Is Mobil 1 a real syn?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 19, 2003
Messages
2,361
Location
Texas
If you note the article says "I am told." Who told him? What knowledge do they have? For that fact, the author seems to know very little substantive about synthetic oil. That points to hearsay with no real knowledge to back it up. He may be an engine builder but I bet the most newbie member on this board knows more about oil than that tech guy. Dan
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Messages
688
Location
Morgantown, WV
I've seen this before on other forums. A lot of people seem to think M1 is a Group III. And then they spread their "wisdom" as though they had the oil analyzed themselves. Cheers, 3MP
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
2,095
Location
IL
Synthetics don't really use the mineral carrier anymore, so I would say this guy is incorrect. Yes sulfur reduces friction and adds lubricity but AFAIK there are no group I oils anymore. Not even Schaeffer, which used to use it extensively. So there goes that idea. Also esters have FM properties and less friction than mineral oil, even Group I. And there are plenty of additives that can be used to improve it further.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
4,478
Location
Southern California
Mobil extolls the virtues of PAOs on its website. The company is too big and has pockets too deep to play fast and loose with the truth publically. Funny thing is, ExxonMobil has both synthetic markets covered. They're vertically integrated to produce the raw PAOs that go in their own Mobil 1 oils, and also sell to other blenders, yet they're also a top player at the forefront of hydroisomerized Group-III base stock development and production. And, they'll sell upgrade equipment to other refiners to produce Group-III base stocks, or even complete turn-key refineries. The company's laughing all the way to the bank with a win-win situation.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2002
Messages
6,388
Location
Washington St.
Typical of many enthusiasts magazines...they ask a question of an expert, but he's not an expert in the subject of the question. This guy is an engine builder, not a tribologist. There are two types of petroleum base oils, napthenic and paraffinic. The higher the proportion of paraffinic oil in the final base oil, the better the oil will perform in an engine, other things being equal. Napthenic oils are best for certain industrial applications, but not engines. Crude oils are either paraffinc, or napthenic, or a combination of the two. The choice of crude determines the type of base oil. Napthenic crudes have a higher yield of fuel, so they're more valuable to integrated oil companies. And, he obviously knows little about synthetic oils. In his engines, either a top quality paraffin based oil (or paraffinic--same thing) or a top quality synthetic, in the racing oil formulation in the viscosities he likes will work well; here's one: http://www.schaefferoil.com/data/110.html Ken [ August 19, 2003, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Ken2 ]
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2002
Messages
8,937
Location
SC
quote:
Originally posted by Steve S: No oil reguardless what basestock is 100% oil there are additives and the carrier oil.
Yes, but with the introduction of Mobil 1 TriSyn formula, Mobil stopped using mineral oil as the additive carrier. Hence, current formulations of Mobil 1 DO NOT have any mineral oil in them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top