M1,maybe is not fully synthetic.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I find it amusing that people in the USA are swearing off Mobil 1 based on spec sheets for Japanese products.

I find the Japanese MSDS to be a confirmation of PAO in Mobil 1. I can't believe that anyone thought Mobil 1 still has 100% PAO (after the Castrol Syntec debacle of the later 90's that allows companies with Group III Hydrocracked oil to call it synthetic). 40% or so PAO (a rough estimate of what Mobil 1 has based on the Japan MSDS) is still quite good considering that many competitors "apparently" have zero PAO in their US synthetics. The major exception to that is Amsoil, but their PAO oils are apparently not API certified.

If you want even more PAO than Mobil 1 than you can get M1 EP. It looks like Castrol Edge is comparable to M1 EP. If you don't care about API certification, the premium Amsoil oils have high amounts of PAO, probably more than M1 EP and Edge.
 
Originally Posted By: crinkles
with mobil not being forthcoming with disseminating information, i can see how people would do that. every bit of information whether wrong or right will be pounced on, because there are so little.

I see what you're saying.

The problem is that the information being pounced on is irrelevant. You can't tell what's in the American oil by looking at Japanese spec sheets any more than you can tell what's in a house by looking in the convenience store down the street.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I see what you're saying.

The problem is that the information being pounced on is irrelevant. You can't tell what's in the American oil by looking at Japanese spec sheets any more than you can tell what's in a house by looking in the convenience store down the street.

You may be right about that. Or it may be that Mobil would give it a different name, like they do for the ESP line in EU, if the Japan M1 was different than USA M1.

What do you think is in M1 and/or M1 EP USA oils (PAO percent)?
 
Originally Posted By: Mark888
What do you think is in M1 and/or M1 EP USA oils (PAO percent)?

No idea. It probably varies by grade, and it may even vary year-to-year.

I would love to know, but I have to admit it's only out of sheer curiosity. I don't use it now and don't see myself using it in the forseeable future, so I probably won't be the first to find out. Moreover, we can be fairly sure it has to be at least good enough to keep its long list of OEM factory and service fills. Based on that, I think we can have a fair idea of how good it is (and how good it isn't) without knowing the details of its formulation.
 
Last edited:
Yep, what RI said.

Companies often formulate using different base oils depending on the market. Ferndog, a Shell R&D technician who posted here a few years ago, said that Pennzoil Platinum may use different base oils depending on supply/availability etc.

Recent patents posted by Molekule on Mobil 1 suggest they are using multiple PAO's, but that could be for future use. It appears from the information provided here over the last few years that Mobil is using majority Grp III with their High Vis PAO and Grp V base oils, in varying amounts depending on the desired viscosity.

Trying to keep up with who is using what base stock is tricking and a waste of time IMO. Just focus on the end performance, specifications met and used oil analysis results.

From Ferndog:
Quote:
Thanks for the welcome. For future reference, I will remain technical - no PR offered but I will answer questions if asked and if it does not reveal anything confidential. I'm a gearhead - not a salesman.

Pennzoil Platinum currently uses Group III. But be aware that we have a variety of many base stocks (Group I through V) at a variety of plants and focus on the performance of the finished oil rather than limiting ourselves to a single base oil group requirement.

Remember that base oil alone can not perform all the functions of a full motor oil. And on top of that, there are lots of different types of base oils and viscosity grades.
 
Originally Posted By: buster

Trying to keep up with who is using what base stock is tricking and a waste of time IMO. Just focus on the end performance, specifications met and used oil analysis results.


Amen! Some of the best-performing oils out there are Group III+. PAO has its place, but to reject a product because it isn't pure PAO base stock is absurd.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: buster

Trying to keep up with who is using what base stock is tricking and a waste of time IMO. Just focus on the end performance, specifications met and used oil analysis results.


Amen! Some of the best-performing oils out there are Group III+. PAO has its place, but to reject a product because it isn't pure PAO base stock is absurd.


The objections aren't usually in terms of performance. It's paying a premium price for alleged premium ingredients and finding out that they swapped in the very basestock that they objected to other blenders calling synthetic.

The sword now cuts the other way.

Why should they command the premium price over other blenders while using cheaper base stocks? What gives them their, often heralded, distinction (in a material way)??

Personally, I could care less. I don't buy the stuff anymore and have no problem with anyone who uses it.
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
The objections aren't usually in terms of performance. It's paying a premium price for alleged premium ingredients and finding out that they swapped in the very basestock that they objected to other blenders calling synthetic.

So, if performance isn't the important factor, is this a purely symbolic issue?

It seems to me that saying an oil isn't "premium" because it's group III based is kind of like saying a Corvette isn't fast because it uses pushrods and leaf springs.
 
Originally Posted By: bookworm
Thanks for your relpy.

Some data from that official website:

0w-40
Name Concentration*
POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE 1 - 5%
KEROSENE 0.1-1 %weight
SLACK WAX (PETROLEUM), HYDROTREATED 50-60 %weight
Mineral Oil 5-10 %weight


5w-40
Name Concentration*
POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE 1 - 5%
Mineral Oil 30-40 %weight

5w-30
Name Concentration*
POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE 1 - 5%
Mineral Oil 40-50 %weight

10w-30
Name Concentration*
POLYOLEFIN POLYAMINE SUCCINIMIDE 1 - 5%
ZINC DITHIOPHOSPHATE < 2.5%
Mineral Oil 50-60 %weight







Someone please translate this for the laymen...does this mean that M1 contains between 1% - 5% of PAO, group IV product?
 
As long as it meets the specifications, that is all that matters. When you buy oil, that is all you need to know, unless you are one of us.
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
does this mean that M1 contains between 1% - 5% of PAO, group IV product?

...on the Japanese market? Yes.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
does this mean that M1 contains between 1% - 5% of PAO, group IV product?

...on the Japanese market? Yes.

You fellas are getting your chemical names mixed up. What you are seeing in the 1 to 5% range is a dispersant. PAO (Group IV fluid) is polyalphaolefin and is not shown on these MSDSs but they are present.

Additionally, someone else in a related thread compared specs of Japanese Mobil 1 oils with corresponding U.S. versions and concluded they were the same. I have not verified this myself but trusted that person's judgement.
 
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
Someone please translate this for the laymen...does this mean that M1 contains between 1% - 5% of PAO, group IV product?
M1 0W40 likely contains more PAO, especially as there is still 25-44% of the finished lube unaccounted for in the MSDS. It is clear, however, that high viscosity index group III base fluids account for the majority of the mixture.


Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
The objections aren't usually in terms of performance. It's paying a premium price for alleged premium ingredients and finding out that they swapped in the very basestock that they objected to other blenders calling synthetic.

So, if performance isn't the important factor, is this a purely symbolic issue?

It seems to me that saying an oil isn't "premium" because it's group III based is kind of like saying a Corvette isn't fast because it uses pushrods and leaf springs.


It's not a symbolic issue but rather a marketing issue. "Premium" and "synthetic" have no currency and lack any concise meaning. If any of these terms had any performance standards, could someone enlighten the rest of us on the parameters?

This published data is interesting, and I first saw it posted by JAG here:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1372952
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: buster

Trying to keep up with who is using what base stock is tricking and a waste of time IMO. Just focus on the end performance, specifications met and used oil analysis results.


Amen! Some of the best-performing oils out there are Group III+. PAO has its place, but to reject a product because it isn't pure PAO base stock is absurd.


The objections aren't usually in terms of performance. It's paying a premium price for alleged premium ingredients and finding out that they swapped in the very basestock that they objected to other blenders calling synthetic.



Oh, I understand the objection... what I don't understand is the fanatical belief that PAO is somehow more "premium" than Group III+ just because its synthesized from natural gas rather than synthesized from petroleum in a hydrocracker. Both III+ and PAO have some really great properties, and in some sense they have some complimentary properties (III+ seems to be a better carrier for many additive packages for example). In the final assessment, it SHOULD be a performance-based decision, regardless of the actual chemical composition of the base stock.

As for the price- cost of oil is such a relatively small fraction of the total cost of operating most vehicles (unless you still believe in 3k mile oil changes or have a compact that gets 40 mpg) that the difference in cost between the cheapest oils and M1 is pretty much irrelevant to the cost of owning/operating the car. The more expensive the purchase price of the car, the longer the OCI, and the lower the gas mileage of the vehicle, the more irrelevant the cost of the oil becomes. If you're running a fleet, even that small fraction can indeed be a big number- but for the average family with 2-4 vehicles??? I don't think so.

Note that I'm not saying M1 is the greatest (I use it in 1 car, Rotella T Synth in everything else), just pointing out that the cost argument against M1 and other pricey oils doesn't have a lot of traction when compared to fuel cost, vehicle purhcase price, insurance, registration, other maintenance, etc.
 
Why should anyone ever eat a chef-prepared gourmet meal? Why should anyone bother buying New York striploin when eating mcdonalds burgers and fries tastes just as good and satisfies the requirements of eating? Afterall, it's just the stomach-filling performance that counts.
 
Originally Posted By: Max_Wander
Why should anyone ever eat a chef-prepared gourmet meal? Why should anyone bother buying New York striploin when eating mcdonalds burgers and fries tastes just as good and satisfies the requirements of eating? Afterall, it's just the stomach-filling performance that counts.


Strawman.

A new-york strip differs in a very quantifiable performance measure from a quarter pounder. Unless you are going to taste your motor oil, I'm not convinced that PAO differs in any such quantifiable performance measure from group III+
grin2.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Z
  • Locked
What makes Mobil EP clean sludge,ingredients?
Replies
16
Views
3K
dnewton3
JavierH19
0w-8 has gone mainstream. M1 AFE 0w-8.
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
5K
MolaKule
cammyfive79
The many varieties of M1 full synthetic - all the same for 3-5k OCIs?
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
dnewton3
J
Oil (re)selection for GDI
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
burbguy82
NibbanaBanana
Can't find M1 10-30
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
NibbanaBanana
Back
Top