You have made assertations before about Mobil oils that have turned out to be false (sodium detergents). I think you have a dog in this fight but your credibility is on the line if you make assertations and again are shown to be incorrect.
M1 EP 15W-50 Goes Group III
- Thread starter Tom NJ
- Start date
- Status
You have made assertations before about Mobil oils that have turned out to be false (sodium detergents). I think you have a dog in this fight but your credibility is on the line if you make assertations and again are shown to be incorrect.
I do not care for the Mobil MSDS. Other companies will list their components by CAS, Mobil doesn't anymore. I have an MSDS archived from MX2T, the new MSDS is far less detailed. I'd like to see the CAS 68037-01-4 (PAO) somewhere to either verify or deny the talk. First GC rumored to have gone the group III route, now M1! Does Redline have a stock offer?
On a ligther note...what do you think is the most apropos movie tagline for this thread? I vote for:
Apocalypse Now: The Horror. . . The Horror. . .
The Day after...
Re: Mobil sodium situation.. I apologize as I was in a severe motorcycle accident (on a race course with all appropriate safety equipment)thus have been out of comission for a good while; the non-participation/continuance of the sodium deal was a result. Please forgive me...
However, in this discussion, the current, as of today MSDS for Mobil 1 EP 15W-50 as posted today indicates a pour point of -54F.. This is a Group IV pour point, not a group III 50W.. It is as simple as that.....
George Morrison, STLE CLS
However, in this discussion, the current, as of today MSDS for Mobil 1 EP 15W-50 as posted today indicates a pour point of -54F.. This is a Group IV pour point, not a group III 50W.. It is as simple as that.....
George Morrison, STLE CLS
And since "The Day After" depicted an event which never took place, certainly appropriate for this discussion as Mobil 1 is still a Group IV, thus the Group III "never took place"...
George Morrison, STLE CLS
George Morrison, STLE CLS
The MSDS and the PDS are not consistant.. This is the current pds http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_1_Extended_Performance.asp
Notice the pour point is now -42c which is = to -43f? Thats a significant change. Interesting isn't it?
Notice the pour point is now -42c which is = to -43f? Thats a significant change. Interesting isn't it?
Last edited:
Per the Mobil 1 PDS, standard Mobil 1 5w-30 synthetic shows a pour point of -54, but the Mobil 1 EP 5w-30 synthetic shows a pour point of -48.
The PDS publish date is January, 2006. The MSDS publish date is September 21, 2006.. Thus the -54F pour point would appear to be the most current information relative to pour point..
George Morrison, STLE CLS
George Morrison, STLE CLS
Notice also that the Mobil 1 Motorcycle oils PDS' state "100 percent" Synthetic. M1 EP for all we know, could have contained Group III for quite some time. They have always used very vague wording IMO. Lets also not forget that Mobil is doing what every other company would do. The market will determine whether it was the right decision and in today's internet world, I'm not so sure it was a good move....
So, despite the differnt pour points, how do you explain the differnce? How do you explain the G-C results that Tom summarized for us(which seeing the inconsistancy in Mobils publishing I am giving as much credibility)?
I understand your positionbut I cannot accept your explanation without further proof other than cherry picking published documents.
edit to add.
This fire is started(the readership is posting link to this thread as I see many anonymous readers looking in) and the only thing that will put it out is if Mobil comes out and states that they use PAO as there primary base stock in all there synthetic formualtions. Is mobil willing to do that?
I understand your positionbut I cannot accept your explanation without further proof other than cherry picking published documents.
edit to add.
This fire is started(the readership is posting link to this thread as I see many anonymous readers looking in) and the only thing that will put it out is if Mobil comes out and states that they use PAO as there primary base stock in all there synthetic formualtions. Is mobil willing to do that?
Last edited:
That is exactly what ExxonMobil is telling ExxonMobil distributors: that "all Mobil 1 and Delvac 1 formulations are PAO based".. Again, ExxonMobil owns this little company called Mobil Chemical which produces a huge portion of the U.S. PAO base stocks.. And Mobil 1 PAO basestock usage is a significant portion of Mobilchem's sales.
That is exactly what the Mobil 1 "hotline" will tell you if you call. That Mobil 1 is 100% synthetic and that synthetic base oil is PAO.......
George Morrison, STLE CLS
That is exactly what the Mobil 1 "hotline" will tell you if you call. That Mobil 1 is 100% synthetic and that synthetic base oil is PAO.......
George Morrison, STLE CLS
George you also said "Lucille", a Mobil tech, said Mobil clean contains no Na, but it does. You also said M1 is esterless, but it isn't. Mobil tech will NOT tell you it contains group III or PAO. If it didn't contain any group III, they would say so bc that used to be their big selling point. PLEASE, put the bias aside and look into this a bit further.
No disrespect intended George, but so far, you haven't convinced me of your position. If XOM still insist that PAOs are the majority basestock in all their Mobil 1 and Mobil 1 EP formulations, have one someone in upper level management produce and sign a no-nonsense letter stating so. If they don't move quickly, I'm afraid they'll never get this genie back in the bottle.
Just to be clear, our analysis does show some PAO and AN in the 5W-30 EP, along with a trace of POE. But it also contains a large portion of mineral oil which I presume is Group III. If one defines Group III as synthetic, then ExxonMobil would be correct in saying that the oil is full synthetic, is made entirely from synthetic base oils, and contains PAO. All of these statements are true, but these statements do not specifically exclude it from containing Group III.
Also, I do not know when this change took place - the sample we analyzed is only four weeks old so this change could be brand new and the techs may not be in the loop yet. Just speculating on that, but I know what I see on the G.C. and stand by my conclusions.
Tom
Also, I do not know when this change took place - the sample we analyzed is only four weeks old so this change could be brand new and the techs may not be in the loop yet. Just speculating on that, but I know what I see on the G.C. and stand by my conclusions.
Tom
Tom, do you still stand behind this statement? Thanks.
As I shared, Mobil 1 Tech Support told me, George Morrison, today, 11/1/06, that Mobil 1 contains PAO as its base stock. Today! Honest! (Joe was the person's name)
Who was the final word on "Mobil 1 contains NA?" and that M1 is not esterless? did ________ step in, writing final decrees or did I miss something? I thought all thinking people finally agreed that Mobil 1 (and Delvac 1) were esterless???
As I shared, I have been gone some months due to my motorcycle accident, but, well, "welcome back George you dispenser of lies and deceit!".... Wow... Now I may be remembering why I haven't been here since my accident...
Anyway, ExxonMobil engineers, management have shared again and again that Mobil 1 and Delvac 1 are PAO based, real synthetics.... I am sharing what is being put in writing; Again, we have a pour point of a 50W engine oil at -54F. That is Pure, Good Group IV pour point, NOT Group III...
That is a published, effective 9/21/06 MSDS number......
Why is this real, current, concrete evidence of Group IV being disregarded??? I am afraid the Bias is indeed quite evident......
George Morrison, STLE CLS
George Morrison, STLE CLS
Who was the final word on "Mobil 1 contains NA?" and that M1 is not esterless? did ________ step in, writing final decrees or did I miss something? I thought all thinking people finally agreed that Mobil 1 (and Delvac 1) were esterless???
As I shared, I have been gone some months due to my motorcycle accident, but, well, "welcome back George you dispenser of lies and deceit!".... Wow... Now I may be remembering why I haven't been here since my accident...
Anyway, ExxonMobil engineers, management have shared again and again that Mobil 1 and Delvac 1 are PAO based, real synthetics.... I am sharing what is being put in writing; Again, we have a pour point of a 50W engine oil at -54F. That is Pure, Good Group IV pour point, NOT Group III...
That is a published, effective 9/21/06 MSDS number......
Why is this real, current, concrete evidence of Group IV being disregarded??? I am afraid the Bias is indeed quite evident......
George Morrison, STLE CLS
George Morrison, STLE CLS
What is AN?
Hi 427,
Yes I do. As I said before, we are not trying to quantify the percentages of the components, only the presence and relative ratios. The G.C.s I am looking at show mineral oil as the largest single component, while I would expect carrier oil to be in the 5-10% area.
As a user and long proponent of Mobil 1, I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, but I don't know how that is possible.
Tom
Yes I do. As I said before, we are not trying to quantify the percentages of the components, only the presence and relative ratios. The G.C.s I am looking at show mineral oil as the largest single component, while I would expect carrier oil to be in the 5-10% area.
As a user and long proponent of Mobil 1, I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, but I don't know how that is possible.
Tom
Alkylated naphthalene, a Group V synthetic base oil made by ExxonMobil. Specifically we are seeing their Synesstic AN 5 cSt product.
Tom
Tom
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
