Is there any solid scientific evidence that Mobil 1 is good for extended drains?

Status
Not open for further replies.
quote:

Originally posted by Terry:

1) limited EP capability

2) limited solvency

3) cost benefit vs the detractors above


I still don't get it. In what way is Mobil 1's EP capability "limited"? It's got moly, boron, and now (it seems) a ton of calcium.

Limited solvency? How do you determine that?

Cost benefit vs Schaeffer's? By the time I pay shipping, Schaeffer's costs just as much as Mobil 1 does at Wal-Mart.
 
quote:

Originally posted by G-Man II:

quote:

Originally posted by Terry:

1) limited EP capability

2) limited solvency

3) cost benefit vs the detractors above


I still don't get it. In what way is Mobil 1's EP capability "limited"? It's got moly, boron, and now (it seems) a ton of calcium.

Limited solvency? How do you determine that?

Cost benefit vs Schaeffer's? By the time I pay shipping, Schaeffer's costs just as much as Mobil 1 does at Wal-Mart.


Not for me, by ordering two cases up here, I'm cheaper per quart than Mobil 1 is per single bottle. The more you order, the lower your price overall. Remember, you get free shipping with very large orders.
 
"What are the reasons these components might have been omitted from the supersyn additive package? It seems likely they knew of these problems when they formulated it. "

Ray IMHO cost constraints to be marketed at Walmart so GMan II can cost justify, like many consumers.

A chemist could chime in here and help me with the chemistry aspect so I am not on a limb so to speak.

Simply put without getting proprietary not enough of the SUPERSYN stuff.
 
" I still don't get it. In what way is Mobil 1's EP capability "limited"? It's got moly, boron, and now (it seems) a ton of calcium.

Limited solvency? How do you determine that?"


Gman II, I'll point to the reformulations you mention above, made at least twice in the past year to year and a half in North America that were a direct response to EP/barrier lube issues with the early SuperSYn formula. New calcium is interesting isn't it?

Limited solvency is a problem all oils face and I see the M1 generating increased insolubles or failing to control those in extended drains and the shorter drains some recommend here. At 400 degrees F and higher the oil cooks like most others.

I must reiterate that I sell no products but my analysis interpretation skills and I see this modis operandi alot in UOA.

Is M1 a poor oil NO. It just could be better and I know that from tesing it ,over and over and over.
 
quote:


original post by Quad Driver. No manufacturer recommends an extended drain. All manufacturers void the warranty with an extended drain. No oil makers recommend an extended drain (note: I said makers, not blenders: shaeffers, castol, RP, redline, and amsoil have not now, nor ever have had wells, refineries or tankers or anything, other than a big vat full of stuff they pretty much get from the same suppliers)

Interesting stuff. My mfg (BMW) recommends about 15k per change. It's a 3 liter with a 7 qt. sump. Will any old conventional go 15k? Will BMW sny do the trick? Schaeffers #703? Mobil 1 xW30? Mobil 1 0W40? I'd really like to know because I'd like to get 197k out of then like I did on my last one!

What do you say QuadDriver? Will any old SL oil do the job for 15k?

[ July 10, 2003, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: joatmon ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by pedaltothemetal:
Hey if Mobile 1 changed the oil every 7500 miles during that 1,000,000 mile BMW test, that should tell you something. Maybe that's the max they could go with the oil, or else the engine may not have made it to one million mile if they chose to change it say at 10,000 miles.

According to Mobil, they changed the oil based on BMW's recommended maintenance interval, which for that model and year was 7500 miles. This wasn't a test to see how much life they could get out of the oil. It was a test to see how much life they could get out of the engine following BMW's maintenance schedule using Mobil 1.
 
OK I think I finally understand what QD is trying to beat into our heads. He is trying to make two points (feel free to correct me if I misunderstand):

1. Change oil at the mfr recommended "normal" interval regardless of type oil used.

2. UOAs are not indicative of actual engine wear so you're wasting your time with them.

Hm, well, OK. I'm not sure I'd want to take regular oil to 7500 miles but I don't have any UOAs handy to show that it's a bad idea. If that's worked for you to 215k miles, then more power to you. I've taken several cars to almost 200k miles on regular oil, but it was with 3k oil changes (and no UOAs).

On the second point, certainly the volume of metals reported by the UOAs are not indicative of the volume of metals actually in the oil. Read any explanation of how spectrometric analysis works and this becomes clear. This is probably why some labs provide reports of insolubles, which gives you an idea of crud too large to show up on the spectrometer but too small to get trapped in the oil filter. Is it still an exact accounting of every particle -- probably not. Nevertheless, even though the information provided is not perfect, it still has value and can be used to gauge how the oil is performing.

I guess I still don't understand how all this ties in with the cost of oil, buying high-mileage trucks, or comparing virgin oil to used oil. Perhaps your larger point is that we are all wasting our time, discussing things that don't matter. And you may be right, but then again, much in life doesn't "matter" but we pursue it anyway out of human curiosity.

Cheers, 3MP
 
quote:

Originally posted by rchavis:
Humm. Seem to me that this statement is most interesting, since,
1. No auto manufacture to date, has voided a warranty for using extended drains.


You dont know this to be true. In fact, you cannot prove this to be true or false. The stated policy is the warranty is void unless the maint schedule is followed. If you dont have examples of actual cases, why mention it?

quote:


2. In Europe these auto same manufactures, recommend 10,000 mile interval oil changes.
[/qtote]

Yes and in europe where syn oil is virtually unheard of (the use thereof is for all intents and purposes and 'american fad' - and that you CAN verify) these longer drain intervals are acheived on dino oil meeting the 'minimum standards' as you point out. As I have said numerous times now, too many to count, use the long drain interval on any oil. My advice would also apply to our european viewers, but I of course will not recommend violating whatever one persons user manual says.


3. Those companies that blend as you say, do indeed make their oil. Those refineries as you called them actually pump their sludge out of the ground and boil it, til an oil like substance is produce to meet the minimum standards for SAE and API, then mixed in an additive package that again meets the minimum standards because exceeding those stardards would dig into their profit margins.


Do they? perhaps you could tell me the location of the well heads or refineries for any of the blenders I had mentioned. You DO realize of course that regardless of the origin of the basestock (hydrocracked, diester, pao, &c) the raw materials for the basestock from crude refining. Amsoil does NOT make base stocks. Shaeffers does NOT make basestocks. Castrol does NOT make basestocks. the list goes on. for the most part they are purchesed from exxon/mobil corp or shell.

quote:


4. Oil makers as you call them, have no reason to recommend an extended drain interval because at 3,000 miles, their profits are soaring.

But I'm just reaching here. It's not like this information is not readily available, makes sense or can be proven.


Oil makers do not set drain intervals. Only SOME of the blenders do. And we can go further to say, the ones with pyramid schemes are the ones who do. I believe the verbage on the bottles from most is quite clear when it states 'change your oil in accordance with the manufacturers recommended limits'. As I pointed out in antoher thread on another forum, marketing 101 seems to work. You as others seem to fear this 3000 number. You set it in your head yourself. As I have said numerous times, too many to count...you dont qualify for the 3000 mile limit.
 
quote:

Originally posted by joatmon:
Interesting stuff. My mfg (BMW) recommends about 15k per change. It's a 3 liter with a 7 qt. sump. Will any old conventional go 15k? Will BMW sny do the trick? Schaeffers #703? Mobil 1 xW30? Mobil 1 0W40? I'd really like to know because I'd like to get 197k out of then like I did on my last one!

What do you say QuadDriver? Will any old SL oil do the job for 15k?


what does the owners manual say? if it says 15K mile drain intervals, then go 15K mile. Does it say use SL oil or sh or sj? does it say use syn oil? very few manus/models have ever outright required syn oil. With the advent of the LT1, GM has required an oil meeting 4718M spec in the LT1/LS1....which conveniently is covered by syn oil...which is conveniently covered by M1, which is conveniently factory fill. Due to US law, a manu cannot specify a brand to use, or if they do, they must provide that brand free of charge. The only example I have ever seen that comes close is my Volvo-Penta service manual requires synthetic 75-90 gl5 lower unit lube, but states 'like Mobil corps Mobillube synthetic 75w-90'

so In short, your owners manual is gonna give an API service class, a preferred grade and a drain interval. it is not gonna say 'unless you are using non-synthetic in which case the interval is....' This means that the lawyers and engineers have decided that this combo and recommendation will keep warranty costs down
 
quote:

Originally posted by QuadDriver:
Yes and in europe where syn oil is virtually unheard of (the use thereof is for all intents and purposes and 'american fad' - and that you CAN verify) these longer drain intervals are acheived on dino oil meeting the 'minimum standards' as you point out.



Boy, are you way off the mark on this one. ALL premium motor oils produced and sold in Europe are full synthetcs. You need to do some research on this, bud.

quote:

You DO realize of course that regardless of the origin of the basestock (hydrocracked, diester, pao, &c) the raw materials for the basestock from crude refining.



Again, wrong. Esters are not synthetic hydrocarbons. The feedstocks for esters are acids and alcohols.
 
quote:

Originally posted by 3 Mad Ponchos:

Hm, well, OK. I'm not sure I'd want to take regular oil to 7500 miles but I don't have any UOAs handy to show that it's a bad idea. If that's worked for you to 215k miles, then more power to you. I've taken several cars to almost 200k miles on regular oil, but it was with 3k oil changes (and no UOAs).


Cheers, 3MP


Actually, the 215k mile 'control vehicle' reached that on syn oil (I think once in there I put in pennz 10-40 due to a scheduled maint and inability to get syn oil (amsoil) in time, this accured around 100K miles I think). I would have expected a board like this to be VERY interested in how the journals and bores mic out when I swap motors. Instead its was insinuated once that the same vehicle without the oil changed, but UOAs done would have less wear!!!

I have the perfect vehicle that a bunch of oil guys presumably would want to crawl over - one that has run on syn oil. GOOD syn oil for a hideously long distance, while working hard, and changes probly on a 5K mile average. But as I mentioned in another thread...I have 2 180+K mile specimens in the wings that run only on dino oil AND I got both of them used so the pedigree of 'early life' is suspect - needless to say, regardless of whatever abuse they might have occured, both seem willing to put up similar numbers mileage wise.

for the record, that station wagon I have had so much ash in the heads I had to use a screwdriver and shopvac to remove it. Its a common problem with chevy V-motors - not enuf oil reaches the valve spring area - which is used for cooling - so what does get there burns to ash. I dropped the pan one day, tossed in new std size bearings, never did a single plastigage check, tossed in a hi-vol (note I didnt say hi pressure) pump, and now I have more oil pressure than any chevy ever did new and I go 3000ish miles on walmart oil - mostly because the detergency is slowly but surely cleaning the rest of the heads out. Oh the valve seals are shot - probly from the heat so it gives a small puff on startup, but it uses a quart every 2000 miles or more so whatever abuse this car went thru, its minimal and like I said, Im around 185K on it and all im using it for now is to tow a 5000lb boat.

all this shows is that dino oil, cheap QS dino oil from walmart even, with questionable changing intervals is not as bad as people make it out to be. at 185K that wagon is fer sure one the mileage leaders on this board. sentenced to being a tow vehicle, it is one of the hardest working. if I crack that motor open some day and find its only SLIGHTLY more worn than the truck, with a known maint history....well that sorta shoots the syn vs dino theories down in flames no?

(of note: the 185Kish mile s blazer IS getting a new motor as soon as I install the cam in the new one. It uses NO oil and is 100% original and was used for years as a rural mail carrier truck. It also runs on dino oil (walmart brand of course) and who knows in the past. the stickers on the door seem to indicate it might have seen a lot of pennzoil. last summer it was horribly overheated such that the pickup coil was fried. since then it has injested a little coolant (but not into the oil) and its steadily gotten worse. My decision not to toss in new head gaskets was driven by finding a 0 mile reman motor on ebay for 700 bux. with warranty. that truck would also be a mileage leader on this board, and with its stop and go past - certainly semi-abusive (the 700r4 tranny already grenaded in spectacular fashion a couple of years back due to the excessive stop and go nature)

again, the point is, a comparo of a known factor - a syn oil truck with known intervals vs two similar mileaged motors on whatever oil and whatever intervals would be very interesting indeed. at least one would think.
 
quote:

Originally posted by G-Man II:


Boy, are you way off the mark on this one. ALL premium motor oils produced and sold in Europe are full synthetcs. You need to do some research on this, bud.


I have researched this. For over a decade. All premium motor oils in the US are synthetics also. And where syn oil usage in the US is what? 6%? 10%? its lower in europe. contrary to popular belief, the average european does not drive BMW M-cars on the autobahn. they drive tiny VWs, volvos, saabs, citroens and due to the extreme price of petroleum products in europe, get by with whatever they can find at what constitutes thier walmart. Whether it be texaco, severn, shell, statoil, veba oel, gdanska, any of the petrols (plus, fina etc) the primary output is regular honest to god dino oil.

and as for diester oils, look again, the rective agent to make the alcohol (propylene dioxide?) is added at the refinery to produce said alcohol.
 
quote:

Originally posted by MikeW:

The manual also specifically says to use their brand 5w30 synthetic oil. It says you can use Mobil 1 or Castrol Syntec (again explicity) for makeup oil.


can someone cut/paste/transcribe this passage in here for us? the exact wording
 
quote:

all this shows is that dino oil, cheap QS dino oil from walmart even, with questionable changing intervals is not as bad as people make it out to be. at 185K that wagon is fer sure one the mileage leaders on this board. sentenced to being a tow vehicle, it is one of the hardest working. if I crack that motor open some day and find its only SLIGHTLY more worn than the truck, with a known maint history....well that sorta shoots the syn vs dino theories down in flames no?

Ah OK so your point then, really, is that an engine can make it to 200k on dino oil without much difficulty. Is that what all this is about?

Coz if so, then *shrug* I got no argument, I've done it myself several times. I don't think too many people on this board believe that an engine is used up at 100k.

If you're offering to measure the wear rates on your two engines, that'd be pretty interesting to know. But I hope when you post that you're a bit more clear about it.

Still a little puzzled,
confused.gif

3MP
 
I found one so far, but it's not quite current. It's posted below. If I find a newer one, I'll post it.

--------------

We have a 2001 Z3 Roadster and it says the following:

SPECIFIED ENGINE OIL:

The quality of the engine oil which is selected has critical significance for the operation and service life of an engine. Based on extensive testing, BMW has approved only certain engine oils.

Use only approved "BMW High Performance Synthetic Oil."

If you are unable to obtain "BMW Hight Performance Synthetic Oil," you can add small amounts of synthetic oil in between oil changes. Only use oils with the API SH specification or higher.

My old 2002 E46 and my current 2003 E46 Manual's all say something very similar.
Report Post | IP: Logged


quote:

Originally posted by QuadDriver:

quote:

Originally posted by MikeW:

The manual also specifically says to use their brand 5w30 synthetic oil. It says you can use Mobil 1 or Castrol Syntec (again explicity) for makeup oil.


can someone cut/paste/transcribe this passage in here for us? the exact wording


 
For the 2003 X5 manual says:

SPECIFIED ENGINE OIL:

"The quality of the engine oil which is selected has critical significance for the operation and service life of an engine. Based on extensive testing, BMW has approved only certain engine oils.

Use only approved BMW High Performance Synthetic Oil.

If you are unable to obtain "BMW High Performance Synthetic Oil," you can add small amounts of synthetic oil in between oil changes. Only use oils with the API SH specification or higher."

I believe my 2003 530i manual says the same.

[ July 10, 2003, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: joatmon ]
 
Well, I'm still not sure I understand what QuadDriver's point is, since he hasn't actually stopped to identify that specifically.

As for oil recommendations, I can offer this excerpt from the 2003 Saab 9-3 Sport Sedan manual:
quote:

Engine oil
Oil grade:
We recommend the use of Saab or Mobil oils, available from your Saab dealer, for regular oil changes.
These oils are specially developed from high-quality components to meet the demands of extended service intervals (max. 18,000 miles (30,000 km) or 2 years). Saab and Mobil oils are tested and approved in accordance with the GM standard for long-life oils. Such gasoline engine oils are given the designation GM-LL-A 025. The requirements are the same for diesel oils, though these are given the designation GM-LL-B 025.

To ensure optimum engine performance, with regard to lubrication, the ability to dissolve residues and the neutralisation of combustion products in the oil, for a service interval of 18,000 miles (30,000 km) or a maximum of 2 years, the engine oil used must fulfil GM-LL-A 025 (gasoline engines) or GM-LL-B 025 (diesel engines).

Only oil of the above grades may be used.


And so you know, only two oils sold in the US currently meet this new GM spec (Saab 0W-30 & Mobil 1 0W-40), while twelve sold in Europe meet it. And all of these oils are fully synthetic.

[Edit:]
Whoops! Almost forgot: here's the URL for the Opel version of the same specification.

[ July 10, 2003, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Eiron ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by pscholte:
offtopic.gif
(sort of) Gentlemen (not sure if we have any gentlewomen members),

We really need to look hard at what this forum is all about. Are we here to defend preconceived ideas or to enlighten one another? Most of you probably leave me in the dust in regards to practical and "technological" knowledge so, while I try to participate where I think I can add value, I do a lot of listening to what you all have to say...and right now, what I am hearing a lot of (with the exception of Terry and a few others) is "Well I think..." I don't want to know what you "think," especially if what you think is biased 'cause your an Amsoil or Mobil or Schaeffer's diehard; I want to know what you KNOW. Now if you are a diehard because of what you KNOW, I want to hear it. Does that mean we can't give educated opinions or share "war stories?" Of course not, but I think we should at least try to add more light then heat to the discussions. I look forward to what the future holds for this forum, but it surely seems like we are going through some serious growing pains right now that for me at least are adding as much confusion as they are wisdom.

Thanks for listening.


Very well stated.
bowdown.gif
bowdown.gif


I hope the folks involved in this thread take your comments to heart. I too am enoying this thread but it does seem to be going in circles primarily because it seems that most here are too busy making statements to actually have a discussion.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Eiron:
As for oil recommendations, I can offer this excerpt from the 2003 Saab 9-3 Sport Sedan manual:
quote:

Engine oil
Oil grade:
We recommend the use of Saab or Mobil oils, available from your Saab dealer, for regular oil changes.
These oils are specially developed from high-quality components to meet the demands of extended service intervals (max. 18,000 miles (30,000 km) or 2 years). Saab and Mobil oils are tested and approved in accordance with the GM standard for long-life oils. Such gasoline engine oils are given the designation GM-LL-A 025. The requirements are the same for diesel oils, though these are given the designation GM-LL-B 025.

To ensure optimum engine performance, with regard to lubrication, the ability to dissolve residues and the neutralisation of combustion products in the oil, for a service interval of 18,000 miles (30,000 km) or a maximum of 2 years, the engine oil used must fulfil GM-LL-A 025 (gasoline engines) or GM-LL-B 025 (diesel engines).

Only oil of the above grades may be used.


And so you know, only two oils sold in the US currently meet this new GM spec (Saab 0W-30 & Mobil 1 0W-40), while twelve sold in Europe meet it. And all of these oils are fully synthetic.


The more posts I see (all over this forum) the more I am concerned that corporate arrangements and hype craft the words like those above rather than science and testing. On the one hand we have Terry who sees beaucoup UOAs and writes words that don't come close to endorsing the confidence in M1 that exudes from the Saab Owners Manual espeically for long drain intervals. Where's the truth? Are we to conclude that Mobil and Saab or Mobil and Porsche (and say Valvoline with BMW) are "cozy" and that explains the glowing confidence in these oils (remember when Porsche was FIRMLY in the Shell camp and very successful in endurance racing at the time--by the way), or are certain engines made with certain oils in mind and so they (the oils) won't necessarily perform so glowingly in other engines (explaining what Terry sees)or are UOAs only trustworthy for very narrow interpretations related to trends in specific vehicle-oil combinations (and not "which is a better oil") or what? I am really coming to believe the bigger the hype the bigger the "hide" in terms of the true worth of some of these products.
 
Fundamental philosphical issues to address.

1) marketing tells MOST,well some, well almost some... but not all the truth.

2) lubricants and engines are sold to be resold

3) If I sell a competing product I want you to buy my product or I starve.

4) Teardown analysis is useful and time consuming,and costly after running 185K miles to substantiate wear,lube performance, and engine condition.

5) Why teardown when I can tell with a very sharp degree of accuracy what needs to be replaced or not with a $35 analysis or short series of trend analysis ?

6) Lube analysis is not an exact science but a combination of science and art. The interpretation of the results IS the key and most perform poorly at this art and science, including the learned degree'd and highly experienced mechanics.


This might focus our direction here..... , maybe not.
shocked.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top