished product is what we should be concerned with.
I believe the reason for the doubts on the Group III basestocks is because, when you hear group III, one automatically assumes a reported synthetic, with its' robust additive package. Mobil Drive Clean contains only the additives that enables it to meet or exceed GF-4 specs. There is a substantial cost savings on the additive pack when using a group III base stocks becaise it requires less in the way of polymers to bridge the viscosity gap, and less anti-oxidizers, as well as other organic additives. These components can be fairly expensive, so it makes sense for a comapny that has the capabilities to produce the largest quantities of group III basestocks, to use them, then to acquire additive components on the open market.
There is nothing magical about a group III base stocks, it is just that oil companies and the un-educated public believe that this is some magical formulation that you can run for some longer period of time and at extremes, when in fact it is only a small piece of the equation. The bottom line is: Does it meet spec? There is not an oil made that can make claims without meeting spec. And all we are claiming is that Mobil Drive Clean meets the latest GF-4 spec. Now if you want something that last a little longer, than look for an A-3 or A-5 ACEA spec. If you want something that runs a little cleaner, look for a Diesel CH-4/ CI-4 spec. The finished product is what we should be concerned with.
