If cost was the reason Mobil 1 went to group III, maybe they can produce again another line of M1 that does cost a little more but is a pure synthetic formula for those who want the best and are willing to pay for it.
M1 EP 15W-50 Goes Group III
- Thread starter Tom NJ
- Start date
- Status
Terry, you've mentioned several times that you've seen poorer performance, in certain areas, of M1 formulations of late. This seems to coincide with the revelations that M1 now includes a large percentage of Group III basestock. It also coincides with the published specifications changes we've seen take place over the last year or two.
Given the above, all these coincidences may leave some suspicious of XOM motives, if not the quality of their latest formulations. Care to elaborate?
Given the above, all these coincidences may leave some suspicious of XOM motives, if not the quality of their latest formulations. Care to elaborate?
Maybe people in the know couldn't spill the beans...
What I am saying is that Mola sponsored and supplied years of FREE work here on a science and not marketing driven basis BEFORE he ever offered his formulations for sale and few support him. Thus he cannot afford to advertize. And since he is a Scientist it is not his nature to advertize. He cares about making the best ________ lubricants period.
What I am saying is that Mola sponsored and supplied years of FREE work here on a science and not marketing driven basis BEFORE he ever offered his formulations for sale and few support him. Thus he cannot afford to advertize. And since he is a Scientist it is not his nature to advertize. He cares about making the best ________ lubricants period.
Quote:
If cost was the reason Mobil 1 went to group III, maybe they can produce again another line of M1 that does cost a little more but is a pure synthetic formula for those who want the best and are willing to pay for it.
Mobil 1 EEP?
Or Mobil2?
""Currently he has a 20w50 racing oil that is out of control cutting edge""
maybe, maybe not peer review??
of data or otherwise opinion only.
But posted to ANY oil RL, SF, RP etc anyone nowdays oils are so GOOD changeing from Chevron to RL, RP, SF etc would have to show a BIG advantage
which I do not think is there is) for MOST of us.
A Bad example (guessing at numbers but you get my idea) but use anyway, using iron wear only.
CVX say at 5k 15ppm iron
RL at say 10K 15ppm iron
SF at say 10K 5ppm iron
SO what 10ppm plus or minus is NO big deal IMHO I would want 0 iron with RL or any other high dollar oil.
And if a given oil is 4X the cost I want at least 4X the mileage at the same wear rate as the CVX @5K.
Put it this way oil protection goes down the day it is put in, It is ment to be drained that is part of the dispersant
idea it will hold gunk but MUST be drained (not counting by pass filtration even tho that will pro long oil life it still must be drained).
Anyway IMHO NO oil out there for me offers a cost/perfromance advantage to use other than "normal" SL/SM 5/30 changeD AT 5k.
Flame suit on.
bruce
maybe, maybe not peer review??
of data or otherwise opinion only.
But posted to ANY oil RL, SF, RP etc anyone nowdays oils are so GOOD changeing from Chevron to RL, RP, SF etc would have to show a BIG advantage
which I do not think is there is) for MOST of us.
A Bad example (guessing at numbers but you get my idea) but use anyway, using iron wear only.
CVX say at 5k 15ppm iron
RL at say 10K 15ppm iron
SF at say 10K 5ppm iron
SO what 10ppm plus or minus is NO big deal IMHO I would want 0 iron with RL or any other high dollar oil.
And if a given oil is 4X the cost I want at least 4X the mileage at the same wear rate as the CVX @5K.
Put it this way oil protection goes down the day it is put in, It is ment to be drained that is part of the dispersant
idea it will hold gunk but MUST be drained (not counting by pass filtration even tho that will pro long oil life it still must be drained).
Anyway IMHO NO oil out there for me offers a cost/perfromance advantage to use other than "normal" SL/SM 5/30 changeD AT 5k.
Flame suit on.
bruce
Dramatically lower cost raw materials and potentially fully formulated lubes, but equal or superior quality that the domestic players will not be able to compete on cost basis. Thus the current product has to be cheapened to meet the market competition. I thought by now we'd see Chinese PCMO in Walmart but hasn't happened yet. Maybe we are... under the Tech 2000 or other Walmart brands.
Exactly. What advantage might China have in such a capital-intensive field, where labor costs are perhaps 0.001% of total costs? Do they have smarter petro-chemists? Better marketing? Don't think so.
bruce you haven't raised any questions that haven't been addressed a thousand times before. So calm those Bees..
There is a Harley Vtwin UOA analysis that was shared here for example using emperical data on the SF20w50. Hey, I am talking out my hat on prompting Mola to open a whole line of lubes. I just know good stuff when I test the experimental formulations and use analysis to judge its capabilities. Even in my own cars.
Your point about getting the longer drain to cost justify AND get the same wear rate is being done and has been done for years, with many formulas, I suppose from what I know that SF could do it in spades. BTW Mola has never been a long drain proponent, like you he knows too much about the formulas to trust them like that. I however use testing daily to verify or debunk those ideas and frankly after 30 years of getting my hands dirty like longer drains with a quality lube in my cars.
Wear is only one aspect of a oil analysis and what that unit needs from the lubricant, cooling, friction reduction,wear reduction, heat transfer, hydrodynamic sealing, EP protection, mixed lube regimen protection, neutralizing acid, dispersing, solubolizing, emissions protection,fuel resistance, even sound attenutation all come into play with properly interpreted oil analysis. Not just 10 ppm vs 15 ppm of Fe elemental production.
Just to keep things clear, I am hired by Mola, not a participant in SF.
There is a Harley Vtwin UOA analysis that was shared here for example using emperical data on the SF20w50. Hey, I am talking out my hat on prompting Mola to open a whole line of lubes. I just know good stuff when I test the experimental formulations and use analysis to judge its capabilities. Even in my own cars.
Your point about getting the longer drain to cost justify AND get the same wear rate is being done and has been done for years, with many formulas, I suppose from what I know that SF could do it in spades. BTW Mola has never been a long drain proponent, like you he knows too much about the formulas to trust them like that. I however use testing daily to verify or debunk those ideas and frankly after 30 years of getting my hands dirty like longer drains with a quality lube in my cars.
Wear is only one aspect of a oil analysis and what that unit needs from the lubricant, cooling, friction reduction,wear reduction, heat transfer, hydrodynamic sealing, EP protection, mixed lube regimen protection, neutralizing acid, dispersing, solubolizing, emissions protection,fuel resistance, even sound attenutation all come into play with properly interpreted oil analysis. Not just 10 ppm vs 15 ppm of Fe elemental production.
Just to keep things clear, I am hired by Mola, not a participant in SF.
Duly noted. And it's one of the reasons that Tom's revelations are more than a passing interest.
agree...which is exactly why so many BITOG members now use any SM rated oil. These oils are clearly sufficient. Engines today are lasting on average 150,000 miles. Very few Americans want to keep a car much longer than that and if you ever have, you've probably experienced all the little things failing and not the engine.
Regarding Mobil 1, I find it hard to believe that any of the top automakers would have selected M1 as factory fill if it not had performed. Is it the best? No.
The issue to me, is whether XOM has been deceiving the public by claiming "PAO only" but really slipping in Grp III as the primary knowing 99% of us would never know the difference.
Because in most parts, any good oil will cover the automakers engines and they "recommend" Mobil 1 as an extension of Mobils marketing plan.
And its working. Money for the automakers and of course, Mobil makes a little profit.
Take care, bill
Buster, I was addressing those who are wailing and gnashing of teeth about this test result on their favorite oil brand...
Point is there are chemical alternatives out here, you just may not be able to go to Walmart and get it from a "name brand"..
Tom, did Hatco sell some of the first base oils to AJ Amatuzio back in the early 70's for their 10w40 product? Were you involved with that work ?
Point is there are chemical alternatives out here, you just may not be able to go to Walmart and get it from a "name brand"..
Tom, did Hatco sell some of the first base oils to AJ Amatuzio back in the early 70's for their 10w40 product? Were you involved with that work ?
I certainly wouldn't discount China on anything. They're not techologically stupid you know. We're talking about a country capable of spaceflight and nuclear weapons. Oil is nothing.
I feel to be fair to the consumer,Mobil could have taken Amsoil's route.They could have had their "EP" line made with pao,and their standard line an "XL" version with group III and marketed the oils in that way.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
