Group III or Group IV steaks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:




i think m1 was the second shooter on the grassy knoll.I also heard they HAD to shutdown several refineries to hide WMD's in them.I also have proof m1 causes ED and male pattern baldness......
repost.gif





Commie sons a bitches! I knew it but just couldn't prove it till now!
rugerman.gif
coffeetime.gif
 
Quote:


Quote:




i think m1 was the second shooter on the grassy knoll.I also heard they HAD to shutdown several refineries to hide WMD's in them.I also have proof m1 causes ED and male pattern baldness......
repost.gif





Commie sons a bitches! I knew it but just couldn't prove it till now!
rugerman.gif
coffeetime.gif





LOL........now that's funny..
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
 
If you guys don't believe me about fickle American consumers just read the ENEOS thread....so why should Mobil1 care when the sheeple who believe that anything Japanese is great and well meaning and super high quality..sheesh...just look at the people lining up to be the first guy on the block to have "Japanese oil" in their car....unbelieveable.
 
The only reason that I have lessened my use of Mobil 1 is the pricing. With Pennziol Platinum available at $1.99 a quart why would I pay over $6.00 a quart for Mobil 1?

I think there has been far too much made of "possible" heavy use of Group III in Mobil 1. I may feel differently when someone can show me some actualy lab results showing higher Group III use consistantly throughout the product line.

I will agree that I don't like Mobil's attitude about using too many weasel words when answering questions on the topic, but it is not objective evidence of using Group III. A lot of circumstantual evidence is bounced around here, but nothing of substance.
 
It's time again to remind folks that Tom tested M1 EP oils only. Not regular M1. He also found a decent amount of expensive alkylated napthalene in the oils.

PT1 hasn't answered my question.
frown.gif
 
Sure, I'm aware of what was tested, and that there's apparent conflict in member test results. The presence of the ANs is not really the point. The alleged presence of the G-III, and Mobil's behavior when asked about it, is. Circumstantial evidence can be of great substance, and in this case, it is. As several of us have pointed out, Mobil's moaning about trade secrets rings totally hollow. Mobil used to brag openly about the content of their M1 line -- when it was PAO, esters, ANs, etc. Now, suddenly, they're pretending that they just can't possibly share any such info. That's nonsense. Anyone can believe what they want to about the evidence, either way. Until Mobil again says what's the bottle, if only in general terms, I'm going to presume they've turned down the trail that ironically, Castrol blazed for them ten years ago.

XOM could end all this in two seconds if it wanted to. . .
 
Does PAO have a smell? I don't know what M1 smells like, but I know what RP smells like; and coincidentally, Maxlife smells just like RP. Yeah to me anyway, Maxlife with its 12-22% PAO, smells just like Royal Purple; that's why I ask if PAO has a distinct smell.
confused.gif
 
Quote:


Until Mobil again says what's the bottle, if only in general terms, I'm going to presume they've turned down the trail that ironically, Castrol blazed for them ten years ago.

XOM could end all this in two seconds if it wanted to. . .




With nearly the same level of doubt as there is behind yours, I could presume that Tom either lied or mis-analyzed the G.C. tests. My point is being innnocent until proven guilty should be applied here as it is in the courtroom. How about dropping the presumptions and buying based on performance and price? The irony of that is that based on that criteria, I think that very few of the M1 lineup is the top choice. M1 0W-40 and 5W-40 still are IMO, but not any of the others (brand new M1 oils excepted due to no data to judge them on). I doubt this will suit you since you are a lawyer and I'm an engineer...we view things differently.

Apparently I could make a lot of money selling motor oils to BITOG members as long as it used only PAO/Group 5, I told people that, and the cost was reasonable. Never mind that it might perform worse than dino oils.

BTW, if we found out for certain that Mobil 1 never used Group 3 in any oil and as a result you started using it, I'd have to give you a hard time for that too.
grin.gif


I'm posting for fun because I'm bored. These are my real thoughts though. Don't take offense to anything I've said.
 
Quote:


I'm posting for fun because I'm bored.




As good a reason as any, I suppose.
wink.gif

....................................................

Quote:


With nearly the same level of doubt as there is behind yours, I could presume that Tom either lied or mis-analyzed the G.C. tests. My point is being innocent until proven guilty should be applied here as it is in the courtroom. How about dropping the presumptions and buying based on performance and price?




There’s nothing inherently wrong in what you say here. OTOH, I believe that the presumption of innocence exists to protect relatively power-deprived individual citizens against the power and might of the state. If the authorities want to lock you up, they must prove every element of every charge against you, beyond any reasonable doubt. XOM, as a corporate citizen, is certainly entitled to that presumption when it faces criminal charges. But it’s not. We’re just consumers who are understandably upset, since it now appears (confirmation pending...) that M1 might no longer be the product that XOM had promised and delivered for so long. Many of us asked XOM, expecting a clarification that there was no G-III in M1, since we clearly remember all the years when they did readily share such info. Now, with our tentative lab work, coupled with Mobil’s sudden case of mealy-mouth suggest to me that the most probably conclusion is – G-III.

I also agree about the “buy factor”. M1 seems to be good stuff, at least by our UOAs, but when you factor in the price (and especially if you add in a content-doubt factor), it’s hard to see it as a first pick.
......................................................

Quote:


Apparently I could make a lot of money selling motor oils to BITOG members as long as it used only PAO/Group 5, I told people that, and the cost was reasonable. Never mind that it might perform worse than dino oils.




Well, you wouldn’t make much selling that to me anyway. I can handle a high-performance G-III oil (or even perhaps a dino...), if the performance-per-price was right (and I had some respect for the oil company).
cheers.gif
 
The interesting thing is, during the NAD hearings Castrol didn’t claim their GIII Syntec was as good as the old PAO formulation, they claimed it was better …

Quote:


link…

Castrol also contends that its data show the current formulation of Syntec provides more protection than the old formulation and is, in fact, superior to Mobil 1®, Mobil's synthetic oil.




… even going on to say it was superior to Mobile 1 -- another PAO formulation.

You’d think these GIII’s were the Rodney Dangerfield of oils … “can’t get no respect”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom